If men win the lottery, they marry and have children.
If women win the lottery, their fertility does not rise. (Indeed, low-income women get divorced.)
You might think more resources means more kids. Yes with men, not with women.
Maybe we need a society, as was the case in the baby boom, where men have sufficient resources to marry and reproduce.
This may help explain why some child subsidies (like cheap daycare or child benefits paid to the mother) do little or nothing to boost a country's fertility.
The authors have a brief column summarizing the study.
(Note that the effect on men's fertility is not huge.)
Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel" asks why Eurasia became more advanced than other areas of pre-modern farming (New Guinea, Africa, the Americas).
3 factors:
1. East-West orientation of Eurasia meant technologies could diffuse more easily (appears to be unsupported).
Rich countries don't have revolts, color revolutions, socialist revolutions, coups, civil wars, regime changes.
They keep what regime they have, democratic or autocratic.
Below: the World Bank's high income countries. Last time any had a regime change was when they were poor.
The rich Arab states were immune as revolts, revolutions, civil wars, and regime changes of the Arab Spring after 2011 affected the poorer ones.
(Libya was an edge case, fairly rich but had a revolt and civil war.)
Red is high income.
Socialist revolutions were supposed to happen in the most advanced and rich capitalist states.
They didn't. They happened in poorer countries.
Settler colonialism is trending.
Some current examples. 🧵
1. China. Settled loyal Han in disloyal Xinjiang (from 90s). Settled 1m loyal mainlanders in disloyal Hong Kong.
A road across Xinjiang's Taklamakan desert China built to entice settlers.
2. Indonesia. Settled about 300k loyal Javanese in West Papua. Many around the giant Grasberg gold and copper mine, which had been a target of attacks by Papuan independence activists.
Anna Krylov, a chemistry professor, has published several pieces on how left/woke ideology is undermining science. Here's her latest.
She gives examples of four main issues:
1. Policing of language.
Ever longer list of forbidden words like "healthy weight".
2. Rewriting the history of science.
More and more scientists having their names stricken from buildings, textbooks, awards, etc.
Some examples:
3. Suppression of viewpoints and research results.
Paper retractions, censorship of valid research.
E.g. in 2022, Nature Human Behaviour (NHB) published an editorial stating that the journal will not publish valid research that the editors consider ‘harmful’ to groups.