Tag Archives: Socioeconomic Status

America’s Prisons

Posted on February 11, 2016 | Leave a comment

Prison

For awhile now there has been a growing awareness that America’s prison system is failing society.  The fact that we incarcerate so many of our young folks only to see them emerge from the system as hardened criminals is repulsive.  I have been excited to hear talk of prison reforms during the campaigns but am left disheartened as Rand Paul seemed to be the only candidate seriously and earnestly addressing the issue.

We have to do something.

But I don’t know if this is it:

Pennsylvania is on the verge of becoming one of the first states in the country to base criminal sentences not only on what crimes people have been convicted of, but also on whether they are deemed likely to commit additional crimes. As early as next year, judges there could receive statistically derived tools known as risk assessments to help them decide how much prison time — if any — to assign.

In theory, and in a nearly perfect world, this method could be a good one.  For example, today we lock up minor drug offenders for far too long.  This method could be employed to demonstrate that a first time weed arrest at age 15 requires very little prison time.  On the other hand, a single arrest may very well occur for unique experiences resulting in a ‘signature’ that is otherwise inappropriate.

And say nothing of the potential problems when sentencing takes into account socio-economic conditions or race.  Not to mention the libertarian arguments against punishment for a crime not yet committed.

Leave a comment

Posted in Crime

Tagged , ,

Crime: Socio-Economic vs IQ – The Bell Curve

Posted on December 10, 2012 | Leave a comment

It’s here, the last chapter comparison between the impact of the socioeconomic status of the family or the mother of the children and the IQ of the same.

I last posted on crime back in late July and then I mentioned:

When I picked up the book I was looking for books on “How to Raise Chickens” as a result of a post of mine some time back.  I saw the book on the shelves and was taken by the title.  I bought it and it was immediately relegated to my stack.  Some time later, Boortz was speaking about the author and I decided I better begin the book.  At this time I was still unaware of the controversy of the book.  Then I posted on it.  I was then made aware of the controversy.

As I mentioned then, I wasn’t aware of the massive controversy of the book.  I simply saw it on the shelf, bought it and then heard it referenced on the radio.  I started reading it and then posted on it.  Only later did I learn of that controversy.  And when I actually hit the big chapter, chapter 13, I understood why.

Now, as then, I won’t go further than chapter 12 [11 actually, I don’t find 12 interesting] and for the same reasons.  However, the controversy that surrounds the later sections of the book shouldn’t diminish the value that the first chapters deliver.

Now.  Crime.

The authors look to quantify crime in two ways:

  1. Asking if the man ever was engaged in criminal activity.
  2. Reporting if the man was interviewed in a correctional facility.

As they point out, both have weaknesses.  The self-reporting may not be accurate but does have the upside of capturing uncaught criminal activity.  The other has valid crime involvement but doesn’t capture criminals who haven’t been caught.  The “smart” ones.

The results are below:

And then:

In both cases, when controlling for other factors, the SES status of the family fades and becomes meaningless.  In fact, as SES increases so to does the rate of self reported crime.  And in both cases, a man possessing a low IQ is at significant risk for each category.

 

Leave a comment

Posted in Crime, Middle Class, Politics: National, The Bell Curve

Tagged , , , ,

Education: Socioeconomics vs IQ – The Bell Curve

Posted on August 6, 2012 | Leave a comment

The second installment of the comparison of socioeconomic status and IQ.  This post examines the impact of each on:

  1. Dropping out of school
  2. Obtaining a GED
  3. Graduating from college

In a previous post, I showed various charts.  Among them is the probability of cropping out of school based on the SES of the family:

The pattern is clear, kids from wealthier families have a better chance of obtaining a high school education.

The came the data showing the probability of a kid, who has dropped out, obtaining a GED:

This is a tale that is counter-intuitive.  We expect the narrative to be that rich kids do better than poor kids.  But this data shows the opposite for folks who obtain a GED after dropping out of school.

Finally we show data that speak to college degrees.  College is, arguably, a key factor to the success of an individual in today’s society.  Maybe.

