Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Schools Help Us?
Now is the season of graduation in the United States. Many students graduate from school with different minds.The education that we are now receiving is a "signal": education helps us send a message that we are competent.
Generally economists point out that education has two effects on us:
(1) Human Capital (G. Becker)
Education improves our ability and competence.
Expenditures on education, training, medical care, and so on as investments in human capital. Many studies have shown that high school and college education in the United States greatly raise a person's income, according to Becker.
(2)Signaling (M. Spence)
Education shows our ability and competence, but doesn't necessarily improve our skill. Some economists say that education has a "sheepskin effect" on us. A sheepskin stands for a diploma that we can get when we graduate from school.
Certainly, graduates from Harvard looks smarter than those from public high school. "Looking smart or competent" is quite important when we look for a job or have a job interview.
The question at hand is: is the effect of education on us always positive?
I don't think so because we have to lose much precious time during our study at school. If we used our time at school to do a job, we could make money. However, if we used our time to study at school, we couldn't make money but could learn what we want to(or have to) study.
At this point, the question is which is better for you, to study at school or to have a job.
In developing countries, many young people go to work and many of them want to study at school to improve their skill and their living standard in the future.
In contrast, in developed countries, most of young generation go to school and many of them may dislike studying and suffer from heavy stresses and strains of exams.
In Japan around half of the high school graduates go to university and study for 4 years and get a bachelor degree. However, many of undergraduate students start to look for a job in their third grade and they don't (or can't) have time to study at university.
Some professors say that it's ridiculous for their students to look for a job because they should study at university for 4 years but in fact they study only for 3 years. 1 year is the term for looking for a job.
For them, 4-year undergraduate study seems to be not good and too long to study. It should be a negative effect on them to study for 4 years. For them school might not help. They think that they should have a time to look for a job and look at a real business life and society.
Schools don't always help us. However, if you really want your school to help you with your future career, you might have to make use of what you have learned at school and to try to seize on something important for you in your everyday life. I always say to myself.
