David Brady
@davebrady72.bsky.social
Public policy professor, Price School USC @priceschool.usc.edu, father, poverty/social policy/racial inequality/immigration/policymakers, posts do not speak for employer, https://bradydave.wordpress.com
Really excited to see Tom Mueller’s new book _The Case for Rural America_.
uncpress.org/978146969151...
uncpress-us-new.imgix.net/covers/97814...
uncpress.org/978146969151...
uncpress-us-new.imgix.net/covers/97814...
October 22, 2025 at 2:58 PM
Really excited to see Tom Mueller’s new book _The Case for Rural America_.
uncpress.org/978146969151...
uncpress-us-new.imgix.net/covers/97814...
uncpress.org/978146969151...
uncpress-us-new.imgix.net/covers/97814...
How many MPA-online programs start the programs with an on campus residency… with a marching band?!?
September 20, 2025 at 4:21 AM
How many MPA-online programs start the programs with an on campus residency… with a marching band?!?
There are really great faculty and staff in lots of programs. And then there are the forces to be reckoned with that are the @priceschool.usc.edu
Masters of Public Administration Online Program faculty and staff.
Masters of Public Administration Online Program faculty and staff.
September 20, 2025 at 4:20 AM
There are really great faculty and staff in lots of programs. And then there are the forces to be reckoned with that are the @priceschool.usc.edu
Masters of Public Administration Online Program faculty and staff.
Masters of Public Administration Online Program faculty and staff.
One of the intellectually richest seminar series I’ve attended is the Political Institutions and Political Economy (PIPE) Collaborative organized by my colleague Jeff Jenkins @priceschool.usc.edu. The first event of the year is TODAY at noon in VPD 302. Join us!
September 2, 2025 at 3:42 PM
One of the intellectually richest seminar series I’ve attended is the Political Institutions and Political Economy (PIPE) Collaborative organized by my colleague Jeff Jenkins @priceschool.usc.edu. The first event of the year is TODAY at noon in VPD 302. Join us!
From the Auspurg & Bruderl piece. It’s zero already….
August 19, 2025 at 7:34 AM
From the Auspurg & Bruderl piece. It’s zero already….
Our latest paper on the subject finds a ton of zeros too. This paper was particularly hard to publish. Why don’t we see papers on the BIAS of reviewers committed to a failing hypothesis against all evidence?
August 19, 2025 at 7:08 AM
Our latest paper on the subject finds a ton of zeros too. This paper was particularly hard to publish. Why don’t we see papers on the BIAS of reviewers committed to a failing hypothesis against all evidence?
How can anyone look at this plot and say the story is not about zero.
Good grief, who cares if you’ve got a positive or negative coefficient of they’re almost all not different than zero.
Funny the authors acknowledge me on the front page.
Good grief, who cares if you’ve got a positive or negative coefficient of they’re almost all not different than zero.
Funny the authors acknowledge me on the front page.
August 19, 2025 at 6:38 AM
How can anyone look at this plot and say the story is not about zero.
Good grief, who cares if you’ve got a positive or negative coefficient of they’re almost all not different than zero.
Funny the authors acknowledge me on the front page.
Good grief, who cares if you’ve got a positive or negative coefficient of they’re almost all not different than zero.
Funny the authors acknowledge me on the front page.
I find Gruber particularly articulate & persuasive in explaining why the US has never been able to accomplish a single payer system.
July 5, 2025 at 3:31 PM
I find Gruber particularly articulate & persuasive in explaining why the US has never been able to accomplish a single payer system.
I would blame the quality of South Dakota’s public education for this, but it’s unclear how much education Noem actually got.
May 20, 2025 at 3:29 PM
I would blame the quality of South Dakota’s public education for this, but it’s unclear how much education Noem actually got.
And his complete dismissal of any fundamental causes of disease - including racism is anti-scientific. He’s not even qualified scientifically to make these claims.
May 17, 2025 at 7:37 PM
And his complete dismissal of any fundamental causes of disease - including racism is anti-scientific. He’s not even qualified scientifically to make these claims.
His enthusiasm for the Trump coalition is evident.
May 17, 2025 at 7:36 PM
His enthusiasm for the Trump coalition is evident.
Let me engage friendlily with @peterlicari.bsky.social to say I'd have to respectfully disagree that this simulation of biased sampling and non-heterogeneous effects is acceptable. Here he says the range of estimates is not bad so there isn't a big problem. Hmm, this looks pretty bad to me.
April 24, 2025 at 3:33 PM
Let me engage friendlily with @peterlicari.bsky.social to say I'd have to respectfully disagree that this simulation of biased sampling and non-heterogeneous effects is acceptable. Here he says the range of estimates is not bad so there isn't a big problem. Hmm, this looks pretty bad to me.
As the table of contents shows, the book is distinctive for being so thoroughly engaged with interdisciplinary debates in social policy, inequalities, political economy, political philosophy, economics, AND medicine and public health.
April 23, 2025 at 8:04 PM
As the table of contents shows, the book is distinctive for being so thoroughly engaged with interdisciplinary debates in social policy, inequalities, political economy, political philosophy, economics, AND medicine and public health.
