The government says it cannot reunite the 545 children separated from their parents at the border, because it has no record of the parents' identities or whereabouts. But the parents know exactly who they are. That makes this an easy problem to solve.
Step one: Send saliva samples from the children to a respected international organization--Doctors Without Borders, maybe, or The Red Cross--which would then sequence the DNA of each child.
Step two: Issue a public call to parents whose children were taken from them to submit saliva samples of their own.
Step three: Sequence the parental DNA from these samples.
Step four: Using the DNA data, parents and children could then be matched with essentially 100 percent accuracy. Problem solved!
The Trump administration might resist calls to collect the necessary saliva samples from the children. If widely publicized, any such opposition would entail high political cost.
Very little money would be necessary to implement this solution. A gofundme.com appeal could raise more than enough in a matter of minutes.
What am I missing? Why haven't we already done this?

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Robert H Frank

Robert H Frank Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @econnaturalist

19 Oct
As psychologists say, “It’s the situation, not the person.” The strongest predictor of what people will do is what others around them do. In this thread, I’ll describe what behavioral contagion theory says about how the campaign is likely to play out during the final two weeks.
First some background: During the pandemic, I’ve been participating in weekly Zoom calls with former Peace Corps Volunteers who served with me in Nepal during the late 1960s. As among so many of my other friends, there is high anxiety in this group about the election.
During our early calls, prediction markets were pegging the presidential race as a near tossup. That struck me as preposterous, and I tried to explain why. As our conversations unfolded, it gradually became my role on the call to reassure others about Biden’s prospects.
Read 19 tweets
22 Jul
As Genevieve Guenther (@DoctorVive) points out, the climate conversation has finally moved past the mindless disputes with denialists that dominated recent discussion. But we now seem stalled in the absence of a consensus about what to do next.
In the face of record wildfires and 100°F Arctic temperatures, most people now accept that we face a deadly serious challenge. Now many ask, is rapid decarbonization even feasible at any cost? And if so, is there any prospect that voters would be willing to bear that cost?
On the first question, if you’re not familiar with the work of the energy engineer Saul Griffith, I urge you to read this short piece that explains how we can decarbonize rapidly:
medium.com/otherlab-news/…
Read 9 tweets
4 Jun
Will General Mattis end up being Citizen B, whose willingness to speak out proves explosively contagious?
In a recent thread about behavioral contagion’s role in debate, I described an example involving 10 citizens—A through J—who would oppose an authoritarian regime publicly if they thought it safe to do so. Citizen B was the pivotal figure in this example.
Each has a threshold indicating her/his willingness to speak out as a function of how many others are speaking out. A, for example, is willing to speak out no matter what. B and C are more cautious, each willing to speak out only if at least 20% of others are also speaking out.
Read 11 tweets
28 May
Economic Naturalist Question #19. Why are dramatic political shifts so difficult to predict? #EconTwitter Image
In an earlier thread, I explored why introductory economics courses appear to leave little lasting imprint on the millions of students who take them each year:
Students learn more effectively when they pose interesting questions based on personal experience, and then use basic economic principles to help answer them. This exercise became what I call my “economic naturalist” writing assignment.
Read 22 tweets
19 May
Economic Naturalist Question #15. Why don’t top-ranked private universities charge higher tuition than many of their lower-ranked counterparts? #EconTwitter
After posing this question, my former student Lonnie Fox noted that although the ratio of applications to available slots is far higher at top-ranked universities than at their lower-ranked counterparts, tuition payments vary little across schools of different rank.
Top-ranked schools typically admit less than 10% of applicants, whereas many lower-ranked schools admit more than 50%. Expenditures per pupil are also higher at top-ranked schools. If both costs and demand are higher at top-ranked universities, why don’t they charge more?
Read 12 tweets
25 Apr
Economic Naturalist Question #2: Why do brides often spend thousands of dollars on wedding dresses they will never wear again, while grooms typically rent cheap tuxedos, even though they will have many future occasions that call for one?
Jennifer Dulski, who got married six months before she took my class in 1997, posed one of my all-time favorite responses to my Economic Naturalist writing assignment.
Asking why brides buy and grooms rent is an interesting question because it would seem that each would do better by following the other’s strategy. Why don’t brides rent and grooms buy?
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!