If you don't think that your class at school is helpful, you should skip it and take another class to improve your ability. Whether schools help us or not might depend on how we use our time.
Above 2 theories don't tell about it, but at any rate whether our school help us or not should be up to us. We cannot get something important for our life if we don't try to seize on a chance of good study at school.
(Reference)
(1) Akerlof, G.(1970), "The Market for Lemons: Quality Uncertainty and Market Mechanism", Q.J.E.
(3) Becker, G.(1993), "Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, with Special Reference to Education" The University of Chicago Press
*The above picture is from UW-Milwaukee.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
痴漢対策は政策的課題
痴漢などの性犯罪を繰り返す、風俗通いがやめられない。
そんな「性依存症」に悩む人たちを治療の対象ととらえる考え方が少しずつ広がり始めている。ただ、こうした考え方に対する理解度はまだ低く、継続的な支援を行う医療機関なども少ない。
Aさん（男性、20歳代） 小学校時代から女子児童のスカートの中をのぞくようになった。中学生になると電車内で痴漢を繰り返し、逮捕された。その後、保護観察中に再犯して少年院に入所。出所後も痴漢行為をやめられず、再び逮捕された。現在は治療の一環として、医療機関が実施するグループミーティングに通っている。
Bさん（男性、40歳代） 20歳代からストーキングや痴漢、のぞきでこれまで何度か逮捕された。公務員として勤務。親の紹介で結婚し、子供も生まれたが、30歳代の時に逮捕されたのをきっかけに離婚した。40歳代で強制わいせつ事件を起こして服役。出所後も事件を起こし、再び実刑判決を受けた。現在は、働きながら医療機関を受診し、治療を受けている。
東京都豊島区の榎本クリニックが実施するグループミーティングには週2回、10人ほどの男性がやって来る。痴漢やのぞき、性器の露出を繰り返すなど、性依存症に悩む人たちだ。年齢は10歳代から60歳代までと幅広い。学歴も職業もさまざまだ。
AさんやBさんのように、参加者の7割近くに性犯罪による逮捕歴がある。ミーティングでは、これまでの自分の体験を話し、生まれ育った家庭や対人関係などの悩み、性嗜好（しこう）などを告白し合う。同クリニックの精神保健福祉部課長の斉藤章佳氏（精神保健福祉士、社会福祉士）は、「こうした取り組みを通じて参加者同士の結束力が生まれれば、他のメンバーも頑張っているのだから自分も性衝動に負けたくないという気持ちが生まれる。やがては犯罪行為に対する抑止力を身に付けることができる」と話す。
打ち明けにくい内容を正直に言語化することで、気持ちが楽になると斉藤氏はみている。 同クリニックでは、こうした集団精神療法のほか、カウンセリングや薬物療法も実施している。ただ、アルコール依存症や性依存症は、回復することはあっても完治することはないといわれている。根気強く治療を続けるのが基本だ。
斉藤氏は、性依存症の概念を犯罪性の有無によって大別する。前者では痴漢やレイプ、小児性愛、セクハラ、のぞき、盗撮、売買春などの問題行為を繰り返す。後者では強迫的なマスターベーションや風俗店通い、不特定多数の相手との性行為がやめられないなどのケースがある。
「いずれの場合も、その行為によって社会的・身体的損失があるにもかかわらず、繰り返したり、自身のコントロールを失ってしまったりして、やめることができない」 斉藤氏は「性依存症は必ずしも性欲過多な男性がなるものではない」と言う。アルコールやギャンブルなどへの依存と同様、誰もが抱え得る対人関係の問題が根底にあるとみている。
横浜市で性依存専門外来を開設する大石クリニックの大石雅之院長は、「もともと持っている性質に原因があるのか、生い立ちや生活環境に原因があるのかを断定するのは、現時点では難しい」と話す。
言い換えると、こうした状況に陥る可能性が自分にないとは誰にも断言できないということだ。近年のアダルトサイトや出会い系サイトのまん延が、性に依存する人を生み出していると指摘する声もある。しかし、性依存症の人が国内にどれだけいるのかを示す統計的なデータはない。
…米国やカナダでは、性依存症の治療法に関する研究が1970年代ごろから積極的に進められている。日本国内でも少しずつ広がりつつあるが、現時点では性依存症を「病気」と位置付ける意識は低く、この問題は興味本位で語られることが多い。
斉藤氏は「性依存症の治療を行っていることが伝われば、地域住民による反対運動も起きかねない。地域の中で患者が問題を起こせば、管理責任が問われる可能性もある」と指摘する。医療機関サイドからすれば、周囲の理解が得られない中でこの問題に真剣に取り組むには、それなりのリスクを覚悟しなければならない。こうしたことが、医療機関による対応の足かせになっている可能性もある。 実際、性依存症者を継続的に支援する医療機関や施設は全国的にもまだ少ない。このため、性依存症の問題が表面化しても、適切な治療を受けられないケースがある。コントロールを失った性依存症者の問題行為による被害を最小限に食い止めるための対策も求められている。 大石院長は「性依存者を初犯の段階でピックアップして、すぐに治療を開始できる仕組みが整備されれば、その後の問題行為をかなり防げるのではないか」と指摘している。livedoor news
