« Nationalize the banks | Main | House prices & biases »

February 23, 2009

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

dearieme

"though the results are not statistically significant": in other words, they cannot be confidently distinguished from mere chance. So why do you report them?

Luis Enrique

dearieme,

have a read of this:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/cf1d659a-f25f-11dd-9678-0000779fd2ac.html

Mark

"I doubt if £1.90 an hour is much recompense for the disutility of working".

Yes, but the disutility of working for marginal income may incentivise better birth control. Interested to know of any research on this.

Laurie Penny

Better birth control? I'm sorry? Actually, we already have pretty decent birth control - what we don't have is decent abortion provision. What you seem to be saying, however, is that women who are poor and don't have partners shouldn't have kids at all, is that what you're saying?

Or are you saying the working classes - because that's who people tend to be talking about when they advocate better birth control - should breed less?

I totally agree that abortion needs to be a viable and easy option for every woman who might fall pregnant, so that all classes can excercise their reproductive freedoms with autonomy. But you're just going to have to accept that some people actually want to have kids, and then find themselves in difficult straits. That's their choice.

dearieme

Thanks, Luis. It's not the first criticism of sig tests that I've seen. Still, I'd need to know just how low the sig was. It's one thing to fail at 95/5, another to fail at 70/30.

Luke Lea

A good argument for wage subsidies -- financed by a graduated consumption tax!

The latter requires international cooperation and an end to tax havens -- but those are features, not bugs.

See BornAgainDemocrats.com for a little more detail

TB

Thanks for this reminder of the bind mothers are in. You don't mention the impact of a long time out of work on career progression, lifetime earnings and poverty in old age. Your example talks about a woman on minimum wage and you might think these irrelevant. Sadly, your shop checkout may be being operated by a woman engineer. Some professions are better than others at providing realistic part-time working opportunities. Better support for working mothers would unleash lots of trained brain power to the benefit of us all.

Tommo

Laurie Penny - "But you're just going to have to accept that some people actually want to have kids, and then find themselves in difficult straits. That's their choice".

No chance. I haven't got kids because I was never in a financial position to support them properly. Why should I now pay for someone else's desire to have a live dolly all of their own to play with?

This isn't about about the working class...that kind of distinction is now totally obsolete.

john b

I don't often line up with the libertoonians, but I'd have to disagree with Laurie here - of course 'can I afford to support them?' should be a consideration when someone considers having kids.

That doesn't mean that a woman for whom contraception fails and who doesn't want an abortion should be forced to raise her child in penury. Nor does it even mean that for a woman who chooses (or a couple who choose) to conceive a child they know they can't afford to support, as the consequences of doing so would be deeply unfair on the child...

But I can't understand how you can *possibly* say that someone who chooses to conceive a child in the full knowledge that they will be unable to support it *isn't* being irresponsible, or that we shouldn't try and deter people from making that decision *at least to the extent that such deterrence doesn't punish the child as well*.

Sam

This could be because the extra income, small as it is, helps child development (say, if it’s spent on books or educational toys), or because paid childcare is better than the mothers’ care.

Or it could be a selection bias. The set of poor single mothers who choose to stay at home with their infants undoubtedly contains some excellent mothers, but probably contains more lard-arsed layabouts than the set of poor single mothers who choose to work.

Matthew

In that Harford piece can you really state, as he does, that whe:

researchers estimated that every dollar spent on the programme saved $4.30 and were 87 per cent confident that the result was real.

it is the same as:

if I offered you the chance to spend a dollar and get back $4.30 87 per cent of the time, you would be right to see this as a good bet. Gosset would have agreed with you.

??

Matthew

In that Harford piece can you really state, as he does, that whe:

researchers estimated that every dollar spent on the programme saved $4.30 and were 87 per cent confident that the result was real.

it is the same as:

if I offered you the chance to spend a dollar and get back $4.30 87 per cent of the time, you would be right to see this as a good bet. Gosset would have agreed with you.

??

breitling watches

This is just one idea, and perhaps displays no more than my limited imagination. If there are better ideas out there, that amount to more than "implement something called "market socialism" and then - alacazam! - full employment!" then I'd love to hear them. http://www.watchgy.com/ mostly bank deposits, fell by £143.2bn in Q1. And of course there’s no guarantee such buying will continue.
http://www.watchgy.com/tag-heuer-c-24.html
http://www.watchgy.com/rolex-submariner-c-8.html

The comments to this entry are closed.

blogs I like

Why S&M?

Blog powered by Typepad