The data suggests a massive SES impact.  Very few kids from the poorest families are graduating college while nearly 40% of the wealthiest kids are achieving that milestone.

The data is somewhat mixed.  High school and college graduation rates seem highly dependent on the SES of the parents while attainment of a GED is the exact opposite.

Now, what if we add in the predictive value of IQ?

First, dropping out of school:

The first thing that should be apparent is that dropping out of school is rare for kids of either average SES or intelligence.  But dropout rates escalate dramatically for those of below average intelligence.  IQ is more than a 3x predictor than SES of the school dropout.

How does GED look?

The data including IQ doesn’t change the fact that obtaining a GED goes against the commonly held belief that kids from poorer households do worse than the rich kids.  Even accounting for IQ, the folks from the poorer families obtain a GED at higher rates than do kids from wealthier households.

Our last look into education is the college graduation rate:

Again, a dramatic difference.  With one exception; the data shows very little difference between low SES and low IQ.  But when it comes to highly intelligent kids, it doesn’t matter if they come from poorer families or wealthier families; the kids are graduating college at a better than 75% clip.

As with poverty, IQ plays a dominant role in the educational attainment of our children.  All else being equal, the smarter the kid, the better they will achieve educationally.

 

Leave a comment

Posted in Education, Middle Class, Politics: National, The Bell Curve

Tagged , , , , , ,

Poverty: Socioeconomics vs IQ – The Bell Curve

Posted on August 1, 2012 | Leave a comment

About 6 weeks ago I started posting data from the book, “The Bell Curve.”  The first portion of the book deals with various conditions, poverty, education, crime and so on that take place in our society.  And more than just look and detail those conditions, the authors try and look at what might cause some of those conditions.  The point being that a vast majority of today’s commentators on such matters blame the socioeconomic conditions of families for the unfortunate plight many of our citizens find themselves in today.

Having problems graduating high school?  Check and see if the kid is from a poor family.

Mothers raising children in poverty?  Check and see of that mother herself came form a poor family.

Individuals in jail?  Check and see if those folks came from a poor family.

And the evidence is there that such an impact exists.  But is there another, stronger variable that impacts these conditions?  The author’s answer is, “Yes.  And that variable is IQ.”

Let’s review the first set of data I showed back then.  The first set of data shows the probability that an individual will be living below the poverty line in 1989, the data the study used:

The next set of data shows the probability that a child will be living below the poverty line in 1989 when her mother is married:

And the third set of data shows that same probability for that same child if her mother is single.

The data has an uncomfortable, but not surprising trend, to be born wealthy is better than being born in poverty.  However, here the authors, as I mentioned, looked for additional variables.  Specifically IQ.  Look at the data with the socioeconomic status AND the IQ included in the same graph.

Let’s go down the line starting with the probability of living in poverty:

The difference is dramatic.  Not only does having a very low IQ put you at significant risk of living in poverty compared to having a very low SES background, but being very intelligent is more important than being very wealthy.

Next we look at children of married mothers living in poverty and the impact that her SES and IQ have:

While the dramatic difference in the values isn’t the same, the pattern is.  A mother having everything else considered who is less intelligent has a higher probability of raising her children in poverty than an equally neutral mother of higher intelligence.

Finally, the probability of children of single mothers living in poverty and the impact that her SES and IQ have:

Right back to the dramatic difference.  What looked like an impacting variable before, SES clearly now has the appearance of having a minimal effect on raising children in poverty.  Rather IQ dominates this condition for children of single mothers.  Those children lucky enough to be born to the brightest of mothers have a 1/7th the chance of living in poverty compared to those children whose mothers score on the very lowest on IQ tests.

Clearly, as it relates to poverty and child poverty, IQ is the runaway variable when compared to SES.

 

Leave a comment

Posted in Middle Class, Politics: National, The Bell Curve

Tagged , , , , , ,

Crime: SES Impact – The Bell Curve

Posted on July 30, 2012 | Leave a comment

This post speaks to the eleventh chapter in the book, “The Bell Curve.”  It is here that the authors take a look at the impact of SES on crime and criminality in the NLSY study.  Again, in the early chapters of the book, the authors only look at white members of the NLSY.  Data pulled for the criminality is further restricted to men.  The data is presented below.

