Tuesday, April 23, 2013

William Sidis and The Nature of Education.

I let the 115th birthday of William Sidis pass by without comment earlier this month, but he's been on my mind since.

I encountered his story in my first year of law school; a child prodigy (at 11, the youngest person to enroll at Harvard, ever), he became famous for his precocity.  My sense (and Wikipedia agrees) is that Sidis was very much a product of his parents.  Sidis apparently could read the New York Times at 18 months, and by age 9 knew eight different languages.  At age 11, Sidis delivered a lecture on higher mathematics at the Harvard Mathematical Club, and at 17 enrolled in Harvard Law School.

Despite the amazing success of Sidis as a youth, I don't think any parent would wish Sidis' future on their child.  By 21, he was in jail for rioting. When the New Yorker ran an article and a cartoon some years later discussing how he had become an eccentric recluse, Sidis sued for invasion of privacy, took it to the Supreme Court, and lost. It's not hard to see why Sidis was so incensed by the article -- few would enjoy the New Yorker describing their life as lonely, living in a hall bedroom in Boston's shabby "South End."

Sidis died shortly thereafter at age 45, of a cerebral hemmorage. 

Sidis has long been a cautionary guide post about how not to bring up children, and his parents were criticized extensively. Sidis himself was portrayed derisively in newspapers even as a child. You can see the presumption in the New Yorker cartoon I've included above, from the article that provided the basis for Sidis' suit. The comic portrays Sidis as a snotty kid, a punk, know-it-all prick.

Here's the thing.  William Sidis was from Southie.  And that immediately reminded me of the following clip from Good Will Hunting:

"But he's a bit defensive ... I need someone who can get through to him."
"Like me."
"Yeah, like you."
"Why?"
"Well, because you have the same kind of background."
"What background?"
"Well, you're from the same neighborhood."
"He's from Southie?"
"Yeah."
"Boy genius from Southie ... how many shrinks you go to before me?"
"Five."
Which makes me pause when I consider William Sidis now.

Few viewers of Good Will Hunting today would consider it implausible that the brilliant mathematician would be so out of touch that it would take him five tries to think of getting someone to talk to Will from the same neighborhood, from the same tradition, from the same culture. We find it believable that the mighty, the wealthy, the brilliant, and the powerful are unable to communicate with the poor.

Yet at the same time, we sense that Robin Williams' character immediately understands things about Matt Damon's that Stellan Skarsgård's will never comprehend. It is Robin Williams' ability to speak to he who Stellan Skarsgård cannot that is the work of genius depicted in the film.  It is Robin Williams' ability to communicate between the prodigy and the professor.

I take that lesson and look at William Sidis. And I am forced to ponder the nature of education.

Friday, April 12, 2013

Sonoma Charter Isn't Giving The Trustees A Choice.

Ethnicity of Students, Hispanic or Latino
Sonoma Valley Public Schools
"Education Statistics of California," 
Google Public Data Explorer
Gary DeSmet and Helen Marsh shouldered a heavy load on Tuesday at the Sonoma Valley Unified School District Board of Trustees meeting.  It was well described by Bill Hoban in this article.

I know that the School Board Trustees, in their individual capacities, want to provide every bit of support they can for the families and students at Sonoma Charter. But the Charter School has a racial segregation problem that is obvious, serious, and that has not been addressed after multiple warnings.

The plain fact is that there is simply no way that Sonoma Charter is a neighborhood school with this demographic profile.  At all.  Further, the failure to correct the problem makes Sonoma Charter look more like a relic of the past than a guide to the future of education, an issue that has come up on this blog before.

It is a real failing of the Charter School administration, that they have made it so extraordinarily difficult for any Trustee, at this point, to vote to renew the charter.

I am afraid for the Charter School that they have reached the point where there are now going to be consequences, and that this is going to cause real hardship for many families and students.  But I think the Board of Trustees, even though I am sure they want to support the School, have simply been put in an untenable position, and that they cannot provide more public money that will be used to allow this situation to continue.

Friday, April 5, 2013

... While the ATF Moves on Big Data.


