(With the caveat that I don’t know anything and am making this up) You can’t judge a policy on purely consequentialist grounds; the motivating purpose is morally relevant, and the framing gets at motivation?

I guess it’s fine for a journalist to be strategic in choosing what to write about. But “noble lies” involve moral arrogance and are wrong for this reason

He’s Steve Levitt’s coauthor

Ah, we teach undergrads the quadratic cost version that gets maximum differentiation in equilibrium. This is what I thought the “hotelling model” was until now.

Wait what is the incoherence in Hotelling?

I choose to read it literally. She owned several boats, and before she moved to DC she burned them.

Perhaps people would have asked “how did you afford the boats?”

This is very interesting; it’s new this year?

You found the magic fixed effect that only soaks up the bad variation?

Anyway good thing this situation remained hypothetical

I agree but I’ve lived in Pittsburgh and in a similarly-sized New England city, and while these things are everywhere, “sensitive to sins against presumption of equal standing” and **especially** “on the look out for rule compliance” are distinguishing Pittsburgh features in my experience

This part is a spot on description of Pittsburgh in particular. Way less of this on the east coast

This would be a better system but applicants would *hate* it

It would be closer to normal length if an editor had cut the parts about how, according to Pinker, Pinker has been brave and correct.

But this seems spot on

NumPy the software library rhymes with “lumpy.” SciPy is pronounced “skippy”

Instrumental-variables methods were invented to estimate supply and demand for butter and flaxseed oil (in order to estimate tax incidence) in Appendix B of “The Tariff on Animal and Vegetable Oils”, Philip G. Wright, 1928