Did she decline? I thought the article said FS picked up their option on her contract.

I’ve been trying to find a new one the last couple of months, and think I’ve just settled on Airmail, which came out last week on iphone (but not yet ipad). It has snoozes that sync with the desktop app, which is nice. It’s also very customizable, including the way it looks and what different swipes (differentiated by…

Looks like it’s time to post this again:

Doesn’t it do the opposite? It shows that teams can be miles apart in terms of quality and still play super close games, and presumably even the clearly worse team can win once in a while.

“If elected, Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.”

You have to go back back to 2011's The Ides of March or all the way back to 2007's Oceans Thirteen to find a person of color playing anything resembling a lead role—and even then, that’s a bit of a stretch.

Marry me!

Can someone explain this to me? Is there a history behind the term that I don’t know about or something? (Perhaps because I’m not from the US?) Or is it just that we usually think of migrant workers as the poor and downtrodden, so we shouldn’t use the term for people who are otherwise? If the latter, is it also…

Again, totally fair for you to be skeptical. As someone else pointed out, it apparently isn’t behind a paywall, so if reading it yourself is what it takes to be convinced (as it also was for me), then I’m happy to leave it to you.

No offense taken, don’t worry about it - I’m skeptical about anonymous online people, too.

Oh wow, cool. Maybe the policy has changed, or maybe because it’s new or something. In that case, yes, no excuse for not being able to get to it.

for example in two-working-parent households the analysis does show that the policy doesn’t make it any more likely for at least one parent to stay home with a daughter, but does make it more likely for sons.

Unfortunately I think it is for most. If you’re at an institution with a subscription (or if you’re from a developing country, and no doubt various other categories of people) then you just never see the paywall. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think that’s the usual NBER setup (I can’t see a paywall either, but I’m at such an…

Not believing it until you see it is totally fair - I’ve even seen it and I’ve still been open about the possibility that it’s still me making the mistake. For what it’s worth, though, I have the same training in statistics (and econometrics, which is more what this is) that the authors of the paper have, but I’m not…

To be clear about my post, I don’t think there’s any evidence at all for deception on RVC’s part.

I do have access to the full study through my institution. I don’t know the legality of me copy/posting the table here, so I’m not going to, but if the paper gets posted somewhere open then this all comes from Table 4, columns 1 (for fathers) and 2 (for mothers) on page 33.

Ha, I mean, I’m rustier on this stuff than I should be - enough that I spent a good few minutes trying to find a way to get the 50% they’re talking about, just in case I was doing something silly - but I just don’t see any way to do it, and it wouldn’t be consistent with what they do elsewhere anyway.

Ha, yeah, looks like we’re on the same wavelength here. High five for reading the paper.

Yeah. The part of the analysis that the comparison of fathers with sons to fathers of daughters comes from says that before the policy there’s a 1.99% chance that men took leave for an infant. After the policy, it’s 3.15% if they have a son, and 2.61% if they have a daughter.

I’m looking at the study right now, and am a little lost as to how they come to that 50% number. Not because I just don’t understand - I’m pretty well trained in this sort of econometric analysis - but because I think they’re making an (almost certainly innocent) mistake.