Assorted links

Comments

1. In a culture of celebrity worship, how does one judge a short story with no author's name attached to it? On its merits? What a novel idea. What if the idea spread to, for example, academia generally, and economics specifically. Without the ability to attach work to the name of a celebrity economist, who would bother to read it? Who would bother to write it?

Many journals, but not all, do blind submissions precisely to address this.

It doesn't always work, because in some specialized fields you can know exactly who is writing based on the subject matter.

Or the author heavily cites to their previous work and can't really afford to redact all those footnotes.

4. "This postneonatal mortality disadvantage is driven almost exclusively by excess inequality in the
US: infants born to white, college-educated, married US mothers have similar mortality to advantaged women
in Europe"

"Excess inequality" is a remarkably Marxist thing for a Chicago economist to talk about.

Also: Steve Sailer, please call your office.

I couldn't tell from the paper. Does this analysis factor out the health of the mother? Non-white, not college educated, or unmarried mothers in the US may have worse health and higher risk factors.

"Given that one of the most striking facts about infant mortality in the US is the disparity in mortality between black and white infants, it is important to note that the facts we document in this paper are essentially unchanged if we exclude US blacks from the sample."

So, you can eliminate race as the factor.

But that means "excess mortality" would also be Marxist. Right??

The US has a large and aggressive movement that claims to care deeply for every unborn fetus but once the fetus is born that professed concern disappears like mist under a hot sun.

I keep seeing people say this.

I'm not sure what it means.

I know a lot of folks who are deeply concerned about unborn fetuses. They also spend a great deal of time, energy, and money caring for born infants and older children.

Who are these people you know who are anti-abortion but pro-child suffering? Maybe you should sit down and have a heart to heart with them.

He's referencing the subset of folks who are virulently anti-abortion but once some poor (and usually dark skinned) kid is born are just a virulently opposed to: paying for preschool for the kid, helping their (usually single, usually poor) mother with daycare so she can work, paying for welfare and food stamps for the kid, etc.

In other words, the rhetoric is 'how dare you kill that baby' but soon after 'look at those poor dummies having all those kids'

Marie is asking JC to give specific examples of people who oppose abortion but who don't care if poor children die from neglect.

JC - I know many of those people, who care about the least safe among us. You are telling untruths about them and either a liar or profoundly stupid. Or simply befuddled by your addiction to forms of media that worship healthy and powerful people and disparage people with no power. The sad thing is, the vast majority of the aborted babies would wish you well if only they were given a chance to know you a little.

“Excess inequality”: I assume that the authors have a God-given ability to infer the correct level of inequality?

I wonder how many non-white mothers there are in Austria and Finland (from the abstract, I understand that they are the only countries surveyed to reach European-wide conclusions). Because, if there are not that many, maybe the comparison should only be between white US mothers and white Austrian and Finish mothers.

Depends upon whether or not Turks are "white".

Well, there is this - 'According to the Austrian Statistical Bureau, in Mid-2006, 814,800 foreigners legally lived in Austria, representing 9.8% of the total population, one of the highest rates in Europe.

Of these foreign residents, 305,100 came from the former Yugoslavia and 110,800 from Turkey.

Owing to a growing naturalization rate, 330,000 people have been naturalized between 1985 and the end of 2003, representing about 4% of the 7.4 million Austrian citizens living today in the country.

Of these new citizens 110,000 came from the former Yugoslavia and 90,000 from Turkey. Considering pre-1985 naturalizations, in 2005 at least 18% (in Vienna more than 30%) of the population was either foreign or of foreign origin.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Austria

I'd like to see the complete catalog of catalogs that don't exist yet.

#4 Wow! So the U.S. infant mortality problem is entirely a result of poor at-home care by low SES parents. Strange that they compared similarly "advantaged" groups between US and EU but not "disadvantaged" groups as I am curious if there would be a difference. Authors recommend after-birth home nurse visits.

They did compare both disadvantaged and advantaged groups, see tables 4 and 6.

The most astounding fact from the study (table 4) is the that the US has *twenty times* the infant homicide rate as Finland. Even when restricted to disadvantaged groups only, the US still has *five times* the infant homicide rate. Americans love murdering babies.

"Americans love murdering babies." Why not; they are pretty good at murdering each other in general, aren't they?

