"There has been almost no increase in the increment to individual earnings for each year of schooling between K and 12 since 1980. It was roughly 6 percentage points per year in 1980, and it still is. The earnings increment for a B.A. has risen from 30.4 percent in 1980 to 50.4 percent in 2000 to 56.4 percent in 2017. The gain to a four-year graduate degree (a Ph.D., for example, but an M.D., J.D., or perhaps even an M.B.A.) relative to high school was approximately 57 percent in 1980, rising to 127 percent in 2017.
These differences result in large part because ever greater levels of skill — critical thinking, problem-solving, originality, strategizing — are needed in a knowledge-based society.
In their paper “The Economics of Parenting,” three economists, Matthias Doepke at Northwestern, Giuseppe Sorrenti at University of Zurich and Fabrizio Zilibotti at Yale, describe three basic forms of child rearing:
The permissive parenting style is the scenario where the parent lets the child have her way and refrains from interfering in the choices. The authoritarian style is one where the parent imposes her will through coercion. In the model above, coercion is captured through the notion of restricting the choice set. An authoritarian parent chooses a small set that leaves little or no leeway to the child. The third parenting style, authoritative parenting, is also one where the parent aims to affect the child’s choice. However, rather than using coercion, an authoritative parent uses persuasion: she shapes the child’s preferences through investments in the first period of life. For example, such a parent may preach the virtues of patience or the dangers of risk during when the child is little, so that the child ends up with more adultlike preferences when the child’s own decisions matter during adolescence.
There is an “interaction between economic conditions and parenting styles,” Doepke and his colleagues write, resulting in the following patterns:
Consider, first, a low inequality society, where the gap between the top and the bottom is small. In such a society, there is limited incentive for children to put effort into education. Parents are also less concerned about children’s effort, and thus there is little scope for disagreement between parents and children. Therefore, most parents adopt a permissive parenting style, namely, they keep young children happy and foster their sense of independence so that they can discover what they are good at in their adult life.
The authors cite the Scandinavian countries as key examples of this approach.
Authoritarian parenting, in turn, is most common in less-developed, traditional societies where there is little social mobility and children have the same jobs as their parents:
Parents have little incentive to be permissive in order to let children discover what they are good at. Nor do they need to spend effort in socializing children into adultlike values (i.e., to be authoritative) since they can achieve the same result by simply monitoring them.
Finally, they continue, consider “a high-inequality society”:
There, the disagreement between parents and children is more salient, because parents would like to see their children work hard in school and choose professions with a high return to human capital. In this society, a larger share of parents will be authoritative, and fewer will be permissive.
This model, the authors write, fits the United States and China.
There are some clear downsides to this approach:
Because of the comparative advantage of rich and educated parents in authoritative parenting, there will be a stronger socioeconomic sorting into parenting styles. Since an authoritative parenting style is conducive to more economic success, this sorting will hamper social mobility.
Sorrenti elaborated in an email:
In neighborhoods with higher inequality and with less affluent families, parents tend to be, on average, more authoritarian. Our models and additional analyses show that parents tend to be more authoritarian in response to a social environment perceived as more risky or less inspiring for children. On the other hand, the authoritative parenting styles, aimed at molding child preferences, is a typical parenting style gaining more and more consensus in the U.S., also in more affluent families."
2021 m. birželio 23 d., trečiadienis
2021 m. birželio 22 d., antradienis
Delta variantas yra kol kas pavojingiausia SARS-CoV-2 mutacija
"Atrodo, kad delta variantas yra ne tik lengviau perduodamas, bet ir sukelia sunkesnę ligą. Remiantis laboratoriniais eksperimentais, Amerikos ligų kontrolės ir prevencijos centrai įtaria, kad abi problemos gali būti susijusios su delta varianto sugebėjimu apeiti antikūnų apsaugą, neatsižvelgiant į tai, ar antikūnus sukėlė ankstesnė infekcija, ar vakcinacija. PHE pranešė, kad delta varianto hospitalizavimo rizika padidėja 32–289%, palyginti su alfa. Tai taip pat gali padaryti virusą labiau mirtinu.
Vakcinos išvados nebuvo tokios nerimą keliančios. Palyginti su alfa mutacija, delta sumažino apsaugą nuo simptominės infekcijos nuo 50% iki 33% po vienos Pfizer-BioNTech ar AstraZeneca dozės, bet tik nuo 88% iki 80% po antrosios, tikėtina, kad vakcinos apsauga laikui bėgant dar labiau padidės. Tas skiepijimas vis dar veikia taip gerai, kad reikia skubiai administruoti daugiau jo, ypač vargingame pasaulyje.
Mažesnė apsauga nuo praeities infekcijų - ar tai būtų nuo SARS-CoV-2, ar kitų koronavirusų - yra baisi žinia tokioms šalims, kaip Afganistanas, kur maždaug trečdalis gyventojų buvo užkrėsti iki praėjusių metų rugpjūčio, rodo antikūnų tyrimai. Afganistano ligoninėse šiuo metu yra daugybė Covid 19 pacientų, įtariama delta. Be plačios vakcinacijos gali būti tik laiko klausimas, kada išsivystys atsparesnė vakcinacijai mutacija "[1].
