Month: May 2011

This is probably TMI, but I've had a recurrent itchy, mild rash for a while now. At its worst, my whole back was a bumpy, red mess. I tried everything but nada. Eventually I went to an allergy specialist and took a test. The good news is that I'm pretty safe from sea-food, so that embarrassing episode years ago at Magdalen College High Table was probably nerves. (Yes, I ran down the medieval hall puking just outside the old oak doors down into the cloister. Lovely.) But the allergy that leapt out at the doctor was wheat. Not gluten. Just wheat.

So my breakfast and Daily Show snack is a goner. No more shredded wheat and raisins (I'm mildly allergic to grapes as well). No more – and this is gonna hurt – pre-blog Ginger Snaps. No more wheat toast. No pasta. No cake or muffins or, gulp, petite vanilla bean scones. In fact, no more morning scones and coffee at my favorite deli in Provincetown. No more pizza.

I'm also allergic to seet chestnut, white bean, coconut (but they were my favorite M&Ms!), cabbage or dill. How will I survive without cabbage?

That was a joke.

Der Spiegel interviewed French social scientist Emmanuel Todd on two causes of the Arab Spring:

For me, as a demographer, the key variable is not the per capita gross domestic product but the literacy rate. The British historian Lawrence Stone pointed out this relationship in his study of the English revolution in the 16th and 17th centuries. He saw the critical threshold at 40 to 60 percent.

… [The birth rate] has fallen by half in the Arab world in just one generation, from 7.5 children per woman in 1975 to 3.5 in 2005. The birth rate among female academics is just below 2.1, the level needed to maintain a population. Tunisia now has a birth rate similar to that of France. In Morocco, Algeria, Libya and Egypt, it has dropped below the magic threshold of three children per woman. This means that young adults constitute the majority of the population and, unlike their fathers and mothers, they can read and write, and they also practice contraception. But they suffer from unemployment and social frustration. It isn't surprising that unrest was inevitable in this part of world.

(Image by Dylan C. Lathrop for Good, where Zak Stone compiled predictions for Arab revolutions this summer.)

Yglesias connects the falling crime rate to positive feedback loops:

Consider, for example, the fact that there would be fewer murders in Philadelphia if murderers in Philadelphia had a higher chance of getting caught and sent to jail. But if there were fewer murderers in Philadelphia, then the cops could dedicate more resources to each murder and murderers would have a higher chance of getting caught and being sent to jail. So if the murder rate decline in Philadelphia, that decline has a good chance of becoming self-sustaining.

Serwer, meanwhile, eyes demographics:

As Kleiman explained to me last year, the most relevant statistic when it comes to crime is the number of people in a given country who are in prime "crime committing age" between 15 and 30 years old. That's why the so-called Baby Boom generation correlated with such a large increase in crime.

Tom Jensen says the result backs up PPP's polling:

NY-26's results are not occurring in a vacuum. Democrats had a 7 point lead at 47-40 on our last look at the national generic Congressional ballot. And Democrats have led the generic Congressional ballot on 7 consecutive national polls we've asked about it on going back to mid-February. Voters shifted sharply back toward the Democrats after just a couple months of Republican control of the House.

Nate Silver's two cents:

I don’t know that Mr. Obama is much more likely than a 2-to-1 favorite to retain the White House, nor that Democrats better than even money to take back the House. But both sets of odds have improved, in my view, from where I would have pegged them a few months ago.

Susan Orlean contemplates them:

It’s not that the term “mom” doesn’t sometimes serve a purpose besides being the tender name you call the woman who gave birth to you. The aforementioned mom jeans—medium wash denim, buttoned over the slightly-out-of-shape belly, tasteful stitching, legs neither wide enough to be subversive nor tight enough to be sexy—are a real thing; having the shorthand of describing them in one quick stroke is genius. Unfortunately, I feel mortified when I hear the term because I am a mom, or—as I prefer to say—I have a child.

Will Wilkinson pinpoints a political weakness:

As governor, Mr Johnson showed that a non-ideological, pragmatic libertarianism can work as a governing philosophy. But neither full-blooded libertarians nor allegedly liberty-loving tea-party enthusiasts really care much about governing. Libertarians, accustomed to dwelling on the margins of American politics, participate in elections without hope of electoral success, if they participate at all. For them, presidential campaigns offer at best an occasion to preach the libertarian gospel to the wary public, and the more table-pounding the better.

Alex Massie agrees:

Johnson's style – relaxed, calm, patient – is ill-suited to the times. His principles and beliefs challenge conservatives and liberals alike while offering nothing to the nationalist rassentiment that pervades the Republican party these days. Ron Paul's movement is, fundamentally, based on emotion; Johnson makes the mistake of trying to appeal to reason. That won't work this year.

John Sides advises:

MUCH more interesting is not “what it means” but “what POLITICIANS think it means.”  Even though their perceptions may extrapolate well beyond the available data, it still matters whether they think that NY26 was an outlier, a harbinger of a voter backlash against GOP policies, a sign that Democrats can gain ground in 2012 by accusing the GOP of endangering Medicare, or what have you.

