Newmark's Door

There will be no new posts here over the New Year's Day weekend and maybe for a few days after that. Here's some stuff that you might want to read until the Door is back. Happy New Year!

There's a veritable feast of stuff at Esquire's "What I've Learned: The Archive".

Attempts to answer 12 "Whys?"

"Why parents hate parenting".

"Why cold, dark, small, and depressive nations top the rankings".

"Why Are We Beginning to Hate Congress?" ["Beginning to"??]

"Why Do Harvard Kids Head to Wall Street?"

"Why Do IQ Scores Vary By Nation?"

"Why Are Fewer and Fewer U.S. Employees Satisfied With Their Jobs?"

"Why We Dream: Real Reasons Revealed".

"Why Texas is doing so much better economically than the rest of the nation".

"Why Geeks Hate the iPad".

"Why GPS voices are so condescending".

"Why the Latest Frontier of Statistical Research in Baseball Is Defense".

"Why Do Foreigners Like Fanta So Much?"

High school debate.

I've lamented before on this blog the awful decline of high school debate. Here is another, recent depressing example. Maybe even more discouraging is that a number of people are aware of the problems, but no change seems to be forthcoming. For example, a former debater was quoted nearly 15 years ago: "[contemporary debate is] an exercise which would provide good training for only two occupations: becoming an auctioneer and making Federal Express commercials. And that's all." What I hadn't known until recently was why high school debate has gotten so far off track. The answer it turns out, is connected to Harvard law professor, Lawrence Tribe. (Via the interesting Slate exchange, "Debating Debate Club".)

I agree. Speech by Lt. Gen. John F. Kelly, USMC, 11/13/10. For my money, one of the most powerful phrases, ever, is "Semper Fidelis".

There's a study now that suggests full-fat dairy products may have a good effect: "Dairy component shows promise in cutting diabetes risk".

. . . courtesy of The Sports Guy, Bill Simmons.

"It occurs to me that every 'shocking expose' or article about the modeling industry I have ever read – in the past 15 years – touches on one of the following 20 themes."

To mark the occasion The Economist has run "Why Do Firms Exist?"

And here's what George L. Priest said about "The Problem of Social Cost":

The political or ideological dimension of the Coase Theorem is often ignored. To Coase, the implication of the proposition that "In the absence of transaction costs, the assignment of liability will have no effect on the allocation of resources" is that courts and the government can do no good by interfering in markets. If government action can somehow reduce transaction costs, that may enhance welfare; otherwise, courts and the government are fooling themselves by attempting to improve upon market outcomes and should stay out. Coase’s ambition was to deflate arguments for more intrusive government, not—as it happened—to revolutionize our understanding of the operation of the legal system.

I'd quibble: I'd say it's not the "sole purpose" but it should be one of the primary ones.

Note that both statements are echoes of one of Henmingway's famous lines: "The most essential gift for a good writer is a built-in, shock-proof, shit detector."

And it's why I've never been keen on core curriculum. In my estimation, such requirements do little to achieve that purpose. Sorry, American Council of Trustees and Alumni.

Rather long but extremely cogent analysis by Frederick M. Hess of AEI.

I'm not worried about it. Technology + the market has an impressive track record in solving problems like this.

An interesting question, which the article doesn't answer, is whether one or two people messed up, or whether this was an institutional failure. I doubt outsiders will ever know, but the case is a heck of a wake-up call regardless: student seeking to transfer to Harvard lied, big time, and for a while, got away with it.