Private market fans are usually a fan of private education. The trouble is that educational outcomes are mostly just genetics, so there isn't much room for improvement. One way to study this is to look at school voucher randomized trials.
This meta-analysis shows that they don't do anything for reading or math ability in the West. The results for non-Western countries are larger, but not very trustworthy due to rampant scientific misconduct in those countries. Shrug tier.
Private education probably preferable on other grounds, but not for actual learning outcomes.
The Participant Effects of Private School Vouchers Across the Globe: A Meta-Analytic and Systematic Review
Happy to release our newest and largest admixture project. 🧵 Thread with the main findings.
First, we compiled data from 100s of sources to estimate genetic ancestry for over 400 units in the Americas. These are countries and subnational divisions of the larger countries, such as US states, Canadian provinces, various Caribbean islands. Results can be seen in these 4 maps.
It was a real pain in the ass to merge the spatial data to produce the maps!
Next up, we gathered cognitive ability data from international datasets, and various regional and subnational scholastic tests, and any other source of standardized testing we could find. These were then converted to British international norms (Greenwich mean IQ) as best we could. It gives this map.
Using data from across the world, we estimated the speed of selection against intelligence across countries.
There is a certain regionality to the data
Relatively atheistic north Europeans have apparently quite weak selection, while more religious areas have stronger negative selection. This is the opposite of what American data suggested when studying individuals.
Some big accounts as asking why so many MAGA types are suddenly so very anti-Indian, considering that Indians in the US and to some degree in the rest of the West, are model immigrants (high performance, low crime). The main answer is not difficult to understand.
This answer is based on the typical finding of sociology. In terms of partisanship, whichever groups in society you dislike is just the ones you perceive to be most different from you politically. Brandt and colleagues worked this out in 2014.
On top of this general pattern, there's the fact that importing a bunch of foreign workers depress local salaries. That is of course why the companies do this. What's the largest source of such foreigners? India. So capitalists love them (cheaper labor) and workers dislike them (suppress their wages).
Maybe you've seen a map like this one. It gives one the impression that Europeans were uniquely or particularly evil regarding slavery, in this case of Africans.
However, slavery was more or less a human universal. Pre-Columbian Americas, ancient China, or the Islamic world.
Europeans, rather than being the master enslavers (which they were also for a time), were rather the liberators. The only group of people who decided to take matters into their hands to free the slaves of the world.