Caplan has written a delightful book, breezy in prose style, but reasonably rigorous in its handling of the nature-nurture statistics. I hope people who like Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids do have more kids. And I hope people who put it down immediately to see what the Kardashians are up to on reality TV have fewer kids.
Second: You can make a tax deductible contribution via VDARE by clicking here. (Paypal and credit cards accepted, including recurring "subscription" donations.) UPDATE: Don't try this at the moment.
Third: send money via the Paypal-like Google Wallet to my Gmail address (that's isteveslrATgmail.com -- replace the AT with a @). (Non-tax deductible.)
Here's the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: "You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps." You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.
You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.
Or you can send money via credit card (Visa, MasterCard, AmEx, Discover) with the industry-standard 2.9% fee. (You don't need to put money into your Google Wallet Balance to do this.)
Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone -- the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).
Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google's free Gmail email service. Here's how to do it.
(Non-tax deductible.)
Fourth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.)
Fifth: if you have a Chase bank account (or, theoretically,other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it's Steven Sailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.)
Posts
49 comments:
Not all that much off-topic, but there was an extraordinarily natalistic episode of Stargate Universe tonight.
It reminded me a great deal of M Night Shyamalan's The Village.
There are some serious cultural conservatives writing for the Stargate franchise [which I guess is why it had to be cancelled - just like The Sarah Connor Chronicles].
I agree with Half Sigma's career tracks theory. Starting on the right track is essential in many high paying industries these days.
Getting an i-banking or PE job is practically impossible if you don't start with an entry level financial analyst position.
With respect to human reproduction, does the United States really need Anglo-Saxons anymore? Commenters have observed in other threads that in the division of labor economy that we have created, other groups do as well if not better in the various specialized economic sectors (manual labor, agriculture, engineering, law, medicine, sports, film, music, etc.).
Are Anglo-Saxons becoming a source of inefficiency--a burden if you will--in American society?
Be specific: We need to have more Mexican kids here.
Everyone knows that a Mexican labor force is the key to success in the new global economy.
500 million Mexicans instead of a paltry 50 million would put the USA back on top.
/end bitter sarcasm
Speaking of kids, Criterion's dvd compilation SILENT NARUSE offers a priceless glimpse into Japanese relations between men and women--and parents and children--in the 1930s. Compiliation comprises 5 relatively short features--on average each is less than an hour--with wonderful acting, technical finesse, and stylistic boldness that would later flower into the cinema of one of Japan's most beloved masters. Great juggling of humor, pathos, and social satire. A must-see for film lovers.
Sailor's review is way better than the drivel you get from either the liberal-left or the social conservatives on this topic. At least Sailor addresses the issue of increasing competition for elite schooling and careers and the trade-offs between the Caplan and the Chua style of parenting. Sailor presents useful strategic thinking on the relevant issues of selecting which style of parenting is more optimal.
All of the other reviews of this book are useless drivel about "meaningful life", "purpose" and other such horse-shit.
Books and arguments such as Caplan's and Chua's require lots of qualifiers. When Caplan says "don't try too hard", he's certainly not saying "don't try at all or slum it as a parent." He means, "don't have a cow, man." In other words, do spend time to raise your kids right but don't think that MORE is necessarily more. Sometimes, less is more. And there is the factor of diminishing returns. If you spend 10 hrs of quality time with your kids per week, that may do a lot of good and be crucial for their upbrining. But don't think that 20 hrs will necessarily will do them twice as good. So, do what is necessary and essential, but don't do more in the hope that it will necessarily pay off in great dividends.
For some kids, it might. If a kid shows 'child prodigy' skills as a chess player or piano player, then maybe the parents should push the kid. But not every kid is gonna be Bobby Fischer because his parents pushed him to be one. And kids have their own passions and stuff. Spielberg's parents didn't push him into filmmaking. He got zapped by Disney films like Roy in CLOSE ENCOUNTERS got zapped by aliens. Spielberg knew what movies were gonna be his life. He FELT it as a child. And Dylan's parents didn't push him into American pop music. He heard some stuff on the radio and from peers, and he just fell in love with that music.