Kit Eaton summarizes the new Mobile Workforce Report which finds that mobile workers (those using iPads, iPhones, or Androids) work on average an extra 240 hours a year compared to their static colleagues:

43% will keep their smartphone within reach while they sleep. These folk are 60% more likely to wake to check on their phones… Younger workers (aged 22-34) are the worst at this, with 77% keeping their phone in the bedroom, 60% within arm's reach.

(Photo via Flickr user JD Hancock)

Today on the Dish, Andrew fired back at BHL's defense of DSK and the rich in general, and marveled at the power of the pro-Israel lobby. Andrew crystallized what he meant by the gay left, David Samuels decoded Obama's sneaky plan for peace, and P.J. Crowley urged Obama to pull troops out of Iraq. Charles Kenny wasn't convinced faster internet helps international growth, college graduates didn't regret going, and crime fell despite the recession, maybe due to anti-lead policies, while readers fleshed out other possible reasons. Cities paid for ridiculous slogans, and a huge prison break may be on the horizon, which may be a good thing since harsh sentences aren't effective.

Weigel made the case for Pawlenty, who refused terminally ill cannabis treatment, but he couldn't top the frontrunner with no interest in government. Sarah Palin persecuted a neighbor with lemonade stands, and David Brooks avoided Newt because of "pulsing waves of cerebral activity." Michael Grunwald feared the GOP's extreme candidates, Romney reminded voters of the boss who fired them and hoped that Palin runs. A prankster cold-called voters for the enemy, the DNC ramped up attacks on the GOP for letting the auto industry die, and Pawlenty's blue collar roots led nowhere. Huntsman managed to be with the GOP in policy but moderate in argument, and Nate Silver warned Republicans about jettisoning the Ryan budget.

Andrew revealed his take on the Rapture, readers contemplated the new Rapture date, and the apocalypse came to Joplin, Missouri. Gay military men mimicked normal composures in DADT briefings, and marriage equality happened at sea. Circumcisions could make it to the Supreme Court, beards could save the planet, Obama traveled through time, and Red Bull created Austria's richest man. 

Correction of the day here, quotes for the day here and here, Yglesias award here, MHB here, FOTD here, VFYW here, and VFYW contest winner #51 here.

–Z.P.

Dozens of readers are offering theories as to why crime rates dropped when they did. One writes:

You asked, "Why have crime rates collapsed so drastically and stayed low even during an historically awful period of unemployment?" Because the newly unemployed do not (yet) come from a place of chronic poverty with few or no alternatives. Because there is a social safety net in place. Because the newly unemployed 55-year-old middle manager isn't prepared culturally, mentally, philosophically or emotionally to turn to crime (yet). And people are staying married because they can't afford to divorce and support 2 households.

Another writes:

I was struck by a gaping whole in the NYT story: The notion that higher unemployment equals higher crime is fine, but where is it held that the two move in equal proportions to one another within a certain time frame? While it seems safe to assume that desperate times lead individuals to desperate measures, it seems far-fetched to suggest that college grads, unable to find jobs, turn quickly to carjacking. Is it too much to say that individuals are more likely to engage in crime only after a long period – perhaps their whole lives – of underprivilege?

If the recession were longer-lasting, or if unemployment levels are sustained, and if optimism and opportunity continue to fail, and if the social safety net supporting many of the nation's indigent were to fray and falter, we might see a surge in crime. But I'm shocked that these criminologists are shocked that crime levels have continued their downward trend.

Another:

Are you aware of Stephen Levitt's theory that legalized abortion is related to the drop in crime? Not saying I agree with it (I don't feel qualified), but it's one argument I've heard to try and close the gap.

Another sends the above video, which fleshes out that popular Freakonomics theory. Another writes:

This is a topic that I've give a lot of thought to, largely because I have lived in New York City for the past decade and am always comparing my experience to that of my parents, who lived through the peak crime years of the 1970s and '80s. To think that I have never felt nearly as fearful of crime is remarkable, and you're correct that there is no simple explanation for such long-term decline. But there is one possible factor I have always come back to: technology. Yes, saying "the Internet changed everything" is an easy way out, I think it has shifted the balance of how crime pays.

Here's one example: I don't feel overly worried about having my wallet stolen. Simply put, because of credit and ATM cards, stealing a wallet or purse isn't as profitable a crime; you won't get much cash, and the chances of you getting anything out of the credit and ATM cards before your victim cancels them is pretty thin (thanks to cell phones). And the Internet has taken up a lot of the crime that was once "on the street" (i.e., drug dealing, gambling and prostitution); crime might not have dropped as dramatically as the numbers suggest, it's just better concealed. And this might even have a positive effect on violent crime, as it diminishes the returns on "turf wars."

Another is on the same page:

Young people devoting time to the activity of surfing the web increasingly take themselves off the street.  The advent of online porn has led to the wholesale closure of porn theaters, strip clubs, and massage parlors.  These brought young people together in edge areas.  Porn on the Internet also provides release without "human" contact.  I would note that rape is a crime that has had the greatest decline of all.

The Internet has also provided unbelievable tools to law enforcement, and other advances in technology aided by the Internet I believe are leading to more accurate convictions for crimes.  There are fewer in prison, but those that are should be.  We are benefiting from a more sedentary, older, and inward looking population then has existed in the past. Just my two cents.

Another two:

The population is aging. That accounts for about 70% of the change in rates of crime, according to the well-known demographer David Foot. Demography is mostly destiny.