R--OPTION - Investigative System
Solicitation Number: DJA-13-AOSI-PR-0238-1
Agency: Department of Justice
Office: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF)
Location: Administrative Programs Division (APD)
available at http://tinyurl.com/cbwoq59
From Wired: "[ATF] is looking to buy a 'massive online data repository system' ... to process automated searches of individuals, and 'find connection points between two or more individuals' ... instead of requiring an analyst to manually search around for your personal information, the database should 'obtain exact matches from partial source data searches' such as social security numbers (or even just a fragment of one), vehicle serial codes, age range, 'phonetic name spelling,' or a general area where your address is located. Input that data, and out comes your identity, while the computer automatically establishes connections you have with others."

"... the ATF is widely perceived as a weak, stagnant and underfunded agency. Even if it has a database that can track you down and find out who your friends are, it won’t necessarily be able to apply that to tracing gun transactions due to Congressional restrictions. If the agency finds a gun linked to a crime, and then traces the gun to someone who bought it from someone else, all of that work figuring out the who’s-who will still likely have to be done manually."

It takes a few months for the Federal Government to get moving after something like Newtown.  They're making progress.  However, as the article notes, Federal Law bars the ATF from creating a centralized database tracing gun transactions.  It doesn't bar anyone else from doing it, just ATF.  Which is a policy with certain downsides.

... and California's Deficit Comes Right Back.

From the New York Times: "A federal judge on Friday rejected California’s motion to regain control of mental health care in its prisons, ruling that the quality of care failed to meet standards required by the Constitution."

This suggests a significant defeat is in the offing for the Brown administration, because the State budget will now likely be thrown back into a deficit position due to the $1.9 billion in costs associated with housing prisoners out-of-state; while the decision today concerned the mental health system, it is expected exactly the same rationale will apply to the overcrowding decision.

"What Crimes did Prisoners Commit?"
Criminal Justice and Judiciary FAQ
California Legislative Analyst
This is not the first time I've blogged about this. Prison overcrowding is the enduring wild card in the State budget on the spending side, especially now with the emergence of Obamacare.

Perhaps one of the ironies of the whole situation is that California (particularly its voters) is working rather hard to decriminalize marijuana. According to the State's Legislative Analyst's Office, approximately 31 percent of inmates in California’s prisons were incarcerated for a drug-related crime. I don't think decriminalization of possession would make the difference-- there are about 1,500 prisoners at the State level for possession -- but I suspect the real change would be caused by the legitimization of formerly criminal enterprises -- there would be less need for violent "self help."

But Federal law continues to block that legalization, while at the same time the Federal Government is criticizing the State for failing to build enough prisons to reduce the overcrowding that is at least partially created by the very policy the voters of the State have rejected.

Hmmm.

Wednesday, March 27, 2013

Prop. 8 and Crossing the Rubicon.

In the Prop. 8 arguments on Tuesday, Justice Kennedy focused on the fact that there are 40,000 adopted children of same sex couples in California. It was perhaps the most poignant moment in the whole oral argument (I bothered to listen):
"On the other hand, there is an immediate legal injury or legal — what could be a legal injury, and that's the voice of these children. There are some 40,000 children in California ... that live with same-sex parents, and they want their parents to have full recognition and full status. The voice of those children is important in this case, don't you think?"
I don't think that Justice Kennedy was asking a question here. Justice Scalia followed up with an oblique history reference:
"I mean, we granted cert. I mean, that's essentially asking, you know, why did we grant cert. We should let it percolate for another — you know, we — we have crossed that river, I think."
The allusion to Caesar crossing the Rubicon was appreciated by the historian in me.  The phrase originates with Julius Caesar's seizure of power in the Roman Republic in 49 BC. Roman generals were strictly forbidden to bring their troops into the home territory of the Republic in Italy. On 10 January, Caesar led his army across the Rubicon River, crossing from the province of Cisalpine Gaul into Italy. After this, if he did not triumph, he would be executed -- it was a point of no return.

