Sunday assorted links

Comments

1. This is a subset of a more general question. How risky does your recreation need to be? I personally prefer excitement that comes with a bit of speed, and risk of injury, but not serious risk of death. So mountain biking, but no motorcycles. Hiking and scrambles, but no free climbing. Travel, but no walks through conflict zones.

That... and I wonder if the risk to a woman are much higher than that of a small unimposing man.

so who gets to explain to the girls
that travel is not so much about
"challenging gender norms"?

My brother and I, both 6’6” 230+ lbs, hiked the us/canada border in Washington last year. 3rd day we saw our first hiker, all 21 years and 5’10” of her. She looked terrified so we just smiled, nodded and kept hiking. I’ve never felt stressed in the backcountry, but sure felt for her.

Can you be more specific about the hike? Is it a trail or a designated area that I could look up and learn more about. I am interested.

sounds safer than a south chicago baby shower
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-chicago-violence-shootings-20190406-story.html

4. The most important reason to protect civil society and rule of law is that peaceful prosperity is not a secure steady state. Countries fall out. Societies can become trapped in all sorts of bad situations (crime, graft, civil war) that are nonetheless local maxima. Incremental moves may change players but do nothing for overall welfare. How does Mexico become Chile(*)? Other than with luck and another 50 years .. who knows?

* - lower murder rate than the US

More police, higher paid police (so they're less corruptible), and more honest judges and prison officials would be a start.

1) I got through part of it until the politics took over.
Question: Do we believe that the author suffers street harassment in New York City on a daily basis? Perhaps she walks by a particularly bad area every day, but in that case that’s a ‘bad area’ phenomenon, not a reason to slander New York City.

2. Jonathan Meer on the minimum wage.

It will get much worse in the next recession. The economic expansion over the last decade has allowed employers to absorb much of the cost of increased labor market regulations, but a downturn will quickly force them to cut jobs that are marginally productive only in good times.

--------------

It takes a generation to completely price labor. The researcher has to wait until the test subjects retire and die to get a complete accounting.

4. The economic burden of Mexican crime.

I estimate the impact of the recent and unprecedented surge in drug-related violence in Mexico on the labor market outcomes of Mexican workers. Using a nationally representative longitudinal dataset that allows me to account for unobserved time-invariant heterogeneity, I find that there is a negative relationship between local violence and labor market outcomes.

--------------

The researcher gets a very good measurement of labor costs over the period because the labor gets shot and killed in a couple of years, shortening the summation time.

Mexico actually sells a 100 year bond which folks use to bet whether every Mexican will die of murder in a 100 years.

1. It's not very interesting to apply the Western identity politics game to travel. Most occi-centric!

3. Uh-oh: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/04/opinion/brexit-ireland-and-the-failure-of-the-european-idea.html

#6...I'm sorry, but this doesn't rise even to the level of irksome.

1 "And yet, most told me that they weren’t sure they could do their walk with Paul until after they’d done it. " Paul being the man walking around the world.

What is it with these women? Do they imagine that the man doing these things isn't afraid, sore, uncertain? This article reminds me of the moaning and complaining that high tech is primarily male. There isn't support, encouragement, training to lead women into these fields. There isn't that for men either. Maybe men are naturally more obtuse, if something interests then they figure out how to do it.

If you want to find out a far more interesting and less navel gazing story of a woman who walked three continental hiking trails, the Appalachian, the Pacific Crest and the Continental divide, go to YouTube and search for Homemade Wanderlust. I suspect a lack of education in grievance studies is an advantage.

My daughter traveled the world by herself, and i stopped worrying about her as i watched her connect with people and benefited from the people who would watch out for the wispy young woman that they admired for many reasons.

Another quote. "Priyanka observed that while Paul endures great physical stress on the walk, he avoids talking about the real effects on his body. He doesn’t want physical hardship to become the subject of the story. For her, though, “it’s the most important and necessary thing to talk about how my body is feeling.”"

Yawn.

It's toxic masculinity for men not to be constantly complaining about their body aches. And the suffering that women have to endure walking by and being psychologically assaulted by Trump Tower everyday in NYC is akin to living in a concentration camp.

Woke up already!

Some people do stuff because they want to do stuff. Other people do stuff because they want to surround themselves with cheerleading.

5. A very amteurish article.

It was great that Ben Shapiro had Andrew Yang for an hour long interview.

Imagine if all the Democratic candidates would go on Shapiro or Rogan.

I bet that Beto would totally flame out and that Sanders would come across like the lunatic that he is.

News flash! Guy Makiavelli praises Bernie as completely authentic, according to William Barr.

#5: Article presents the idea that

"It was difficult for any north Indian ruler to conquer a subcontinent crisscrossed by so many rivers, mountains, dense forests and jungles with his army only to gain very tangential benefits for it all.... This caused a large number of sub-cultures to be born out of a larger pot of Hinduism. Anyone east of the Indus was a Hindu as long as they called themselves one, goes the famous saying, but calling yourself a part of any particular subgroup of Hindus was always a tricky business."