この問題についての理解はかなり低いといえるのではないか？感情論や偏ったフィミニズム論を援用して語られることが多いが、痴漢とその被害、性依存症の実態をまず把握し、政策的な対策が急務である。
痴漢は犯罪。被害者も不幸であり、加害者とその家族も同じく不幸である。できるだけ不幸を緩和し幸福度を上げるのが、これからの公共政策に与えられた大きな課題である。その観点からも、この対策に税金を投じることには大きな意味がある。
しかし、痴漢をした人はまた痴漢に走る。タバコや大酒がやめられないという問題と少し似ているかもしれない。
いわゆる「中毒財」の問題である。阪大の池田新介教授がこの問題に明るいが、痴漢行動も中毒財への選考行動とよく似た構造を持っているかもしれない。
とすると、経済学的な観点から痴漢行動が分析でき、何らかの政策的な含意が得られるかもしれない。
とにかく喫急の課題である。
そんな「性依存症」に悩む人たちを治療の対象ととらえる考え方が少しずつ広がり始めている。ただ、こうした考え方に対する理解度はまだ低く、継続的な支援を行う医療機関なども少ない。
Aさん（男性、20歳代） 小学校時代から女子児童のスカートの中をのぞくようになった。中学生になると電車内で痴漢を繰り返し、逮捕された。その後、保護観察中に再犯して少年院に入所。出所後も痴漢行為をやめられず、再び逮捕された。現在は治療の一環として、医療機関が実施するグループミーティングに通っている。
Bさん（男性、40歳代） 20歳代からストーキングや痴漢、のぞきでこれまで何度か逮捕された。公務員として勤務。親の紹介で結婚し、子供も生まれたが、30歳代の時に逮捕されたのをきっかけに離婚した。40歳代で強制わいせつ事件を起こして服役。出所後も事件を起こし、再び実刑判決を受けた。現在は、働きながら医療機関を受診し、治療を受けている。
東京都豊島区の榎本クリニックが実施するグループミーティングには週2回、10人ほどの男性がやって来る。痴漢やのぞき、性器の露出を繰り返すなど、性依存症に悩む人たちだ。年齢は10歳代から60歳代までと幅広い。学歴も職業もさまざまだ。
AさんやBさんのように、参加者の7割近くに性犯罪による逮捕歴がある。ミーティングでは、これまでの自分の体験を話し、生まれ育った家庭や対人関係などの悩み、性嗜好（しこう）などを告白し合う。同クリニックの精神保健福祉部課長の斉藤章佳氏（精神保健福祉士、社会福祉士）は、「こうした取り組みを通じて参加者同士の結束力が生まれれば、他のメンバーも頑張っているのだから自分も性衝動に負けたくないという気持ちが生まれる。やがては犯罪行為に対する抑止力を身に付けることができる」と話す。
打ち明けにくい内容を正直に言語化することで、気持ちが楽になると斉藤氏はみている。 同クリニックでは、こうした集団精神療法のほか、カウンセリングや薬物療法も実施している。ただ、アルコール依存症や性依存症は、回復することはあっても完治することはないといわれている。根気強く治療を続けるのが基本だ。
斉藤氏は、性依存症の概念を犯罪性の有無によって大別する。前者では痴漢やレイプ、小児性愛、セクハラ、のぞき、盗撮、売買春などの問題行為を繰り返す。後者では強迫的なマスターベーションや風俗店通い、不特定多数の相手との性行為がやめられないなどのケースがある。
「いずれの場合も、その行為によって社会的・身体的損失があるにもかかわらず、繰り返したり、自身のコントロールを失ってしまったりして、やめることができない」 斉藤氏は「性依存症は必ずしも性欲過多な男性がなるものではない」と言う。アルコールやギャンブルなどへの依存と同様、誰もが抱え得る対人関係の問題が根底にあるとみている。
横浜市で性依存専門外来を開設する大石クリニックの大石雅之院長は、「もともと持っている性質に原因があるのか、生い立ちや生活環境に原因があるのかを断定するのは、現時点では難しい」と話す。
言い換えると、こうした状況に陥る可能性が自分にないとは誰にも断言できないということだ。近年のアダルトサイトや出会い系サイトのまん延が、性に依存する人を生み出していると指摘する声もある。しかし、性依存症の人が国内にどれだけいるのかを示す統計的なデータはない。
…米国やカナダでは、性依存症の治療法に関する研究が1970年代ごろから積極的に進められている。日本国内でも少しずつ広がりつつあるが、現時点では性依存症を「病気」と位置付ける意識は低く、この問題は興味本位で語られることが多い。
斉藤氏は「性依存症の治療を行っていることが伝われば、地域住民による反対運動も起きかねない。地域の中で患者が問題を起こせば、管理責任が問われる可能性もある」と指摘する。医療機関サイドからすれば、周囲の理解が得られない中でこの問題に真剣に取り組むには、それなりのリスクを覚悟しなければならない。こうしたことが、医療機関による対応の足かせになっている可能性もある。 実際、性依存症者を継続的に支援する医療機関や施設は全国的にもまだ少ない。このため、性依存症の問題が表面化しても、適切な治療を受けられないケースがある。コントロールを失った性依存症者の問題行為による被害を最小限に食い止めるための対策も求められている。 大石院長は「性依存者を初犯の段階でピックアップして、すぐに治療を開始できる仕組みが整備されれば、その後の問題行為をかなり防げるのではないか」と指摘している。livedoor news
この問題についての理解はかなり低いといえるのではないか？感情論や偏ったフィミニズム論を援用して語られることが多いが、痴漢とその被害、性依存症の実態をまず把握し、政策的な対策が急務である。
痴漢は犯罪。被害者も不幸であり、加害者とその家族も同じく不幸である。できるだけ不幸を緩和し幸福度を上げるのが、これからの公共政策に与えられた大きな課題である。その観点からも、この対策に税金を投じることには大きな意味がある。
しかし、痴漢をした人はまた痴漢に走る。タバコや大酒がやめられないという問題と少し似ているかもしれない。
いわゆる「中毒財」の問題である。阪大の池田新介教授がこの問題に明るいが、痴漢行動も中毒財への選考行動とよく似た構造を持っているかもしれない。
とすると、経済学的な観点から痴漢行動が分析でき、何らかの政策的な含意が得られるかもしれない。
とにかく喫急の課題である。
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Men Are Overconfident!?
