BAGANBAZAR GRAPHEXPLORE · ANALYZE · GROW
Theme
LiveDesk
BusinessBryan Caplan on ParentingWorld​LASTMA impounds 84 vehicles over traffic violations in LagosWorldPeter Obi’s wife is godmother of my daughter not her husband – Nonye Soludo insistsWorldKano govt suspends durbar processions, horse-riding activities over security concernsWorldSecurity personnel avert possible religious crisis in Jalingo
Business/Source-attributed reporting
Business DESK

Bryan Caplan on Parenting

Bryan Caplan of George Mason University and EconLog talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the ideas in Caplan's new book, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids. Caplan argues that parents spend too much time trying to influence how their kids will turn out as adults. Using research on twins and adopted children, Caplan argues that nature dominates nurture and that parents have little lasting influence on many aspects of their children's lives. He concludes that parents should spend less time and energy trying to influence their children. If parenting takes less time, then have more kids, says Caplan. The conversation concludes with a discussion of whether a larger population is bad for the planet.

Published Sep 27, 2026 · 9:30 AMOriginal source: EconTalk1 reads
Bryan Caplan of George Mason University and EconLog talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the ideas in Caplan's new book, Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids. Caplan argues that parents spend too much time trying to influence how their kids will turn out as adults. Using research on twins and adopted children, Caplan argues that nature dominates nurture and that parents have little lasting influence on many aspects of their children's lives. He concludes that parents should spend less time and energy trying to influence their children. If parenting takes less time, then have more kids, says Caplan. The conversation concludes with a discussion of whether a larger population is bad for the planet.
ORIGINAL SOURCE

EconTalk

This report is indexed by BAGANBAZAR GRAPH with its original publisher named and linked for readers.

Read at original outlet ↗
RELATED COVERAGE

More from this desk.

BAGANBAZAR GRAPHSource-attributed newsBUSINESS desk
Business

William Easterly on Benevolent Autocrats and Growth

William Easterly of New York University talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the oft-heard claim that poor countries led by autocrats grow faster than poor countries that are democratic. Drawing on a recent paper, "Benevolent Autocrats," Easterly argues that while some autocracies do indeed grow very quickly, a much greater number do not. Yet, the idea that the messiness of democracy is inferior to a dictatorship remains seductive. Easterly gives a number of arguments for the perennial appeal of autocracy as a growth strategy. The conversation closes with a discussion of the limitations of our knowledge about growth and where that leaves policymakers.

Original sourceEconTalk
BAGANBAZAR GRAPHSource-attributed newsBUSINESS desk
Business

Tim Harford on Adapt and the Virtues of Failure

Tim Harford, author and journalist, talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about Adapt, Harford's book on the virtues of failure and the trial and error process. Harford argues that success is more likely when there is experimentation and trial and error followed by adapting, rather than following a top-down, ex ante plan driven by expertise. The conversation looks at the what war can teach us about information, knowledge, and planning, the challenge of admitting mistakes, and the implications of trial and error for our daily lives.

Original sourceEconTalk
BAGANBAZAR GRAPHSource-attributed newsBUSINESS desk
Business

William Byers on the Blind Spot, Science, and Uncertainty

William Byers of Canada's Concordia University and author of The Blind Spot talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the nature of knowledge, science and mathematics. Byers argues that there is an inherent uncertainty about science and our knowledge that is frequently ignored. Byers contrasts a science of wonder with a science of certainty. He suggests that our knowledge of the physical world will always be incomplete because of the imperfection of models and human modes of thought relative to the complexity of the physical world. The conversation also looks at the implications of these ideas for teaching science and social science.

Original sourceEconTalk