Ever heard the argument we need abortion as it lowers crime? Ever heard the argument Steven Levitt and John Donahue proved this? And you dont know how to respond, you likely say abortion is murder and should be treated as a crime, but it fails to convince your opponent. So does the abortion - crime link exist?
The history of the debate began in the 90s when a few economists argued the abortion crime link may exist, and then debated conservative journalists, notably Steve Sailer. Steve in his debate with Levitt (the creator of the theory) showed after legalization of abortion crime rose, it tripled, and did not fall until the 90s. If Abortion lowered crime, the rate in which crime was rising should have slowed (which would mean it lowered crime) or should have lowered the overall rate. Though Levitt calculated the arrest rate improperly, and when the fixes where added the abortion effect vanished.[1][2]
Though I do respect Levitt, he is one of the only researchers that responds to criticisms effectively and makes sure his data is easily accessible, which is already better then most economists in the field. Though having that data accessible means there is more opening to attack, and instead of the we cannot confirm results without his data response we get more of a "your data has flaws" response. Unless he can prove his data is correct, which he didn't.
John Lott, another economist who has criticized the Levitt hypothesis since the start, notes: "Violent crime in the United States soared after 1960. From 1960 to 1991, reported violent crime increased by an incredible 372 percent. This disturbing trend was seen across the country, with robbery peaking in 1991 and rape and aggravated assault following in 1992. But then something unexpected happened: Between 1991 and 2000, rates of violent crime and property crime fell sharply, dropping by 33 percent and 30 percent, respectively. Murder rates were stable up to 1991, but then plunged by a steep 44 percent. [the 1990 drop is what Levitt emphasizes] ... But a thorough analysis of abortion and crime statistics leads to the opposite conclusion: that abortion increases crime."[3]
Lott basically says look, crime soared after legalization and if abortion lowered crime it should have immediately decreased crime. But instead it has a lag time until the 1990s when Levitt argues the abortion crime link lowered crime. Lott contends, though, that many reasons attributed to the drop. Conceal carry laws, the crack cocaine epidemic ended (lowering crime), the death penalty became more common, and prison sentences and incarnation rates rose. In other words, these other factors could account for the drops Levitt contends happened. A paper written by Lott was published saying crime increased by 7%, and the overall cost to society increased from crime was 3.3 billion dollars in victimization costs [4].
The abortion crime myth is exactly that -- a myth
[1] http://www.isteve.com/abortion.htm
[2] http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB113314261192407815-7O0CuSR0RArhWpc9pxaKd_paZU0_20051228.html?mod=tff_article
[3] http://www.lewrockwell.com/lott/lott64.html
[4] http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=270126
The history of the debate began in the 90s when a few economists argued the abortion crime link may exist, and then debated conservative journalists, notably Steve Sailer. Steve in his debate with Levitt (the creator of the theory) showed after legalization of abortion crime rose, it tripled, and did not fall until the 90s. If Abortion lowered crime, the rate in which crime was rising should have slowed (which would mean it lowered crime) or should have lowered the overall rate. Though Levitt calculated the arrest rate improperly, and when the fixes where added the abortion effect vanished.[1][2]
Though I do respect Levitt, he is one of the only researchers that responds to criticisms effectively and makes sure his data is easily accessible, which is already better then most economists in the field. Though having that data accessible means there is more opening to attack, and instead of the we cannot confirm results without his data response we get more of a "your data has flaws" response. Unless he can prove his data is correct, which he didn't.
John Lott, another economist who has criticized the Levitt hypothesis since the start, notes: "Violent crime in the United States soared after 1960. From 1960 to 1991, reported violent crime increased by an incredible 372 percent. This disturbing trend was seen across the country, with robbery peaking in 1991 and rape and aggravated assault following in 1992. But then something unexpected happened: Between 1991 and 2000, rates of violent crime and property crime fell sharply, dropping by 33 percent and 30 percent, respectively. Murder rates were stable up to 1991, but then plunged by a steep 44 percent. [the 1990 drop is what Levitt emphasizes] ... But a thorough analysis of abortion and crime statistics leads to the opposite conclusion: that abortion increases crime."[3]
Lott basically says look, crime soared after legalization and if abortion lowered crime it should have immediately decreased crime. But instead it has a lag time until the 1990s when Levitt argues the abortion crime link lowered crime. Lott contends, though, that many reasons attributed to the drop. Conceal carry laws, the crack cocaine epidemic ended (lowering crime), the death penalty became more common, and prison sentences and incarnation rates rose. In other words, these other factors could account for the drops Levitt contends happened. A paper written by Lott was published saying crime increased by 7%, and the overall cost to society increased from crime was 3.3 billion dollars in victimization costs [4].
The abortion crime myth is exactly that -- a myth
[1] http://www.isteve.com/abortion.htm
[2] http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB113314261192407815-7O0CuSR0RArhWpc9pxaKd_paZU0_20051228.html?mod=tff_article
[3] http://www.lewrockwell.com/lott/lott64.html
[4] http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=270126
No comments:
Post a Comment