1. The Oregon Health Insurance Experiment

Basically, in early 2008, Oregon opened up a waiting list for its Medicaid programme to low-income adults who had previously failed to attain enrolment. 90,000 people applied for 10,000 openings, creating a beautiful natural experiment, allowing economists to study the effects of Medicaid coverage. Oregon used a lottery to allocate the places.

Four papers were eventually released enumerating the effects: the first studied self-reported health, healthcare utilisation and medical debt; the second dealt with clinical outcomes; the third with emergency department use; and the fourth with labour market outcomes.

The chief findings of these studies were that:

An increase in healthcare utilisation, namely though higher hospitalisation rates, emergency-dept. visits, outpatient visits, prescription drug use and and preventative-care use.

Decreased financial strain through fewer medical debts, and a virtual elimination of bank-breaking out-of-pocket payments.

Improved self-reported health and lower rates of depression, but no impact on actual physical health outcomes.

No effect on employment or earnings.

2. The effect of military service on lifetime earnings

Josh Angrist's PhD thesis tried to test how military service impacted people's lifetime earnings. This is notoriously difficult to measure, since certain personality traits which lead to people joining the army in the first place could also cause a propensity for lower earnings later in lifetime.

So Angrist used the draft during the Vietnam War as a natural element and analysed the results. He found that, among white men, serving in the army reduced lifetime income by 15pc.

3. The impact of the minimum wage in New Jersey's fast food industry

I'll just quote their abstract for this one: “On April 1, 1992, New Jersey's minimum wage rose from $4.25 to $5.05 per hour. To evaluate the impact of the law we surveyed 410 fast-food restaurants in New Jersey and [neighbouring] eastern Pennsylvania before and after the rise. Comparisons of employment growth at stores in New Jersey and Pennsylvania (where the minimum wage was constant) provide simple estimates of the effect of the higher minimum wage”.

4. The impact of the 1918 Influenza Epidemic on the post-1940 US population

Douglas Almond sought to test the Barker hypothesis, which claims that a foetus's prenatal environment may have an impact on their health decades into their life. During the time that Spanish Flu impacted the US, 33pc of all women of childbearing age contracted it.

Using U.S. Census data collected in 1960, 1970 and 1980 which identifies the individuals’ place and time of birth, Almond found that individuals who were in utero during the pandemic had, on average, increased rates of physical disability (pictured below), reduced educational attainment, and lower income and socioeconomic status.

5. The effect of Ramadan on children in utero

Another one from Almond. During Ramadan, there is a high compliance rate among pregnant Muslims, despite the fact that many Islamic scholars claim Ramadan is not obligatory for such women. Conducting a study on children aged 7, Almond found that children whose pregnancies overlapped with Ramadan performed worse in maths, reading and writing. The effects were most significant among children whose first three months of gestation overlapped with Ramadan.

6. The effects of the 1944-45 Dutch famine on children in utero

Official rations in occupied Netherlands during this period dropped to as low as 500 calories a day, and 20,000 people died of starvation. The west of the country was harshly effected, while the north and south escaped the worst of it. This allowed researches to study the effects of famine on prenatal development; the results were higher rates of diabetes, schizophrenia and obesity in later life.

7. The impact of mass immigration on Miami's labour market

Most economists agree that the average American would be better off if more low- and high-skilled immigrants were allowed to move into the US, but this faces considerable popular push-back in the US and Europe. David Card analysed the effects of the Mariel Boatlift, wherein 125,000 Cubans arrived in the US between April and September 1980.

This caused the Miami labour force to grow by 7pc, and yet Card found that this large increase in unskilled labour didn't impact the employment prospect or earnings of native unskilled labour in the Miami area.

8. The effect of class sizes on performance in Israel

Joshua Angrist returns, and this time he's studying the effects of an 800-year-old Israeli law. The rule is derived from the teachings of Maimonides, who said: "Twenty-five children may be put in charge of one teacher. If the number in the class exceeds twenty-five but is not more than forty, he should have an assistant to help with the instruction. If there are more than forty, two teachers must be appointed." A strict application of this rule would mean that a school with eighty students would have two classes of forty, while a school of eighty-one would have three classes of twenty-seven.

This has created sharp discontinuities in Israeli class size, so Angrist used this to study the effects of class size on performance. He found that reductions in class size improved maths and reading scores for fifth graders, improved reading scores for fourth graders and had no effect on third graders.

9. The impact of MTV's "16 and pregnant" on teenage pregnancy

Phillip Levine and Melissa Kearney drew on Google and Twitter trends, and found that searches and tweets about birth control and abortion spiked when the show was being aired and in areas where it was popular. They found that the show resulted in a 5.7pc reduction in teen pregnancies between June 2009 and the end of 2010, which can account for 33pc of the total reduction in teen pregnancy during this period.

Quote from: Meta Cognition on July 11, 2015, 07:42:29 PM

9. The impact of MTV's "16 and pregnant" on teenage pregnancy

Phillip Levine and Melissa Kearney drew on Google and Twitter trends, and found that searches and tweets about birth control and abortion spiked when the show was being aired and in areas where it was popular. They found that the show resulted in a 5.7pc reduction in teen pregnancies between June 2009 and the end of 2010, which can account for 33pc of the total reduction in teen pregnancy during this period.

