Source: I work there, although I have literally nothing to do with this project.

Whenever I see people say stuff like this I mentally replace what they said with "Wikipedia is a general-knowledge encyclopedia." Not a dig at you, but this should have always gone without saying.

Really sad that companies put these kinds of restrictions on their employees...

Which, in a post-financial crisis world, also obviously involves relying on government-backing of the insurance companies and bailouts when ratings agencies hand out AAA ratings like candy. Ultimately, only the government can guarantee people a retirement. Which is why I personally think we should say "screw it" and just guarantee everyone a reasonable (livable) payout from social security...

The parenthetical in my original comment was important. If everyone thinks they know what is going on, and they're all wrong, then the price isn't a good reflection of reality.

I really don't believe that most developers of "desktop sites" care about mobile or do anything to optimize for it, and therefore wouldn't care about a 350ms delay, or even be aware of it. The people who are going to foul this up, it seems to me, are the "mobile web" developers who try to make their sites act like apps instead of just presenting content in a flexible manner.

For example, if the original paper made a critical mistake, then there is no point is carrying out a replication, it won't work anyway. The Reinhart and Rogoff paper is a great example of this.

We really should require that ALL papers in ALL disciplines allow for re-analysis, it is basically like an extended, and ongoing peer review process.

Naive educators desperate to show they are doing everything possible to improve outcomes + mountains of marketing and lobbying dollars from the companies that make the "solutions".

Source: I used to work in academic technology.

There are lots of reasonable-sounding proposals on various topics on both sides of the aisle (mostly from think tanks). The important thing is what happens when a party actually gets into government.

As a left-winger, my views and yours probably aren't that far off. I would be fine with a flat tax (that was actually collected from everyone) and a large deductible. Even more so if it was coupled with a meaningful basic income guarantee.

The problem is that I don't actually believe politicians when they say that is what they will do. With all the talk about "job creators", it really, truly sounds as though the modern GOP actually wants a regressive system where the rich pay almost nothing and there is no deductible because the poor need to pay their "fair share" (whatever that means).

So it isn't that we don't understand math. My preferred tax code probably looks surprisingly similar to your preferred tax code, I just don't trust any of your politicians to actually move us in that direction (and for the record, it's not like I trust HRC to do any better).