Links to Consider, 9/20/2024
Dreams of privatizing Freddie, Fannie; Health care spending out-of-pocket; Joseph Bronski on IQ heritability; Michael Strong on better schools
The WSJ reports that regarding Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae,
Former Trump administration figures and bankers have been discussing plans on ending U.S. government control of the mortgage-finance giants should Trump win the presidential election, according to people familiar with the matter. The talks have been under way since at least this past spring and include reaching out to investment managers for advice on how to get the deal done.
This is not a good idea. I have already explained why, and I offered a better solution, which could be implemented much more easily and quickly.
If I were in charge of the agency that oversees Freddie and Fannie, I would keep them as government enterprises, but with a narrow mission. The only mortgages that they could purchase would be 30-year, fixed-rate first mortgages for purchasing owner-occupied homes. All other mortgages would be left to the private sector.
Surprised to learn that the US is below the OECD average for out of pocket health care spending as a fraction of per capita consumption, with virtually the same % as Canada.
Pointer from Tyler Cowen. This was also true when I was writing Crisis of Abundance, published in 2006. Americans are not used to spending their own money on health care. The difference with other OECD countries is that more of our spending is covered by employer-provided health insurance, whereas more of their spending is funded by taxpayers.
Most of the lower heritability of IQ compared to height comes from measurement error being dumped into e^2
The point is that because we measure height more accurately than intelligence, we can expect higher correlations with analyses of height, including its heritability.
Bronski puts that in a footnote. I would have put it higher up in the essay. I think that statistics courses should do more to stress the importance of measurement error in correlation analysis.
millions of parents are spontaneously creating more humane learning environments for their children through homeschooling, microschooling, virtual schooling, private schooling, and religious schooling. As millions of children are raised in environments which:
A. Cultivate meaning and purpose, rather than nihilism, hedonism, and/or debilitating woke politics;
B. Have relationships with caring adults;
C. Are provided with more agency, and
D. Are embedded in healthier and more positive subcultures,
many dysfunctions, mental illness, and much of the misery associated with our society will gradually vanish.
substacks referenced above:
@
@
School vouchers are pretty much the clincher on why I think we are moving to FL/TX soon. Yeah, the taxes and housing are nice too and may even be worth as much or more. But it's hard for me not to get over the fact that they respect my basic right to decide how my kids are educated. And while I could afford to send them all to private regardless, most can't, and as such they will be growing up in an indoctrinated society. I think there will be positive externalities to growing up in a state with educational freedom.
I was looking at a school down in Florida the other day and it's amazing the flexibility they offer. How many days a week you want to come to dayschool. Homeschool and micro school support. In person, online, hybrid. Include field trips and extracurriculars or not. All at a reasonable price covered mainly by the voucher.
In the same sentence, Strong makes a contradiction I see too many right-wing critiques makes. Schools, he says, teach nihilism, the belief that there is no morality. But they also teach "debilitating woke politics". Woke politics are very moral. In fact, "woke" pretty much comes from commonly accepted moral principals combined with "bad science". So everyone agrees that racism is bad and people should be treated fairly. You combine that with the idea that there are no inherent differences between groups and it follows as the night the day that any differential outcomes are unfair, must be caused by bad things, and must be changed. Disparity proves discrimination and everyone knows discrimination is bad.
The model extends to sex and international affairs.