No one ever expected something good to come from watching MTV. I thought they were just exploiting dumbass kids this whole time. Very sneaky MTV.

God bless 'em

How is #5 related to economics?

Society

Quote from: DTEDesty on July 12, 2015, 01:54:29 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on July 12, 2015, 10:46:04 AM

How is #5 related to economics?

Society

If you make it that broad, then everything falls under economics.

You said related, and society is related to it. I'm not OP, I was simply answering your question with a valid answer.

Next time specify if you want a specific kind of answer.

How is #5 related to economics?

It's not as obvious as the others, but it's clear enough that prenatal development and educational attainment affect quality of life.

Was a judgement call, more than anything else.

Quote from: DTEDesty on July 12, 2015, 02:12:02 PM

I'm not OP

Okay, then don't try answering a question directed at him them, especially when that answer is going to be deliberately stupid.

Directed to him by your mind. Can I read your mind? Please stop acting silly. The question was objectively open. Stupid questions warrant stupid answers. You've only yourself to blame for being so indirect.

...

That's on the same level as my answer, only more explaining.

You basically just said "It's the same but better".

Think before you speak.

but remember my answer? One word.

How are you failing to grasp that this is exactly what made it such a stupid, poor answer?

It got to him.

Stupidity does have that effect on smart people.

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on July 12, 2015, 10:46:04 AM

How is #5 related to economics?

It's not as obvious as the others, but it's clear enough that prenatal development and educational attainment affect quality of life.

Was a judgement call, more than anything else.

I see it now. It'd be interesting to see what some other cultures practice that may interfere with long-term aptitude, and by extension, income.

I say the same thing

Except you didn't, and it wasn't Meta's post that persuaded me. I read the article's abstract which discussed its economic implications more than the summary in the OP.

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on July 12, 2015, 03:42:21 PM

Quote from: DTEDesty on July 12, 2015, 03:31:54 PM

I say the same thing

Except you didn't, and it wasn't Meta's post that persuaded me. I read the article's abstract which discussed its economic implications more than the summary in the OP.

Let me write down what I think I know what you know.

It affects the economy because these individuals will affect society (make it up some day), and economy is mostly society and vice versa. These people being more stupid will make society more stupid, and thus prone to bad economy.

Correct?

No, it demonstrates trends in human capital that can be corrected for earlier and in a more cost-effective manner than waiting until students are in school. Though the differences in test scores seem statistically insignificant, and I would've liked to see the data (though the article is behind a paywall).

I deduced stuff and understood what you mean, but I feel like you're leaving out some information that's vital here. What is this trend in human capital that you speak of?

In this case, the trend is for Muslim cultures in England (specifically those that participate in Ramadan while pregnant) could 'profit' from avoiding those practices and ultimately have smarter kids making more money. But it also seems to suggest that the typical family could see a similar gain by adjusting their behavior because of the important of prenatal nutrition, i.e., paying more attention to what babies need rather than the common idea that pregnant women can just eat whatever they feel like eating. At least that's what I got from it. A lot of that is just my own assumptions.

You can make this a point of you focusing on the micro economy, but what is the macro economy made up of?

Quote from: DTEDesty on July 12, 2015, 04:19:54 PM

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on July 12, 2015, 04:12:03 PM

Quote from: DTEDesty on July 12, 2015, 04:06:20 PM

I deduced stuff and understood what you mean, but I feel like you're leaving out some information that's vital here. What is this trend in human capital that you speak of?

In this case, the trend is for Muslim cultures in England (specifically those that participate in Ramadan while pregnant) could 'profit' from avoiding those practices and ultimately have smarter kids making more money. But it also seems to suggest that the typical family could see a similar gain by adjusting their behavior because of the important of prenatal nutrition, i.e., paying more attention to what babies need rather than the common idea that pregnant women can just eat whatever they feel like eating. At least that's what I got from it. A lot of that is just my own assumptions.

So smarter kids give smarter societymake more money if you're nitpicking and thus better economy?

I'm sorry, but that's the main point I'm seeing in your post here. You said no when I asked if this was it, but you're saying what I assumed.

Are you actually interested in this discussion, or are you just trying to generalize statements until you can feel like your original statement was somehow meaningful?

Not really, yes, and more.

If I'm wrong, then you will show me more information. If I'm right, then I've already gotten all the possible information.

Now enough deflection. Answer me. Is there more to it than that society is made up of people, and their intelligence determines everything from micro economy to macro economy? Ramadan children being stupid will affect how much money they make, and educating the pregnant women costs less than the effort put into the stupid children.

The informing part might have an effect, but they could choose to ignore that information because their god is more important than a slightly more intelligent child, and the difference shouldn't be so much. It's the child's income that really matters, and working smarter gets you more money, and more money making means paying more in taxes, which gives the government more money to use for stimulating the economy, and more money for you to spend.

Does that hit the mark? Was that what you were thinking? - no need to be pedantic