CONVERSABLE ECONOMIST: All You Need to Know about Disability Insurance Some of this difference seems to reflect not differences in the characteristics of those receiving disability, but rather differences in the process for granting disability benefits across state. As one example from the overview paper by Pomeroy and Jim McCrery, some of the Administrative Law Judges who hear appeals about whether someone should receive DI are very likely to grant those appeals, while others are not: “There also appears to be considerable (albeit shrinking) decisional inconsistency among judges. In 2010, for example, one ALJ in Texas approved only 9 percent of applications for benefits while another in Tennessee approved 99 percent …”
The Grumpy Economist: Immigration, trade, and child care This is a small example of a spreading disease in American economic policy. The recipe: 1) introduce strong supply and competition restrictions, usually to politically favored groups. Soon, however, those groups start charging higher prices. So 2) give subsidies so people can pay the higher prices induced by 1). It’s perfect: now both sides depend on politicians. See, most egregiously, health care and housing.
Gentrification’s battlefront in L.A. – The Unz Review What Southern California now has a lot of, in contrast, are affluent, hard-nosed, 100% white guilt-free immigrants — Armenians, Israelis, Vietnamese, Persians, Russians, Koreans, Uzbekis, Chinese, Arabs, etc. — who don’t see much reason why they should take any guff from Mexicans, who have the numbers but not the money.
How IQ testing can boost number of gifted black and Hispanic students – The Unz Review Oh, so that’s it! They had a quota, a one standard deviation lower bar, for poor or immigrant students. Assuming a scoring system where 100 = the median and the standard deviation = 15, then “non-disadvantaged students” had to score at almost the 98th percentile while ELL and FRL students had to score only at the 84th percentile. Alternatively, the non-disadvantaged had to be in the top two percent while the disadvantaged only had to be in the top 16 percent.