andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2011 andrew_gelman_stats-2011-1079 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: From my New York Times blog today, here’s an example of how contemporaneous poll results can be given exactly opposite interpretations. Recently in the New Republic, William Galston shared some recent findings from Gallup: Respondents were asked to categorize three economic objectives as extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. Here’s what they said: Extremely/very important Somewhat/not important Grow and expand the economy 82 18 Increase equality of opportunity for people to get ahead 70 30 Reduce the income and wealth gap between the rich and the poor 46 54 When Gallup asked a sample of Americans in 1998 whether the gap between the rich and the poor was a problem that needed t
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 From my New York Times blog today, here’s an example of how contemporaneous poll results can be given exactly opposite interpretations. [sent-1, score-0.307]
2 Recently in the New Republic, William Galston shared some recent findings from Gallup: Respondents were asked to categorize three economic objectives as extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. [sent-2, score-0.369]
3 Today, those numbers are reversed: Only 45 percent see the gap as in need of fixing, while 52 percent don’t. [sent-4, score-0.598]
4 Again, Democrats are the outliers: 62 percent of them want it fixed, versus 24 percent of Republicans and 47 percent of independents. [sent-5, score-0.69]
5 [Actually, 45% is a bit further from 24% than to 62%, so it is the Republicans who are (very slightly) the outliers here. [sent-6, score-0.105]
6 ] Galston concludes that Obama should tone down the class war: “a campaign emphasizing growth and opportunity is more likely to yield a Democratic victory than is a campaign focused on inequality. [sent-8, score-0.235]
7 See my column for my interpretation of these competing poll interpretations. [sent-11, score-0.341]
8 I write that the ambiguity revealed in these polls actually makes sense: if there were a clear and unambiguous majority in favor of some policy and all its ramifications, we would expect it would have already passed and there would be no remaining political dispute. [sent-12, score-0.208]
9 The very fact that an issue is politically live suggests some flexibility on opinions and helps us understand what otherwise seems contradictory about these poll results. [sent-14, score-0.163]
10 I did a Google search and found this note at the website of the Center for Economic and Policy Research: It is more than a little bizarre to read a column on public attitudes to inequality in the NYT which completely equates reducing inequality with raising taxes. [sent-17, score-0.765]
11 In fact, the main reason that inequality has risen so much over the last three decades has been the increase in the inequality of before-tax income. [sent-18, score-0.849]
12 It is likely that the public would reject most of the policies that have allowed the wealthy to seize a much larger share of income over the last three decades if any politician ever had the courage to raise them. [sent-22, score-0.373]
13 Instead, Gelman and many others would like to restrict debate to “Loser Liberalism,” where the question is exclusively whether we want to tax the winners to help the losers. [sent-23, score-0.539]
14 I don’t know why the Center for Economic and Policy Research writer (based on the labeling of the webpage, the column appears to be by Dean Baker, but I’m not sure) thinks that I “would like to restrict debate to ‘Loser Liberalism. [sent-26, score-0.472]
15 ’” For one thing, I’ve never used the phrase “loser liberalism” nor do I even recall ever having seen this phrase before encountering it today. [sent-27, score-0.221]
16 Second, I never said I wanted to restrict debate in this way: I was just discussing the interpretation of some recent polls. [sent-29, score-0.514]
17 I have no problem at all with debate on trade policy, insurance, patents, and the other topics mentioned in that Center for Economic and Policy Research column. [sent-30, score-0.183]
18 It’s pretty silly to say that I want to restrict debate when I never have said such a thing! [sent-31, score-0.445]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('inequality', 0.292), ('galston', 0.238), ('percent', 0.23), ('loser', 0.183), ('debate', 0.183), ('restrict', 0.18), ('poll', 0.163), ('economic', 0.159), ('democrats', 0.146), ('policy', 0.143), ('gap', 0.138), ('rich', 0.135), ('majorities', 0.13), ('liberalism', 0.116), ('tax', 0.113), ('republicans', 0.11), ('column', 0.109), ('wealthy', 0.108), ('outliers', 0.105), ('center', 0.103), ('gallup', 0.097), ('important', 0.092), ('campaign', 0.085), ('taxes', 0.084), ('said', 0.082), ('phrase', 0.079), ('contemporaneous', 0.072), ('redistributive', 0.072), ('categorize', 0.072), ('convinces', 0.072), ('equates', 0.072), ('economy', 0.072), ('opposite', 0.072), ('three', 0.07), ('interpretation', 0.069), ('decades', 0.068), ('leveling', 0.068), ('objectives', 0.068), ('fixed', 0.068), ('poor', 0.068), ('risen', 0.065), ('unambiguous', 0.065), ('opportunity', 0.065), ('income', 0.064), ('courage', 0.063), ('kenworthy', 0.063), ('encountering', 0.063), ('exclusively', 0.063), ('unfairly', 0.063), ('increase', 0.062)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.9999994 1079 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-23-Surveys show Americans are populist class warriors, except when they aren’t