But we all know it's ideas of caste and jati and religion that are in the driving seat, not passengers along for the ride; it's not like China is particularly less rugged or divided.

In addition, the economic integration of India means that sub-nationalism provides fewer and fewer benefits. Indeed, the benefits of belonging in a larger community of states have become more apparent as separatist and support for sub-nationalistic issues is stalling. The economic pros of being in a union far outweigh the cons of striking out alone.

A very pertinent example is of Great Britain. The current economic heavyweights of this age are China, the US and the EU. Britain, as it is now learning, is a very large minnow in a sea dominated by sharks, with reference to the size of its economy in comparison with the economic powers of today. A similar sentiment is starting to grow in India. The economic benefits of being in the union are becoming evident.

This is the sort of thing that these people always get backwards of course - the benefits of having a functional political nation bend best towards following the natural cultural fault lines of the nation, rather than a tendency to "push" groups together into a union. "Clever" sorts think that they understand that nations are simply a story and can be easily put together by anyone good at crafting a narrative, to the peril of their societies.

Claimed economic benefits will prove very illusory indeed, if these forced unions cannot and do not pull together as functioning polities accountable to a single people.

I would bet "market size" just isn't as important, in the long run, as having a polity without significant ethnic or regional faultlines, that is small enough that it is has a manageable set of priorities. High scale and internal disunity is harder to deal with than being small. Iceland and Switzerland are not going to hell any time soon.

1. In the surveillance society anyone will be able to walk anywhere alone, even small children, and never get lost or harmed. And we'll rent exoskeletons from Didi Chuxing and take the scenic route across mountain ranges. Disreputable people need not apply.

A friend of mine remarked that she found it strange the practice, in our area, of microchipping pets hadn't been extended to small children.

The US should get rid of the minimum wage, as soon as it gets rid of property zoning and the routine criminalization of push -cart vending.

You keep making this claim in various places and never explain your logic. If anything, the connection should be the opposite of what you suppose. That is, if a $15 wage floor makes some people unemployable, then abundant alternatives where, as a sole proprietors, they can legally work while 'paying' themselves less than $15/hr are that much more important. Restrictions on forms of self-employment hit harder in the face of high minimum wages, not the reverse.

3. Well, the British obviously don't want to lock up a bunch of (possibly nationalist) Irish bad guys in small places where they can make connections and plot against public order.

2. Raising the minimum wage is a cynical attempt by politicians to substantially increase price and wage inflation to increase tax revenues while pretending to be acting compassionately toward low income, unskilled workers.

In my country the government can raise taxes by having a majority in Parliament and the Senate.

3. Cultural sameness brings peace while diversity brings violence.

Sameness is accompanied by less violence.

1. NatGeo has certainly taken the criticism of it's past to heart. Now it seems like at least one article per issue is about a social inequality of some sort.

This is a brilliant paper. Finally someone shows how increasing wages hurts the little guy. Now for the next step. If we could back out the minimum wage increases since 1969 {50 years according to my research, which I will only refer to, instead of explaining, but if you would like to go more deeply, you may well use the equation Yiost = α + [a f terst × MWgroups]β + Io + Is + It + Xstγ + eiost (} then we would find that an hour’s minimum wage of $1.25 purchased 4.33 gallons of gas. Today I bought gas at 2.59 so 4.33 gallons ran $11.21. Last summer that gas would have run $13.37. But a couple months ago it would have been only $7.84. If we average the three we find that minimum wage should be set at $ 10.81, but as Professor Meer understands, in order to get the desired results, we must include the 1969 data, which yields an average gas purchasing ability of $8.42, which of course will allow the rich and the poor to promote AGW equally. And equal is good, right? However, my preference would be to flush all the gobbledygook, and set the guaranteed minimum income at $13,991 (8.41 x 30 x 52, since we should have standardized the work week at 30 hours around 27 years ago, thereby increasing demand since then by a factor of 2). All of this I have shown can be accomplished by using only the numbers 1,2, 4,5, and 7 through 9. As evidence in support of this claim, I challenge all of you to find the single grammatical or spelling error in this post.

#4 violence begets poverty.

I don't remember anything about pacification as a poverty reduction strategy. The war on drugs is a value destroyer.

Mexico has always been a violent country. It is popular to blame the drug war but that is just recency bias. Cartels have extensive exhortation rackets independent of drugs: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/mexico-violence-oil/

It is a happy fantasy to believe that the problem is something relatively straight forward like illegal drugs. But it is not, it really is amoral familism all the way down.

https://www.justice-ni.gov.uk/articles/northern-ireland-crime-survey
3. &why do northern Ireland sociologists
use perceptions/feelings about crime
in place of the standard crime metrics?

I would love to see Jonathan Meer's data. I just did a quick check of restaurant employment -- the largest employer of minimum wage labor--against changes in the minimum wage and changes in total employment and found that restaurant employment moves with total employment and that changes in the minimum wage have an insignificant impact.

I find it interesting that essentially ever time I check such claims about the minimum wage against the data it never seems to confirm the claims of minimum wage opponents. I wonder why?

Comments for this post are closed