Scientist here. Just wanted to chime in that nobody cares about the quality of a scientist's English. Like 0.00% of scientists. If you can follow what the person is saying, it's fine. (And frankly I have been to plenty of talks in which I cannot follow the presenter's English. In those cases, I read the slides.)
Economics is different. (This is a positive, not a normative statement)
That exact thread of his not withstanding, I guess.
Also, ljl at linking to JPubE instead of JPE.
What an æss.
Jaeger thinks you can’t be an a hole if you are PC
https://twitter.com/davidajaeger/status/1271082758295732224?s=21
https://twitter.com/davidajaeger/status/1270636623936589824?s=21
Scientist here. Science has likewise focused disproportionately on interesting, sexy problems at the expense of relevant problems.
We can reverse some cancers and it is nothing short of miraculous. Some people get cancer, but _everyone_ eats. Yet nutrition isn't considered high-end science. It's not sexy.
Here is an example Kafka would love. The research agenda of mental health -- the loss of which destroys a staggering amount of wealth (lost productivity, drug abuse, crime, etc) is largely run by pharma. And because of this we have sunk so low, at least in the US, that we pathologize being a high-energy kid. White boys are probably the most-drugged subset.
The establishment isn't immune to valid criticism.
Scientist here. A perfect example of institutionalized racism is NYĆs school system. It educated probably 1 million kids across something like 2k schools. The most formative years, when all of the basics are established, are a disaster for poor kids of any color — BY DESIGN. Kids are sorted into schools according to neighborhood catchments the boundaries of which are drawn politically. We bought our apartment according to these boundaries, down to the N vs S side of our street.
Smart kids in poor neighborhoods have to be lucky enough to have parents who know that they need to be tested at age FOUR to be placed in a gifted and talented program K through fifth grade. Else they go to their local school.
Is my well funded research program really more important than fixing problems like this?
And before you say that the poor parents need to organize and vote, appreciate people with resources who buy expensive apartments in good catchments will RESIST changing the system their property value is derived from the catchment. This is what systematic racism looks like. No one is discriminating against an individual, but whole classes of people are totally boxed in,
Scientist here. A perfect example of institutionalized racism is NYĆs school system. It educated probably 1 million kids across something like 2k schools. The most formative years, when all of the basics are established, are a disaster for poor kids of any color — BY DESIGN. Kids are sorted into schools according to neighborhood catchments the boundaries of which are drawn politically. We bought our apartment according to these boundaries, down to the N vs S side of our street.
Smart kids in poor neighborhoods have to be lucky enough to have parents who know that they need to be tested at age FOUR to be placed in a gifted and talented program K through fifth grade. Else they go to their local school.
Is my well funded research program really more important than fixing problems like this?
And before you say that the poor parents need to organize and vote, appreciate people with resources who buy expensive apartments in good catchments will RESIST changing the system their property value is derived from the catchment. This is what systematic racism looks like. No one is discriminating against an individual, but whole classes of people are totally boxed in,
This is cr@p on so many levels.
First, nothing you wrote has anything to do with r@ce except when you started talking about systematic racism. Everything you wrote applies to poor whts and hispanics and American Indeens and pacific islanders and everyone else.
Second, if you don't like the schools, do something.
Join the PTA with 100 of your friends and fix the local school.
Move. Leave the city. Leave the state. Move to Jersey or PA or IA.
Move to a spot in the city with better schools. They exist.
Get a cheap place in a good suburb.
Or put your kids in private school -- there are scholarships or you can scrimp and save and do it.
Third, no matter what you do, make sure that your kids have 2 good parents watching out for them and hanging on everything they do.
Take responsibility for yourself, Scientist.
Scientist here. A perfect example of institutionalized racism is NYĆs school system. It educated probably 1 million kids across something like 2k schools. The most formative years, when all of the basics are established, are a disaster for poor kids of any color — BY DESIGN. Kids are sorted into schools according to neighborhood catchments the boundaries of which are drawn politically. We bought our apartment according to these boundaries, down to the N vs S side of our street.
Smart kids in poor neighborhoods have to be lucky enough to have parents who know that they need to be tested at age FOUR to be placed in a gifted and talented program K through fifth grade. Else they go to their local school.
Is my well funded research program really more important than fixing problems like this?
And before you say that the poor parents need to organize and vote, appreciate people with resources who buy expensive apartments in good catchments will RESIST changing the system their property value is derived from the catchment. This is what systematic racism looks like. No one is discriminating against an individual, but whole classes of people are totally boxed in,This is cr@p on so many levels.
First, nothing you wrote has anything to do with r@ce except when you started talking about systematic racism. Everything you wrote applies to poor whts and hispanics and American Indeens and pacific islanders and everyone else.
Second, if you don't like the schools, do something.
Join the PTA with 100 of your friends and fix the local school.
Move. Leave the city. Leave the state. Move to Jersey or PA or IA.
Move to a spot in the city with better schools. They exist.
Get a cheap place in a good suburb.
Or put your kids in private school -- there are scholarships or you can scrimp and save and do it.
Third, no matter what you do, make sure that your kids have 2 good parents watching out for them and hanging on everything they do.
Take responsibility for yourself, Scientist.
Funny you suggest joining the PTA. It is as if I planted this reply. (I didn't.)
