3 ms·

> First of all, they vast majority of the article is n=1 where they sampled one year. Wouldn't "n" be number of murders? > Furthermore, the entire analysis is

> First of all, they vast majority of the article is n=1 where they sampled one year. Wouldn't "n" be number of murders? > Furthermore, the entire analysis is stupid because 2020 was the pandemic year. It was a pandemic year in every one of these states. > Go to [1] and sort by median household income. What you will find is basically the same ranking as in this article. What do you believe - poverty or political preference leads to increases of crime? What if the two of them are linked? If a handful of states follow the same political ideology, and also share an outsized poverty and murder rate it is worth analyzing if those same policies have an impact.

hervature 5y ago
> Wouldn't "n" be number of murders? No. I'm not disputing the murder rates. Those are probably very accurate for that year. I'm disputing the claim that red states have a murder problem based on one year of information. > It was a pandemic year in every one of these states. Not equally. Given the information they used, it is entirely plausible that the murder rate did not increase more in blue states because, in general, they weren't allowed to go outside unlike, say, Florida. To be clear, this is not "proof" that an ideology is better. This is a temporary measure that could lead to longer term issues. > What if the two of them are linked? That's what I'm saying. This article is claiming a link without actually analyzing the impact. You need a longitudinal study is my whole point.
- long_time_gone 5y ago
  > You need a longitudinal study is my whole point. I agree. I think this report is just meant to provide a counter to the prevailing (accepted?) narrative. Maybe it's meant to inspire/fund the type of study you suggest?