-
- Compare how the authors of the following two passages support their statements or arguments. The first passage is from a report by an economist examining the impact of poverty on educational achievement. The second is an excerpt from an analysis by an economist about how the American public’s misconceptions about economics affect their voting habits. First, write a brief summary of each passage, identifying its main assertions or points. Then identify the supporting evidence or arguments for each main point. What kinds of evidence or support does each author use? What sources do they use to support their points? Finally, discuss the differences and similarities in how these authors support their points. What are the main similarities and differences? How might you explain these similarities and differences?
-
- The impact of education on earnings and thus on poverty works largely through the labour market, though education can also contribute to productivity in other areas, such as peasant farming (Orazem, Glewwe & Patrinos, 2007: 5). In the labour market, higher wages for more educated people may result from higher productivity, but also perhaps from the fact that education may act as a signal of ability to employers, enabling the better educated to obtain more lucrative jobs. Middle-income countries—which frequently have well developed markets for more educated labour—are particularly likely to see the benefits of education translated into better jobs and higher wages. In Chile, for instance, between one quarter and one third of household income differences can be explained by the level of education of household heads (Ferreira & Litchfield, 1998, p. 32).
Source: van der Berg, Servaas. Poverty and Education. UNESCO / International Institute for Educational Planning, 2008, p. 3.
-
- Consider the case of immigration policy. Economists are vastly more optimistic about its economic effects than the general public. The Survey of Americans and Economists on the Economy asks respondents to say whether “too many immigrants” is a major, minor, or non-reason why the economy is not doing better than it is. 47% of non-economists think it is a major reason; 80% of economists think it is not a reason at all. Economists have many reasons for their contrarian position: they know that specialization and trade enrich Americans and immigrants alike; there is little evidence that immigration noticeably reduces even the wages of low-skilled Americans; and, since immigrants are largely young males, and most government programs support the old, women, and children, immigrants wind up paying more in taxes than they take in benefits.
-
- Given what the average voter thinks about the effects of immigration, it is easy to understand why virtually every survey finds that a solid majority of Americans wants to reduce immigration, and almost no one wants to increase immigration. Unfortunately, for both Americans and potential immigrants, there is ample reason to believe that the average voter is mistaken. If policy were based on the facts, we would be debating how much to increase immigration, rather than trying to “get tough” on immigrants who are already here.
Source: Caplan, Brian. “The Myth of the Rational Voter.” Cato Unbound, 6 Nov. 2006, www.cato-unbound.org/2006/11/05/bryan-caplan/myth-rational-voter.