Is that a tongue-in-cheek reference in abortion?

There are more unwanted pregnancies and unwanted births in the US than Finland due, in part, to a lack of sex education in schools and access to reproductive health services in general.

Universal health care that provides free birth control pills to any woman who wants them regardless of age or ability to pay would undoubtedly lower the teen pregnancy rate and improve the welfare of children more generally. Why should we expect women who don't want kids to take care of their children properly?

1. No it is not. Fetuses are aborted, infants are murdered.

2. "Unwanted" pregnancies in US are due to female advantaged child support laws in US. Women are incentivized to have children out of wedlock.

3. They can always give the kid up for adoption.

Alexei - English is not your native language, is it? Possibly you do not realize that there is no Royal Academy instructing the non-aristocrats who speak English on the meanings of English words? Not one in a thousand native English speakers would be convinced by your little prononciamento. By the way, in English, aristocrat is not necessarily a compliment; and I sincerely doubt it was in whatever language you grew up with, either.

I like the description of feminists as arbiters of language. But they do not seem particularly noble nor aristocratic.

"due, in part, to a lack of sex education in schools and access to reproductive health services in general."

I really find this hard to believe. "semen in the vagina causes pregnancies" would take a teacher 5 seconds. It's not like most pregnancies are happening prior to 5th grade. Let's be honest here: most unwanted pregnancies happen because people are irresponsible and *choose* not to use protection *despite* knowing that sex causes pregnancy. It's not exactly rocket science.

Alexei Sadeski - I guess you are a native English speaker after all . I now believe you were satirically riffing on the Aristotolean and, when used out of context, dehumanizing register to which the word "fetus" belongs (it is not on the chronological list of non-borrowed English terms which English speakers use to describe their children - beginning with unborn baby or just "baby", newborn baby or just "baby", little baby or just "baby", toddler, et cetera...),

My take away from #2, after beauty fades and charms become familiar, you can still enjoy a scary movie together in a successful relationship.

#5: it takes a lot of imagination to offer Bitcoin mining hardware by 2024.

"This postneonatal mortality disadvantage is driven almost exclusively by excess inequality in the
US: infants born to white, college-educated, married US mothers have similar mortality to advantaged women
in Europe."

No, that is not "inequality," that is "deprivation." Why do people use the former when they mean the latter?

Rhetorical question.

Also, must ride the inequality grant gravy train.

+1

If baby A lives and baby B doesn't, maybe baby B should have had what baby A had.
But there's no reason to think that baby A having less of what he had would make baby B any healthier.

If there is a reason to think that, the study should demonstrate exactly what that reason is.

Not a single Gil Elvgren? But then since it is the Guardian, I am shocked at how hetero normative it is, even if several of those suggest a real love for the unpleasant grotesque. Not that I object to the grotesque, Peter Fendi produced a lot of totally lighthearted grotesques.

#3 - Cranach the Elder? Balthus?

And I guess no movies allowed. Otherwise, Borowczyk?

Hispanic infant mortality rates tend to destroy the argument that the b/w difference is due to access, SES, etc.

There's always some inconvenient, usually unnamed ethnic group that destroys arguments like this.

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22751415

"Why Finnish babies sleep in cardboard boxes"

Finland has dedicated programs to encourage moms to be better mothers. It appears to be working. Doing something similar here in the States could also work at a relatively low cost (the Finnish baby boxes cost about 140 Euros)

In America, sleeping in a cardboard box is a privilege reserved for dogs.

2. The second link is broken.

How the US can be more like Finland: Move everyone to Minnesota.

That would ruin Minnesota. The place already isn't what it once was.

We have a higher infant mortality rate because we consider pre mature births as live births. No other country does this. But the lefties use this lie to denigrate the United States.

If we compared US infant mortality rates to countries with similar definitions, countries like Canada and the Nordic countries, the US still performs poorly. And what if we compare white American infant mortality rates with black ones? They are defined in the exact same manner. The divide here isn't between lefties and righties but those who recognize a problem and those who want to sweep it under a rug.

The lefties want to sweep it under a rug?

If you would bother to read the linked journal article, you would stop spouting such obvious lies. The article accounts for your statement and thoroughly falsifies it.

(In case your comment was sarcastic, I blame Poe's law.)

Comments for this post are closed