3 ms·

I'm not adverse to the specific hypothesis, but not a fan of Freakonomics and the size of the effect they claim seems surprising. They appear to be claiming it

I'm not adverse to the specific hypothesis, but not a fan of Freakonomics and the size of the effect they claim seems surprising. They appear to be claiming it accounts for all of the reduction in crime. This strikes me as somewhat implausible. Wouldn't better birth control be expected to show a similar impact, for similar reasons? (Though maybe the two correlate strongly in American politics?) edit: a paper looking into that based on differential timing on legal changes https://escholarship.org/content/qt8rw2m36w/qt8rw2m36w.pdf https://escholarship.org/content/qt8rw2m36w/qt8rw2m36w.pdf

mynameishere 3y ago
People who consistently use birth control tend to be less impulsive and more future-oriented than people who have to resort to abortion (a last-resort form of birth control). ie, the type of people who aren't your typical criminals. That would be the thinking, I suppose. For my part, I think mass incarceration is probably the main reason for crime going down.
- techcode 3y ago
  Pretty much every criminal says they've learned more crime/techniques and could build their "network" in prison. So more prisoners would likely have effect of continuing/promoting crime. Anyway - no birth control method (except abstaining) is 100%, even when you stack multiple different ways it can happen. And some methods of birth control - like pill for woman and vasectomy for guys - can mess you up long term. Women describe getting off the pill like completely changing their taste/smell senses, even brain/thinking ...etc (which sounds similar to what happens in/after pregnancy). When they give it to teenage girls (to "fix" their irregular cycle) they often gain weight.. And while vasectomy could be reversed, it's not guaranteed it would work.
  - ctrw 3y ago
    That's why you don't let them go once they are in. Works quite well in El Salvador.
  - spondylosaurus 3y ago
    ^ There's a reason people recommend using two methods of birth control at any given time, but even then—freak accidents happen. Four nines isn't 0% :P Also worth noting that there are about a million birth control pills on the market with different side effects... and different levels of efficacy. Progestin-only pills are popular because people tend to tolerate them well, but they're notably less effective than pills with estradiol in them. Sometimes that's a worthwhile trade-off!
- wanderingstan 3y ago
  > I think mass incarceration is probably the main reason for crime going down. This hypothesis is strongly challenged by the fact that crime has also dropped in other developed countries that do not have mass incarceration.
throwiforgtnlzy 3y ago
Very sensible. While libertarian and anarcho-capitalist outfits like Reason and Freakonomics may have strange views (and sometimes held climate denial views), they do also sometimes offer uncomfortable, factual truths. Unfortunately though, the US lacks a fair and equitable universal healthcare system and doesn't really care about imposing absurd externalities on individuals who lack health insurance or the means to side-step the narrowing separation between church and state. Birth control access isn't free or universal in the US. And, it would be unsurprising that a considerable fraction of lower-income women in physical relationships are less able to insist on using birth control at all times. It could also be that higher-income women worry more and have the means and assertiveness to make different choices. Perhaps the root cause is when kids are born, regardless of public policies or personal choices, that aren't wanted, aren't loved, and lack sensible parental role models, they end up in worse circumstances and have more problems in life.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  I used to volunteer as a guardian ad litem; you are an independent party who advocates for a child’s interests in family court (I had one during my parent’s divorce, and I wanted to pay it forward). Between that experience, and knowing that 40% of annual pregnancies both in the US and globally are unintended, you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of suffering is because of unwanted children existing through no fault of their own, and parents who are, quite frankly, either unequipped or willfully harmful and should’ve never been parents. So now, I strongly advocate for anyone who even has a hint of not wanting to have kids to seek permanent birth control (vasectomy or bisalp). Could you possibly regret not having kids? Sure, we all grieve the loss of optionality and possibility. But having kids you don’t want or can’t take care of is far more regretful imho, for everyone involved. > Perhaps the root cause is when kids are born, regardless of public policies or personal choices, that aren't wanted, aren't loved, and lack sensible parental role models, they end up in worse circumstances and have more problems in life. Nailed it.
  - throwiforgtnlzy 3y ago
    > I used to volunteer as a guardian ad litem; you are an independent party who advocates for a child’s interests in family court (I had one during my parent’s divorce, and I wanted to pay it forward). Woah, nice. I wouldn't know where to start without going to law school first. I surmise the invention of cheap transportation combined with successive generations of mass communication like the internet demolished the central fixtures of local community and togetherness in the lives of most people. So not only do people move frequently, but they don't engage with people around them. This can't be healthy for individuals or families. Without the moderating and supportive forces local communities apply and provide on their members, people can gravitate towards hyper-individualism, odd beliefs, extremism, antisocial behaviors, isolation, and loneliness. As such, it becomes more difficult to socialize children properly, a society becomes paranoid with low trust, and it motives lashing out via crimes of desperation, despair, and malice. Healthy societies don't have rampant drug overdoses, mass shootings, droves of unhoused people, favelas, armored middle-class housing, $100M+ homes, or plunging net fertility rates overall.