Introduction: From my New York Times blog today, here’s an example of how contemporaneous poll results can be given exactly opposite interpretations. Recently in the New Republic, William Galston shared some recent findings from Gallup: Respondents were asked to categorize three economic objectives as extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. Here’s what they said: Extremely/very important Somewhat/not important Grow and expand the economy 82 18 Increase equality of opportunity for people to get ahead 70 30 Reduce the income and wealth gap between the rich and the poor 46 54 When Gallup asked a sample of Americans in 1998 whether the gap between the rich and the poor was a problem that needed t
2 0.21551442 286 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-20-Are the Democrats avoiding a national campaign?
Introduction: Bob Erikson, one of my colleagues at Columbia who knows much more about American politics than I do, sent in the following screed. I’ll post Bob’s note, followed by my comments. Bob writes: Monday morning many of us were startled by the following headline: White House strenuously denies NYT report that it is considering getting aggressive about winning the midterm elections. At first I [Bob] thought I was reading the Onion, but no, it was a sarcastic comment on the blog Talking Points Memo. But the gist of the headline appears to be correct. Indeed, the New York Times reported that White House advisers denied that a national ad campaign was being planned. ‘There’s been no discussion of such a thing at the White House’ What do we make of this? Is there some hidden downside to actually running a national campaign? Of course, money spent nationally is not spent on targeted local campaigns. But that is always the case. What explains the Democrats’ trepidation abou
Introduction: Matthew Yglesias noticed something interesting in a political story today that reminds me of one of our arguments in Red State, Blue State. I have the feeling that most readers of this blog are less fascinated than I am by U.S. politics, so I’ll put the rest below the fold. Yglesias quotes a Washington Post article on Blanche Lincoln returning to the U.S. Senate after surviving a primary challenge from a candidate supported by organized labor: Lincoln was embraced by her colleagues . . . Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) held up two fists and said of her primary campaign: “Fighting Wall Street with one hand, unions with the other.” Yglesias points out a fundamental asymmetry here: Schumer, who’s become something of a national leader among Senate Democrats, celebrates this ideal [of governing in a manner that's equidistant from rival interest groups], but there’s not a single member of the Republican Party–much less a leader–who’d say anything remotely similar. Schumer is basi
4 0.20721589 1145 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-30-A tax on inequality, or a tax to keep inequality at the current level?
Introduction: My sometime coauthor Aaron Edlin cowrote (with Ian Ayres) an op-ed recommending a clever approach to taxing the rich. In their article they employ a charming bit of economics jargon, using the word “earn” to mean “how much money you make.” They “propose an automatic extra tax on the income of the top 1 percent of earners.” I assume their tax would apply to unearned income as well, but they (or their editor at the Times) are just so used to describing income as “earnings” that they just threw that in. Funny. Also, there’s a part of the article that doesn’t make sense to me. Ayres and Edlin first describe the level of inequality: In 1980 the average 1-percenter made 12.5 times the median income, but in 2006 (the latest year for which data is available) the average income of our richest 1 percent was a whopping 36 times greater than that of the median household. Then they lay out their solution: Enough is enough. . . . we propose an automatic extra tax on the income
5 0.18526648 1577 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-14-Richer people continue to vote Republican
Introduction: From the exit polls: This is all pretty obvious but it seemed worth posting because some people still don’t seem to get it. For example, Jay Cost, writing in the Weekly Standard: The Democratic party now dominates the Upper East Side of Manhattan, as well as the wealthiest neighborhoods in the most powerful cities. And yet Republicans are still effectively castigated as the party of the rich. They are not — at least not any more than the Democratic party is. Arguably, both the Democrats and the Republicans are “the party of the rich.” But Republicans more so than Democrats (see above graph, also consider the debates over the estate tax and upper-income tax rates). Cost writes: Sure, the GOP favors tax rate reductions to generate economic growth, but the Democratic party has proven itself ready, willing, and able to dole out benefits to the well-heeled rent-seekers who swarm Washington, D.C. looking for favors from Uncle Sam. But he’s missing the point. The par
6 0.1839139 2255 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-19-How Americans vote
7 0.17985196 666 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-18-American Beliefs about Economic Opportunity and Income Inequality
8 0.1745459 98 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-19-Further thoughts on happiness and life satisfaction research
9 0.173706 673 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-20-Upper-income people still don’t realize they’re upper-income
10 0.168366 394 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-2010: What happened?
