okay! so I don't have substantial thoughts on the second point and you shouldn't haveve trust me if I did, BUT the paper is solid
2. Even better, the authors are thoughtful about the sorts of 'spillovers' that might screw up the validity of their analysis.
-
-
3. The fact that their analysis shows tippelzones seem to cause decreases in sexual assaults, but not drug crimes, leads me . . .
-
to trust their results even more; as do the size of the results. And their model fits unusually well for social science.
-
4. This is a much better paper than the statistical nothingburger from a few years ago claiming decriminalization -> trafficking
-
5. The only thing that gives me pause is the effect fading out after 2 years. I could maybe tell a story about that where . . .
-
over time, there's some kind of increase in vice/crime in areas migrating from non-tippelzone cities? Maybe that was addressed.
-
6. And of course if you're a market participant you know more about tippelzones in practice than the authors & should probably
-
trust your gut if you're skeptical.
-
7. I don't know whether making a decrim --> less rape argument is helpful, BUT if you want to, this is very strong support /end
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.