Flying 58 combat missions over Pacific gets you to certain privileges. Number one of these? Rocking pink socks without shame.
Hi, I'm Ilya Gerner.
I think public policy is fascinating. I write about it here.
Among other professional and amateurish activities, I'm a daily contributor to Comedy Central's Indecision
We can be Twitter pals.
You can also reach me at ilyagerner [at] gmail [dot] com.
Political Language
Above is a menu from the Metropolitan Club, a fancy private club in DC, from 1901. I was invited to an event there this week, and stumbled across this menu while researching the venue. At first I was shocked at how high the prices were — even by modern standards, $20 is ridiculous for a celery appetizer.
Then I realized: These prices are in cents, and the most expensive things on this fine dining menu cost all of $1.
60¢ for lobster salad. 20¢ for spaghetti. 40¢ for brandy peaches.
This is inflation writ in asparagus and meringues.
The extreme differences between the prices on this menu and the prices we’d pay today (between 10 and 40 times the 1901 prices — e.g. $8 for a dessert rather than 25¢), is due to a century-long trend of the Dollar’s decline into near-worthlessness.
[Rest of the post at hipsterlibertarian, but she ends with “ inflation robs the poor to help the rich afford the lobster salad whose time of costing 60¢ grows more distant by the day.”
I looked up the average hourly wage for a manufacturing worker in 1901. It was 23 cents, according to the Bureau of Labor statistics.
The average wage for manufacturing workers in 2012 was $19.20.
That means someone living in 1901 had to work 3 hours for that lobster salad. Today’s worker would have to put in one hour to afford an equivalent meal.
Basically, the poor chump in 1901 would have to slave away the whole day just so he can afford the things I can purchase with the work-time I spend browsing Tumblr.
For all the things that the Tennessee state legislature lacks — common sense, tolerance, proper hygiene probably — there’s one thing it has in surplus: self-esteem. How do we know?
- Tennessee State Sen. Jon Lundberg (R) sponsored and passed a resolution to honor HIMSELF.
- Asked why he would award himself this real life Award for Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence, he said, “I think it’s important for us as a state to say, ‘Hey, great job on creating jobs and moving the ball forward.’”
- The same state senator previously passed a resolution honoring his daughter for graduating high school.
Sometimes you gotta treat yo’ self.
Photo by Rob D. Casey/Workbook Stock/Getty Images
This is all I see when reading about this story:
“I’m really surprised Internet sleuths did not break this case,” said a dumb person.
McConnell Campaign Steals Meme From Comedy Central
If you require any more evidence that the Internet is an immensely weird place, there’s now a Buzzfeed article that refers to me as “Meme Master,” which should put your doubts to rest.
Via Crooked Timber in re: Reinhart-Rogoff’s adventures in public policy research (short story: they chose all of the above and then loudly advocated for spending cuts based on the results of their research, which purported to show a causal relationship between debt levels rising to 90% of GDP and stagnant growth.)
Something weird has happened to The Most Trusted Name in News.
Henri: We need to make sure that marriage in France remains between one woman, one man and an occasional American co-ed. How we can protest the government’s vote in favor of same-sex marriage?
Marcel: I know! We’ll bare our chests and cuff ourselves together on the street.
Alain: We can wear masks! This won’t look homoerotic at all!
- An imagined conversation that MUST have taken place because these protesters are members of Hommen, a group opposing marriage equality in France.
Photo of very confused Frenchmen by Kenzo Tribouillard/AFP/Getty Images
I call false flag on this anti gay marriage protest in France.
“We know that people that are now being trained to come in and act like Hispanic [sic] when they are radical Islamists. We know these things are happening. It is just insane not to protect ourselves, to make sure that people come in as most people do … They want the freedoms we have.”
—
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), explaining why we can’t have nice things like immigration reform.
So if Congress ever reclassifies tacos al pastor from “delicious treat” to “terrorist organization,” we know which politician is responsible.
(via ccindecision)
On the one hand, a guy whose previous statements included, “pregnant terrorists will come to America, deliver their baby, and raise them as sleeper agents with birthright citizenship” is kind of a national treasure. The Bachmanns and Steve Kings of the world don’t have the creativity for that kind of awfulness.
On the other hand, this guy helps make laws. Gah.
Congratulations New Zealand, being “like Scotland, but far away” is no longer your number one claim to fame!
After a 77 to 44 vote in parliament, New Zealand became the first country in the Asia-Pacific region and the 13th in the world to legalize same-sex marriage.
