andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2012 andrew_gelman_stats-2012-1145 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
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
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 My sometime coauthor Aaron Edlin cowrote (with Ian Ayres) an op-ed recommending a clever approach to taxing the rich. [sent-1, score-0.498]
2 In their article they employ a charming bit of economics jargon, using the word “earn” to mean “how much money you make. [sent-2, score-0.168]
3 ” They “propose an automatic extra tax on the income of the top 1 percent of earners. [sent-3, score-1.105]
4 ” 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. [sent-4, score-1.031]
5 Ayres and Edlin first describe the level of inequality: In 1980 the average 1-percenter made 12. [sent-7, score-0.143]
6 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. [sent-8, score-1.452]
7 Then they lay out their solution: Enough is enough. [sent-9, score-0.076]
8 we propose an automatic extra tax on the income of the top 1 percent of earners — a tax that would limit the after-tax incomes of this club to 36 times the median household income. [sent-13, score-2.205]
9 This seems fair enough to me, but one thing that puzzles me is: my impression is that Ayres and Edlin feel that the rich have too much as it is already? [sent-14, score-0.274]
10 (Yes, inequality could decline, but if it’s on an inexorable upward trend, my quick guess would be that maxing this ratio at 36 would be nearly equivalent to setting the ratio to 36. [sent-16, score-0.633]
11 When we last heard from Ayres he was supplying advice for young people who were rich or expecting to be rich. [sent-23, score-0.261]
12 So I think it’s fair to say he’s no class warrior, that he’d like to keep income inequality at the current level but no lower. [sent-24, score-0.867]
13 And please note that I’m neither endorsing the Ayres/Edlin plan nor criticizing it. [sent-25, score-0.093]
14 (Given my lack of expertise in macroeconomics, I’m certainly not the one you’d go running to, asking for an informed opinion on a proposed tax plan. [sent-26, score-0.382]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('ayres', 0.338), ('income', 0.334), ('inequality', 0.289), ('tax', 0.28), ('edlin', 0.259), ('median', 0.215), ('percent', 0.147), ('automatic', 0.146), ('propose', 0.145), ('times', 0.137), ('ratio', 0.129), ('extra', 0.118), ('cowrote', 0.107), ('asking', 0.102), ('freeze', 0.101), ('whopping', 0.101), ('rich', 0.1), ('earners', 0.097), ('fair', 0.095), ('endorsing', 0.093), ('taxing', 0.093), ('richest', 0.093), ('supplying', 0.091), ('earnings', 0.086), ('upward', 0.086), ('employ', 0.084), ('charming', 0.084), ('threw', 0.083), ('ian', 0.081), ('recommending', 0.081), ('top', 0.08), ('current', 0.079), ('jargon', 0.079), ('puzzles', 0.079), ('club', 0.078), ('aaron', 0.077), ('earn', 0.077), ('sometime', 0.076), ('incomes', 0.076), ('macroeconomics', 0.076), ('lay', 0.076), ('coauthor', 0.075), ('average', 0.073), ('household', 0.072), ('level', 0.07), ('expecting', 0.07), ('budget', 0.068), ('crisis', 0.066), ('clever', 0.066), ('decline', 0.063)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.99999994 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
2 0.26112235 495 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-31-“Threshold earners” and economic inequality
Introduction: Reihan Salam discusses a theory of Tyler Cowen regarding “threshold earners,” a sort of upscale version of a slacker. Here’s Cowen : A threshold earner is someone who seeks to earn a certain amount of money and no more. If wages go up, that person will respond by seeking less work or by working less hard or less often. That person simply wants to “get by” in terms of absolute earning power in order to experience other gains in the form of leisure. Salam continues: This clearly reflects the pattern of wage dispersion among my friends, particularly those who attended elite secondary schools and colleges and universities. I [Salam] know many “threshold earners,” including both high and low earners who could earn much more if they chose to make the necessary sacrifices. But they are satisficers. OK, fine so far. But then the claim is made that “threshold earning” behavior increases income inequality. In Cowen’s words: The funny thing is this: For years, many cultural c
3 0.21732406 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 0.20721589 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
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
6 0.18369219 2261 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-23-Greg Mankiw’s utility function
7 0.16290985 673 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-20-Upper-income people still don’t realize they’re upper-income
8 0.15919228 2223 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-24-“Edlin’s rule” for routinely scaling down published estimates
9 0.15405667 98 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-19-Further thoughts on happiness and life satisfaction research
11 0.1457963 1498 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-16-Choices in graphing parallel time series
12 0.14316374 338 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-12-Update on Mankiw’s work incentives
13 0.13968459 666 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-18-American Beliefs about Economic Opportunity and Income Inequality
14 0.13821413 709 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-13-D. Kahneman serves up a wacky counterfactual
15 0.13727555 922 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-24-Economists don’t think like accountants—but maybe they should
16 0.12780502 8 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-28-Advice to help the rich get richer
17 0.12528569 990 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-04-At the politics blogs . . .
18 0.12494795 1663 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-09-The effects of fiscal consolidation
19 0.12179441 1334 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-21-Question 11 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.126), (1, -0.073), (2, 0.105), (3, 0.033), (4, -0.02), (5, 0.001), (6, 0.042), (7, 0.012), (8, -0.014), (9, 0.039), (10, -0.089), (11, -0.009), (12, -0.069), (13, 0.118), (14, 0.045), (15, -0.032), (16, 0.079), (17, 0.051), (18, -0.07), (19, 0.024), (20, 0.195), (21, 0.035), (22, 0.077), (23, 0.025), (24, -0.063), (25, -0.017), (26, -0.029), (27, -0.023), (28, 0.004), (29, -0.039), (30, 0.025), (31, -0.013), (32, 0.003), (33, 0.009), (34, 0.032), (35, 0.039), (36, 0.025), (37, -0.041), (38, -0.049), (39, 0.037), (40, -0.028), (41, 0.035), (42, 0.018), (43, 0.001), (44, -0.032), (45, -0.042), (46, -0.027), (47, -0.034), (48, -0.03), (49, -0.009)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.97186279 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
2 0.86177433 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
3 0.80890745 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: 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
5 0.80669308 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
7 0.7447533 495 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-31-“Threshold earners” and economic inequality
8 0.73097253 311 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-02-Where do our taxes go?