Fumio Otake of Osaka University (labor economics) contributed a nice article to a major newspaper in Japan:
Have you ever heard of the term glass ceiling?
It refers to situations where the advancement of a qualified person within the hierarchy of an organization is stopped at a lower level because of some form of discrimination (sex or race, deaf, blind, disabled, aged and so on). It is distinguished from formal barriers to advancement, such as education or experience requirements.
Recently the fraction of women in the middle management in companies has been increasing but is still relatively small to that of men. Moreover, there's a wage gap between men and women. Why not? That's what many labor-economists are interested in.
Generally, there must be 3 possible reasons for it:
(1) Top managers dislike women.
It is a kind of preference or discrimination against women. However, rational firms try to hire more competent and productive workers in competitive market. If a woman were more competent than a man, they would try to hire the former and pay higher wage. So if there were such discrimination against women in some firms, the competition they face should not be hard.
Some researchers find that the firms which hire more women are making more money than those which don't in Japan.
(2) Managers hire more men because men are more likely to continue working.
It is, what is called, "statistical discrimination" . The idea is that firms want to hire people who continue to work but they don't know who are more likely to continue. (Firms don't know the types of workers, workers who continue to work or not)
Firms give workers many kinds of job-training and they want to get higher return from such "human investment". So they want to hire people who continue working. They try to find the type from their experience and know that men are more likely to continue to work than women.
And thus women become less competent than men in the business society because firms are less willing to invest women.
This is a statistical discrimination. It's a kind of signaling game, where the informed party is workers and the uninformed party is firms. Woman must be a signaling to firms as "not working long".
(3) Men are more overconfident than women.
Sounds interesting! According to the research conducted by Uri Gneezy of UC-San Diego and other economists, women may be less effective than men in competitive environments, even if they are able to perform similarly in noncompetitive environments.(1)
In a laboratory experiment they observe, as they increase the competitiveness of the environment, a significant increase in performance for men, but not for women. This results in a significant gender gap in performance in tournaments, while there is no gap when participants are paid according to piece rate.
