The White House just released a really good executive order on cleaning up America's streets, re-institutionalizing insane people, and ending open air drug abuse and the problems it creates.
Here's a quick overview🧵
The first section is the one I'm most excited for. An alternative name for it could be "Bring Back The Asylums"
It instructs the administration to make it possible to involuntarily commit crazy people again
That crazy hobo pushing a cart full of urine bottles? He's going away!
The next section is one that you'll need to familiarize yourself with if you're interested in 'what happens next'.
This was a never achieved goal in Trump-I.
The idea is to compel cities to do what you want by withholding, barring, and giving discretionary funds for compliance.
So, for example, one idea that has made its way through the whisper networks is to compel cities to adopt housing plans and to build more homes by taking away all possible federal funds if they don't
Upzone? Here, have money
Stagnate? No soup for you
Downzone? Fighting words
This will be the first attempt at actually making this happen.
The grantees who will be preferred by this program will be those that
Don't let people use drugs in public, don't let hobos set up tents and mill about, don't let people squat in homes that aren't theirs...
Preferred grantees will be those who try to lock up insane hobos, and
Actually comply with using sex offender registries.
You might not have known, but a lot of hobos are sex offenders with criminal histories. You won't find their 'address' listed though, since they lack one.
This section also instructs the AG to make federal criminals subject to evaluation as sex pests who can be involuntarily committed
It also says to start doing things to stop the catch-and-release game that's played with crazy people, where they're let out due to 'lack of space'
The next section cuts off the infinite spigot of pointless funding for so-called "harm reduction" programs that keep people using drugs 'safely' instead of seeking real treatment
This section also funds assistance for commitment, comprehensive services, and crisis interventions
You might ask yourself:
Where's the court capacity to do all of this?
Not a worry: The EO funds the expansion of drug and mental health courts.
The last section begins by calling for an end to "Housing First" programs.
These are programs that seek to get homeless people into homes prior to getting them into treatment for their mental health and drug abuse issues.
They often lead to wasted public funds.
A recurring theme in all this is that the administration wants homelessness programs to be more effective.
For too long now, programs have failed to push people into treatment. But now that's required.
The Order also calls for prosecuting people who run programs that facilitate drug use.
This admin wants a cold turkey stop to drug use, no more excuses and partial-measures that don't resolve the issue. They want people to toughen up and end soft approaches.
The final part of the order demands recipients of grants for homelessness provide data where requested to make programs work better.
And this part, which shouldn't need to be said: stop sex offenders from being housed with unrelated children.
This Order is bound to make a lot of people upset
People have terrible theories about homelessness that signal all sorts of perverse psychodrama and mandate programs fail in predictable ways
Pierre Guillaume Frédéric le Play argued that France's early fertility decline was driven by its inheritance reforms, where estates had to be split up equally to all of the kids, including the girls.
There's likely something to this!🧵
For reference, the French Revolution ushered in a number of egalitarian laws.
A major example of these had to do with inheritance, and in particular with partibility.
In some areas of France, there was partible inheritance, and in others, it was impartible.
Partible inheritance refers to inheritance spread among all of a person's heirs, sometimes including girls, sometimes not.
Impartible inheritance on the other hands refers to the situation where the head of an estate can nominate a particular heir to get all or a select portion.
In terms of their employment, religion, and sex, people who joined the Nazi party started off incredibly distinct from the people in their communities.
It's only near the end of WWII when they started resembling everyday Germans.
Early on, a lot of this dissimilarity is due to hysteresis.
Even as the party was growing, people were selectively recruited because they were often recruited by their out-of-place friends, and they were themselves out-of-place.
It took huge growth to break that.
And you can see the decline of fervor based on the decline of Nazi imagery in people's portraits.
And while this is observed by-and-large, it's not observed among the SS, who had a consistently higher rate of symbolic fanaticism.
I simulated 100,000 people to show how often people are "thrice-exceptional": Smart, stable, and exceptionally hard-working.
I've highlighted these people in red in this chart:
If you reorient the chart to a bird's eye view, it looks like this:
In short, there are not many people who are thrice-exceptional, in the sense of being at least +2 standard deviations in conscientiousness, emotional stability (i.e., inverse neuroticism), and intelligence.
To replicate this, use 42 as the seed and assume linearity and normality
The decline of trust is something worth caring about, and reversing it is something worth doing.
We should not have to live constantly wondering if we're being lied to or scammed. Trust should be possible again.
I don't know how we go about regaining trust and promoting trustworthiness in society.
It feels like there's an immense level of toleration of untrustworthy behavior from everyone: scams are openly funded; academics congratulate their fraudster peers; all content is now slop.
What China's doing—corruption crackdowns and arresting fraudsters—seems laudable, and I think the U.S. and other Western nations should follow suit.
Fraud leads to so many lives being lost and so much progress being halted or delayed.
British fertility abruptly fell after one important court case: the Bradlaugh-Besant trial🧵
You can see its impact very visibly on this chart:
The trial involved Annie Besant (left) and Charles Bradlaugh (right).
These two were atheists—a scandalous position at the time!—and they wanted to promote free-thinking about practically everything that upset the puritanical society of their time.
They were on trial because they tried to sell a book entitled Fruits of Philosophy.
This was an American guide to tons of different aspects of family planning, and included birth control methods, some of which worked, others which did not.
One of the really interesting studies on the psychiatric effects of maltreatment is Danese and Widom's from Nat. Hum. Behavior a few years ago.
They found that only subjective (S), rather than objective (O) maltreatment predicted actually having a mental disorder.
Phrased differently, if people subjectively believed they were abused, that predicted poor mental health, but objectively recorded maltreatment only predicted it if there was also a subjective report.
Some people might 'simply' be more resilient than others.
I think this finding makes sense.
Consider the level of agreement between prospective (P-R) and retrospective (R-P) reports of childhood maltreatment.
A slim majority of people recorded being mistreated later report that they were mistreated when asked to recall.