[RD] Daily Graphs and Charts

[Lohrenswald]

I am actually lighter than any of the weights on that diagram so I am going to count that as a victory.

 

[JohannaK]

Drinking straws I mean, of course.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

ATMs have replaced enhanced human tellers in the US.

Bank Tellers vs. ATMs in the U.S. (in thousands)

Datawrapper/BLS

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

 

[madviking]

two things

1. they should've done numbers... i mean for real

2. goddammit virginia

 

[Joecoolyo]

I was just going to ask. Virginia doesn't seem like an execution heavy state. Did something happen?

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Spoiler :

 

[warpus]

"The U.S. is most competitive where trade barriers are greatest" ?

That surprises me, I would expect the U.S. do very well in free market-like conditions, not the opposite.

 

[Cutlass]

"The U.S. is most competitive where trade barriers are greatest" ?

That surprises me, I would expect the U.S. do very well in free market-like conditions, not the opposite.

I think we'd need to read the report behind the graph. The US domestically is very competitive in services. And services is a larger part of the economy now than it is in the past. But many services have effective barriers to foreign trade, even if they are not laws, tariffs, or regulations. Simply put, many services are local, and foreign competition just doesn't apply. But you'd need to see a breakdown by industry to know the real point the author was trying to make.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Major American companies today are also heavily dependent on the enforcement of monopolies commonly called intellectual property. Technically those are trade barriers. Our "Free Trade Agreements" have focused on strengthening them rather than enabling true free trade.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

"Cell-cell signaling in the 4-cell embryo of C. elegans. The P2 cell produces two signals: (1) the juxtacrine protein APX-1 (Delta), which is bound by GLP-1 (Notch) on the ABp cell, and (2) the paracrine protein MOM-2 (Wnt), which is bound by the MOM-5 (Frizzled) protein on the EMS cell."

 

[Domen]

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I was just going to ask. Virginia doesn't seem like an execution heavy state. Did something happen?

They look heavy on the chart because they jumped in fast, plus being a smaller area the red dots made a solid red out of it with lower numbers. We don't think of them as execution heavy because despite their fast start they have throttled way back while Texas and Florida started slow but are now getting all the press because they seem to just never be satisfied with the blood they shed.

 

[Cutlass]

Spoiler :

A stunning visualization of our divided Congress

By Christopher Ingraham April 23

Political polarization is on the rise, and with it come lots of clever new ways to visualize that polarization. I've even taken a crack at it myself. A group of researchers recently gave it another go in a paper published in PLOS One, and while it doesn't tell us anything we don't already know, it's nonetheless one of the more effective visualizations of rising partisanship that I've seen. Take a gander.


By Christopher Ingraham April 23

Political polarization is on the rise, and with it come lots of clever new ways to visualize that polarization. I've even taken a crack at it myself. A group of researchers recently gave it another go in a paper published in PLOS One, and while it doesn't tell us anything we don't already know, it's nonetheless one of the more effective visualizations of rising partisanship that I've seen. Take a gander.

Clio Andris, David Lee, Marcus J. Hamilton, Mauro Martino, Christian E. Gunning, John Armistead Selden, in PLOS ONE

You'll see that they've created network diagrams for each House of Representatives from 1949 to 2011. They've drawn dots for each representative, and lines connecting pairs of representatives who vote together a given number of times. Finally, the dots for each representative are placed according to how frequently the Representatives vote together overall.

What we're left with is a picture of political mitosis. Similar voting between Democrats and Republicans was fairly common up through the 1980s. But starting in the 1990s the parties began pulling apart from each other, like a single cell dividing into two.

Not only that, but within parties Representatives are voting more similarly too -- that's illustrated with the dots in each party's cluster becoming more tightly packed together over time. Starting in the 2000s, there are hardly any links between the parties at all.

Again: this is nothing we don't know. In fact, historically our current era of polarization may just be a return to historic norms. And while this visualization is effective at showing the parties peel away from each other, it misses some other nuances about polarization -- for instance, that current trends are largely driven by Republicans moving away from the center.

Still, it's a great way of showing just how much Congress has changed over the past 60 years.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...unning-visualization-of-our-divided-congress/

 

[Monsterzuma]

 

[Domen]

I made a graph showing hypothetical U.S. population growth until 1980 had there been absolutely no immigration since 1790:

http://s28.postimg.org/m3mus5j3v/USA_Pop_Growth.png

 

[Borachio]

Sooner or later, I believe, the powers that be are going to realize what a good thing a large population really is (economically speaking). Especially for countries covering large geographical areas.

The human resource is in fact the only true resource there is, and when the US wakes up to the fact that, at a third of their size, it doesn't have a hope of competing with China or India in the long term, it will start to encourage mass immigration.

In fact, we might even see the developed world competing for immigrants.

Now, wouldn't that be fun?!

 

[Yeekim]

I made a graph showing hypothetical U.S. population growth until 1980 had there been absolutely no immigration since 1790:

Why did you stop at 1980?

 

[Domen]

I have not found data on the rate of natural increase after 1980.

And also I suppose that after 1980 the difference between fertility of immigrants and fertility of locals started to be statistically significant, because natural growth in the USA started to decline (well, it started to decline already after 1960), and the nature of immigration changed - immigrants from high-fertility countries like Mexico started to come in great numbers, while immigrants from Europe (where fertility also declined) became a minority of all immigrants.

Finally, 1980 was the first U.S. census with question about ancestry.

 

[Traitorfish]

I made a graph showing hypothetical U.S. population growth until 1980 had there been absolutely no immigration since 1790:

...Why?