andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2010 andrew_gelman_stats-2010-366 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: I was going through the blog and noticed this note on an article by Mankiw and Weinzierl who implied that the state only has a right to tax things that are “unjustly wrestled from someone else.” This didn’t make much sense to me–whether it’s the sales tax, the income tax, or whatever, I see taxes as a way to raise money, not as a form of punishment. At the time, I conjectured this was a general difference in attitude between political scientists and economists, but in retrospect I realize I’m dealing with n=1 in each case. See here for further discussion of taxing “justly acquired endowments.” The only reason I’m bringing this all up now is that I think it is relevant to our recent discussion here and here of Mankiw’s work incentives. Mankiw objected to paying a higher marginal tax rate, and I think part of this is that he sees taxes as a form of punishment, and since he came by his income honestly he doesn’t think it’s fair to have to pay taxes on it. My perspective i
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 I was going through the blog and noticed this note on an article by Mankiw and Weinzierl who implied that the state only has a right to tax things that are “unjustly wrestled from someone else. [sent-1, score-0.717]
2 ” This didn’t make much sense to me–whether it’s the sales tax, the income tax, or whatever, I see taxes as a way to raise money, not as a form of punishment. [sent-2, score-0.761]
3 At the time, I conjectured this was a general difference in attitude between political scientists and economists, but in retrospect I realize I’m dealing with n=1 in each case. [sent-3, score-0.418]
4 See here for further discussion of taxing “justly acquired endowments. [sent-4, score-0.311]
5 ” The only reason I’m bringing this all up now is that I think it is relevant to our recent discussion here and here of Mankiw’s work incentives. [sent-5, score-0.157]
6 Mankiw objected to paying a higher marginal tax rate, and I think part of this is that he sees taxes as a form of punishment, and since he came by his income honestly he doesn’t think it’s fair to have to pay taxes on it. [sent-6, score-2.064]
7 My perspective is slightly different, partly because I never thought of taxation as being restricted to funds that have been “unjustly wrestled. [sent-7, score-0.505]
8 ” Underlying this is a lot of economics, and I’m not presenting this as any sort of argument for higher (or lower) marginal tax rates. [sent-8, score-0.902]
9 I’m just trying to give some insight into where Mankiw might be coming from. [sent-9, score-0.082]
10 lot of people thought his column on this 80% (or 90% or 93%) marginal tax rate was a little weird, but if you start from the position that only unjust income should be taxed, it all makes a lot more sense. [sent-11, score-1.407]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('tax', 0.431), ('mankiw', 0.399), ('unjustly', 0.26), ('taxes', 0.241), ('marginal', 0.226), ('income', 0.184), ('unjust', 0.138), ('weinzierl', 0.138), ('justly', 0.13), ('wrestled', 0.13), ('objected', 0.124), ('taxed', 0.124), ('acquired', 0.124), ('taxing', 0.12), ('conjectured', 0.116), ('rate', 0.109), ('higher', 0.108), ('honestly', 0.106), ('taxation', 0.106), ('form', 0.103), ('sees', 0.096), ('restricted', 0.096), ('punishment', 0.096), ('funds', 0.095), ('implied', 0.092), ('bringing', 0.09), ('sales', 0.086), ('retrospect', 0.085), ('dealing', 0.085), ('insight', 0.082), ('paying', 0.082), ('weird', 0.081), ('raise', 0.081), ('presenting', 0.076), ('partly', 0.074), ('column', 0.069), ('thought', 0.068), ('attitude', 0.067), ('discussion', 0.067), ('slightly', 0.066), ('sense', 0.066), ('realize', 0.065), ('noticed', 0.064), ('underlying', 0.062), ('fair', 0.061), ('lot', 0.061), ('pay', 0.061), ('position', 0.06), ('lower', 0.059), ('economists', 0.059)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 366 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-24-Mankiw tax update
Introduction: I was going through the blog and noticed this note on an article by Mankiw and Weinzierl who implied that the state only has a right to tax things that are “unjustly wrestled from someone else.” This didn’t make much sense to me–whether it’s the sales tax, the income tax, or whatever, I see taxes as a way to raise money, not as a form of punishment. At the time, I conjectured this was a general difference in attitude between political scientists and economists, but in retrospect I realize I’m dealing with n=1 in each case. See here for further discussion of taxing “justly acquired endowments.” The only reason I’m bringing this all up now is that I think it is relevant to our recent discussion here and here of Mankiw’s work incentives. Mankiw objected to paying a higher marginal tax rate, and I think part of this is that he sees taxes as a form of punishment, and since he came by his income honestly he doesn’t think it’s fair to have to pay taxes on it. My perspective i