11 0.16756941 384 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-31-Two stories about the election that I don’t believe
12 0.15105638 495 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-31-“Threshold earners” and economic inequality
13 0.15006053 1388 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-22-Americans think economy isn’t so bad in their city but is crappy nationally and globally
14 0.14746881 1022 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-21-Progress for the Poor
15 0.14005095 100 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-19-Unsurprisingly, people are more worried about the economy and jobs than about deficits
16 0.13667449 201 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-12-Are all rich people now liberals?
17 0.1227304 1300 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-05-Recently in the sister blog
19 0.11744033 366 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-24-Mankiw tax update
20 0.11726776 50 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-25-Looking for Sister Right
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.197), (1, -0.131), (2, 0.162), (3, 0.072), (4, -0.09), (5, 0.013), (6, -0.015), (7, -0.008), (8, -0.034), (9, 0.046), (10, -0.081), (11, 0.003), (12, -0.017), (13, 0.054), (14, 0.068), (15, -0.015), (16, 0.021), (17, 0.035), (18, -0.047), (19, 0.026), (20, 0.103), (21, 0.014), (22, 0.03), (23, 0.003), (24, -0.046), (25, 0.003), (26, -0.046), (27, 0.009), (28, 0.022), (29, 0.013), (30, 0.008), (31, 0.038), (32, 0.012), (33, 0.064), (34, -0.051), (35, 0.009), (36, -0.02), (37, -0.002), (38, 0.055), (39, 0.031), (40, 0.021), (41, 0.029), (42, 0.02), (43, 0.06), (44, 0.02), (45, 0.001), (46, -0.021), (47, -0.07), (48, -0.012), (49, -0.001)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.96509802 1079 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-23-Surveys show Americans are populist class warriors, except when they aren’t
Introduction: From my New York Times blog today, here’s an example of how contemporaneous poll results can be given exactly opposite interpretations. Recently in the New Republic, William Galston shared some recent findings from Gallup: Respondents were asked to categorize three economic objectives as extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. Here’s what they said: Extremely/very important Somewhat/not important Grow and expand the economy 82 18 Increase equality of opportunity for people to get ahead 70 30 Reduce the income and wealth gap between the rich and the poor 46 54 When Gallup asked a sample of Americans in 1998 whether the gap between the rich and the poor was a problem that needed t
2 0.87311256 1577 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-14-Richer people continue to vote Republican
Introduction: From the exit polls: This is all pretty obvious but it seemed worth posting because some people still don’t seem to get it. For example, Jay Cost, writing in the Weekly Standard: The Democratic party now dominates the Upper East Side of Manhattan, as well as the wealthiest neighborhoods in the most powerful cities. And yet Republicans are still effectively castigated as the party of the rich. They are not — at least not any more than the Democratic party is. Arguably, both the Democrats and the Republicans are “the party of the rich.” But Republicans more so than Democrats (see above graph, also consider the debates over the estate tax and upper-income tax rates). Cost writes: Sure, the GOP favors tax rate reductions to generate economic growth, but the Democratic party has proven itself ready, willing, and able to dole out benefits to the well-heeled rent-seekers who swarm Washington, D.C. looking for favors from Uncle Sam. But he’s missing the point. The par
Introduction: Frank Newport of Gallup reports ( link from Jay Livingston): Americans become progressively less positive about economic conditions the farther away from home they look. Forty-nine percent rate economic conditions in their local area as excellent or good, but that drops to 25% when rating the U.S. economy, and to 13% when assessing the world as a whole. This is really wack: I can see how it might make sense for Americans to think conditions are worse in other countries, but it’s hard to see a rational reason for the Lake-Wobegon-like pattern of people thinking things are ok locally but not nationally. Gallup highlights the partisan breakdown, which I graphed here: Unsurprisingly (given that their party controls the presidency and one house of Congress), Democrats are more optimistic than Republicans. This is just the flip side of University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan claiming in October 2008 that the economy is not that bad because “the current unem
Introduction: Matthew Yglesias noticed something interesting in a political story today that reminds me of one of our arguments in Red State, Blue State. I have the feeling that most readers of this blog are less fascinated than I am by U.S. politics, so I’ll put the rest below the fold. Yglesias quotes a Washington Post article on Blanche Lincoln returning to the U.S. Senate after surviving a primary challenge from a candidate supported by organized labor: Lincoln was embraced by her colleagues . . . Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) held up two fists and said of her primary campaign: “Fighting Wall Street with one hand, unions with the other.” Yglesias points out a fundamental asymmetry here: Schumer, who’s become something of a national leader among Senate Democrats, celebrates this ideal [of governing in a manner that's equidistant from rival interest groups], but there’s not a single member of the Republican Party–much less a leader–who’d say anything remotely similar. Schumer is basi
