It was a period when the dispute over the islands had spilled onto the streets of China, with government-sanctioned anti-Japanese protests, and Mr. Xi’s quick ascent to the policy making group on the islands signaled his plans to take overall control of the issue.
“China is no longer focusing just on Diaoyu Island, not only on the gas field of the East China Sea median line, but this is a way of breaking through the first island chain to reach the ocean,” the account said.
23andMe’s business was never going to be selling genetic test kits at $100 a pop; even if the company reaches its goal of selling 1 million kits cumulatively, that’s only $100 million in revenue, a small sum by the standards of biotech and play money at Google. But what a large enough database of people who were sharing not only genetic information but information about their health and their bodies offered was something greater: a tool that could be used to find new genetic connections, for detecting drug side effects, maybe even for finding new diagnostics or cures. That’s why 23andMe needs to get to 1 million kits sold – to build that database. That promise has brought on other investors, including Facebook billionaire Yuri Milner.
A palavra “petralhas”, como sabem, já foi dicionarizada. Esta no “Grande Dicionário Sacconi da Língua Portuguesa”. Eu e o Flavinho VE, do Valor Econômico, vamos morrer, mas o dicionário vai ficar. Vejam a acepção nº 1: “Que, ou pessoa que, sem nenhum escrúpulo, não vacila em cometer todo e qualquer ato marginal à lei, como usurpar, mentir, extorquir, ameaçar, chantagear, roubar, corromper, ou que defende com ardor ladrões. Corruptos, usurpadores, mentirosos, cínicos, extorsionários, chantagistas etc. que, porém, posam de gente honesta e defensores intransigentes da ética”. Aí o dicionário dá exemplos do emprego da palavra: “jornalista petralha; jornaleco petralha; há petralhas nesse governo?
Uma nota de apoio ao deputado licenciado José Genoino (PT-SP), um dos 11 condenados do mensalão presos no complexo penitenciário da Papuda, em Brasília, já soma mais de 11,5 mil assinaturas. O texto, que começou a circular em setembro, reúne a assinatura de artistas, intelectuais e políticos. Entre os signatários estão o cantor e compositor Chico Buarque, a filósofa Marilena Chauí, o escritor Fernando Morais, o crítico literário Antonio Candido, o senador Eduardo Suplicy (PT-SP) e a ministra da Cultura, Marta Suplicy (veja a lista de quem assina).
“Genoino personifica um sonho. O sonho de que um dia teremos uma sociedade em que haja fraternidade e todos sejam, de fato, iguais perante a lei”, diz o texto, assinado por 11.523 pessoas até as 15h20 deste domingo (17).
Pachter has not contacted me directly with his questions nor did he give any warning before publishing his blog post. While I am happy that he is carefully scrutinizing publications and independently re-analyzing primary data, his rather sensationalistic approach to reporting his results in the absence of discussion or peer-review risks doing a disservice to science and adds more heat than light
Same old same old: the conversation should be private (no, it shouldn’t if we want to keep track of affirmations), and the criticism was not peer-reviewed (the criticism IS the peer-review, only more thoughtfull since is not anonymous)
The American situation is far from unique; in the two countries in which I spend most of my time, Britain and France, the inability of governments of whatever stripe to put public finances on a sound basis is by now plain for all to see. A slowdown in the rate of growth of the national debt is what is now regarded by much of the population as the most ferocious and heartless austerity.
The name of poor old Keynes is regularly invoked, as if he had ever supported deficit spending that (in the case of France) has lasted nearly half a century without interruption. Government deficits are not run any longer, if they ever were, to stimulate demand when demand contracts in the private sector: they are run to create economic dependence on government and as a permanent unearned subsidy (unearned, that is, by the economy as a whole) of the living standards of the entire population. And no population is going to vote, in the name of probity and prudence, for lower living standards, any more than pimps will vote for sexual purity.
I bet some readers are thinking: but the reason that Brazilian teachers are so bad is that salaries are so low, so we can’t attract the best graduates into teaching. Okay, but first, salaries aren’t that low when you take teachers’ huge pension privileges into account (and remember: upper-middle-income country – that means average salaries are much, much lower than in rich countries. If they weren’t, then Brazil wouldn’t be middle-income! This is a tautology!). Second, what good will it do to pay existing teachers more, if your aim is to attract better candidates into the profession? Why not just give bonuses to very highly qualified new entrants, and to existing teachers who can demonstrate the very high quality of their work? Yes, that’s performance-related pay, and I know that Brazil’s teaching unions go out on the streets whenever that’s suggested. But that doesn’t change the fact that giving more money to people to do exactly the same as they are already doing will not change outcomes – it will just leave you poorer.
We can see from this why political populists make such a lasting impression. Going back to Ariely (2008) points to the fact that by our very nature, mankind is wired to compare. Certainly free health care sounds like a much more attractive deal than finding a job and purchasing medical insurance, particularly when you don’t have to pay any taxes. Welfare and disability compare favorably to working a full-time job, or even looking seriously for one.
Ariely (2008, pp. 4-19) discusses the sleight-of-hand trick of using a “decoy” to make your alternative appear relatively superior. An example of this trick has been used by Democrats (though Republicans are just as good at it) in the response they have given to Paul Ryan’s desire to reform Social Security and Medicare. The former head of the Government Accountability Office, David Walker, a Democrat, has been giving presentations to Americans since 2007. He says, and he should know, that both Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are broke and the Federal Reserve simply prints more money to prop them up.
Predictably Rational: A Brilliant Book by Richard B. McKenzie | ThinkMarkets
I have become very interested in the topic of rationality in economics in the past few years. Some of the major challenges to the rationality postulate in standard economics have come from quarters advocating a new paternalism. They have argued that because individuals engage in systematic and predictably irrational behavior we cannot be sure that the free choices of these individuals will enhance their well-being. “Thus,” the state ought to incentivize (or nudge) behavior in a better direction. As many readers of this blog know, Glen Whitman and I are writing a book for Cambridge University Press on the new paternalism. I expect that McKenzie’s book will be enormously helpful in this task. But for all economists it is vital to understand, better than we have, the role of the rational-behavior postulate in economics. McKenzie’s book is the place to explore the matter deeply.
A qualificação de pessoal na própria empresa é a solução mais comum, mas também a aplicação desse remédio está longe de resolver o problema. Alta rotatividade, pouco interesse dos trabalhadores e baixa qualidade da educação básica foram os principais obstáculos apontados pelas companhias consultadas. Mas o terceiro item apontado, a educação básica deficiente, talvez seja a explicação mais provável tanto do desinteresse dos trabalhadores como da rotatividade.
Paradiastole, Epanorthosis, Syncatabasis, Grandiloquence, Pleonasm, Synonymia, Auxesis & Meiosis, Paralipsis, Paraprosdokian, and Apheresis/Apocope/Syncope.