Data on crime can be hard to obtain.  Many times an individual can be “successful” at crime and not be caught.  This would reduce the instance of crime and present a challenge in reporting group patterns.  In an attempt to overcome this shortcoming, the book uses two classifications:

  1. Self reported crime
  2. Being interviewed in a correctional facility

The impact of SES on the first, self-reported crime is shown here:

While the impact of the socioeconomic status of the parents of the men interviewed is low, less than 4 points, it’s interesting to note that the trend is reversed from what we might expect.  The lack of significant SES impact follows as demonstrated below.

Here it shows that SES plays an even smaller role in determining criminality.

As I mentioned, this is the 11th chapter in the book.  Chapter 12 deals with civility and citizenship.  After reading the chapter, I was left with the feeling that I was reading a filler, one more chapter to fill a book.  As with crime before it, the data presented was sparse and, in my opinion, unfulfilling compared to the earlier chapters and data.

Then comes Chapter 13.

When I picked up the book I was looking for books on “How to Raise Chickens” as a result of a post of mine some time back.  I saw the book on the shelves and was taken by the title.  I bought it and it was immediately relegated to my stack.  Some time later, Boortz was speaking about the author and I decided I better begin the book.  At this time I was still unaware of the controversy of the book.  Then I posted on it.  I was then made aware of the controversy.

It’s chapter 13 where that controversy begins.  It’s here that the authors go into the subject of racial disparities, if they exist, between races.  In the book, the  authors explicitly put pen to  paper and ask, rhetorically for us, why should we explore this topic, one so painful and emotional?  They gave an answer, however, I was struck by the question.

As a result, I won’t go there.

Much of the talk I talk here at TarHeel is, or may be, emotional.  But it’s easy political kinda stuff.  Shit we can all agree is fun or enjoyable to debate.  But race is different.  I have neither the expertise, the knowledge or the education to be able to talk about this subject with anything resembling expertise.  And while I think it’s important to talk about the painful experiences of race, I feel it’s CRITICAL to bring an expert’s touch to the subject of race and IQ.

I don’t have that expertise.

With that said, I understand the controversy surrounding the book.  It IS controversial.  However, I need to point out that the first 13 chapters didn’t discuss race even one time.  And as a I read those first 12 chapters, I was struck by the straight forward and powerful arguments presented.

The next series of posts on this book will go back to Chapter 1 and revisit each until we get to the 11th chapter again.  At that point, I’ll stop.

Leave a comment

Posted in Crime, Middle Class, Politics: National, The Bell Curve

Tagged , , ,

Welfare: SES Impact – The Bell Curve

Posted on July 23, 2012 | Leave a comment

I’m continuing my series on the chapters of “The Bell Curve”, by Herrnstein and Murray.  If you are interested in the posts so far, just go to the category selections on the right sidebar, I’ve grouped them together under The Bell Curve.

So far we’ve taken a look at the impacts that the socioeconomic status of the parents of white women in the NLSY have on various life outcomes.  Included in those outcomes so far is poverty, education, Employment and the family.  This post deals with welfare and the dependency on welfare.

The first look at the impact of SES has welfare is what the probablity is of a white woman going on welfare within a year of her first birth.  The data presented below shows that probability with poverty and marital status  taken into account:

As probability of going on welfare moved from the poorest, about 28%, to the wealthiest, about 19%, the trend is down.  However, the authors report that the results are not statistically significant.

But another picture arises altogether when we look at chronic welfare recipients:


Here the results are dramatic.    The probability of a white woman in the NLSy study is greatly influenced by the socioeconomic status of her parents.  The authors don’t explain what might cause the change in the mild predictive value of SES in welfare at all vs. the highly predictive value that it plays in chronic welfare dependency.  However, they do hint that education plays a role somehow.

Leave a comment

Posted in Economics, Middle Class, Politics: National, The Bell Curve, Welfare

Tagged , , ,