5 0.78733152 1020 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-20-No no no no no
Introduction: I enjoy the London Review of Books but I’m not a fan of their policy of hiring English people to write about U.S. politics. In theory it could work just fine but in practice there seem to be problems. Recall the notorious line from a couple years ago, “But viewed in retrospect, it is clear that it has been quite predictable.” More recently I noticed this , from John Lanchester: Republicans, egged on by their newly empowered Tea Party wing, didn’t take the deal, and forced the debate on raising the debt ceiling right to the edge of an unprecedented and globally catastrophic US default. The process ended with surrender on the part of President Obama and the Democrats. There is near unanimity among economists that the proposals in the agreed package will at best make recovery from the recession more difficult, and at worst may trigger a second, even more severe downturn. The disturbing thing about the whole process wasn’t so much that the Tea Partiers were irrational as that th
6 0.78708565 201 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-12-Are all rich people now liberals?
7 0.78478396 666 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-18-American Beliefs about Economic Opportunity and Income Inequality
8 0.76387405 286 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-20-Are the Democrats avoiding a national campaign?
9 0.7441563 1097 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-03-Libertarians in Space
10 0.74289757 1145 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-30-A tax on inequality, or a tax to keep inequality at the current level?
11 0.74025273 636 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-29-The Conservative States of America
12 0.73982495 100 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-19-Unsurprisingly, people are more worried about the economy and jobs than about deficits
13 0.7319544 384 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-31-Two stories about the election that I don’t believe
14 0.73182708 394 andrew gelman stats-2010-11-05-2010: What happened?
15 0.73174143 630 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-27-What is an economic “conspiracy theory”?
16 0.73154324 659 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-13-Jim Campbell argues that Larry Bartels’s “Unequal Democracy” findings are not robust
17 0.72798431 1300 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-05-Recently in the sister blog
18 0.72399509 130 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-07-A False Consensus about Public Opinion on Torture
19 0.72394514 50 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-25-Looking for Sister Right
20 0.71794993 362 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-22-A redrawing of the Red-Blue map in November 2010?
topicId topicWeight
[(9, 0.04), (15, 0.018), (16, 0.09), (21, 0.038), (24, 0.101), (45, 0.03), (55, 0.013), (56, 0.021), (72, 0.182), (95, 0.012), (99, 0.3)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
Introduction: Dan Kahan writes: We all know it’s ridiculous to be able to go on an fMRI fishing trip & resort to post hoc story-telling to explain the “significant” correlations one (inevitably) observes (good fMRI studies *don’t* do this; only bad ones do– to the injury of the reputation of all the scholars doing good studies of this kind). But now one doesn’t even need correlations that support the post-hoc inferences one is drawing. This one’s good. Kahan continues: Headline: Religious Experiences Shrink Part of the Brain text: ” … The study, published March 30 [2011] in PLoS One, showed greater atrophy in the hippocampus in individuals who identify with specific religious groups as well as those with no religious affiliation … The results showed significantly greater hippocampal atrophy in individuals reporting a life-changing religious experience. In addition, they found significantly greater hippocampal atrophy among born-again Protestants, Catholics, and those with no religiou
2 0.97252625 1179 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-21-“Readability” as freedom from the actual sensation of reading
Introduction: In her essay on Margaret Mitchell and Gone With the Wind, Claudia Roth Pierpoint writes: The much remarked “readability” of the book must have played a part in this smooth passage from the page to the screen, since “readability” has to do not only with freedom from obscurity but, paradoxically, with freedom from the actual sensation of reading [emphasis added]—of the tug and traction of words as they move thoughts into place in the mind. Requiring, in fact, the least reading, the most “readable” book allows its characters to slip easily through nets of words and into other forms. Popular art has been well defined by just this effortless movement from medium to medium, which is carried out, as Leslie Fiedler observed in relation to Uncle Tom’s Cabin, “without loss of intensity or alteration of meaning.” Isabel Archer rises from the page only in the hanging garments of Henry James’s prose, but Scarlett O’Hara is a free woman. Well put. I wish Pierpoint would come out with ano
3 0.95936167 84 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-14-Is it 1930?