1. The delta variant is the most dangerous SARS-CoV-2 mutation yet; Daily chart.
Citation metadata
Date: June 16, 2021
From: The Economist
Publisher: Economist Intelligence Unit N.A. Incorporated
The delta variant is the most dangerous SARS-CoV-2 mutation yet
"As well as being more transmissible, the delta variant seems to lead to more severe disease. On the basis of lab experiments, America's Centres for Disease Control and Prevention suspects that both problems could be linked to the delta variant's ability to circumvent antibody defences, regardless of whether antibodies were induced by past infection or vaccination. PHE reported that the risk of hospitalisation from the delta variant increases by between 32% and 289% compared with alpha. That may make it more deadly, too.
The vaccine findings were less alarming. Compared with the alpha mutation, delta lowered protection from symptomatic infection from 50% to 33% after one dose of Pfizer-BioNTech or AstraZeneca, but only from 88% to 80% after the second, with vaccine protection expected to increase further over time. That inoculation still works so well highlights the urgency of administering jabs, particularly in the poor world. Lower protection afforded by past infections--be it from SARS-CoV-2 or other coronaviruses--is terrible news for countries such as Afghanistan, where about a third of the population was infected by August last year, according to antibody surveys. Hospitals in Afghanistan are currently overrun with covid-19 patients, with delta as the suspected cause. That makes it essential to jab more people more quickly. Without widespread vaccination, it could only be a matter of time before a mutation that is more resistant to vaccination develops." [1]
1.
The delta variant is the most dangerous SARS-CoV-2 mutation yet; Daily chart.
Citation metadata
Date: June 16, 2021
From: The Economist
Publisher: Economist Intelligence Unit N.A. Incorporated
Kodėl Lietuvoje trūksta kadrų?
Galvojate, kad verslininkai moka mažas algas, ir todėl gabūs išvažiuoja? Jūs esate teisūs, bet verslininkai galvoja kitaip:
"Verslo žinios pritaria ekspertams, akcentuojantiems, kad norint sulaukti sėkmės, pritraukiant investicijas ateityje, reikia ilgalaikių tvarių sprendimų ir labai rimto profesinio orientavimo jaunuoliams, kad nenorėtų visi būti „influenceriai“.
„Kol kas valstybė neįgali pasirašyti Švietimo susitarimo, universitetai ruošia tai, ką nori (arba kokius dėstytojus turi ir nori išlaikyti), centralizacijos ir išteklių valdymo politikos nėra, visi žiūri savo uodegos“, – apgailestauja Andrius Francas, personalo paieškos bendrovės „Alliance for Recruitment“ partneris. "
Pinigai? Kokie pinigai?
2021 m. birželio 21 d., pirmadienis
Kelios taisyklės padės jums pirkti internetu
"Pirkimas internetu gali pasijausti, kaip magija. Pora paspaudimų ir po kelių dienų dėžutė yra prie jūsų slenksčio. Bet taip pat gali atrodyti, kad žaidi skaitmeninio gudrybės žaidimą. Pirkėjai turi atsargiai žengti, kad išvengtų padirbtų atsiliepimų, nesaugių ar netinkamai paženklintų produktų ar padirbtų prekių, slepiamų už teisėtų, atrodytų, sąrašų. Taip yra todėl, kad gyvename „Rinkos Eroje“.
Trečiųjų šalių pardavėjai prekiauja savo prekėmis per „Amazon“, „Walmart“, „Target“ skaitmeninius turgus. Šis sandoris gali būti vertinamas kaip abipusė nauda: klientai gauna didesnį produktų pasirinkimą, o mažmenininkai - daugiau pardavimo. Problema? Užuot pirkę iš tos žinomos svetainės, jūs perkate iš nežinomo pardavėjo ir dažnai tai yra prekės ženklas, apie kurį niekada negirdėjote. Be to, grąžinimų politika gali skirtis nuo tiesiogiai svetainėje parduodamų prekių. Dauguma svetainių neatlieka trečiųjų šalių produktų kokybės kontrolės. O konkurencija tarp pardavėjų yra tokia intensyvi, daugelis manipuliuoja savo sąrašais, kad padidintų reitingus. Daugelį metų aptaręs būdus, kuriais galima manipuliuoti turgavietėmis, aš sukūriau tris pagrindines internetinio pirkimo principus:
- Žinokite, kas parduoda tai, ką perkate jūs;
- Įsitikinkite, kad yra lengva grąžinimo politika;
- Nepasitikėkite apžvalgomis. "[1]
1. A Few Rules Will Prime You for Online Buying
Nguyen, Nicole. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y. [New York, N.Y]21 June 2021: B.1.
A Few Rules Will Prime You for Online Buying
"Shopping online can feel like magic. A couple of clicks and a few days later, a box is on your doorstep. But it can also feel like playing a game of digital dodgeball. Shoppers must tread carefully to avoid the fake reviews, unsafe or mislabeled products, or counterfeit goods hiding behind legitimate-seeming listings.
That's because we are living in the Marketplace Era. Third-party sellers peddle their wares via the digital bazaars of Amazon, Walmart, Target. The deal could be seen as a win-win: Customers get a larger selection of products, and retailers get a cut of more sales. The problem? Instead of buying from that site you know, you're buying from a seller you don't know and often it's a brand you've never heard of.
Plus, policies for returns and refunds might be different than items sold directly by the site. Most don't vet third-party products for quality. And the competition between sellers is so intense, many manipulate their listings to boost ratings.
After years of covering the ways in which marketplaces can be manipulated, I've developed three key tenets for online shopping:
-- Know who is selling what you're buying;
-- Make sure there's an easy return policy;
-- Don't trust reviews." [1]
1. A Few Rules Will Prime You for Online Buying
Nguyen, Nicole. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y. [New York, N.Y]21 June 2021: B.1.
Užsisakykite:
Pranešimai (Atom)