Growing Up Poor In A Rich Neighborhood

It appears to have drawbacks:

In research just published in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, they uncovered a surprising result among children in the U.K.: Low-income boys who grow up around wealthier peers have more behavior problems like lying, cheating and fighting than their counterparts who grow up immersed in poverty. That result implies that there may be unintended negative consequences to efforts at creating the kinds of communities where poor and better-off families live side by side.

One theory on why this is:

Something called the “relative position hypothesis” may help explain the findings, [Duke’s Candice] Odgers said. Previous studies have suggested that children often evaluate their social rank and self-worth based on comparisons with those around them. Simply put, being poor may be more distressing to a child when he is surrounded by others who are better off.

Is Christie Too Unpopular To Win?

Christie

The New Jersey governor looks like he’s prepping for a run:

[ launched a federal political action committee, or PAC, Monday as he seeks to lay the groundwork for a likely 2016 presidential campaign.

Harry Enten deflates the Christie hype with the above chart:

Some nominees, such as Democrats Michael Dukakis and Bill Clinton, weren’t well known at this point in the campaign. Some, such as Republicans Bob Dole and Ronald Reagan, were very well known and popular. There was George W. Bush in 1999, who was particularly well liked, even if he wasn’t universally known. But no prior nominee had a net favorability rating more than 10 percentage points below where you’d expect given his name recognition.

Christie is 25 percentage points off the pace.

A Side Effect Of Local Newspapers Dying

Danny Hayes discovered that “the impoverishment of local political news in recent years is driving down citizen engagement”:

[O]ur analysis, based on a large-scale study of local coverage and citizen behavior in every congressional district across the country, demonstrates that the fading of two-newspaper towns is not the only problem. When the content of local news deteriorates — as has happened nationwide in an era of newsroom austerity — so do citizen knowledge and participation.

What this means in practice:

For example, a decline of two standard deviations in the number of news stories in a district (about 26) reduces by about two points the likelihood of a respondent being able to identify a candidate’s ideology. We find that this is true not only for the least politically engaged voters but also those who are typically more attentive to politics. Where the news environment is impoverished, engagement is diminished for all citizens.

Another Snowpacalypse?

Those of us in the Northeast are watching the beginning of this week’s big blizzard, which will likely inundate 29 million people with up to three feet of snow and 55 mph winds. So far 4,360 flights have been cancelled and NYC’s public transit system could grind to a halt. The National Weather Service is calling the storm “potentially historic”. Harry Enten unpacks that possibility:

New York City is under a blizzard warning for 20 to 30 inches of snow. The biggest snowstorm to ever hit New York dropped 26.9 inches of snow on Feb. 12 and 13, 2006, according to data going back to 1869. The snowy wallop was caused by mesoscale bands that pivoted over the city in the overnight hours. …

If the National Weather Service is dead-on accurate (not a sure thing), the coming blizzard will make it into New York’s top six at a minimum. As long as a foot and a half of snow falls, this storm will be tied for the 10th spot with an 1872 storm none of us was alive to see. Boston is also under a blizzard warning for 20 to 30 inches of snow. According to data dating back to 1935, Boston’s top snowfall, 27.5 inches, occurred during the “President’s Day Storm II” in 2003. It’s quite possible this storm will top it.

But Andrew Freedman warns against that hype:

Don’t pay too much attention to the highest snowfall totals, or the fluctuating numbers. Instead, focus on the likely impacts of the conditions that you are likely to encounter. The big three are heavy snow, strong winds and, if you’re near the coast of New England, coastal flooding. Blizzard conditions require three criteria in order to be met, and they grind transportation of all forms to a standstill while threatening lives through low wind chills. …

Unfortunately, these mesoscale bands are hard to predict less than a few hours in advance. The National Weather Service anticipates several of them to form, including one in the vicinity of the New York City area, but pinpointing exact “jackpot” spots is impossible at this point. That’s why it’s best to prepare for 15 to 30 inches of snow, rather than getting hung up on the likelihood of breaking an all-time record.

Bob Henson breaks down what this means for the region:

Given the projected intensity of this storm, as well as the strong model agreement and the textbook nature of the overall pattern, it seems very plausible to expect widespread snowfalls from Monday night through Tuesday night of 12” to 24” between northern New Jersey and southwest Maine, with some areas in mesoscale bands getting 24” to 36”. Lesser amounts can be expected further to the southwest, with Philadelphia possibly getting a few inches on top of its Monday total. If the system moves more slowly than expected, it could add to the accumulations on the southern and western flank of the vast snow shield. Massive transportation impacts can be expected over the next several days, with reverberations to the air-traffic system nationwide. The high winds and snow could lead to large-scale power outages across New England.

Weather Underground is live-blogging.

The Greek Backlash Against Austerity

Results In The Greek General Election

Over the weekend, Greek anti-austerity party Syriza, lead by firebrand Alexis Tsipras, claimed a resounding victory. Matt Schiavenza contemplates the sizable implications:

Tsipras’ victory presents the troika—a consortium consisting of the European Central Bank, the European Commission, and the International Monetary Fund—with a series of unappetizing options. If the troika gives in and writes down Greek debt, then other, larger countries—such as Spain—will have an incentive to negotiate a similar deal, triggering a major financial headache in Brussels and Frankfurt. If the troika refuses, then Greece is likely to default on its debt obligations this year and be forced to exit the eurozone—a fate that neither Tsipras nor the European leadership say they want.