Introduction: Greg Mankiw writes (link from Tyler Cowen ): Without any taxes, accepting that editor’s assignment would have yielded my children an extra $10,000. With taxes, it yields only $1,000. In effect, once the entire tax system is taken into account, my family’s marginal tax rate is about 90 percent. Is it any wonder that I [Mankiw] turn down most of the money-making opportunities I am offered? By contrast, without the tax increases advocated by the Obama administration, the numbers would look quite different. I would face a lower income tax rate, a lower Medicare tax rate, and no deduction phaseout or estate tax. Taking that writing assignment would yield my kids about $2,000. I would have twice the incentive to keep working. First, the good news Obama’s tax rates are much lower than Mankiw had anticipated! According to the above quote, his marginal tax rate is currently 80% but threatens to rise to 90%. But, in October 2008, Mankiw calculated that Obama’s would tax his m
3 0.56989932 2261 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-23-Greg Mankiw’s utility function
Introduction: From 2010 : Greg Mankiw writes (link from Tyler Cowen ): Without any taxes, accepting that editor’s assignment would have yielded my children an extra $10,000. With taxes, it yields only $1,000. In effect, once the entire tax system is taken into account, my family’s marginal tax rate is about 90 percent. Is it any wonder that I [Mankiw] turn down most of the money-making opportunities I am offered? By contrast, without the tax increases advocated by the Obama administration, the numbers would look quite different. I would face a lower income tax rate, a lower Medicare tax rate, and no deduction phaseout or estate tax. Taking that writing assignment would yield my kids about $2,000. I would have twice the incentive to keep working. First, the good news Obama’s tax rates are much lower than Mankiw had anticipated! According to the above quote, his marginal tax rate is currently 80% but threatens to rise to 90%. But, in October 2008, Mankiw calculated that Obama’s
4 0.51820219 338 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-12-Update on Mankiw’s work incentives
Introduction: Tyler Cowen links to a blog by Greg Mankiw with further details on his argument that his anticipated 90% marginal tax rate will reduce his work level. Having already given my thoughts on Mankiw’s column, I merely have a few things to add/emphasize. 1. Cowen frames the arguments in terms of the “status” of George Bush, Greg Mankiw, Barack Obama, and their proposed policies. I hadn’t thought of the arguments as being about status, but I think I see what Cowen is saying. By being a well-known economist and having a column in the New York Times, Mankiw is trading some of his status for political advocacy (just as Krugman does, from the opposite direction). If Mankiw didn’t have the pre-existing status, I doubt this particular column would’ve made it into the newspaper. (Again, ditto with many of Krugman’s columns.) So it makes sense that arguments about the substance of Mankiw’s remarks will get tied into disputes about his status. 2. Neither Cowen nor Mankiw address
Introduction: Given Grandma Mankiw’s hypothetical distaste for Sonia Sotomayor’s spending habits (recall that Grandma “would have been shocked and appalled” by the judge’s lack of savings), I expect she (the grandmother) would be even more irritated by the success of Sotomayor’s recent book: Now that Sotomayor has a ton of money coming in, in addition to a well-paying job and pension for life, that would almost seem to validate Sotomayor’s foolish, foolish decision to enjoy herself in middle age rather than sock hundreds of thousands of dollars into a retirement account she likely would never touch during her lifetime. One interesting thing about this example is that Mankiw apparently holds within himself a descriptive and normative view of economics. Descriptively, he models people as “spenders” or “savers.” But, normatively, he seems to attribute higher values to the “savers.” (He also seems to be confused about the relation between saving to intertemporal preference (see my long p
6 0.24781604 922 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-24-Economists don’t think like accountants—but maybe they should
7 0.21732406 1145 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-30-A tax on inequality, or a tax to keep inequality at the current level?
