October 10, 2020
Mesmerizing puzzles, superhero writers, the republic's defenses, modern love
Welcome to the Weekend Reccs. Today’s world is curious and cacophonous. This newsletter delivers an eclectic sample of some of the best things to read, watch, and ponder over your weekend. There’s a lot of economics and politics, but there is also so much more.
If you were forwarded this from a friend be sure to subscribe to never miss an issue. If you aren’t sure this is for you, keep reading—you’ll have another opportunity at the end!
Hi friends,
I hope you all are staying well. We had a surprisingly warm week here in Chicago — it has been some of the best weather of the whole year.
The Weekend Reccs
Puzzling: When my brother sent me this video my first thought was that there was no way I was going to spend 25 minutes watching someone do Sudoku. But I decided to give it a minute, then two, and before I knew it 25 had passed. This was truly mesmerizing. (s/o Jon Satcher)
All hail the King: I was excited to see NYT run a profile on Matt Levine. I am clearly a huge fan of Matt’s, and a public one at that (three people sent me the profile before I had a chance to read it). I would say that he falls squarely into the pool of such-incredibly-talented-people-with-such-distinct-written-voices-that-I-hope-I-never-meet-them-in-real-life-because-we-all-need-superheroes-thank-you-very-much. Among this rarified group are Richard Reeves, Stephen King, Donald Glover, Margaret Atwood, Geroge R. R. Martin, and many more.
Speaking of financial news: I’d say a pretty easy baseline for appearing like a legitimate administration is to not appoint people to a regulatory body who appear to have violated the regulations of said body and then tried to cover it up all while serving in an administration role. GOP is toeing the line here between morally bankrupt and comically inept.
Sweet, Sweet Nutrition: Look, nutrition is weirdly hard. But the consensus seems to be that you can get pretty far just by avoiding added sugars, and that you should see any time as eating them as a special treat. I don’t think a moderation approach here makes sense in terms of daily consumption, personally. Having added sugars built into your regular diet almost assures you’ll consume too many. I, for one, eat a lot of baked goods, and a lot of ice cream, and that’s not great, but I can recognize those things really clearly as treats (and, as a result, that I’m overly indulgent). Whereas in almost all my other groceries I buy strictly items with 0g added sugars. It is a pretty straightforward (and therefore easy) rule to implement at the store and pretty effective.
Lines of Defense: It is very scary that the President and Vice President refuses to agree to a peaceful transfer of power. This is not normal. This is not a partisan squabble. This is very scary. That being said, there are dozens, if not hundreds of small cusps at which reality will fall one way or another given forces that are both being shaped each day and, in some cases, have been baked in for decades. It is a difficult task to identify these cusps, much less the forces that shape them. However, one of the cusps appears to be the announcements made by Fox News Decision Desk on Election Night.
Another important cusp, long baked-in are when states can begin processing mail-in votes (s/o Caroline Tervo). It very well may be the case that our republic is held together because Florida and Ohio have started to process ballots, or may be torn apart because Pennsylvania can’t until 7:00a November 3rd.
Here is a great overview of the ballots that already have been processed, however a word of warning: huge swings are possible on Election Day, and Democrats overwhelmingly have told pollsters that they are going to vote absentee. If any numbers concerned Democrats see in upcoming weeks are comforting, these should not be the ones.
Modern Love: I really enjoyed this piece on theories of love and family life. It reminded me of this proposed framework under which to describe different types of love, and also about many of my own musings on the topic from years ago. During my sophomore and junior years of college my relationship with Caroline was growing and maturing rapidly, and I undertook some introspection into what pieces of the relationship were “love,” and what were something else, like friendship. Then I tried to strip those pieces down to their shared core.
What I came up with was that deep, resilient, complete love is about trust more than intimacy, or passion, or commitment, or even caring. And that such trust forms the basis of whatever dynamic occurs in terms of the union’s shape. I think there’s a lot here to discuss, and this edition of the Reccs is already on the longer side, so I won’t expound much. But I think such a view perhaps better captures Marino’s ultimate proposition in the linked article. You cannot make sacrifices in the near-term without trusting your partner to be willing to make equivalent sacrifices in the long-term, and trusting that together you are both working towards a healthy balance.
Quick Links:
NYT has done the legwork to find the best live animal feeds; my favorite is “Kitten Rescue.”
Watch the counts of emojis used on Twitter in real time.
The grandson of John Tyler, 10th US President—yes, I meant grandson; yes, I meant 10th—died Tuesday.
Lagniappe
Take the advice from #4 above and put it in to practice this week! On your grocery run try to buy 0g added sugars. It is an easy rule to apply but can be a hard rule to follow because a ton of foods have added sugars that you would never expect. For me, though, this just reinforces the rule’s necessity. If during the week you are craving something sweet you can always add some good ol’ honey to whatever you’re eating.
Graph(s) of the week
[WSJ] Pretty obvious graph, but important. Stock market != economy, sure, but also the stock market is pretty clearly the largest driver of wealth in America. Continuing the work of engaging people of lower incomes with the market (e.g. through automatic-enrollment retirement plans) is an important strategy in much larger work around promoting a widely prosperous society.
[WSJ] Of all the things I am not an expert in, healthcare is near the top of the list. But this seems like a pretty clear underinvestment…? The US has only ordered >1 per capita for two types of vaccines, basically assuring that only those two would be ready for widespread deployment. While Pfizer and Moderna’s vaccines do appear the most promising, you have to remember these were purchased a while ago, when that maybe was not so clear. So while it appears optimal in outcome it may have been suboptimal at the time. Aren and Benedict have convinced me that in both vaccines and therapeutics the government should have been throwing just about everything at the wall and stockpiling it given not only the huge health consequences, but also the huge economic consequences of being just a little faster off the line in terms of distribution.
Your friend,
Harrison