Either way, the events in Greece signal that Europe’s long, failed experiment with austerity is cracking. In addition to Syriza, anti-austerity parties have grown popular in Spain, where opinion polls show Pablo Iglesias’ Podemos with 20 percent support. And Euroskeptic parties gained heavily in last years’s European parliament elections, particularly Marine Le Pen’s National Front Party, which has campaigned against fiscal austerity in France.

James Forsyth fixates on Syriza’s forming “a coalition with a party that takes just a robust view as it on the need to renegotiate the terms of the Greek bailout, The Independent Greece party”:

Independent Greece and Syriza have little in common other than their view on the bailout, Independent Greece sits in the same group as the Tories in the European Parliament. That Alexis Tsipras has chosen to do a deal with them rather than the leftist Potami who favour a less confrontational approach to the troika is telling. It shows that he has no intention of blinking first in his negations with the IMF, the rest of the European Union, the European Central Bank and the European Commission. ​

George Magnus is unsure how this ends:

Negotiations will start very soon because there are outstanding loan tranches and repayments to be sorted out by 1 March, and larger repayments to the IMF in July and August. Most likely, technical agreements will be reached to extend or reschedule payments due. The crux, however, is that the troika creditors will come face-to-face with a Greek government that is quite different from its predecessors, which included factions and groups whose political interests were almost indistinguishable from those of creditors and of the policies they espoused.

Greece and its creditors could forge some kind of mutually face-saving compromise over the terms of the debt so as to manage debt servicing better, and offer Greece some relief. But it will be much harder to reach agreement regarding the policies of austerity and structural reform, and the more radical changes to living conditions that Syriza has campaigned on.

Daniel V. Speckhard foresees major hurdles:

The need to get agreement across the members of the European Union, and in some cases, parliamentary approval, makes it a tall order, particularly if one is under a tight time frame. And the populist rhetoric that the far-left government can be expected to adopt in its early months combined with no experience in managing international relations or public messaging for foreign audiences, is likely to complicate negotiations further.

Bloomberg View’s editors want the troika to give ground:

Europe’s leaders have to clearly understand the meaning of Sunday’s vote in Greece. Germany, Finland and the EU institutions that have lent Greece money must now negotiate with Tsipras in good faith — as they refused to do with more co-operative governments that preceded his — to soften the destructive economic policies they have imposed. Although this will encourage Syriza-like protest parties in Spain and elsewhere, such is the cost of ignoring the political dangers of Greek austerity for so long.

Yves Smith highly doubts Syriza will get what it wants:

[W]hat happens when Syriza comes to realize that the Troika is deadly serious, which I believe it is? Whether the Eurocrats are right or not, it seems that at least the Fins and the Germans see Greece as disposable. Their leaders believe that throwing it out of the Eurozone or simply taking radical punitive measures if Greece does not do a deal by the summer rollover date will be at most disruptive but not fatal to the Eurozone; indeed, they may believe any short-term [crisis] would be to the Eurozone’s long-term benefit, since making Greece a demonstration case of how costly it is to defy the Troika would serve to cow the rest of the periphery countries.

Hugo Dixon tries to imagine a way forward:

[T]here might be a way of cutting a deal. The snag is that doing so would involve a massive somersault – or what Greeks call a “kolotoumba”. Many of Tsipras’ backers would then accuse him of betraying their cause. It is still far from clear whether he is prepared to do that. But if the Syriza leader is not prepared to compromise, Greece will default and will have to impose capital controls to stop the banks collapsing. If the people then forced the government to backtrack, there would be one final chance to stay in the euro. Otherwise, the drachma would beckon.

Tom Rogan fears Syriza has lost touch with reality:

Syriza’s platform is, in fact, delusional. Alice in Wonderland comes to mind. “If I had a world of my own,” Alice says, “everything would be nonsense.” The Greek voters who brought Syriza to victory are asking for nothing less. After all, what are German taxpayers to make of Syriza’s proposals? Having already spent many billions to save Greece from a fiscal meltdown and preserve its euro-zone access, Germans are now being asked to give up on getting their money paid back. Syriza’s debt-forgiveness plan is fundamentally unserious.

But Dan Hough’s research suggests that Syriza will be more moderate in office:

In terms of Greece’s immediate future, a Syrzia-dominated government is unlikely to live up to the often radical pre-election rhetoric.  Syrzia is likely to take decisions that supporters find very difficult; but it will take them nonetheless.  Whether it gets any credit for them when Greece next goes to the polls is an altogether different matter.

However, Spyros Economides warns that “Greece is entering a period of deep uncertainty”:

Syriza’s victory may indeed turn out to be pyrrhic. It is confronted by the immense task of governing at a time when Greece may be ungovernable, while also facing a potentially divisive internal struggle. International partners have also made it clear that the new Greek government, whatever its makeup, will have to honour the country’s existing agreements and commitments.