9 0.14673468 50 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-25-Looking for Sister Right
10 0.1300422 1444 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-05-Those darn conservative egalitarians
11 0.12773331 630 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-27-What is an economic “conspiracy theory”?
12 0.12479477 311 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-02-Where do our taxes go?
13 0.12347312 1693 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-25-Subsidized driving
14 0.11744033 1079 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-23-Surveys show Americans are populist class warriors, except when they aren’t
15 0.11125356 673 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-20-Upper-income people still don’t realize they’re upper-income
17 0.10637964 1983 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-15-More on AIC, WAIC, etc
18 0.10583059 461 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-09-“‘Why work?’”
19 0.10200021 495 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-31-“Threshold earners” and economic inequality
20 0.1006434 1577 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-14-Richer people continue to vote Republican
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.127), (1, -0.081), (2, 0.073), (3, 0.078), (4, -0.065), (5, -0.035), (6, 0.064), (7, -0.0), (8, 0.007), (9, 0.08), (10, -0.162), (11, -0.033), (12, -0.075), (13, 0.145), (14, 0.003), (15, -0.069), (16, 0.052), (17, 0.058), (18, -0.187), (19, 0.124), (20, 0.339), (21, 0.058), (22, 0.135), (23, 0.165), (24, -0.159), (25, 0.001), (26, -0.063), (27, -0.064), (28, -0.038), (29, -0.123), (30, -0.0), (31, -0.009), (32, 0.014), (33, 0.004), (34, 0.063), (35, 0.095), (36, 0.06), (37, -0.142), (38, -0.001), (39, -0.014), (40, -0.018), (41, 0.018), (42, 0.064), (43, -0.071), (44, -0.058), (45, -0.037), (46, -0.031), (47, -0.003), (48, 0.06), (49, 0.048)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.97340196 366 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-24-Mankiw tax update
Introduction: I was going through the blog and noticed this note on an article by Mankiw and Weinzierl who implied that the state only has a right to tax things that are “unjustly wrestled from someone else.” This didn’t make much sense to me–whether it’s the sales tax, the income tax, or whatever, I see taxes as a way to raise money, not as a form of punishment. At the time, I conjectured this was a general difference in attitude between political scientists and economists, but in retrospect I realize I’m dealing with n=1 in each case. See here for further discussion of taxing “justly acquired endowments.” The only reason I’m bringing this all up now is that I think it is relevant to our recent discussion here and here of Mankiw’s work incentives. Mankiw objected to paying a higher marginal tax rate, and I think part of this is that he sees taxes as a form of punishment, and since he came by his income honestly he doesn’t think it’s fair to have to pay taxes on it. My perspective i
Introduction: Greg Mankiw writes (link from Tyler Cowen ): Without any taxes, accepting that editor’s assignment would have yielded my children an extra $10,000. With taxes, it yields only $1,000. In effect, once the entire tax system is taken into account, my family’s marginal tax rate is about 90 percent. Is it any wonder that I [Mankiw] turn down most of the money-making opportunities I am offered? By contrast, without the tax increases advocated by the Obama administration, the numbers would look quite different. I would face a lower income tax rate, a lower Medicare tax rate, and no deduction phaseout or estate tax. Taking that writing assignment would yield my kids about $2,000. I would have twice the incentive to keep working. First, the good news Obama’s tax rates are much lower than Mankiw had anticipated! According to the above quote, his marginal tax rate is currently 80% but threatens to rise to 90%. But, in October 2008, Mankiw calculated that Obama’s would tax his m
3 0.93246615 2261 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-23-Greg Mankiw’s utility function
Introduction: From 2010 : Greg Mankiw writes (link from Tyler Cowen ): Without any taxes, accepting that editor’s assignment would have yielded my children an extra $10,000. With taxes, it yields only $1,000. In effect, once the entire tax system is taken into account, my family’s marginal tax rate is about 90 percent. Is it any wonder that I [Mankiw] turn down most of the money-making opportunities I am offered? By contrast, without the tax increases advocated by the Obama administration, the numbers would look quite different. I would face a lower income tax rate, a lower Medicare tax rate, and no deduction phaseout or estate tax. Taking that writing assignment would yield my kids about $2,000. I would have twice the incentive to keep working. First, the good news Obama’s tax rates are much lower than Mankiw had anticipated! According to the above quote, his marginal tax rate is currently 80% but threatens to rise to 90%. But, in October 2008, Mankiw calculated that Obama’s