The very first page really grabs the reader and convinces you this is a book you’ll want to read. If you’ve watched the new show “The PITT” and are struck by its illustration of health inequalities, this book should be on your list.
April 23, 2025 at 8:02 PM
The very first page really grabs the reader and convinces you this is a book you’ll want to read. If you’ve watched the new show “The PITT” and are struck by its illustration of health inequalities, this book should be on your list.
Rough week for our friends at Duke.
But, man, Mike White makes some good TV.
But, man, Mike White makes some good TV.
April 7, 2025 at 4:27 AM
Rough week for our friends at Duke.
But, man, Mike White makes some good TV.
But, man, Mike White makes some good TV.
Lugano Switzerland is well worth the train ride from Milan or Zurich.
March 16, 2025 at 8:08 PM
Lugano Switzerland is well worth the train ride from Milan or Zurich.
From Milan… unfortunately raining.
March 15, 2025 at 8:11 PM
From Milan… unfortunately raining.
Imagine if social scientists policed external validity the way we police ANY use of causal language without causal identification.
Then ask how it’s remotely coherent to police causal language and simultaneously enable all kinds of wild claims about external validity.
Then ask how it’s remotely coherent to police causal language and simultaneously enable all kinds of wild claims about external validity.
February 22, 2025 at 4:27 PM
Imagine if social scientists policed external validity the way we police ANY use of causal language without causal identification.
Then ask how it’s remotely coherent to police causal language and simultaneously enable all kinds of wild claims about external validity.
Then ask how it’s remotely coherent to police causal language and simultaneously enable all kinds of wild claims about external validity.
Saying an effect is local or punting on external validity is what we call “retreating to the historicist’s refuge”. Doing so - if honestly - abandons any deductiveness to one’s causal claim. The historicist’s refuge is prevalent especially in US social science.
February 22, 2025 at 3:43 PM
Saying an effect is local or punting on external validity is what we call “retreating to the historicist’s refuge”. Doing so - if honestly - abandons any deductiveness to one’s causal claim. The historicist’s refuge is prevalent especially in US social science.
We demonstrate how one cannot make anything resembling a “valid causal claim” if you have a breakdown in ANY of the THREE of internal, construct and external. We often refer to a vignette of a RCT regarding jury summons.
February 22, 2025 at 3:38 PM
We demonstrate how one cannot make anything resembling a “valid causal claim” if you have a breakdown in ANY of the THREE of internal, construct and external. We often refer to a vignette of a RCT regarding jury summons.
Here’s the abstract. The article is open access at the journal.
We present formalizations of our argument in both Rubin & Pearl frameworks.
We also draw on advances in social science methodology as well as review important themes in philosophy of science and history of social science.
We present formalizations of our argument in both Rubin & Pearl frameworks.
We also draw on advances in social science methodology as well as review important themes in philosophy of science and history of social science.
February 22, 2025 at 3:35 PM
Here’s the abstract. The article is open access at the journal.
We present formalizations of our argument in both Rubin & Pearl frameworks.
We also draw on advances in social science methodology as well as review important themes in philosophy of science and history of social science.
We present formalizations of our argument in both Rubin & Pearl frameworks.
We also draw on advances in social science methodology as well as review important themes in philosophy of science and history of social science.
Compelling case by @hjghassell.bsky.social & @johnholbein1.bsky.social showing how two-way fixed effect studies of mass shootings violate parallel trends assumption. This visualization is a smoking gun.
www.cambridge.org/core/journal...
www.cambridge.org/core/journal...
January 29, 2025 at 4:00 PM
Compelling case by @hjghassell.bsky.social & @johnholbein1.bsky.social showing how two-way fixed effect studies of mass shootings violate parallel trends assumption. This visualization is a smoking gun.
www.cambridge.org/core/journal...
www.cambridge.org/core/journal...
Perhaps even more uncivilized is how severely the US penalizes single mothers.
In US, being in single mother HH increases probability of child poverty by almost 10 percentage points.
In vast majority of other rich democracies, being a single mother doesn’t even significantly increase poverty.
In US, being in single mother HH increases probability of child poverty by almost 10 percentage points.
In vast majority of other rich democracies, being a single mother doesn’t even significantly increase poverty.
January 24, 2025 at 6:39 PM
Perhaps even more uncivilized is how severely the US penalizes single mothers.
In US, being in single mother HH increases probability of child poverty by almost 10 percentage points.
In vast majority of other rich democracies, being a single mother doesn’t even significantly increase poverty.
In US, being in single mother HH increases probability of child poverty by almost 10 percentage points.
In vast majority of other rich democracies, being a single mother doesn’t even significantly increase poverty.
Perhaps surprising to some, if single motherhood was reduced (even to zero!), racial inequality in child poverty would be WORSE not better. This is partly because Black & Latino child poverty are remarkably high even in coupled households. Racial inequality is the real story.
January 24, 2025 at 4:21 PM
Perhaps surprising to some, if single motherhood was reduced (even to zero!), racial inequality in child poverty would be WORSE not better. This is partly because Black & Latino child poverty are remarkably high even in coupled households. Racial inequality is the real story.