One of the worst ways to gauge our risk of becoming a victim of violent crime is to watch TV.

Another is to listen to politicians.

Both tend to sensationalize events for their own purposes. TV news shows want to boost ratings. Well, thinking about it, I guess that’s what politicians do as well.

For example, if you depend on TV for most of your news, you probably know Chicago has been struggling with shootings and murders for the past few years. But you likely don’t know that, according to FBI statistics for 2016, violent crime was worse in Anchorage, Alaska, than in Chicago. It was also worse in Monroe, Louisiana, when measured by crimes reported per 100,000 residents.

But, face it, there aren’t that many TV cameras in Monroe compared to Chicago. And President Donald Trump isn’t likely to get much traction criticizing Alaska’s elected officials or the mayor of Monroe. Politically, there’s more to be gained if he exploits the perceptions and misperceptions that Americans have about Chicago.

Because we live in an era where it’s too easy to amplify misleading and inaccurate information, it’s up to Americans to look beyond sound bites to better understand where real danger lies.

Of course, statistics can’t tell us everything, and they too can be misleading.

For example, the 2016 numbers reflect a huge increase in the number of murders in Orlando, Florida, from 89 in 2015 to 154 in 2016. But that number includes the terrorist attack on Pulse nightclub, where 49 people were murdered.

I don’t mean to pick on only politicians and TV. Many of us have a tendency to judge a place by the worst of what we hear about them.

And newspapers certainly aren’t immune from choosing data that prove the point. An example of that is a USA Today headline, which played off data studied by a company called 24/7 Wall St.

“25 cities where crime is soaring,” yells the headline that pointed to the U.S. cities that saw the biggest increases in violent crime between 2011 and 2016.

The problem is that if a city had an extraordinarily low crime rate in 2011 and a still impressively low crime rate in 2016, that counted as an increase in the statistical study. As a result, places such as Logan, Utah, and Dubuque, Iowa, made the list, despite having among the lowest crime rates of any metropolitan areas the FBI routinely tracks.

Somewhere between a total reliance on numbers and embracing sensationalist claims, common sense can be found. And perhaps some common ground.

We can’t effectively act to make cities and communities safer if we don’t understand what the risks actually are.

Fear about shooters showing up at schools is the most obvious example.

It’s something many students and parents fear, understandably. Trump and numerous governors and lawmakers are working to put guns in the hands of teachers and staff to make schools more secure. The measures are expected to cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars across the country.

But all available data make clear that schools are among the safest places children can be. And no data suggest more weapons will make them safer.

The statistics show us children are about 10 times more likely to die from a gun accident in their own home or the home of a friend or relative than to be shot in school. That’s just accidental shootings. Add in suicides and intentional shootings, and schools rate even better.

As we consider where we will travel, go to dinner, or send our children to school, it’s worth asking whether our decisions are based on solid information.

Pew Research Center has found that perceptions about crime don’t track what is actually happening. Even as crime rates drop, polls show many Americans view crime as a growing problem.

In a piece on the Pew website, John Gramlich notes: “In 17 Gallup surveys conducted since 1993, at least six-in-ten Americans said there was more crime in the U.S. compared with the year before, despite the generally downward trend in national violent and property crime rates during much of that period.”

Put another way, what we think we know about crime is likely inaccurate. And acting on bad information usually leads to bad decisions.

 

I won’t mourn the passing of plastic straws, which are being eliminated across much of the nation.

I prefer my iced tea or soda straight from the glass, although I concede that when you’re on the road, a straw and lid make life easier and cleaner.

It’s not entirely clear whether paper straws or something else will take the place of plastic straws, which are being blamed for plastic pollution that clutters parks, beaches and oceans.

If you listen to liberal politicians and marketing executives from companies such as Disney, Starbucks and American Airlines, you might think plastic straws are akin to a deadly disease that is threatening survival on the planet.

The hype is, well, just that. Science shows straw pollution isn’t a significant issue.

Even many advocates of straw bans admit that plastic straws account for an infinitesimally small fraction of the plastic pollution on the planet.

Banning plastic straws is basically a marketing scheme – by businesses and by environmentalists.

Businesses want their customers and would-be customers to think they are environmentally responsible. So they replace plastic straws with no straws or bio-degradable straws and announce they are helping keep the planet healthy and clean.

Environmentalists want to ban plastic straws as a first move, raising people’s awareness and easing the way for steps with more impact – such as banning plastic bags or mandating recycling.

I’m guessing most of us have our personal peeves about plastic pollution. For example, it’s hard to believe anyone likes seeing old plastic bags strewn through ditches, trees and shrubs. It’s why I would agree – almost – to ban them, despite their obvious convenience.

We have in this country a level of prosperity that allows for lots of conveniences.

It’s why Americans purchase most of their meals outside the home, rather than cook and prepare food in their own kitchens, thereby creating more demand for all that plastic.

It’s why we have the luxury of debating straws, rather than, for the most part, safe drinking water.

No doubt, our prosperity has generated a lot of trash. But we would be smart to keep it in perspective.