Even so, all parents need to be supportive in pushing their kids to attend school, learn three R's, and all that stuff. Though Spielberg and Dylan followed their own muses, they had learned and developed basic skills as social creatures cuz their parents were there for them economically and emotionally, or ecomotionally.
So, 'slacker parenting' isn't what Caplan seems to be about. He's about essential parenting: people should have kids and try to raise kids right. Some kids will do reasonably well without beyond-the-essential parenting, and few will show exceptional talent. I don't think Caplan would object to EXCEPTIONALS being shown special attention. It's like if you're the father of Carl Lewis, it would make sense to push into him athletics. But if you're the father of Gary Coleman, it'd be foolish and a waste of time.
Similarly, I don't think Chua is saying her way will work with every kid. She obviously knew her kids were blessed with good genes. She probably noticed early on that her kids were smart and naturally talented and picked up stuff quickly. But suppose her kids had the IQ of 90. I think Chua would have given up when the kids were young. I mean there's so much you can do with a dumb kid, like a parent can do so much with Gary Coleman or Tattoo when it comes to athletics.
One thing though...
Chua's approach may be generally good for talented kids but stifling of truly exceptional/extraordinatry kids.
Caplan's approach may be less effective in general, but it may provide more creative space for truly exceptional kids.
A smart talented kid without strong personality or originality may achieve more under Chua. Her daughter is a fine pianist and will attend Harvard, but she's still a dime-a-dozen among talented musicians. She is a follower, not a pathfinder, like Dylan or Lennon.
But someone like a young Dylan or Spielberg--creative, original, and eccentric--would do better under a Caplanesque parents. They need lots of time to dream, fantasize, and think things through on their own. If Chua had been Dylan's mother, Dylan might have become a pretty good violinist, but he wouldn't have become the worldshaker he became. He needed time on his own, which his father allowed him.
But keep in mind... the likes of Dylan are one in a million or ten million or even 100 million.
But Chua's daughter is one in a 100,000, which means such people have better job prospects.
That track thing is really true. I decide I wanted to learn how to build a house after I got out of college, and the next thing I knew I was a carpenter -- a manual laborer for life! -- with grad school receding at the speed of life. But later I met a smart garden designer, traded in my hammer for a shovel, and ended up making a lot of upper middle class money anyhow (caught the sweet spot when black yardmen were going out of style and the Mexicans hadn't got there yet.) And I only worked about 18 hours a week.
So, what is it? Race, class, education, mate, brains, luck, you tell me?
Chinese and other East Asians/Indians are more submissive and malleable in personality. A Chua-style parenting system works better for these kids than those from more rebellious, independent-minded races.
Different parenting styles between Westerners and Asians/Indians probably just reflect different innate personality types.
Are Anglo-Saxons becoming a source of inefficiency--a burden if you will--in American society?
LOL.
You reference the guy you know who found out Harvard wants $5 million to move your kid in. You previously mentioned a rich guy who tries to set nerds up with retired ballerinas. I don't know how many rich people you know, driving your famously dented car, but I'm going to guess it's all one guy. There is one Harvard grad you've named as someone you know personally, at least as far as I recall.
"I don't know how many rich people you know, driving your famously dented car, but I'm going to guess it's all one guy."
Nah.
I'm just an uncle, and my nephew is only 3 years old, but hey that's probably closer to real life than the other 20 and 30-somethings here...
The twin and adoption literature may show that parents are powerless to shape how kids turn out on traits that are biological or physiological, i.e. intelligence and personality (both boil down to properties of the brain).
But there is one large class of traits where parents can make all the difference, and sometimes are the only ones who can. Namely, going through rites of passage.
Kids over the past 15 to 20 years have hardly gone through any of the real ones, and that's mostly the parents' fault for trying to keep their children shielded from the tiniest discomfort, which the rite of passage requires.
Speaking of "tracks," it's time for parents to put their children on the track of growing up earlier rather than never. After too long on the sitting-life-out track, how will their boys learn to drive, to flirt with girls, to stand up to something frightening, etc.?
Because these are not biological, but rather a matter of having gone through the rite ("socially constructed"), they're something you have lots of control over, and that matter in the big picture.
