Hive Mind: How Your Nation's IQ Matters So Much More Than Your Own

Hive Mind: How Your Nation's IQ Matters So Much More Than Your Own by Garett Jones

Countries with a higher average IQ tend to be more prosperous. This book explores the topic and analyzes reasons why. One concern that jumps out is test bias. This is brushed aside as irrelevant. Even if the tests are hugely biased, a group that excels on the test tends to show attributes that lead to success. Those with higher IQs tend to be more patient and have greater analytic skills. They can plan for the future and build out structure for long term improvements. The crowd effects lead others to follow the positive crowd. Immigration also tends to help these countries. People in the high-IQ countries work on more complex tasks. Even if lower-skill people come, they free up those working in low-skill tasks to migrate to the complex ones, increasing the overall economy of the country. The high-IQ people tend to be less likely to accept garbage and corruption from politicians because they understand what is going on. The book contains some stats and analysis. It rambles on a bit, but it is pretty short and presents a fairly solid argument for the "aggregate" rather than the individual. 

10% Less Democracy: Why You Should Trust Elites a Little More and the Masses a Little Less

10% Less Democracy: Why You Should Trust Elites a Little More and the Masses a Little Less by Garett Jones

Political systems can be improved by reducing democracy. On the surface, this appears controversial. However, there is already evidence of the success of many "democracy limiting" moves. Elected judges are objectively worse than appointed one. Those that are elected tend to pander to their constituents, and often are likely to give higher damages against non-constituents. They are also more subject to external pressure. Similarly, elected treasurers are generally less competent and more likely to engage in risky behavior. A independent central bank is less likely to print money and has less inflation, while also doing a good job of controlling unemployment.

While some independence are well supported, other democracy limitations are more controversial. Adding some education requirements can improve the quality of elected officials. Requiring a high school diploma or equivalent could be a good basic level. (Preventing felons from voting inadvertently helps serve this role, as many in prison have little education.) Limited the electorate helps to ensure that there will be more that are knowledgeable about what they are voting for. Providing longer terms is also beneficial. Politicians spend significant time campaigning for re-election. Typically more quality legislation happens early in terms, while the end of the term is spent doing things to "look good" for election.

Ironically, some "improvements" can make things work. Eliminating earmarks can reduce quality. Often an earmark is put in place to help trade for approval of other legislation. Without earmarks, it is more challenging to get "good" legislation through.

The book presents a lot of common sense to improve our government, with plenty of studies to back it up. It also provides the case of Singapore with "50% less democracy." However, they are a lucky case - they have a "good" dictator. That gives us our goal. The best government is a high quality dictator. What can we do to have the highest quality leadership, while also having the ability to easily remove a bad quality leader?

The Culture Transplant: How Migrants Make the Economies They Move To a Lot Like the Ones They Left

The Culture Transplant: How Migrants Make the Economies They Move To a Lot Like the Ones They Left by Garett Jones

The prosperity of nations can be correlated to the people that live there. Immigrants to nations bring their standards of prosperity, whether they are colonizers or line capitalists. There is a strong correlation between Chinese immigration and prosperity in Southeast Asia. Northern European colonies tend to do better than Southern European ones. That is pretty much this book. The author quotes a number of papers and spends a lot of time talking about details. He attempts to take academic work and present it to a popular audience, but chances are this will skew just a little out of the academic realm. The details are explained by something he calls SAT score (State history, Agricultural History and Technological History). Looking at the state in 1500 has surprising predictive power. It also is somewhat depressing. Are we doomed based on what conditions were like a half-millennia ago?