Most of the plastic trash found in the oceans – the current environmental outrage that is supposed to move us to action – is from the fishing industry.

In a piece for Bloomberg, writer Adam Minter notes that if all the plastic straws littering the planet were washed into the ocean, they would account for “about 0.03 percent of the 8 million metric tons of plastics estimated to enter the oceans in a given year.”

Minter writes that reports from scientific groups have concluded that the fishing industry is responsible for most of the plastic pollution in the oceans. Abandoned fishing nets are one of the biggest problems, and other fishing gear adds to the problem.

And in a piece for the American Council on Science and Health, Alex Berezow says surveys indicate much of the plastic that ends up polluting our oceans comes from Asia, and to a lesser extent, Africa.

He also notes that most of the plastic is generated by the fishing industry.

Minter notes that one partial solution would be to mark fishing gear so that its owners could be held responsible. He said there are already proposals floating around for this approach.

But Minter and Berezow also argue that such proposals are more feasible in richer, developed nations than in poorer countries. Generally, people who worry daily about having a place to live and getting enough to eat aren’t going to worry a lot about trash in the ocean.

Those knowledgeable about the issue say cleanup proposals will need to find workable incentives – for example, offering bounties for fishermen who turn in someone else’s abandoned gear.

While Americans should do a better job of properly recycling or disposing of trash that litters our communities, it’s foolish to think that if we make McDonald’s or Kwik Shops stop using plastic straws, we’re making a difference.

Sometimes, doing the easy thing does have an impact, but not when it comes to plastic straws.

Turns out, life and our planet are more complicated than that.

 

I’m a little late getting this posted, but as Americans marked Labor Day this week, here’s my take at how Kansas workers and the state are faring.

1,428,358

That’s the number of jobs reported by the Kansas Department of Labor for July 2018.

It’s an increase of about 20,000 private-sector jobs from July 2017, according to state officials. Kansas job growth has been sustained for more than a year, which is good news for the state.

Job growth over the last 10 years has been unsteady. Booming agriculture and oil markets helped Kansas recover after the 2008 recession. Then job numbers slipped with declines in those sectors.

Cuts in the state income tax – for some, total elimination – failed to create jobs or grow Kansas’ economy. The cuts did blast a $1 billion hole in the state’s budget, creating a chronic and severe crisis.

Since Kansas restored some sanity to tax policy, the state’s job numbers have grown for 14 straight months, according to state officials. That’s more coincidence than cause-and-effect. But it’s a fact worth remembering when politicians promise that cutting taxes will create jobs.

1,478,358

That’s the size of the state’s labor force, and it’s one of the more troubling numbers facing Kansas.

The size of our labor pool continues to shrink, in contrast to the slowly growing labor pool nationwide.

And a related figure, the percent of working-age Kansans who have or want jobs, isn’t growing either. In July, Kansas’ labor force participation rate was 66.4 percent. That was down a fraction from a year ago, and down significantly – from about 70 percent – compared to 10 years ago.

It’s hard to see how Kansas will grow much economically if we aren’t able to grow our labor force.

1.3 percent

That’s how much the average hourly wage grew in Kansas from July 2017 to July 2018.

Nationally, the average hourly wage from July 2017 to this July fell slightly. Kansas average hourly wage in July was $24.15, compared to the national average of $27.05, according to federal data.

By comparison, average CEO pay increased 18 percent in 2017, compared to 2016, according to the liberal think-tank Economic Policy Institute. Although the periods being compared aren’t the same, it’s worth noting CEO pay is rising about 14 times as much as U.S. hourly wages.

2.3 percent

That’s the rate of inflation between July 2017 and July 2018.

For many Americans, the cost of living is rising faster than any pay raises they are getting at their jobs.

Higher costs for most middle-income and low-income families are not offset by federal income tax cuts. Those cuts won’t cover even the higher costs of health care, much less higher costs for fuel and housing.

How much workers and families benefit from federal tax cuts depends on earnings, the state in which they live and other factors. But most economists agree that the tax cut and tight job market have not pushed wages up enough to significantly aid middle and low-income workers.

$30,992

That’s the annual difference in average pay between someone with a high school education and a worker with a college degree, according to a report from Marketplace. (That’s the business-oriented program you might have heard on public radio.)

When it comes to boosting wages, Americans need to act on their own behalf. No president, governor or tax cut will be as effective at ensuring the futures of Kansas workers.

If you want to earn more, improve your chances of getting and keeping a job, and help ensure your long-term financial security, education is the way to go.

It can be tough and expensive, but it’s a good investment. And if a four-year degree isn’t possible, consider other post-secondary education. As Forbes pointed out in a recent article, skilled workers are needed in several growing sectors. And there are good two-year colleges that train those workers.

Forbes named two Kansas institutions to its top 25 list of top trade schools: North Central Kansas Technical College in Beloit and Salina Area Technical College.

The best schools, at all levels, are the ones that help their students make the numbers reflect a better life than they did the year before.