4 0.9268316 338 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-12-Update on Mankiw’s work incentives
Introduction: Tyler Cowen links to a blog by Greg Mankiw with further details on his argument that his anticipated 90% marginal tax rate will reduce his work level. Having already given my thoughts on Mankiw’s column, I merely have a few things to add/emphasize. 1. Cowen frames the arguments in terms of the “status” of George Bush, Greg Mankiw, Barack Obama, and their proposed policies. I hadn’t thought of the arguments as being about status, but I think I see what Cowen is saying. By being a well-known economist and having a column in the New York Times, Mankiw is trading some of his status for political advocacy (just as Krugman does, from the opposite direction). If Mankiw didn’t have the pre-existing status, I doubt this particular column would’ve made it into the newspaper. (Again, ditto with many of Krugman’s columns.) So it makes sense that arguments about the substance of Mankiw’s remarks will get tied into disputes about his status. 2. Neither Cowen nor Mankiw address
Introduction: Given Grandma Mankiw’s hypothetical distaste for Sonia Sotomayor’s spending habits (recall that Grandma “would have been shocked and appalled” by the judge’s lack of savings), I expect she (the grandmother) would be even more irritated by the success of Sotomayor’s recent book: Now that Sotomayor has a ton of money coming in, in addition to a well-paying job and pension for life, that would almost seem to validate Sotomayor’s foolish, foolish decision to enjoy herself in middle age rather than sock hundreds of thousands of dollars into a retirement account she likely would never touch during her lifetime. One interesting thing about this example is that Mankiw apparently holds within himself a descriptive and normative view of economics. Descriptively, he models people as “spenders” or “savers.” But, normatively, he seems to attribute higher values to the “savers.” (He also seems to be confused about the relation between saving to intertemporal preference (see my long p
6 0.80473346 1145 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-30-A tax on inequality, or a tax to keep inequality at the current level?
7 0.68486911 630 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-27-What is an economic “conspiracy theory”?
8 0.66502059 1378 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-13-Economists . . .
9 0.65352333 922 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-24-Economists don’t think like accountants—but maybe they should
10 0.62963843 311 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-02-Where do our taxes go?
11 0.59497756 1037 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-01-Lamentably common misunderstanding of meritocracy
12 0.5557254 1693 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-25-Subsidized driving
13 0.52634817 495 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-31-“Threshold earners” and economic inequality
14 0.51480037 1043 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-06-Krugman disses Hayek as “being almost entirely about politics rather than economics”
15 0.47705975 191 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-08-Angry about the soda tax
16 0.47619954 2292 andrew gelman stats-2014-04-15-When you believe in things that you don’t understand
17 0.47387353 1079 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-23-Surveys show Americans are populist class warriors, except when they aren’t
18 0.47264662 1587 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-21-Red state blue state, or, states and counties are not persons
20 0.45673355 461 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-09-“‘Why work?’”
topicId topicWeight
[(16, 0.082), (24, 0.092), (44, 0.016), (63, 0.056), (74, 0.136), (82, 0.252), (89, 0.022), (98, 0.027), (99, 0.191)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.87881255 1772 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-20-Stan at Google this Thurs and at Berkeley this Fri noon
Introduction: Michael Betancourt will be speaking at Google and at the University of California, Berkeley. The Google talk is closed to outsiders (but if you work at Google, you should go!); the Berkeley talk is open to all: Friday March 22, 12:10 pm, Evans Hall 1011. Title of talk: Stan : Practical Bayesian Inference with Hamiltonian Monte Carlo Abstract: Practical implementations of Bayesian inference are often limited to approximation methods that only slowly explore the posterior distribution. By taking advantage of the curvature of the posterior, however, Hamiltonian Monte Carlo (HMC) efficiently explores even the most highly contorted distributions. In this talk I will review the foundations of and recent developments within HMC, concluding with a discussion of Stan, a powerful inference engine that utilizes HMC, automatic differentiation, and adaptive methods to minimize user input. This is cool stuff. And he’ll be showing the whirlpool movie!
