June 7, 2006

WSJ OpinionJournal headlines of op-eds I don't need to read

It often seems lately as if the WSJ Editorial Page boys are just going through the motions, that they've been so catastrophically wrong that they're starting to get depressed and are just winging it. Here are some recent headlines from their website that make the essays sound self-evidently bogus:

On the Editorial Page BY NANCY DE WOLF SMITH
Reza Pahlavi says America should help Iranians who oppose the regime.

By any chance, would one of those Iranians who oppose the regime and thus deserve help from America be Reza Pahlavi, son of the late Shah of Iran?

Leisure & Arts BY JOSIAH BUNTING III
Do Americans still understand the meaning of honor?

Isn't there something a little ironic about the people who helped lie us into the war in Iraq with their WMD duplicity nagging the rest of us about how we don't have enough "honor?" When did fraud become honorable?

On the Editorial Page BY KOFI A. ANNAN
Nations that welcome immigrants are the most dynamic in the world.

Sure, like China, South Korea, and India ... Isn't it funny how the WSJ, which denounces UN supremo Kofi Annan weekly as a crook and a liar, is happy to publish his crooked lies about immigration? (Do check out the readers' spirited responses.)


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Do autistic children never recover?

An NYT oped by Cammie McGovern, "Autism's Parent Trap," is getting a lot of publicity for asserting:

Now, as the mother of a 10-year-old, I will say what no parents who have just discovered their child is autistic want to hear, but should, at least from one person: I've never met a recovered child outside the pages of those old books.

I only have anecdotal evidence, but I know a kid who was extremely autistic from birth -- he hated to be cuddled as a baby. (In contrast, most autistic children don't show symptoms until they are toddlers.) He didn't speak until he was five. Then, one day, he said:

"Nuclear Regulatory Commission"

And he has seldom stopped talking since. He's a nerdy teenager today, but that's a lot better than being autistic.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Prominent alienist calls Americans stupid

Why does the Wall Street Journal hate America? James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal Op-Ed page has, for perhaps the first time in his career, deigned to cite a quantitative study of the educational performance of immigrants. Too bad it's slapdash and misleading:


Keep America stupid--seal the borders!
Why They Call Nativists 'Know-Nothings'
Blogger Harry Forbes notes something quite interesting:

The Boston Globe website published the pictures of each valedictorian in Boston's high schools and other high school programs. As you thumb through the pictures, it is striking how many of these students are immigrants. So many, that I decided to take some statistics. The Globe listed the country of birth for each student. For some US-born students I guessed that they were 2nd generation immigrants (for instance if they were Vietnamese). Almost 2/3 of the Boston valedictorians are either immigrants or children of immigrants. From my analysis: here is the breakdown of the 38 valedictorians:

1st or 2nd generation US 63.2%
Later than 2nd generation US 32.8%

Born in the US 52.6%
Born overseas 47.4%

iSteve readers being more analytical and honest, it was inevitable that one would actually explain what was going on:


That article (and the Journal, too – of course) seemed to miss the real point. These schools appear to only be in Boston proper, not the suburbs


Because Boston it so old, the de jure suburbs, like Cambridge, begin extraordinarily close to the city center, so it's easy to escape the Boston school district.

As we saw back in the tumult over school busing in Boston in the 1970s, most of the white American students left in the Boston public schools -- even back then -- were working class Irish kids in neighborhoods like Southie. Judge Arthur Garrity, who ordered the forced busing in the Boston schools lived in the wealthy white suburb of Wellesley, which was, surprise, unaffected by his decision.


The Boston Public Schools system: 58,000 students (44% black, 33% Hispanic, 14% white, 9% Asian). An additional 21,000+ students live in the district but attend private or charter schools.


The average SAT score of "college-bound seniors" in the district is just 895 (and that's under the new, easier scoring system that began about a decade ago. The statewide average is 1047, and no doubt a higher percentage of seniors are college bound than in Boston, so the real gap is even larger than 150 points (which is about 3/4ths of a standard deviation).


So, if diversity is so wonderful, how come the white parents of the Boston area won't send their kids to diverse schools, other than elite schools with competitive examinations?

Anyway, the current debate is mostly about illegal Mexican immigrants. Although 33% of the students are Hispanics, none of the 38 valedictorians was from Mexico.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

June 2, 2006

IQ and Infant Mortality:

The Audacious Epigone is starting to transcend his overly humble screen name. He offers an interesting look at many factors that correlate with Lynn and Vanhanen's national average IQ figures.