We recognize this for rites like learning how to read, getting a library card, and so on. And that's all good. But there's more to be initiated into in life than the brotherhood of book-borrowers.
Plus any kid who isn't a total wimp *wants* to go through them. They'll feel gipped if you deny them the chance.
I realize kids these days are dorkier than they used to be, and so less likely than before to want to go through rites of passage, but that's even more reason to devote more parenting effort to this area.
Before they might have gotten restless and taught themselves, or sought out other guides, but there are no other sources for guidance anymore, now that everyone lives in a small bubble. About the only quasi-human activity they're plugged into is video games, and god knows those are just as self-esteem-bathing as everything else.
Who's going to teach your kid how to tough through an ordeal -- you or Pokemon?
o/t, but did you pick this up - you may have done and I've missed it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/achievement-gap-widening-between-asian-american-students-and-everyone-else/2011/04/05/AF5YvclC_story.html
"As policymakers over the past decade focused on closing the achievement gap between white students and underrepresented minorities, another rift was widening: the gap between Asian American students and everyone else."
Sailor's review is way better than the drivel you get from either the liberal-left or the social conservatives on this topic. At least Sailor addresses the issue of increasing competition for elite schooling and careers and the trade-offs between the Caplan and the Chua style of parenting. Sailor presents useful strategic thinking on the relevant issues of selecting which style of parenting is more optimal.
It's spelled Sailer, with an "e," NOT with an "o."
You've been commenting here forever, and yet you keep making this mistake.
Well, most of us Sailer followers do not come equipped with vaginas, and it is a bit presumptuous of us to tell those who are such equipped what to do with said vaginas.
No matter how much fathers slack off, getting a 6-pound lump out will still be world-class painful.
To any women out there - I am impressed that you manage to handle being equipped with such high-maintenance reproductive systems.
Before I Google it, aren't the Kardashians (sp) a "Star Trek DS9" race?
"To any women out there - I am impressed that you manage to handle being equipped with such high-maintenance reproductive systems."
well on behalf of female reproductive tract possessors everywhere, thank you for your acknowledgement. Flattery will suerly get you somewhere.
But 6 lb. lump? Mere peanuts. My grandmother claimed one of her bouncing bundles was 13 lbs.
Don't try that at home.
"To any women out there - I am impressed that you manage to handle being equipped with such high-maintenance reproductive systems."
Yeah, thanks.
And thanks to the fellas who invented epidurals!
I figured Steve would get around to this one! It's refreshing.
Among a dozen old friends that I've kept in contact with over the years, I've noticed a bimodal distribution. Half of them are unmarried or married/childless, and the other half have LOADS of kids, ranging from 5 to 9.
Clearly the ones who wanted to be parents have rediscovered the old wisdom that Caplan is discussing. Don't worry about details, just keep the place more or less consistent and the kids will grow up fine. Older kids will take care of younger ones.
if you want to know why he doesnt comment on the relaxed style of mexican parenting readhttp://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2009/04/is_there_a_righ.html he is a open borders man. immigrants have the same rights as we do. just enter into a contract with another and you are in
Only an economist could be so arrogant as to style himself an expert on childrearing after so little experience at it.
Anonymous cites evidence of a growing achievement gap between Asians and Whites (with Asians coming out on top).
This really goes to the question I posed earlier as to whether this country really needs the White population anymore and to the implication of whether the economy might run more efficiently without Whites. (I originally wrote "Anglo-Saxons," but it is probably more accurate to say Whites or people of European descent.) Thoughts?
Half Sigma is wrong about the entertainment industry, at least. I know several executives who got their starts as lawyers or political aides, and two guys I know decided to give screenwriting a try after careers as a defense contractor and a journalist. They're now writing summer blockbusters.
In fact, Steve will be amused to see this article on who is writing the big Hollywood movies that black and Hispanic teenagers are attending in droves:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/risky-business/roundtable-writers-summers-biggest-blockbusters-177491
So who has Hollywood tapped to appeal to an increasingly minority audience? Five white guys and an extremely pale Mexican/Cuban-American (Bob Orci) who writes with a Jewish guy. Two of them (Kruger and Miller) even went to the same high school, the extremely elite math and science magnet school Thomas Jefferson in the D.C. suburbs.
