Fun story

This is from Megan McArdle:

At a conference last year, I saw an incredibly compelling presentation from the guy who does usability for Treo. He talked about design philosophy, and showed slides of a project he does where he goes into various institutions, divides people into groups, gives them spaghetti and some tape, and asks them to build the tallest self-supporting structure they can. The worst-performing group, you'll be unsurprised to hear, was MBA students; they spend all their time arguing about who will be boss. Engineers do okay. But the best performing group? Kindergarten students.

The students don't plan anything. They just try stuff, and if it doesn't work, they try something else. The presenter's argument was that if you want to do something quickly, and well, you need to have a lot of failure. Failure is the quickest way to learn.

Basically a nice quick argument for messy capitalism over planned economies (or planned anything).

White Trash Cute

I love my kid.

Halloween Cute (and more)

This is probably the last year we'll get off this easy on Halloween. They wiggled into their princess gowns last week for a big mom's group Halloween party - but apparently spent the whole time attached to Kirstin's leg (until of course the food showed up, see the picture). Wednesday night they got hitched up again in their princess gear and headed out onto the block.
(For all my friends north of the Mason-Dixon line, it was about 75 outside when we went trick or treating. Hope you were able to get the snowsuit on underneath your kids costumes.)

The best part about two tiny little princesses is that everyone is actually happy to see them because they are so non-threatening. We actually had some neighbors request that we ring their doorbell because they wanted to have the little princesses stop by. Of course, dressing like a princess does not mean one acts like a princess. Twice Maddie was unimpressed with people's charity and just made a stab for their bowl, ripping out a handful of goods and stuffing them in her bucket. I did get her to yell 'thank you' at them from the sidewalk as she hustled to the next house.

Kirstin completely suckered the two of them in with her "Great Pumpkin" tradition (i.e. bulls***). If you leave your candy bucket by the fireplace, the Great Pumpkin will come during the night, take your candy, and leave you a toy. Abby was skeptical, and I have to admit I admired her a little for seeing through this blatant attempt to subvert a national holiday. But she went for it and even ran downstairs Nov 1st to find that the GP had brought her - a book. Honestly, we duped our kid into giving up a bucket of candy for a book. I'm not sure whether to be thankful she is developing a love of reading, or to shake my head at the fact I'm raising a sucker. Maddie got a book too, but this is less disconcerting - she's got the attention span of a rock.

Next year, I predict Abby calls Kirstin out for the B.S. and takes steps to secure her candy in a safety deposit box.

Best. Ad. Ever.

Optimal Taxes

I know, it's the worst title for a post ever. Bear with me. Let's say we have 8 people who earn 10,000 a year, and 2 people who earn 100,000 a year. Now which tax system would you prefer?

1. Those earning under $20,000 a year gets an earned income tax credit (essentially, a refund) equal to 90% of their income. Those earning over $20,000 pays 36% of their income in taxes.
2. Everyone pays 50% tax on all their income, but then everyone receives a $14,000 grant.

The first scheme appeals to progressive instincts. Those who can pay more should pay more. It transfers money from the rich to the poor. But it isn't necessarily fair because why should we punish one group just for being rich? The second scheme seems fair - it treats everyone identically. But why should people who are already rich receive this block grant? They don't need it, do they?

Here's the kicker. Each tax scheme results in an identical distribution of post-tax income. In either case, each of the poor people ends up with $19,000, and each rich person ends up with $64,000. In the U.S., we operate more like scheme 1), but it doesn't necessarily lead to any greater redistribution than a flat tax and grant scheme.

I'm not sure exactly what my whole point is on this, but I thought it was an interesting thought experiment.

Like Watching a Zamboni....

Interesting links to space out to:
1. Go here to watch in (close to) real time the updates made to Wikipedia and where they come from around the world.
2. Go here to watch Cheddarvision. Shockingly, this is not from Wisconsin.

South Park Fun

Sig comes through again. She pointed me towards this site, at which you can create your own South Park character. I did the whole family.