By the way, now that Richard Lynn's new book summarizes 620 IQ studies, about 3.5 times more than his last book, somebody should look into coming up with a new, improved table of national average IQs.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Homogeneity, Happiness, and $78,000 in annual tuition:

Does diversity make us unhappy?
By Mark Easton Home editor, BBC News

It is an uncomfortable conclusion from happiness research data perhaps - but multicultural communities tend to be less trusting and less happy.

Research by the Home Office suggests that the more ethnically diverse an area is, the less people are likely to trust each other.

The Commission for Racial Equality has also done work looking at the effect of diversity on well-being.

Interviewed on The Happiness Formula, the chair of the Commission for Racial Equality, Trevor Phillips accepts that people are happier if they are with people like themselves.

"We've done work here which shows that people, frankly, when there aren't other pressures, like to live within a comfort zone which is defined by racial sameness.

Meanwhile, here's an amusing story out of San Francisco, usually considered the most liberal, politically correct city in America:

Many reluctantly choose private schools
Heather Knight, SF Chronicle Staff Writer
Fourth in a Six-Part Series

Mark Lauden Crosley describes himself as a "passionate believer" in public education. The 54-year-old homeowner in San Francisco's Castro district believes it's critical that children of all socioeconomic and racial backgrounds be educated together. The software designer said he has never voted against any education measure in his life.

But, he said, he believes that even the city's best public schools are overcrowded and underfunded.

And despite his belief in the importance of public education, he must do what's best for his three daughters -- so he sends them to private schools. "There's very little in life that's as important to me as my kids' education. It's a sacrifice you make, and it pays off," he said, noting he nonetheless has nagging concerns that his daughters aren't experiencing diversity in their classrooms. "I don't want my kids in an elite, privileged environment where they don't spend time with people who are different from them. ... But that's the reality, and it bothers me." ...

His twin eighth-graders, Andrea and Danica, go to Katherine Delmar Burke School near Lincoln Park. He sends sophomore Elinor to the Urban School of San Francisco in the Haight. Crosley and his wife, Claudia Stern, a financial consultant, get some tuition assistance to cover the total bill of about $70,000 a year.

Next year, all three daughters will be attending Urban School, where the tuition is $26k, so his pre-aid bill will go up to $78k annually.

Crosley isn't alone in feeling uncomfortable about private schools while choosing them anyway. In San Francisco, families choose private and religious schools in higher proportion than in any other major city in the country. Last year, 29.3 percent of the city's school-age population went to private or religious schools. About 10 percent of children nationwide and 8.7 percent of those in California attend private or parochial schools. Marin County has the second-highest rate in the state at 18.7 percent, followed by San Mateo at 15.4 percent and Napa at 13.4 percent...

But $26,000 does not buy everything. Several Urban students said on a recent morning that they sometimes wish they had an educational experience beyond what they call the "private school bubble," a bubble populated by other teens from pricey, revered private high schools in San Francisco -- and nobody else. "It's a lot of rich, white kids," said Marshall Hendrickson, a blonde, blue-eyed junior at Urban, as he lounged on a sofa with classmates during downtime.

"I can't imagine it's that much different than a public school group of friends, but there's a boundary. Private school kids don't interact with public school kids." Junior Zoe Harris nodded, saying, "It's too bad we have to have private schools. Sometimes I regret I've never been to a public school."

Similar angst-filled discussions play out in households across San Francisco every year as families debate whether to send their children to public or private schools. ...

Other parents told The Chronicle they don't want their children to be around students who wear "saggy pants" or who "curse on Muni" or who may be "rotten apples." A few said they can see big differences between public school students and private school students just by watching them walk in and out of their respective schools.

I bet they can!

There are few things funnier than liberals kvetching about how their children aren't getting enough Vitamin D (Diversity!), but what can they do about it?

Actually, it's really not that hard to get more diversity in your kids' diets -- all you have to do is stop paying $78,000 annually in private school tuition!


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Cool Tool:

Hosted by Google, Gapminder offers for countries around the world perhaps my favorite kind of graphical representation -- the two dimensional scatter plot (e.g., per capita income on the horizontal axis versus life expectancy on the vertical axis), with bubble size representing population, and color of bubble representing region of the world. You can then animate the graph to track how one or more countries has done over the 1975-2004 period.

Is there anyway to put your own data, such as national average IQ scores, in this tool?


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Three strikes laws and the death penalty

Here's the abstract of a study on how three strikes laws encourage witness-murdering, but no word yet on any studies of whether the death penalty serves to discourage witness-murdering.