And when you look at the surnames, you get as many gentile German and British names (Kruger, Fergus, McFeely, Miller, Stentz) as obviously Jewish ones.
Great article as usual, but Goldman Sachs hires plenty of University of Chicago graduates (Big Ten, not Ivy). They are good at finance.
"Well, most of us Sailer followers do not come equipped with vaginas,"
Not physical ones anyway.
An interesting column might result from finding out who your birth parents are and what they have done in life.
"Well, most of us Sailer followers do not come equipped with vaginas, and it is a bit presumptuous of us to tell those who are such equipped what to do with said vaginas."
You feel this way cuz you may have a dick but you have no balls.
Besides, those with vaginas are always telling those with dicks what to do. It seems we girls got more balls these days.
Well, a few of us Sailer followers do not come equipped with penises, and it is a bit presumptuous of us to tell those who are such equipped what to do with said organs.
No matter how much mothers smirk, getting a penis into its functional state must be anxiety provoking.
To any man out there - I am impressed that you manage to handle being equipped with such ridiculously overt reproductive systems.
Dr. Caplan also thinks that the more immigrants, the better. It's one thing to encourage Americans to procreate more children (a good idea for many), it is quite another to favor massive immigration (lunacy).
Here in Canada, many people would like more kids (or any kids for that matter!), but are being priced out of the housing market.
http://canadianimmigrationreform.blogspot.com/2011/04/birth-rate-and-how-immigration-is.html
Good review Steve.
It's funny you mention the Kardashians, though, since Robert Kardashian was a pretty fecund guy by modern standards.
"Speaking of kids, Criterion's dvd compilation SILENT NARUSE..."
Thanks for the recommendation. I put When a Woman Ascends the Stairs (the only one available)on my Netflix Queue.
TLF:
You've posed the question as to whether Anglo-Saxons (and, I'd suppose, somewhat by extension, other of the European-descended white peoples) are or are becoming superfluous, inefficient,--a "drag" on everyone else. Are you serious?
If a person has a job (in the private sector, that is) and pays tax--that's prima facie evidence of generating social "extra." It's sometimes true of government employees, as well--just not as automatically discernible.
Let me ask you--is there any group you'd nominate as being more "deserving" or "necessary?"
"...hope people who put it down immediately to see what the Kardashians are up to...have fewer kids." Disagree. The people who at least would come in contact with this type of book,before getting restless, are going to be way above the average!
"Indeed, [Goldman Sachs] mostly hires just from Harvard, Yale, Princeton (and maybe Stanford)."
Umm, GS hires more people from Penn/Wharton than any of those schools... Definitely Yale, I've hardly seen any Yalies in my career on Wall Street. Also there are more Columbia grads on Wall Street than Yale, and probably more than Stanford.
In the book version of "Devil Wears Prada" (which I assume is more closely based on reality), Meryl Streep's character is much less impressed by Andy's Brown credentials. The book doesn't give an exact explanation for why Andy gets hired, but it does note that she happened to be model thin when she interviewed, thanks to an intestinal parasite she had picked up in India.
IIRC the theme of Andy being smarter and more competent than the silly fashionistas was completely fabricated by the screenwriters. The book is more about dealing with physical and emotional exhaustion, which Andy does no better than anyone else.
So who has Hollywood tapped to appeal to an increasingly minority audience? Five white guys and an extremely pale Mexican/Cuban-American (Bob Orci) who writes with a Jewish guy. Two of them (Kruger and Miller) even went to the same high school, the extremely elite math and science magnet school Thomas Jefferson in the D.C. suburbs.
And when you look at the surnames, you get as many gentile German and British names (Kruger, Fergus, McFeely, Miller, Stentz) as obviously Jewish ones.
Of the 12 screenwriters mentioned in the article, 6 of them are Jewish.
And Greg Berlanti is an openly gay Italian-American who has said of his childhood that "We were Italians in a town of WASPs" and that his family was not "doing as well as 90% of the community."