Among the parliamentarians voting in favor of a equality was Prime Minister John Key, who happens to be a conservative but also wants Frodo and Samwise to just be happy.
Photo of Kiwis celebrating after the vote, by Phil Walters/Getty Images News/Getty Images
Don’t know about you, but we could use some good news today
1. Check out this guy. Bill Iffrig is a 78 year old runner who was knocked off his feet by the first Boston Marathon blast but finished the race anyway, walking the last 12 feet to the finish. (Photo by John Tlumacki/The Boston Globe/Getty Images)
2. The “I have a place to offer” Google document, in which hundreds of Bostonians are advertising a free place to stay, may be the first spreadsheet capable of producing an emotion other than boredom.
3. New Yorkers have love for Boston. Offer expires during next Yanks v. Sox game. (Photo by @stopmotionsolo)
“People are surprised. Of course, some people are surprised I can even read.”
—
Former President George W. Bush, on his painting hobby.
You might say his talents have been vastly misunderestimated. (via ccindecision)
This week, you'll be hearing a lot about the Kermit Gosnell trial in Philadelphia. Here's a 2011 piece on the abortion provider which gives you some necessary backstory.
Since his arrest, a portrait has emerged of a bright young man who was brought in to help rebuild Mantua but ultimately may have done far more to bring it down.
Over the years, his abortion practice deteriorated. He prescribed drugs freely, investigators say. And in the twilight of his career, he has become a symbol for those who would tighten restrictions on all abortion providers.
Gosnell is accused of doing some awful things, nearly all of which you’ll learn about behind the link (be warned). When you’re done reading this, read Dave Weigel’s piece on the “media blackout” that some are suggesting is happening with the case. Whatever your take on abortion, you should be aware of this story, because it’s starting to pick up mainstream traction.
Note that Katha Pollitt wrote about Gosnell in January 2011 in The Nation. So did Michelle Golberg, in The Daily Beast. Lots of pro-choice/feminist writers covered the indictment.
Jill Filopovic asks, “If dozens of women write about a topic but men don’t notice, do they make a sound?”
![“If you regulate guns, what about [some useful but dangerous thing that’s heavily regulated but no one wants to ban],” is the #1 dumbest argument against gun control.
#2? “Criminals don’t care about gun laws,” a formulation that produces 31,700,000 hits on Google.
This is not how gun laws work.
If someone with a criminal record goes to a federally licensed gun dealer, it doesn’t matter whether he wants to follow the law or not. The dealer, who has a strong interest in following the law because his license to operate openly depends on compliance with regulations, will run the potential purchaser through NICS. Where he’ll get denied. As has happened 700,000 times. So he doesn’t get the gun even if he wants to do this bad thing.
But if someone with a criminal record chooses to buy a gun at a show or via a private seller, they can do so because there’s no requirement for the law-abiding citizen to run the buyer through NICS. That’s why they call it a loophole.
If gun control proponents are successful in closing that loophole, people with records will have to steal guns (not that easy) or buy them on the illicit market, where they will be much more expensive because the route of gun manufacturer -> dealer -> “clean” buyer -> criminal will be that much more difficult to traverse. Making criminals pay more for weapons is good.](http://24.media.tumblr.com/b58643b6d5cd8b4a6344f184fd74f25a/tumblr_ml3rlboGQn1qd0p40o1_500.jpg)
“If you regulate guns, what about [some useful but dangerous thing that’s heavily regulated but no one wants to ban],” is the #1 dumbest argument against gun control.
#2? “Criminals don’t care about gun laws,” a formulation that produces 31,700,000 hits on Google.
This is not how gun laws work.
If someone with a criminal record goes to a federally licensed gun dealer, it doesn’t matter whether he wants to follow the law or not. The dealer, who has a strong interest in following the law because his license to operate openly depends on compliance with regulations, will run the potential purchaser through NICS. Where he’ll get denied. As has happened 700,000 times. So he doesn’t get the gun even if he wants to do this bad thing.
But if someone with a criminal record chooses to buy a gun at a show or via a private seller, they can do so because there’s no requirement for the law-abiding citizen to run the buyer through NICS. That’s why they call it a loophole.
If gun control proponents are successful in closing that loophole, people with records will have to steal guns (not that easy) or buy them on the illicit market, where they will be much more expensive because the route of gun manufacturer -> dealer -> “clean” buyer -> criminal will be that much more difficult to traverse. Making criminals pay more for weapons is good.