The Lethal Effects of Three-Strikes Laws Thomas B. Marvell, Carlisle E. Moody Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Jan., 2001) , pp. 89-106

Abstract--Three-strikes laws provide very long prison terms for certain criminals with prior convictions of serious violent crimes. It is likely that the laws increase homicides because a few criminals, fearing the enhanced penalties, murder victims and witnesses to limit resistance and identification. With a state-level multiple-time-series design, we find that the laws are associated with 10-12 percent more homicides in the short run and 23-29 percent in the long run. The impact occurs in almost all 24 states with three-strikes laws. Furthermore, there is little evidence that the laws have any compensating crime reduction impact through deterrence or incapacitation.

A reader comments:

Memorable relevant anecdote: that early scene in the film "Heat" where Waynegro (Kevin Gage) shoots dead a security guard for no discernable reason, making McCauley (Robert DeNiro) and the rest of his crew guilty of felony murder. So McCauley gives the go-ahead to Cherito (Tom Sizemore) to murder the other two guards, because there's no additional legal punishment for those two murders.

This is the flip side of the logic that persuaded the Victorians to stop hanging pickpockets -- if both the Artful Dodger and Bill Sikes are liable to be hanged, how do you discourage pickpockets like the Dodger from turning into robber-murderers like Sikes? The criminal law needs gradations of punishment to provide proper incentives.

We've discovered over the last quarter century that we need long prison terms to discourage criminality, but long terms, in the absence of a higher penalty (i.e., the death pealty) reduce the opportunity cost of witness-murdering.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

June 1, 2006

Robert Samuelson excoriates the press on its immigration coverage:

If you read iSteve.com and VDARE.com, you won't find anything surprising in the new Washington Post / Newsweek column by the distinguished economics pundit, but for the rest of the world, it reveals the journalistic malpractice that greased the skids for the Senate immigration vote last week:

What You Don't Know About the Immigration Bill

The Senate passed legislation last week that Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) hailed as "the most far-reaching immigration reform in our history." You might think that the first question anyone would ask is how much it would actually increase or decrease legal immigration. But no. After the Senate approved the bill by 62 to 36, you could not find the answer in the news columns of The Post, the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal.

Yet the estimates do exist and are fairly startling. By rough projections, the Senate bill would double the legal immigration that would occur during the next two decades from about 20 million (under present law) to about 40 million. One job of journalism is to inform the public about what our political leaders are doing. In this case, we failed. The Senate bill's sponsors didn't publicize its full impact on legal immigration, and we didn't fill the void. It's safe to say that few Americans know what the bill would do because no one has told them. Indeed, I suspect that many senators who voted for the legislation don't have a clue as to the potential overall increase in immigration. Democracy doesn't work well without good information. Here is a classic case.

It is interesting to contrast these immigration projections with a recent survey done by the Pew Research Center. The poll asked whether the present level of legal immigration should be changed. The response: 40 percent favored a decrease, 37 percent would hold it steady and 17 percent wanted an increase. There seems to be scant support for a doubling. If the large immigration projections had been in the news, would the Senate have done what it did? Possibly, though I doubt it.

But if it had, senators would have had to defend what they were doing as sound public policy. That's the real point. They would have had to debate whether such high levels of immigration are good or bad for the country rather than adopting a measure whose largest consequences are unintended or not understood...

The doubling of legal immigration under the Senate bill that I cited at the outset comes from a previously unreported estimate made by White House economists. Because the president praised the Senate bill, the administration implicitly favors a big immigration expansion.

The White House estimate could be low. Robert Rector of the conservative Heritage Foundation has a higher figure. The CBO has a projection that the White House describes as close to its own. But all the forecasts envision huge increases, diverging only because they make different assumptions of how the Senate bill would operate in practice.

Our immigration laws involve a bewildering array of categories by which people can get a "green card" -- the right to stay permanently. The Senate bill dramatically expands many of these categories and creates a large new one: "guest workers." The term is really a misnomer, because most guest workers would receive an automatic right to apply for a green card and remain. The Senate bill authorizes 200,000 guest workers annually, plus their spouses and minor children.

One obvious question is why most of the news media missed the larger immigration story. On May 15 Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama held a news conference with Heritage's Rector to announce their immigration projections and the estimated impact on the federal budget. Most national media didn't report the news conference. The next day the CBO released its budget and immigration estimates. These, too, were largely unreported, though the Wall Street Journal later discussed the figures in a story on the bill's possible budget costs...