If Greece’s international creditors don’t come through with quick concessions, or if radical opposition rears its head against Syriza’s more moderate approach, this could trigger an uncontrollable reaction based on fear of uncertainty. That could lead to an accidental default, which would have disastrous consequences for Greece.

(Photo: A sign is held up stating ‘We start from Greece-We change Europe’ as supporters of Syriza react as exit polls showing their party is set to win the election on January 25, 2015 in Athens, Greece. By Matt Cardy/Getty Images)

The Limits Of New Scientism

Steven Shapin explores the question of whether or not science can make us good. He notes that while modern iterations have shorn religion of its claims to authority, “the ambitions of the new scientism may be self-limiting”:

Different scientists draw different moral inferences from science. Some have concluded that it is natural and good to be ruthlessly competitive; others see it natural to cooperate and trust; still others embrace the lesson of the naturalistic fallacy and oppose the project of inferring the moral from the natural. That was the basis of T. H. Huxley’s skepticism in 1893:

The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before.

Nor does the new scientism solve the long-standing problem of whom to trust. Just like every modern scientist, the advocates of the new scientism do what they can to sell their wares in the marketplace of credibility. And here the new scientism, for all its claims that there is a way science can make you good, shares one crucial sensibility with its opponents: having secularized nature, and sharing in the vocational circumstances of late modern science, the proponents of the new scientism can make no plausible claims to moral superiority, nor even moral specialness.

Map Of The Day

Nathan Yau made a zoomable map of how we commute:

American-Cummute-Flowing-Data

He zeros in on some outliers:

Fewer-lone-drivers2

As you might expect, a lot of people take public transportation to work in the New York City area, along with Washington, D.C. In New York county, an estimated 58% of workers use public transportation, and in the former, 38%. In several counties in Alaska, more people use “other” forms of transportation that isn’t a car, van, or truck. I’ll venture a guess that’s it’s something like snow mobile instead.

In San Juan county, Colorado, it looks like carpooling is a bit more common. However, San Juan has a small population and a large margin of error, so it’s tough to say if carpooling really is more common than driving alone. I’m not sure how much I want to trust estimates where the margin of error is almost equal to the rate. Likely an outlier in sampling more than one in reality.

Take driving alone out of the comparison, and the areas where public transportation is most common is more obvious.

Public-transportation

You can also look at public transportation by itself to similar effect, but I think the comparisons make the geography more interesting. For example, you see more people working from home in the midwest, where much of the land is devoted to farming. In many areas, people just walk to work.

Play around with the map yourself here.

Why Do We Call Terrorists Cowards?

Reviewing Chris Walsh’s Cowardice: A Brief History, Kyle Williams offers an answer:

The first and perhaps most visceral is that, short of obscenities, it is one of the nastiest words that can be wielded against someone—and has been for a long time. Cowards are anathema in the Revelation of St. John, among the first to be damned to the lake of fire, and among the most despicable in Dante’s Inferno. Samuel Johnson confirmed the prejudices of ages before and after him when he wrote that cowardice is “always considered as a topic of unlimited and licentious censure, on which all the virulence of reproach may be lawfully exerted.” One wonders what could be worse.

Walsh also suggests that the term provides comfort to Americans. Believing that terrorists are cowardly may assuage the fear of terrorism. “If they were cowardly then they were scared too—vulnerable and weak,” he writes. “And thinking them weak somehow made another new phrase—‘Boston Strong’—seem more convincingly true.” Terrorism targets innocent civilians, relies on secrecy and infiltration. It stands, at least rhetorically, in contrast to the more open apparatus of the American nation-state and its military might.

Art After Auschwitz

dish_candle

Ryu Spaeth reviews Suspended Sentences, the recently-translated collection of works by Patrick Modiano, who won the Nobel Prize in Literature last year, noting the author’s interest in Paris during the Nazi occupation. He considers how Modian exhibits “the postwar generation’s wariness of the redemptive power of art”:

Modiano expresses this in an episode in “Afterimage” in which [a character, the photographer Francis] Jansen, newly released from the transit camp for Jews that should have sent him to his doom, searches for the relatives of a fellow detainee who wasn’t so lucky. He finds none of them, “[a]nd so, feeling helpless, he’d taken those photos so that the place where his friend and his friend’s loved ones had lived would at least be preserved on film. But the courtyard, the square, and the deserted buildings under the sun made their absence even more irremediable.”

In other words, there are only so many people the artist can save. It is as if the sum effect of Suspended Sentences is a gesture at a silence that rings far louder than the words on the page — the silence of the millions of souls who died in the Holocaust, and broader still, the silence of a ceaseless loss that stretches across millennia and defines our time on Earth. Suspended Sentences, then, is a purposeful act of misdirection, a candle that only serves to emphasize the surrounding darkness. As the narrator in “Afterimage” says of Jansen, “A photograph can express silence. But words? That he would have found interesting: managing to create silence with words.”

(Photo by Flickr user slgckgc)