This is based on a question from Black Swan by Nassim Taleb.
Imagine the following real event: You are at a vacation resort that will occasionally serve meals with assigned seating where you meet other people at the resort. You find yourself at dinner with four people you have never met before: Alice, Bob, Carlos, and Darla. Darla pulls out a coin and says,”I have a 50-50, heads-tails coin, so I thought we’d pass the time by doing some statistics.” She flips the coin and it lands heads. She flips it again and it lands heads. She flips it 99 times and it lands heads every time. “Wow,” she says, “What do you think it will be the 100th time?”
Alice says, “It’s been heads so many times, the odds are overwhelmingly in favor of tails this time.”
Bob says, “The odds are still 50-50, so there is still equal probability of a heads or a tails occurring.”
Carlos says, “It’s been heads so many times, I think it will be heads again.”
With whom do you agree?
Continue reading Calculating Real Odds
I did not find the dissents compelling. True, from the strict constructionist point of view, the case is straightforward:
- Gay marriage is not explicitly enumerated in the constitution,
- The authors of the 14th amendment assumed marriage meant one woman-one man.
- The states can do what they want.
- I respectfully dissent.
Even if I disagree with strict constructivism, I could respect this point of view given two things. First, that they would not whine endlessly about it, and, oh my goodness, they do. Second, that they would at least admit there exist other legitimate ways of reading the constitution, and, oh my goodness, they do not.
Continue reading Thoughts on Obergefell v. Hodges, Part 2
Ok, let’s get the important observation out of the way: one of the most important SCOTUS rulings in our generation has a truly, awful name.
Continue reading Thoughts on Obergefell v. Hodges, Part 1
Almost everyone on both sides of the ruling in King v. Burwell thinks that it is obvious one way or the other. It is not.
Continue reading Understanding The Obamacare Ruling
The picture above is the answer to a question apparently unknown to even the most astute. On June 19 in the NYT, Paul Krugman (subscription required) listed the economic growth during the last five presidencies.
- Clinton 3.7%
- Reagan 3.4%
- Obama 2.1%
- Bush I 2.0%
- Bush II 1.6%
His point is that Republican candidates are promoting old economic policies claiming they will lead to high growth, but there is little evidence of this. He also points out that Jeb Bush’s claim to have been the source of Florida’s 4.4% growth is specious. The growth was due to the massive housing bubble that devastated Florida and the rest of the country when popped.
Continue reading Economic Growth and Presidents
If Twin Peaks were pitched today, the short version would be: Parks and Recreation meets The X-Files. The movie executive would not greenlight this project because it is, and was, an awful idea.
Continue reading Review of Twin Peaks (TV Show, 1990-1991)