Introduction: Lawrence Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute reports: Goldman Sachs’ latest forecast (and they’ve been pretty accurate so far) is that unemployment will rise to 9.9% by early 2011 and trend down to 9.7% for the last quarter of 2011. Obviously, this is a simply awful scenario but it seems one that is being accepted. That is, we seem to be in the process of accepting the unacceptable. Note that this scenario probably assumes the passage of the limited efforts now being considered in Congress. One might be surprised that Obama and congressional Democrats are not doing more to try to bring unemployment down. On the other hand, just to speak in generalities (not knowing any of the people involved), I would think that Obama would be much much more worried about the economy doing well in 2010 and then crashing in 2012. A crappy economy through 2011 and then improvement in 2012–that would be his ideal, no? Not that he would have the ability to time this sort of thing. But perhap
4 0.95818049 1381 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-16-The Art of Fielding
Introduction: I liked it; the reviews were well-deserved. It indeed is a cross between The Mysteries of Pittsburgh and The Universal Baseball Association, J. Henry Waugh, Prop. What struck me most, though, was the contrast with Indecision, the novel by Harbach’s associate, Benjamin Kunkel. As I noted a few years ago , Indecision was notable in that all the characters had agency. That is, each character had his or her own ideas and seemed to act on his or her own ideas, rather than merely carrying the plot along or providing scenery. In contrast, the most gripping drama in The Art of Fielding seem to be characters’ struggling with their plot-determined roles (hence the connection with Coover’s God-soaked baseball classic). Also notable to me was that the college-aged characters not being particularly obsessed with sex—I guess this is that easy-going hook-up culture I keep reading about—while at the same time, just about all the characters seem to be involved in serious drug addiction. I’ve re
same-blog 5 0.95497769 1079 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-23-Surveys show Americans are populist class warriors, except when they aren’t
Introduction: From my New York Times blog today, here’s an example of how contemporaneous poll results can be given exactly opposite interpretations. Recently in the New Republic, William Galston shared some recent findings from Gallup: Respondents were asked to categorize three economic objectives as extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. Here’s what they said: Extremely/very important Somewhat/not important Grow and expand the economy 82 18 Increase equality of opportunity for people to get ahead 70 30 Reduce the income and wealth gap between the rich and the poor 46 54 When Gallup asked a sample of Americans in 1998 whether the gap between the rich and the poor was a problem that needed t
6 0.9477818 68 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-03-…pretty soon you’re talking real money.
7 0.94531292 737 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-30-Memorial Day question
8 0.94423229 550 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-02-An IV won’t save your life if the line is tangled
9 0.94235224 83 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-13-Silly Sas lays out old-fashioned statistical thinking
10 0.94160879 741 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-02-At least he didn’t prove a false theorem
11 0.9373998 624 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-22-A question about the economic benefits of universities
12 0.93611038 1935 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-12-“A tangle of unexamined emotional impulses and illogical responses”
13 0.93268055 1244 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-03-Meta-analyses of impact evaluations of aid programs
14 0.92967957 268 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-10-Fighting Migraine with Multilevel Modeling
17 0.92580515 2331 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-12-On deck this week
18 0.9225232 500 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-03-Bribing statistics
20 0.90553498 190 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-07-Mister P makes the big jump from the New York Times to the Washington Post