mynameishere 3y ago

People who consistently use birth control tend to be less impulsive and more future-oriented than people who have to resort to abortion (a last-resort form of birth control). ie, the type of people who aren't your typical criminals. That would be the thinking, I suppose. For my part, I think mass incarceration is probably the main reason for crime going down.

techcode 3y ago
Pretty much every criminal says they've learned more crime/techniques and could build their "network" in prison. So more prisoners would likely have effect of continuing/promoting crime. Anyway - no birth control method (except abstaining) is 100%, even when you stack multiple different ways it can happen. And some methods of birth control - like pill for woman and vasectomy for guys - can mess you up long term. Women describe getting off the pill like completely changing their taste/smell senses, even brain/thinking ...etc (which sounds similar to what happens in/after pregnancy). When they give it to teenage girls (to "fix" their irregular cycle) they often gain weight.. And while vasectomy could be reversed, it's not guaranteed it would work.
- ctrw 3y ago
  That's why you don't let them go once they are in. Works quite well in El Salvador.
- spondylosaurus 3y ago
  ^ There's a reason people recommend using two methods of birth control at any given time, but even then—freak accidents happen. Four nines isn't 0% :P Also worth noting that there are about a million birth control pills on the market with different side effects... and different levels of efficacy. Progestin-only pills are popular because people tend to tolerate them well, but they're notably less effective than pills with estradiol in them. Sometimes that's a worthwhile trade-off!
wanderingstan 3y ago
> I think mass incarceration is probably the main reason for crime going down. This hypothesis is strongly challenged by the fact that crime has also dropped in other developed countries that do not have mass incarceration.

throwiforgtnlzy 3y ago

Very sensible. While libertarian and anarcho-capitalist outfits like Reason and Freakonomics may have strange views (and sometimes held climate denial views), they do also sometimes offer uncomfortable, factual truths. Unfortunately though, the US lacks a fair and equitable universal healthcare system and doesn't really care about imposing absurd externalities on individuals who lack health insurance or the means to side-step the narrowing separation between church and state. Birth control access isn't free or universal in the US. And, it would be unsurprising that a considerable fraction of lower-income women in physical relationships are less able to insist on using birth control at all times. It could also be that higher-income women worry more and have the means and assertiveness to make different choices. Perhaps the root cause is when kids are born, regardless of public policies or personal choices, that aren't wanted, aren't loved, and lack sensible parental role models, they end up in worse circumstances and have more problems in life.

toomuchtodo 3y ago
I used to volunteer as a guardian ad litem; you are an independent party who advocates for a child’s interests in family court (I had one during my parent’s divorce, and I wanted to pay it forward). Between that experience, and knowing that 40% of annual pregnancies both in the US and globally are unintended, you arrive at the conclusion that a lot of suffering is because of unwanted children existing through no fault of their own, and parents who are, quite frankly, either unequipped or willfully harmful and should’ve never been parents. So now, I strongly advocate for anyone who even has a hint of not wanting to have kids to seek permanent birth control (vasectomy or bisalp). Could you possibly regret not having kids? Sure, we all grieve the loss of optionality and possibility. But having kids you don’t want or can’t take care of is far more regretful imho, for everyone involved. > Perhaps the root cause is when kids are born, regardless of public policies or personal choices, that aren't wanted, aren't loved, and lack sensible parental role models, they end up in worse circumstances and have more problems in life. Nailed it.
- throwiforgtnlzy 3y ago
  > I used to volunteer as a guardian ad litem; you are an independent party who advocates for a child’s interests in family court (I had one during my parent’s divorce, and I wanted to pay it forward). Woah, nice. I wouldn't know where to start without going to law school first. I surmise the invention of cheap transportation combined with successive generations of mass communication like the internet demolished the central fixtures of local community and togetherness in the lives of most people. So not only do people move frequently, but they don't engage with people around them. This can't be healthy for individuals or families. Without the moderating and supportive forces local communities apply and provide on their members, people can gravitate towards hyper-individualism, odd beliefs, extremism, antisocial behaviors, isolation, and loneliness. As such, it becomes more difficult to socialize children properly, a society becomes paranoid with low trust, and it motives lashing out via crimes of desperation, despair, and malice. Healthy societies don't have rampant drug overdoses, mass shootings, droves of unhoused people, favelas, armored middle-class housing, $100M+ homes, or plunging net fertility rates overall.