Layered onto the scenario described above is the PTA. Poor schools in poor neighborhoods have small PTAs which maybe raise a few thousand dollars for their schools. Public schools in rich neighborhoods raise over 1M, paying for for teaching assistants, science labs, tutoring, chess coaches, etc. A parent at a rich school might donate their expertise in architecture to design a roof garden. Another parent will write a grant to fund said roof garden. Etc. Etc. Better schools raise property values in the catchment. A virtuous circles for the rich. And again, BY DESIGN poor kids are kept out of any part of it.
This is a simple example of how an enormous, influential system (over 1M kids flowing through it per year) boxes kids out without discriminating against individuals.
Public school is free, but the education provided students is wildly uneven, all by design.
Funny you suggest joining the PTA. It is as if I planted this reply. (I didn't.)
Layered onto the scenario described above is the PTA. Poor schools in poor neighborhoods have small PTAs which maybe raise a few thousand dollars for their schools. Public schools in rich neighborhoods raise over 1M, paying for for teaching assistants, science labs, tutoring, chess coaches, etc. A parent at a rich school might donate their expertise in architecture to design a roof garden. Another parent will write a grant to fund said roof garden. Etc. Etc. Better schools raise property values in the catchment. A virtuous circles for the rich. And again, BY DESIGN poor kids are kept out of any part of it.
This is a simple example of how an enormous, influential system (over 1M kids flowing through it per year) boxes kids out without discriminating against individuals.
Public school is free, but the education provided students is wildly uneven, all by design.
You don't have to worry about people thinking that you planted the bit about the PTA. Your lack of response clears you of suspicion.
People will note that you completely ignored all previous points against your position and simply segued to a new talking point, which is also misleading.
The urban district in the MSA in which I live has one of the highest per pupil budgets in the state, exceeded very modestly by only a few affluent districts. PTAs or no PTAs, the kids in the urban district have very generous funding.
This pattern is typical of a big urban district, my city is not an outlier.
But you ignored the opportunity to explain why race has anything to do with your argument or why people can't use any one of the traditional strategies for getting their kids a good education.
Funny you suggest joining the PTA. It is as if I planted this reply. (I didn't.)
Layered onto the scenario described above is the PTA. Poor schools in poor neighborhoods have small PTAs which maybe raise a few thousand dollars for their schools. Public schools in rich neighborhoods raise over 1M, paying for for teaching assistants, science labs, tutoring, chess coaches, etc. A parent at a rich school might donate their expertise in architecture to design a roof garden. Another parent will write a grant to fund said roof garden. Etc. Etc. Better schools raise property values in the catchment. A virtuous circles for the rich. And again, BY DESIGN poor kids are kept out of any part of it.
This is a simple example of how an enormous, influential system (over 1M kids flowing through it per year) boxes kids out without discriminating against individuals.
Public school is free, but the education provided students is wildly uneven, all by design.You don't have to worry about people thinking that you planted the bit about the PTA. Your lack of response clears you of suspicion.
People will note that you completely ignored all previous points against your position and simply segued to a new talking point, which is also misleading.
The urban district in the MSA in which I live has one of the highest per pupil budgets in the state, exceeded very modestly by only a few affluent districts. PTAs or no PTAs, the kids in the urban district have very generous funding.
This pattern is typical of a big urban district, my city is not an outlier.
But you ignored the opportunity to explain why race has anything to do with your argument or why people can't use any one of the traditional strategies for getting their kids a good education.
Don't assume budget = quality education. (The US spends a fortune on health care, with abysmal outcomes benchmarked against peer countries.)
I guess I have to spell it out for you that poor neighborhoods in big cities are largely minority.
People who know how to work the system do indeed finagle a higher quality education for their kids. They have them tested and hope they get into gifted programs (not guaranteed as more kids qualify than there are available seats). Some utilize charter schools which are a kind of workaround. They are taxpayer funded and free, but are not run by the department of education and are not bound by teachers union contracts.
But we are in the weeds here.
The larger point is that kids in poor urban neighborhoods (largely black and brown kids) are funneled into the worse performing schools BY DESIGN.
If our goal as a country is to cold-heartedly extract as much lifelong tax revenue from each future workers, you couldn't design a worse strategy.
Don't assume budget = quality education. (The US spends a fortune on health care, with abysmal outcomes benchmarked against peer countries.)
I didn't make that assumption. High spending schools can be poor.
But you implicitly made it when you brought up PTAs and fund raising.
I guess I have to spell it out for you that poor neighborhoods in big cities are largely minority.
Thanks for the insight.
People who know how to work the system do indeed finagle a higher quality education for their kids. They have them tested and hope they get into gifted programs (not guaranteed as more kids qualify than there are available seats). Some utilize charter schools which are a kind of workaround. They are taxpayer funded and free, but are not run by the department of education and are not bound by teachers union contracts.
But we are in the weeds here.
The larger point is that kids in poor urban neighborhoods (largely black and brown kids) are funneled into the worse performing schools BY DESIGN.
No, they really aren't funneled anywhere BY DESIGN.
There is no real design to broader society. No one is funneling people anywhere.
I could talk here about problems of familial, cultural and political disfunction -- and those would all be true and useful in another context -- but that would distract from the basic point that there is no such thing as institutionalized racism as you claimed.
If our goal as a country is to cold-heartedly extract as much lifelong tax revenue from each future workers, you couldn't design a worse strategy.
Fortunately that isn't our goal -- I hope.