"Goldman Sachs hires plenty of University of Chicago graduates (Big Ten, not Ivy)"
facepalm.jpg, I mean seriously man, if you're going to talk about a school to support your point, you should at least know which school you're talking about. U Chicago is famously where Obama taught, you'd think people would have heard that it wasn't a Big 10 school by now.
Northwestern and UIUC are Big 10. U Chicago is not - they disbanded their football team. U Chicago is an extremely nerdy school with an average SAT around 1500 (old system,) known for its leading law, medical, and business schools, and for its programs in things like econ ("Chicago school") and Semitic philology.
Goldman hires from U Chicago because U Chicago has some of the smartest UG's in the Midwest. It doesn't hire that many, though, because Chicago UG's are uglier, nerdier, and poorer than Ivy UG grads, so relatively few are good candidates to become Masters of the Universe.
-bb
In all the studies that show the large influence of genes and peers and the small influence of parents, have any controlled for the level of peer orientation (aka peer dependence) of the kids? Peer orientation is a hugely important concept that I never see mentioned anywhere. (FYI, a peer-oriented child is one whose primary attachments are to peers rather than parents.)
Steve, thanks for citing my blog post on career tracks.
Regarding kids: I don't see why so many on the conservative side of the blogosphere are so eager to see our population increase. The U.S. is too crowded. That smart people aren't having that many kids is not a problem. No, the problem is that the stupid people are having too many kids. And we have too much immigration.
Truth said...
Not physical ones anyway.
:-)
At the considerable risk of merely trying to appear more interesting, I mention in passing that I studied economics at George Mason.
Albertosaurus
Not sure whether this is off topic or not.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13156817
"Intelligence tests are as much a measure of motivation as they are of mental ability, says research from the US.
Researchers from Pennsylvania found that a high IQ score required both high intelligence and high motivation but a low IQ score could be the result of a lack of either factor.
Incentives were also found to increase IQ scores by a noticeable margin.
The study is published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences."
most of us Sailer followers do not come equipped with vaginas, and it is a bit presumptuous of us to tell those who are such equipped what to do with said vaginas.
But presumption is what we do best! How do you think we get those "equipped with vaginas" to sleep with us?
Sherlock Holmes once famously said, “Nothing is more deceptive than an obvious fact”. David Axelrod was not only the person who sealed Obama’s paper trail but he was also the same person who coined the phrase “birther”. He clearly understood that if he simply told everyone to fuck off and stay out of the boy wonders past it would have simply aroused more suspicion about Obama’s past, not less. So what he did is bait the topic by throwing out the birther issue. After all, people only want to see it because they are racist and cannot accept that a black man could be President, right? Nothing on Obama’s birth certificate could be that damming if for no other reason; He was not responsible for what was written on it. The rest of his records are all his doing. I don’t know what Axelrod and Obama are hiding, but if I were a betting man, I would say where there is smoke there is fire.
Re Truth's comment about posters not having vaginas: "Not physical ones,anyway." Ouch! LOL!:)
I found Caplan's original blog series on the topic convincing enough to stretch myself and have a fourth. Three did feel pretty overwhelming at the time and I often felt guilty that I wasn't doing enough for the ones I already had.
Caplan's argument that it was really okay for the kids to watch TV and poke things in the yard with a stick took some pressure off the present, and the idea that most older people wish they'd had MORE kids put some pressure on the future. Together, it was enough to tip the balance in favor of #4's existence, who is a marvelous, beautiful child and who I have enjoyed more than the first two put together.
Experience pays off when it comes to dealing with babies.
But four really IS quite enough, thanks. ;)
I found Caplan's original blog series on the topic convincing enough to stretch myself and have a fourth. Three did feel pretty overwhelming at the time and I often felt guilty that I wasn't doing enough for the ones I already had.
Caplan's argument that it was really okay for the kids to watch TV and poke things in the yard with a stick took some pressure off the present, and the idea that most older people wish they'd had MORE kids put some pressure on the future. Together, it was enough to tip the balance in favor of #4's existence, who is a marvelous, beautiful child and who I have enjoyed more than the first two put together.
Experience pays off when it comes to dealing with babies.
But four really IS quite enough, thanks. ;)
f
Post a Comment