Link love: the moving craziness edition, part 1. Links are a mess because of that and because #2 is swamped at work and has had all sorts of after work hours “fun” work obligations which have been causing her literal heartburn. (Is it the catering? stress? too much sitting at the computer? She doesn’t know but she’d sure like to find out by not having obligations or heartburn!)
Or else possibly This Week in Patriarchy. Unfortunately that’s like every week.
the paws! the tiny pink toes!!! http://www.breakingcatnews.com/comic/the-woman-has-a-hairball/
This is so true
science headlines we’d like to see http://the-toast.net/2014/08/27/science-headlines-like-see/
sometimes the economist is embarrassing . Also, it’s really weird watching non-economists discuss Time on the Cross because it seems to be taught differently outside of economics. In Economic History classes the main focus is that slavery was profitable (in one of my classes it was tied with literature on how serfdom was the only way to keep people in Russia from fleeing to Germany, and other forms of slavery and intimidation and horror were used to keep people working when they had better outside options if they could just leave, which they couldn’t). This profitability argument is in contrast to the “it would have gone away by itself” argument that you sometimes hear crop up. It wouldn’t have gone away by itself. Then after slavery was over, they replaced that profitability with prison chain-gangs. People say that Time on the Cross makes the argument that slaves had it better under slavery, but the focus that I remember was that slavery was awful for all of the reasons that slavery is awful, and instead of getting 40 acres and a mule and government representation as promised and as would have made a big positive difference in the lives of blacks, the South did its best to use terror to create a pseudo-slavery of share-cropping. Slavery wasn’t “better” because it was a good thing, but share-cropping was almost as bad. It was a failure of the government to fully reparate and protect the former slaves that lead to bad outcomes post-slavery. Then it’s tied to Race and Schooling in the South by Bob Margo, which explains the huge economic inequalities caused by segregation. So Time on the Cross as I learned it (in multiple classes, from different schools, including one from a Fogel student) was really an argument for Affirmative Action.