Crémieux Profile picture
Jul 24, 2025 15 tweets 5 min read Read on X
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🧵 Image
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! Image
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. Image
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... Image
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. Image
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' Image
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 Image
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. Image
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.Image
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. Image
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. Image
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.Image
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

The administration is saying 'no more'

Good!

Bring back asylums, end public disorder
If you want to read the Order, you can here: whitehouse.gov/presidential-a…

• • •

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

Keep Current with Crémieux

Crémieux 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 @cremieuxrecueil

Jan 27
The researcher who put together these numbers was investigated and almost charged with a crime for bringing these numbers to light when she hadn't received permission.

Now we have an update that goes through 2020!

First: Where are Sweden's rapists from?

Mostly not Sweden. Image
What countries were those foreign rapists from?

We only got information on the top five origins, constituting roughly half of the foreign-born samples, and thus about a quarter of all the rapists. Image
What about welfare usage? 35.1%.
Alcoholism? 14.9%
Drug addiction? 23.7%
A diagnosed psychiatric disorder besides that? 13%

What about a criminal prior? 52%. That compares to 13.4% of non-rapist criminals. So rapes? Considerably more preventable.
Read 5 tweets
Jan 17
Greater Male Variability rarely makes for an adequate explanation of sex differences in performance.

One exception may be the number of papers published by academics.

If you remove the top 7.5% of men, there's no longer a gap! Image
The disciplines covered here were ones with relatively equal sex ratios: Education, Nursing & Caring Science, Psychology, Public Health, Sociology, and Social Work.

Because these are stats on professors, this means that if there's greater male variability, it's mostly right-tail
Despite this, the very highest-performing women actually outperformed the very highest-performing men on average, albeit slightly.

The percentiles in this image are for the combined group, so these findings coexist for composition reasons. Image
Read 6 tweets
Jan 17
One of the issues with understanding Greater Male Variability on IQ tests is that groups that perform better tend to show greater variance

Therefore, to estimate the 'correct' male-female gap, you need to estimate it when the difference is 0

In the CogAT, that looks like this: Image
In Project Talent, that looks like this: Image
And comparing siblings in the NLSY '79, that looks like this: Image
Read 5 tweets
Jan 14
About a decade ago, a theory emerged:

If men do more of the housework and child care, fertility rates will rise!

Men have been doing increasingly large shares of the housework and child care.

Fertility is lower than ever.Image
In fact, they're doing more in each generation, but fertility has continued to fall. Image
The original claim, that men's household work would buoy fertility, was based on cross-sectional data that was inappropriately given a causal interpretation.

The updated cross-sectional data is as useful, and it affords no assurances about the original idea.

We should move on.
Read 4 tweets
Jan 13
American military veterans have a suicide problem.

Some have theorized the reason is deployment-related trauma.

Leveraging the random assignment of new soldiers to units with different deployment cycles, Bruhn et al. found that was wrong.

Deployment did not increase suicides. Image
Looking only at violent deployments (ones with peer casualties), there aren't noncombat mortality effects either.

What explains veteran suicide rates? Image
The reason seems to be that the proposition is wrong: veterans do not have increased suicide risk.

This may seem surprising, but it's not!

Their suicide rates are elevated over the general population because most of them are young White men. That group has a suicide issue. Image
Read 8 tweets
Jan 12
That aspect is probably not that unrealistic, unfortunately.

Across the OECD, on average, just 55% of 15-to-16-year-olds got this question right, and no country saw 80% get it.

Most people globally *do* struggle even reading simple tables. What else?

Thread.🧵 Image
That table-reading question is "Level 3", which, amazingly, corresponds to an already-high level of ability, by global standards.

This is a simpler Level 1 question, but with this, 92% of the OECD got it, including just 65% of Brazilians and 53% of Peruvians. Image
Level 2!

Just 77% of the OECD got this, with less than half of the Mexican population being up to the task.

In fact, only Asian countries got over 90% on this trivial question. Image
Read 9 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

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

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

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(