I think that Justice Scalia (and probably Justice Kennedy) are aware that society has reached a point of no return when the families of 40,000 children are at issue.  The court needs to do something, one way or another. I continue to think there's going to be a decision on the merits.

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

The Plutonium Standard.

Free Exchange, one of the Economist's bloggers, speculates today on the value of the U.S. Government as a venture capitalist, and comes down in favor, with significant caveats.  The one that grabbed my interest was:
"... it might make sense for America's government to ... support innovation while also being a very bad idea for [nations like] Belgium or ... Mexico. Why? Well the "extraordinary privilege/burden" afforded America by its control of the world's favourite currency and safe asset means that the dollar is always going to be a bit too strong and foreigners are always going to be lending American money a bit too cheaply. That status places American exporters at a slight disadvantage (except in knowledge industries where trade costs are negligible) and means that in the absence of government borrowing cheap loans may flow to less productive investments in stuff like empty exurban homes. It makes sense, then, for America to plow a lot of money into research activities that may boost long-run growth, helping to keep it attractive as controller of the currency/safe-asset of first resort."
This is a less perceptive point than it first appears to be -- the salutary effects of national debt are many, as Alexander Hamilton argued.  Rather than liquidate the national debt, Hamilton recommended bonds be issued and repaid to promote their exchange as legal tender, equivalent in value to hard currency, which allowed the government to increase the money supply and stimulate investment, which in turn increased revenue. Alexander Hamilton didn't argue that such government borrowing can also reduce speculative or inflationary economic activity through upward pressure on interest rates, which is what this blogger's arguing for here. The unstated assumption is that the government allocation of capital might be more efficient at the margin than privately directed investment, a point one or two people might argue with.

But the columnist does finish well, at least analytically speaking:
...  the unique role of America's military as chief guarantor of the public good that is international peace also shines a (generally) more favourable light on investment in technologies ..."
This is the "plutonium standard" argument. America's near-overwhelming military power means that investors have a great deal of confidence in the U.S. Government, and that power has been built on technological innovation.  Instead of an economy based on a gold standard, it is ideas and innovation that the dollar (and ultimately, the American economy) is built upon, which inclines me to agree with the blogger, who argues it is "hard to regret big government investments in technology despite the frequent emergence of waste and failure."

Monday, March 18, 2013

Cyprus, Bank Runs, and the Metallic Flick-Click of a Switchblade.

Wolfgang Münchau, in his column in the Financial Times today, paraphrases Sir Mervyn King, the Governor of the Bank of England. Normally, not a big deal.

Today it's about Cyprus. Also not usually a big deal.

However, the paraphrase today is about bank runs, and specifically, how the European Union has now created the potential for one in Cyprus.  I've tracked down the actual quote.
"These things are very fragile. Once the run starts it was then rational for other people to join in"
Because the quote suggests that a run is rational for depositors, and because of the potential for a Cypriot run to cause the same to occur in Spain or Italy, this is the banking-finance-economics equivalent of the metallic flick-click of a switchblade in a dark alley. 

What did the EU do to cause this? The EU is bailing out the Cypriot banks via a "stability levy" of 9.9% on deposits larger than €100,000. There are strong arguments this is a good idea; deposit insurance's protection is typically not unlimited, and bank deposits over a certain sum begin to look more like investments, where socialized risk has substantial downsides -- namely moral hazard.  

The EU didn't stop there -- they also imposed a 6.75% levy on deposits smaller than €100,000. That was dumb. Banks provide payment services, and bank accounts are indispensable to businesses and individuals. By undermining the security of those smaller accounts, the EU risks destroying the Cypriot economy -- and has sent a message that other customers throughout Europe are not protected against the same.  And the thing is, for smaller banking customers, certainly in Cyprus, and maybe throughout the EU, taking their money out of their accounts is now rational. The design of deposit insurance should make that argument wrong, always.  

Since 2008, Atlantic civilization has faced the dismal truth that while standard economics has offered good answers, political leaders — and all too many economists — chose to forget or ignore what they should have known. This isn't my awesome, unique idea -- it's Paul Krugman's.  And he's right, once again.