Usually I’d chalk this up as another one for the annoying Times lifestyle file, but it’s just too damn weird!!!
THIS summer the unvarying male uniform in the precincts of Brooklyn cool has been a pair of shorts cut at knickers length, a V-neck Hanes T-shirt, a pair of generic slip-on sneakers and a straw fedora. Add a leather cuff bracelet if the coolster is gay.
In truth this get-up was pretty much the unvarying male uniform last summer also, but this year an unexpected element has been added to the look, and that is a burgeoning potbelly one might term the Ralph Kramden.
And this “trend” – in men’s fashion, no less – no wait, men’s casual fashion – no wait, men’s casual fashion with freakin’ potbellies! – somehow warranted 750 words.
And for those looking for a more typical Times kind of lifestyle story, they’ll have to settle for the Post, which explores the recessionary suffering of Westchester in a 5-page (OK, that’s Post online pages) article “Squeaking By on 300,000“ Can’t say I could drag myself to the end.
I’m not sure if this is for the “annoying NY Times lifestyle” file or for the crime file (or, perhaps, for the fashion police file)…
Yet the proposed “looks” — a young man in seersucker shorts, a young woman in a blue blazer over a low-cut blouse and short madras skirt — appeared better suited for a nearby yacht club. After Jennifer Delahunty, dean of admissions at Kenyon College, was shown photos of those outfits, she rendered her review.
Damn right! I guess my kids must be going through a particularly painful period right now
On average, people were able to withstand the pain for significantly longer if they cursed than if they did not. Swearing also increased heart rate and decreased subjective reports of pain.
And before anyone criticizes me for Tierney’s politics, he’s not the author of this post.
The headline definitely catches the eye. The article concludes:
So there you have it. Southerners have little access to healthy food and limited means with which to purchase it. It’s hard for them to exercise outdoors, and even when they do have the opportunity, it’s so hot, they don’t want to.
The image is kind of alluring, too, at least in the foreground:
OK, so this press release came in on a google alert (entirely unrelated to anything, but how often do you see the word “sloth” in PR?
Most Managers are Logical Sloths, says New Rotman Research
Strategic managers, lacking training in how to build their own situational models and reasoning strategies as opposed to “implementing” blueprints and recipes, tend to choose easy problems to make sense of their predicaments and use sub-optimally simplistic methods of framing complex problems, shows new research from the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management.
I think this sells most managers (including yours truly) short. We are sloths in many respects, not limited to our logical optimization. Not only do we see complexity and recourse to blueprints and recipes – we see hard work and call in sick, we avoid conflict, defer difficult decisions, punish the innocent and promote the undeserving, marshall evidence to support whatever we’ve already concluded, extrapolate from insufficient evidence, and miscommunicate efficiently so as to confuse everyone who takes part in a project.
Maira Kalman pulls out a beautiful work, again, for us in the Times. Jefferson is one 0f a kind – this example just stuck out for me as evidence for his, well, uniqueness. This chart of vegetable availability in Washington, DC, was evidently based on Jefferson’s observations over the eight years that he was president. Imagine any of our modern presidents monitoring Eastern Market’s wares!
This is a great idea – abolish cash entirely – I hope it comes to the U.S. too. Heck, I’d be happy if they just got rid of the penny and the dollar bill!
With recovery elusive, a population doddering into old age and perhaps a decade of deflation in prospect, Japan may start mulling the most radical monetary policy of all — the abolition of cash.
Some big banks pay 90% of this face value for credit-default-swaps (insurance) on a mortgage-backed-security they think is going to default (but they don’t own). Their counterparty (insurer) pays off the loans in the MBS and doesn’t have to pay the swap. Pockets the premiums (which were big) minus the cost of paying off the loans.
The real-life analogue to this? Your house is on fire. Your neighbors all buy fire insurance on your house from a friendly agent, promising to pay if the house on your lot is destroyed. The agent walks over to the burning hulk of your house, puts out the fire, repairs the damage, and tells your neighbors “the house isn’t destroyed” so he doesn’t have to pay out. The cost of fixing the house is less than the premiums your neighbors paid.
Before going and buying this sure thing, wouldn’t you ask yourself why in the world anyone would write insurance on a burning house/sure-t0-default MBS? Or what incentives there were if the agent wrote insurance for more than the house was worth?
