4. 2009 study: “”Do voters effectively hold elected officials accountable for policy decisions? Using data on natural disasters, government spending, and election returns, we show that voters reward the incumbent presidential party for delivering disaster relief spending, but not for investing in disaster preparedness spending.”
6. How to get money to people fast (it isn’t the bridges).
3. Where did I put my phone again? (with a pelican cameo, watch the video)
4. Are NBA coaches using their new call challenge privileges rationally? (WSJ) Also WSJ is the 24k kitchen knife. Both pieces are quite interesting.
2. Austan Goolsbee on the vulnerability of the U.S. economy to coronavirus: so many face-to-face services (NYT).
1. “The NWMC nongovernmental organization provides soft propaganda while they operate alongside the Russian military and imbed military tactics into foreign Russian populations through their corporate entity Wolf Holding of Security Structures.” (Huh?)
2. The heroism of Chinese doctors in Wuhan (WSJ, though I believe the paywall is off on this one). Recommended.
6. Michael Strain on what to do (Bloomberg).
1. “Our findings indicate that floodplain homes in the US are currently overvalued by a total of $34B, raising concerns about the stability of real estate markets as climate risks become more salient and severe.”
2. Cowen’s Second Law: “How the Avengers assemble: Ecological modelling of effective cast sizes for movies.”
4. “The Oxford lexicographers have updated the dictionary with 29 Nigerian words, recognising the “unique and distinctive contribution to English as a global language” of Africa’s most populous country.”
2. “Drivers of higher cost cars were less likely to yield to pedestrians at a midblock crosswalk.” And: “Of 461 cars, 27.98% yielded to pedestrians. Cars yielded more frequently for females (31.33%) and whites (31.17%) compared to males (24.06%) and non-whites (24.78%). Cost of car was a significant predictor of driver yielding (OR = 0.97; p = 0.0307); odds of yielding decreased 3% per $1000 increase.”
5. Why are women running more and running faster? (NYT) “He also cited the Shalane Flanagan Effect, noting how women, in particular, are pulling one another up to new levels of sub-elite running through communities found both online and in real life.” Quite an interesting thesis.
6. How Chinese bookstores are surviving the coronavirus (awesome photos too).
3. “Two programmer-musicians wrote every possible MIDI melody in existence to a hard drive, copyrighted the whole thing, and then released it all to the public in an attempt to stop musicians from getting sued.”
4. Pandemics and the advantages of globalization. And “A troop of special Chinese ducks is waiting to be deployed to neighbouring Pakistan to fight a swarm of crop-eating pests that threaten regional food security.”
2. “Resumes that list study abroad experience in Europe for one year are 20 percent less likely to receive any callback and 35 percent less likely to receiving a call back for an interview, relative to resumes that do not list study abroad experience.”
3. “…colleges that ultimately boost earnings also tend to boost persistence, BA completion, and STEM degrees along the way.” Lots more in that paper.
5. I wish to thank and praise my Lubbock hosts, the Free Market Institute at Texas Tech.
6. 2006 study of the possible economic impact of avian flu. Possibly 4.25% of gdp.
Addendum, from the comments, from Aleh:
You don’t need to read the study-abroad paper to realize that it’s implausible. 35% less likely to receive an interview! That would be approaching the impact that’s been found for declaring a criminal record. And it it has to be in Europe specifically, and one year specifically!
Ok, the paper itself. Overall, study abroad per se has no effect. So they slice and dice by location, length, and whether it is a call-back of an interview request, and use a significance level of 0.1, and then – as you’d expect – a couple of weak “findings” appear. A year of Europe seems VERY bad (and yet two weeks in Europe, or any time in Asia, actually improves the raw numbers; that’s the theory there?). Going to Asia doesn’t show a statistically significant change in your chance of getting a callback, unless it’s a callback specifically asking for an interview – when it does help so.
The data here is under-powered and reaches to find any results (slicing and dicing, 0.1 threshold). The “statistical significance filter” works in such cases to ensure that when does one does find a statistically significant result, it will be be a massively overstated – if true at all. A year in Europe doesn’t just have the opposite sign effect than any other experience; it has an absolutely catastrophic effect (-35%). Just no.
This is bad statistics and (not necessarily the authors’ fault) thoughtless promotion of almost a self-evidently implausible claim. If there’s anything to be learned or honestly reported here, it’s the top level finding: that a reasonably controlled experiment found essentially no difference either way by adding study-abroad experience to your resume.
1. The pricing of Lego blocks and sets, more interesting than it sounds, though not to me. And hockey is too expensive for a growing number of Canadians (NYT).