Whether or not the bias is "liberal," groupthink is a powerful force in journalism. Immigration is considered noble. People who critically examine its value or worry about its social effects are subtly considered small-minded, stupid or bigoted. The result is selective journalism that reflects poorly on our craft and detracts from democratic dialogue.

The penultimate sentence is something I've been saying for years, although I would change "subtly considered" to "blatantly demonized as."


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

The American Conservative's latest issue

The June 5, 2006 Issue of The American Conservative:




Out of Iraq, Into Darfur?

By Justin Raimondo
Those who balked at a campaign to liberate Iraq now want to save Sudan.



Iran: Gulf War III?
By Charles V. Peña
An attack on the Islamic Republic would send oil prices skyrocketing, but the real price would be in blood.


Life Lessons
By W. James Antle III
The Democrats have a new abortion strategy: divide
and conquer.

Not So Sweet
By Timothy P. Carney
How Big Sugar turned guest workers into indentured servants

The Day Laborers Took Off
By Dennis Dale
A day without a Mexican

Think Liberty, Act Locally
By John Zmirak
Wilhelm Röpke balanced liberty and order.

Broken China Policy
By Justin Logan
America’s incoherent strategy towards Beijing

Wizards of Oz
By R.J. Stove
Neocons invade Australia



Cruise Control
By Steve Sailer
Tom Cruise in “Mission: Impossible III”

Lose Your Illusions
By Leon Hadar
The Peace of Illusions: American Grand Strategy From 1940 to the Present by Christopher Layne

While You Were Sleeping
By Jesse Walker
Attention Deficit Democracy by James Bovard


All-American Anarchists

By Rod Dreher
Look Homeward, America: In Search of Reactionary Radicals and Front-Porch Anarchists by Bill Kauffman



The Persecution of the Palestinians
By Patrick J. Buchanan
A textbook example of why we are hated

This Little Piggy Popped Pills
By Taki
Revolting Elites



Fourteen Days: One-Man Supreme Court; Staying the (Golf) Course in Iraq; Multinational Anthem

Deep Background: Revenge of Mary McCarthy


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

More blogs

- faute de pire by David Orland is back -- Sophisticated coverage of immigration issues with a Francocentric orientation. It reminds me of what Christopher Caldwell could be doing if he wasn't trimming his sails to get into the NYT.

- Darwinian Conservatism by Larry Arnhart

"The Left has traditionally assumed that human nature is so malleable, so perfectible, that it can be shaped in almost any direction. Conservatives object, arguing that social order arises not from rational planning but from the spontaneous order of instincts and habits. Darwinian biology sustains conservative social thought by showing how the human capacity for spontaneous order arises from social instincts and a moral sense shaped by natural selection in human evolutionary history."

- Reactionary Radicals by Bill Kauffman and friends

- Advocatus Diaboli by Hans Gruber (Hey, wasn't Hans Gruber the English aristocrat arch-villain played by Alan Rickman in "Die Hard?" Are you saying that's not his real name?)


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

John J. Donohue: Postnatal executions of the guilty are less effective at deterring crime than prenatal executions of the innocent.

From the Chronicle of Higher Education:

"Statistical evidence for the idea that the death penalty deters homicide is "at best weak and inconclusive," write John J. Donohue, a professor at Yale University Law School, and Justin J. Wolfers, an assistant professor of business and public policy at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.

"While it remains possible that the death penalty may deter murderers, the available data are "simply too noisy, and the conclusions from any study are too fragile," they write."

Funny how Donohue and his research partner Steven D. "Freakonomics" Levitt ignored how noisy the data were when they popularly proclaimed that legalizing abortion had lowered the crime rate!

My guess is that the recent lengthening of sentences for non-homicides, such as the life sentences for a third felony, means that the death penalty can play a role in deterring a particular kind of murder: witness-murdering. If your state has a three strikes rule but no death penalty, a two-time loser engaging in a felony like armed robbery has a rational incentive to murder his victims to prevent them from identifying him. If he lets them live and they identify him, he goes to prison for life. If he kills them, he reduces the chance he will be convicted, and if convicted he still merely goes to prison for life.

Unfortunately, I've never heard of anyone studying this particular possibility. Indeed, this logic seldom seems to come up in discussions of the death penalty.

Also, having a death penalty gives the district attorneys more leverage, especially in a prisoner's dilemma situation where they've arrested two suspects who worked together but can't convict either one unless one confesses. Avoiding the death penalty gives one the incentive to roll over on the other. (Of course, this also means that sometimes the accomplice who didn't pull the trigger gets framed by his partner who actually was the killer.)


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer