ARNOLD KLING
August 14, 2011
The Top Political Contributors
August 11, 2011
Gender and the New Commanding Heights
August 11, 2011
Jamie Galbraith Makes an Assumption
August 11, 2011
Macroeconometrics: The Science of Hubris
August 10, 2011
Real and Nominal Bond Yields
BRYAN CAPLAN
August 14, 2011
The Effect of Thumb Sucking on Income
August 12, 2011
The Voice of Cold, Hard Truth to All Would-Be Educators
August 12, 2011
Ability, Morality, and Prosperity: A Paper and a Report
August 11, 2011
The Theory of Time and Frittering
August 10, 2011
Male Variance and the Remnants of the Gender Gap
DAVID HENDERSON
August 9, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken", Part Two
August 8, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken"
August 5, 2011
James Bovard on the Peace Corps
August 4, 2011
Summers Way Off on FDR and 1941
August 3, 2011
The "Amazon" Tax
SHARE
If this survey were conducted with privates in the Army, would they be unhappy because basic training and military life is difficult, or would they be happy because for the next 60 years of their life they were proud of their service and happy with the skills they learned?
all else equal, the average women is a little happier than the average man
The happiness distributions are different, though; the male distribution has heavier tails. Would the median be a better measure?
Bryan,
Cool.
I think I'm homing in on the real question at hand... Can you tell me if either of these is an accurate statement of your hypothesis:
(a) Given any number of children greater than zero (and less than... what?), there IS on average a net benefit to both parents of having another child.
(b) Given any number of children greater than zero (and less than... what?), there WOULD BE on average a net benefit to both parents, if only they applied the strategies you recommend.
I suspect your claim is (a). In which case, finding that (b) is false, as I suspect it is, would be suggestive but not dispositive. But I'm not sure what evidence would help you actually establish the counterfactual in (b).
Also, when you say you aim to show selfish reasons for having MORE kids, are you conceding that the self-interested case for having ANY kids is weak?
ARGH, I got my (a) and (b) backward. Ignore the comment above. I meant to say this:
----
Bryan,
Cool.
I think I'm homing in on the real question at hand... Can you tell me if either of these is an accurate statement of your hypothesis:
(a) Given any number of children greater than zero (and less than... what?), there IS on average a net benefit to both parents from having another child.
(b) Given any number of children greater than zero (and less than... what?), there WOULD BE on average a net benefit to both parents from having another child, if only they applied the strategies you recommend.
I suspect your claim is (b). In which case, finding that (a) is false, as I suspect it is, would be suggestive but not dispositive. But I'm not sure what evidence would help you actually establish the counterfactual in (b).
Also, when you say you aim to show selfish reasons for having MORE kids, are you conceding that the self-interested case for having ANY kids is weak?
I love this blog - I know very little about economics but the discussions fascinate me.
However, I'm really feeling economic formulas can't really tell us much about what makes us happy or not! Or how to be happier. Or led more fullfilling lives.