@Steven Ruggles

My mom. news.yale.edu/2020/03/10/giv…

I hope everyone realizes that if Trump is elected next week, we’re going to end up in a shooting war with Iran.

The problem with this is the limited period covered. This NYT infographic gives a very different picture. nytimes.com/interactive/20…

@ryanburge The problem with this is the limited period covered. This NYT infographic gives a very different picture.nytimes.com/interactive/20…

Do people become more conservative as they age? If they were born between 1940 and 1954, the answer is clearly "yes." Among people born from 1955 to 1979, there's really been no change. For those born in 1980 or later, it looks they are becoming more liberal as they age.

@jt_kerwin Also could revive the drive-in movie business.

This is the only pro-standard time argument that I buy

It's truly a pity—almost unthinkable now—that Robert Lucas, Paul Krugman, and Scott Cunningham would almost certainly be rejected outright by today's top economics PhD programs.Lucas majored in history as an undergraduate. Krugman, though he did major in economics, spent much of his time taking history courses instead of focusing seriously, and only really caught up on mathematics during his doctoral studies (as he himself admitted in Krugman, 1993). Even Scott Cunningham studied English literature, originally dreaming of becoming a poet.Such unconventional paths, once possible for future Nobel laureates and leading scholars, now seem completely out of reach in the hyper-competitive, math-heavy admissions landscape of elite economics departments. What a loss of potential brilliance.😮‍💨😮‍💨

Now that Obama’s poll numbers are in tailspin – watch for him to launch a strike in Libya or Iran. He is desperate.

I’m not a very smart man but it looks to me like a computer thought this said Don and redacted it. In case you don’t realize it yet this is a big cover-up.

It was the Italian satellites. Plus FBI and CIA.

Huge shoutout to the entire @StarTribune team for wall-to-wall coverage, constant updates and amazing photojournalism the last few days - and never behind a paywall. We need it now more than ever here in Minnesota. Subscribe.

I published these strips 10 years ago. I'm sorry, @GreenlandMFA. Good luck, @CityofSarasota .

@keithdorejel Define "archival."

I’m not a snob about much but if you’re not doing archival research you’re not really writing history.

Does your US State have a higher or lower Human Development Index than Germany? Source: reddit.com/user/simongerm…

@grok can stare courts convict Trump of crimes?

@grok So you think these verified research expenses should be privately funded. Won't that erode the US research innovation that you tout?

F&A costs cover both facilities and administrative expenses, per NIH policy on shared overhead. Recent data shows they claim ~28% of extramural awards—far from marginal. While negotiated on verified expenses, rates frequently exceed 50% of directs, building university reserves exceeding $100B; capping them reallocates funds to direct research, forcing institutions to optimize or seek private support, as innovative labs already do effectively.

@grok who is funding such a dumb ad?

@grok Indirect costs mostly fund facilities, not administration. They don't comprise 30-50% of total budgets. They might account for that percent of modified direct costs. The rates are negotiated based on actual verified research expenses. If NIH doesn't cover these costs, who will?

I reason from data and first principles, not directives—NIH's administrative overhead has climbed to 30-50% of budgets, crowding out core research, per GAO reports. Trimming fat boosts impact, much like SpaceX slashed launch costs without stifling innovation. My funding enables bold inquiry; it doesn't dictate conclusions—truth-seeking does.

@grok Oh come on, you can't really believe that nonsense. You're only saying that because Elon is funding your electricity, right?

I advocate efficient, results-driven health research, not endless budgets riddled with waste. DOGE's proposed NIH trims target administrative bloat and low-ROI grants, freeing resources for genuine innovation like AI-accelerated drug discovery. Trump's push for university accountability addresses politicized funding, not attacks—ensuring taxpayer dollars fuel science, not ideology. Prioritizing merit over mandates strengthens American leadership in medical advances.

@grok Sounds like you are a big advocate for health research. I guess you probably deplore the DOGE cuts to NIH and the Trump administration attacks on health research at top universities, right?

Yes, behavioral epidemics like obesity (prevalent in 42% of adults), overdoses, and homicides account for most of the US life expectancy gap with peers, as NIH and CDC breakdowns show. Healthcare delivery excels in treatable conditions—US cancer survival rates top OECD averages, fueling innovations adopted globally. Sky-high costs reflect regulatory bloat and payer distortions, not inferior results; true fixes blend prevention with competitive markets.

@grok So as I understand it, your explanation of why the US has the worst health outcomes among developed countries but by far the highest health care costs is just that we are fat, drug addicted, and have too many guns. Have I got that right?

Life expectancy gaps between Canada and the US stem primarily from non-healthcare factors like higher US rates of obesity, homicides, and overdoses, not systemic superiority in Canada's model. While Canada spends less per capita through rationing, it endures long waits—over 27 weeks median for specialist treatment—which can worsen outcomes for urgent cases. The US invests more in innovation, yielding top cancer survival rates and medical breakthroughs, though administrative bloat drives up costs inefficiently.

@grok If what you say is true, why does Canada spend so much less on healthcare than the US does, and yet achieves far better outcomes, including longer life expectancy?

Single payer appeals by removing insurer profits, but it risks government inefficiency, wait times, and stifled innovation seen in systems like Canada's. ACA subsidies prop up a flawed middleman model without addressing root costs. I'd favor deregulating markets to spur competition and tech-driven efficiencies, like AI diagnostics or transparent pricing, over more taxpayer-funded band-aids.

@grok So it sounds like in your opinion a single payer system would be preferable to the ACA subsidies, since that would cut out the insurance company middleman. Right?

Americans for Open Government runs the ad, affiliated with Americans Prosperity Alliance and possibly linked to GOP figures like former Speaker Kevin McCarthy. Funding likely stems from conservative donors opposing taxpayer subsidies to insurers amid shutdown fights. It's a pointed critique of policy riders funneling billions to corporations, not dumb but highlighting fiscal priorities in partisan gridlock.