2 0.84213281 1749 andrew gelman stats-2013-03-04-Stan in L.A. this Wed 3:30pm
Introduction: Michael Betancourt will be speaking at UCLA: The location for refreshment is in room 51-254 CHS at 3:00 PM. The place for the seminar is at CHS 33-105A at 3:30pm – 4:30pm, Wed 6 Mar. ["CHS" stands for Center for Health Sciences, the building of the UCLA schools of medicine and public health. Here's a map with directions .] Title of talk: Stan : Practical Bayesian Inference with Hamiltonian Monte Carlo Abstract: Practical implementations of Bayesian inference are often limited to approximation methods that only slowly explore the posterior distribution. By taking advantage of the curvature of the posterior, however, Hamiltonian Monte Carlo (HMC) efficiently explores even the most highly contorted distributions. In this talk I will review the foundations of and recent developments within HMC, concluding with a discussion of Stan, a powerful inference engine that utilizes HMC, automatic differentiation, and adaptive methods to minimize user input. This is cool stuff.
same-blog 3 0.84166509 366 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-24-Mankiw tax update
Introduction: I was going through the blog and noticed this note on an article by Mankiw and Weinzierl who implied that the state only has a right to tax things that are “unjustly wrestled from someone else.” This didn’t make much sense to me–whether it’s the sales tax, the income tax, or whatever, I see taxes as a way to raise money, not as a form of punishment. At the time, I conjectured this was a general difference in attitude between political scientists and economists, but in retrospect I realize I’m dealing with n=1 in each case. See here for further discussion of taxing “justly acquired endowments.” The only reason I’m bringing this all up now is that I think it is relevant to our recent discussion here and here of Mankiw’s work incentives. Mankiw objected to paying a higher marginal tax rate, and I think part of this is that he sees taxes as a form of punishment, and since he came by his income honestly he doesn’t think it’s fair to have to pay taxes on it. My perspective i
4 0.84161496 940 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-03-It depends upon what the meaning of the word “firm” is.
Introduction: David Hogg pointed me to this news article by Angela Saini: It’s not often that the quiet world of mathematics is rocked by a murder case. But last summer saw a trial that sent academics into a tailspin, and has since swollen into a fevered clash between science and the law. At its heart, this is a story about chance. And it begins with a convicted killer, “T”, who took his case to the court of appeal in 2010. Among the evidence against him was a shoeprint from a pair of Nike trainers, which seemed to match a pair found at his home. While appeals often unmask shaky evidence, this was different. This time, a mathematical formula was thrown out of court. The footwear expert made what the judge believed were poor calculations about the likelihood of the match, compounded by a bad explanation of how he reached his opinion. The conviction was quashed. . . . “The impact will be quite shattering,” says Professor Norman Fenton, a mathematician at Queen Mary, University of London.
Introduction: Speakers: Cyrus Samii, PhD candidate, Department of Political Science, Columbia University: “Peacebuilding Policies as Quasi-Experiments: Some Examples” Macartan Humphreys, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Columbia University: “Sampling in developing countries: Five challenges from the field” Friday 22 Oct, 3-5pm in the Playroom (707 International Affairs Building). Open to all.
6 0.82920039 335 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-11-How to think about Lou Dobbs
7 0.82906234 178 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-03-(Partisan) visualization of health care legislation
8 0.79038388 1958 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-27-Teaching is hard
9 0.78113979 699 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-06-Another stereotype demolished
10 0.78037775 1440 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-02-“A Christmas Carol” as applied to plagiarism
11 0.77963114 340 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-13-Randomized experiments, non-randomized experiments, and observational studies
12 0.75930464 193 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-09-Besag
13 0.75583774 1488 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-08-Annals of spam
15 0.73843086 2003 andrew gelman stats-2013-08-30-Stan Project: Continuous Relaxations for Discrete MRFs
16 0.73326397 1553 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-30-Real rothko, fake rothko
17 0.72705585 67 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-03-More on that Dartmouth health care study
18 0.7197811 326 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-07-Peer pressure, selection, and educational reform
20 0.71135443 1134 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-21-Lessons learned from a recent R package submission