Caplan, Hymowitz and Kling on less-educated men; Lorenzo Warby on power and parliaments; Martin Gurri on information control; Matt Levine on regulatory arbitrage
The likely optimal answer to "what to do about jobs for low IQ folk" is to have lots of gov't programs helping businesses hire such HS dropouts willing to show up to work, and subsidizing their take home wage (gov't paying part or all of their SS & other taxes; adding EITC as monthly or weekly cash).
Not all poor are lazy stupid careless poor - but there are many poor who are; the low IQ stupid part is not their fault. We should be talking more honestly about how society should be incentivizing, pushing, them to act better.
There is no reason for any government program to subsidize their employment, and it would likely be counterproductive because it's not a financial issue. Minimum wage laws rarely impact people with any kind of skill base or aptitude. However, education level is both way overvalued (by overeducated HR departments) and used as a proxy because businesses are not immunized from all sorts of DIE (sic) regulation based on the use of direct experience to evaluate hirees. This immunity would be the actual benefit of any subsidy program. Establishing reasonable limits on the use of 'disparate impact' aka DIE quotas in challenging hiring and retention decisions and forcing business to defend education requirements relative to actual skills would accomplish the same end.
"The reality of financial regulation is that new rules open new avenues for regulatory arbitrage, as institutions find loopholes in regulations. That in turn forces authorities to institute new regulations in an ongoing cat-and-mouse game (between a very adroit mouse and a less nimble cat). " --Olivier Blanchard. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2014/09/blanchard.htm
Thanks for highlighting Lorenzo's latest, Arnold - and also, as an aside, Martin Gurri appears to have independently elucidated what I call "the Silo Effect", which Andrew Doyle has taken up in his latest book, The New Puritans. I discuss it here: https://lawliberty.org/book-review/from-witchcraft-to-wokecraft/
The likely optimal answer to "what to do about jobs for low IQ folk" is to have lots of gov't programs helping businesses hire such HS dropouts willing to show up to work, and subsidizing their take home wage (gov't paying part or all of their SS & other taxes; adding EITC as monthly or weekly cash).
Not all poor are lazy stupid careless poor - but there are many poor who are; the low IQ stupid part is not their fault. We should be talking more honestly about how society should be incentivizing, pushing, them to act better.
There is no reason for any government program to subsidize their employment, and it would likely be counterproductive because it's not a financial issue. Minimum wage laws rarely impact people with any kind of skill base or aptitude. However, education level is both way overvalued (by overeducated HR departments) and used as a proxy because businesses are not immunized from all sorts of DIE (sic) regulation based on the use of direct experience to evaluate hirees. This immunity would be the actual benefit of any subsidy program. Establishing reasonable limits on the use of 'disparate impact' aka DIE quotas in challenging hiring and retention decisions and forcing business to defend education requirements relative to actual skills would accomplish the same end.
Broadly speaking, how would you address the dynamic of financiers slicing cash flows for regulatory benefit and regulators adapting after the fact?
"The reality of financial regulation is that new rules open new avenues for regulatory arbitrage, as institutions find loopholes in regulations. That in turn forces authorities to institute new regulations in an ongoing cat-and-mouse game (between a very adroit mouse and a less nimble cat). " --Olivier Blanchard. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2014/09/blanchard.htm
Thanks for highlighting Lorenzo's latest, Arnold - and also, as an aside, Martin Gurri appears to have independently elucidated what I call "the Silo Effect", which Andrew Doyle has taken up in his latest book, The New Puritans. I discuss it here: https://lawliberty.org/book-review/from-witchcraft-to-wokecraft/