to enact the Conscience Protection Act!
catherine no one (I think) is "dismissing" factors that do actually affect different sociological trends. What is being done is to look very hard at how many factors do the effect, and how much and how accurately we can say a factor is causal, and with what presicion...And then to determine how much certainty is unchallengeably real. If it can be truely determined (what ever that factor might be and in whatever trend it applies)Then....The remaining question is: what do we do with it? Is it something we can only put on the shelf to continue working toward a greater level of pure validity? Is is a large, almost rock solid icon... almost law...that can be used as an element of policy formation with no peripheral chance of damage in what ever form in "human hurt"?? Maybe we do find a real component of sociological impact. Is it so well studied, that if we know all of its ramifications, if we try to make use of the data we can predict the outcome? This is what has to be closely examined. Unfortunately this type of Social architectual attempt at using this sort of data is just dangerous. We have well learned the dangers of assumptions in areas of sciences much harder than the social ones. Even damage due to well established science so solid it produces technologies that have been long embraced,.. we loosed into the population only to find after decades that there were undiscovered factors that produced damage that could not be reversed. Damage so old that no suits could be filed because no one could be said to have ever known or even imagined the possibility. Look at Estrogen Replacement Therapy practiced for decades. Only to discover that not only was it not helpful to heart bone breast and uterus, even the brain. It was for some women damaging. My own mother with no history except for one case of cancer (not breast)in her whole family after a histerectomy at age 36 loses one breast at age 65. Then the other at age 70. She is a survivor thankfully..... But similarly I can in no way say for certain that that treatment was the cause. One single anecdotal case. But, no woman will have the same treatment at age 36 today. Why? because of the very risk of such a possible outcome. She is 76 today. Even hard Sciences bring in social factors such as television, radio, cellphone, internet, video, cable, microwaves, Automobiles, and on one could list, Yet we still don't know what all of this means. Nor can we measure all the impacts and their intereciprocitous sythesis of change to positive and negative in what ever direction they move our minds and lives. Call me a luddite; ...But we won't know what impacts all of these changes have evidenced into our lives until we know. Many we never will. Many will be left to be discovered by centuries to come. We have been on the face of this amazing planet for only a short, short time. We need to be very careful about the introduction of information with out judicious qualification of our findings. Very Judicious....Stephen
Pray for Life monthly prayer/action guide /
So, let’s look at the assumptions one by one and see how they fare.
The person who wrote that concealed weapons laws reduced crime was John Lott. To see a paper challenging Lott's position, see Duggan (JPE) or a more recent working paper by Phillips (NBER, 2005)As for abortion. Has anyone done this study for England?
I just wanted to say that you are the man.
Prostitute versus architect salary:I just got to the point in your book where you claim that prostitutes make more than architects because of the compensating differentials and the demand for their services. The passage came right after you debunked the misconception that crack-dealers make so much money. I do not have data on the average salary of a prostittute or the average salary of an architect but I would guess that the architect makes more. I think that prostitutes are probably subject to the same plight as the foot soldier crack dealer and the McDonald's employee whereby they do the 'grunt' work but someone else is making all the money.