They also find out that the competition enhances the performance of males, but not females in a race of young children.(2)
Some researchers find out that men like competition better than women and men are more overconfident than women.
The question is that it is due to genetic or cultural effects. Which do you think is more reasonable?
The research conducted by Gneezy etc. uses a controlled experiment to explore whether there are gender differences in selecting into competitive environments across two distinct societies: the Maasai in Tanzania and the Khasi in India.
One unique aspect of these societies is that the Maasai represent a textbook example of a patriarchal society whereas the Khasi are matrilineal.
Similar to the extant evidence drawn from experiments executed in Western cultures, Maasai men opt to compete at roughly twice the rate as Maasai women. Interestingly, this result is reversed amongst the Khasi, where women choose the competitive environment more often than Khasi men, and even choose to compete weakly more often than Maasai men.
They view these results as potentially providing insights into the underpinnings of the factors hypothesized to be determinants of the observed gender differences in selecting into competitive environments.
In their guess, men's preference for competition should be due to cultural reason.
As Prof. Otake said, cultural matters might be possibly closely related to gap of economic performance.
(References)
(1)Gneezy, U., M. Niederle, and A. Rustichini “Performance in competitive environments: Gender differences,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 2003, p. 1049-1074.
(2)Gneezy, U., and A. Rustichini “Gender and competition at a young age,” American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, May 2004, 377-381.
(3)Uri Gneezy, Kenneth L. Leonard, John A. List,Gender Differences in Competition: Evidence from a Matrilineal and a Patriarchal Society, NBER Working Paper No. 13727, 2008
Have you ever heard of the term glass ceiling?
It refers to situations where the advancement of a qualified person within the hierarchy of an organization is stopped at a lower level because of some form of discrimination (sex or race, deaf, blind, disabled, aged and so on). It is distinguished from formal barriers to advancement, such as education or experience requirements.
Recently the fraction of women in the middle management in companies has been increasing but is still relatively small to that of men. Moreover, there's a wage gap between men and women. Why not? That's what many labor-economists are interested in.
Generally, there must be 3 possible reasons for it:
(1) Top managers dislike women.
It is a kind of preference or discrimination against women. However, rational firms try to hire more competent and productive workers in competitive market. If a woman were more competent than a man, they would try to hire the former and pay higher wage. So if there were such discrimination against women in some firms, the competition they face should not be hard.
Some researchers find that the firms which hire more women are making more money than those which don't in Japan.
(2) Managers hire more men because men are more likely to continue working.
It is, what is called, "statistical discrimination" . The idea is that firms want to hire people who continue to work but they don't know who are more likely to continue. (Firms don't know the types of workers, workers who continue to work or not)
Firms give workers many kinds of job-training and they want to get higher return from such "human investment". So they want to hire people who continue working. They try to find the type from their experience and know that men are more likely to continue to work than women.
And thus women become less competent than men in the business society because firms are less willing to invest women.
This is a statistical discrimination. It's a kind of signaling game, where the informed party is workers and the uninformed party is firms. Woman must be a signaling to firms as "not working long".
(3) Men are more overconfident than women.
Sounds interesting! According to the research conducted by Uri Gneezy of UC-San Diego and other economists, women may be less effective than men in competitive environments, even if they are able to perform similarly in noncompetitive environments.(1)
In a laboratory experiment they observe, as they increase the competitiveness of the environment, a significant increase in performance for men, but not for women. This results in a significant gender gap in performance in tournaments, while there is no gap when participants are paid according to piece rate.
They also find out that the competition enhances the performance of males, but not females in a race of young children.(2)
Some researchers find out that men like competition better than women and men are more overconfident than women.
The question is that it is due to genetic or cultural effects. Which do you think is more reasonable?
The research conducted by Gneezy etc. uses a controlled experiment to explore whether there are gender differences in selecting into competitive environments across two distinct societies: the Maasai in Tanzania and the Khasi in India.
One unique aspect of these societies is that the Maasai represent a textbook example of a patriarchal society whereas the Khasi are matrilineal.
Similar to the extant evidence drawn from experiments executed in Western cultures, Maasai men opt to compete at roughly twice the rate as Maasai women. Interestingly, this result is reversed amongst the Khasi, where women choose the competitive environment more often than Khasi men, and even choose to compete weakly more often than Maasai men.
They view these results as potentially providing insights into the underpinnings of the factors hypothesized to be determinants of the observed gender differences in selecting into competitive environments.
In their guess, men's preference for competition should be due to cultural reason.
As Prof. Otake said, cultural matters might be possibly closely related to gap of economic performance.
(References)
(1)Gneezy, U., M. Niederle, and A. Rustichini “Performance in competitive environments: Gender differences,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 2003, p. 1049-1074.
(2)Gneezy, U., and A. Rustichini “Gender and competition at a young age,” American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, May 2004, 377-381.
(3)Uri Gneezy, Kenneth L. Leonard, John A. List,Gender Differences in Competition: Evidence from a Matrilineal and a Patriarchal Society, NBER Working Paper No. 13727, 2008
Monday, May 05, 2008
MISIA
I am into her. Misia has been singing for 10 years. She is a famous Japanese singer songwriter. I like her songs. Her songs are soft but strong, which always cheers me up.
Photo: Rhythmedia inc.
Tomatoberry
It looks a strawberry, but tastes a tomato. It is strange but (and so) became popular in Japan.Photo: 5月4日15時0分配信 時事通信
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Smokers Are Unhappy?
Smokers are unhappy. Is that true? Osaka University figures out how happy smokers are by asking them if they are happy: the more they smoke a day, the less happier they are.
Heavy drinkers and gamblers are also less happier than non-heavy drinkers and gamblers. Smokers are more likely to drink and gamble, and moreover smokers and gamblers are more likely to eat out and to have much debt.
Why are they smoke, drink and gamble much although they know these habits are not good for their health?
More impatient and less risk-hating people are more likely to smoke, drink and gamble, but more importantly, smokers who have enjoyed smoking for a longer time are more likely to smoke more. It is not easy for them to quit smoking.
People who have much income and are happier are more patient and people who are not happy are less patient.
If people have an unhappy event, they become less patient and begin to smoke, drink and eat too much. Moreover, once they come to smoke, drink and eat too much, this makes them unhappier and less patient, and then they come to smoke, drink and eat further and further.
How can we help them stop such bad habits? One good idea is to increase a tax on cigarette. By doing it, we can help them become healthier and happier.
Jonathan Gruber of MIT shows that increasing an excise tax on cigarette can also increase the happiness of smokers. Taxing cigarette and alcohol can be helpful to improve their happiness.
Heavy drinkers and gamblers are also less happier than non-heavy drinkers and gamblers. Smokers are more likely to drink and gamble, and moreover smokers and gamblers are more likely to eat out and to have much debt.
Why are they smoke, drink and gamble much although they know these habits are not good for their health?
More impatient and less risk-hating people are more likely to smoke, drink and gamble, but more importantly, smokers who have enjoyed smoking for a longer time are more likely to smoke more. It is not easy for them to quit smoking.
People who have much income and are happier are more patient and people who are not happy are less patient.
If people have an unhappy event, they become less patient and begin to smoke, drink and eat too much. Moreover, once they come to smoke, drink and eat too much, this makes them unhappier and less patient, and then they come to smoke, drink and eat further and further.
How can we help them stop such bad habits? One good idea is to increase a tax on cigarette. By doing it, we can help them become healthier and happier.
Jonathan Gruber of MIT shows that increasing an excise tax on cigarette can also increase the happiness of smokers. Taxing cigarette and alcohol can be helpful to improve their happiness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)