9 0.72895908 630 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-27-What is an economic “conspiracy theory”?
10 0.70132118 1587 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-21-Red state blue state, or, states and counties are not persons
11 0.68290818 1378 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-13-Economists . . .
12 0.66302639 922 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-24-Economists don’t think like accountants—but maybe they should
13 0.65975505 1037 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-01-Lamentably common misunderstanding of meritocracy
14 0.6563704 1079 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-23-Surveys show Americans are populist class warriors, except when they aren’t
15 0.63147676 1693 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-25-Subsidized driving
16 0.62575465 709 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-13-D. Kahneman serves up a wacky counterfactual
17 0.60229868 673 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-20-Upper-income people still don’t realize they’re upper-income
18 0.58226752 1498 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-16-Choices in graphing parallel time series
20 0.56812888 666 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-18-American Beliefs about Economic Opportunity and Income Inequality
topicId topicWeight
[(7, 0.01), (9, 0.017), (16, 0.073), (19, 0.01), (21, 0.014), (24, 0.102), (42, 0.018), (44, 0.171), (45, 0.053), (53, 0.04), (55, 0.016), (61, 0.03), (72, 0.032), (77, 0.011), (89, 0.018), (99, 0.266)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.95550871 864 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-21-Going viral — not!
Introduction: Sharad explains : HIV/AIDS, like many other contagious diseases, exemplifies the common view of so-called viral propagation, growing from a few initial cases to millions through close person-to-person interactions. (Ironically, not all viruses in fact exhibit “viral” transmission patterns. For example, Hepatitis A often spreads through contaminated drinking water.[1]) By analogy to such biological epidemics, the diffusion of products and ideas is conventionally assumed to occur “virally” as well, as evidenced by prevailing theoretical frameworks (e.g., the cascade and threshold models) and an obsession in the marketing world for all things social. . . . Despite hundreds of papers written about diffusion, there is surprisingly little work addressing this fundamental empirical question. In a recent study, Duncan Watts, Dan Goldstein, and I [Goel] examined the adoption patterns of several different types of products diffusing over various online platforms — including Twitter, Face
2 0.93648219 748 andrew gelman stats-2011-06-06-Why your Klout score is meaningless
Introduction: Alex Braunstein writes about Klout, a company which measures Twitter/Facebook influence: As a Ph D statistician and search quality engineer, I [Braunstein] know a lot about how to properly measure things. In the past few months I’ve become an active Twitter user and very interested in measuring the influence of individuals. Klout provides a way to measure influence on Twitter using a score also called Klout. The range is 0 to 100. Light users score below 20, regular users around 30, and celebrities start around 75. Naturally, I was intrigued by the Klout measurement, but a careful analysis led to some serious issues with the score. . . . Braunstein continues with some comparisons of different twitter-users and how their Klout scores don’t make much sense. I don’t really see the point of the Klout scores in the first place: I guess they’re supposed to be a quick measure to use in pricing advertising? Whatever, I don’t really care. What did interest me was a remark on Brauns
same-blog 3 0.93539757 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
4 0.93078387 1837 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-03-NYC Data Skeptics Meetup
Introduction: Rachel Schutt writes: The hype surrounding Big Data and Data Science is at a fever pitch with promises to solve the world’s business and social problems, large and small. How accurate or misleading is this message? How is it helping or damaging people, and which people? What opportunities exist for data nerds and entrepreneurs that examine the larger issues with a skeptical view? This Meetup focuses on mathematical, ethical, and business aspects of data from a skeptical perspective. Guest speakers will discuss the misuse of and best practices with data, common mistakes people make with data and ways to avoid them, how to deal with intentional gaming and politics surrounding mathematical modeling, and taking into account the feedback loops and wider consequences of modeling. We will take deep dives into models in the fields of Data Science, statistics, financial engineering, and economics. This is an independent forum and open to anyone sharing an interest in the larger use of
5 0.91990519 1627 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-17-Stan and RStan 1.1.0
Introduction: We’re happy to announce the availability of Stan and RStan versions 1.1.0, which are general tools for performing model-based Bayesian inference using the no-U-turn sampler, an adaptive form of Hamiltonian Monte Carlo. Information on downloading and installing and using them is available as always from Stan Home Page: http://mc-stan.org/ Let us know if you have any problems on the mailing lists or at the e-mails linked on the home page (please don’t use this web page). The full release notes follow. (R)Stan Version 1.1.0 Release Notes =================================== -- Backward Compatibility Issue * Categorical distribution recoded to match documentation; it now has support {1,...,K} rather than {0,...,K-1}. * (RStan) change default value of permuted flag from FALSE to TRUE for Stan fit S4 extract() method -- New Features * Conditional (if-then-else) statements * While statements -- New Functions * generalized multiply_lower_tri
6 0.91584593 954 andrew gelman stats-2011-10-12-Benford’s Law suggests lots of financial fraud
7 0.91317439 444 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-02-Rational addiction
8 0.9096837 2150 andrew gelman stats-2013-12-27-(R-Py-Cmd)Stan 2.1.0
9 0.90946585 111 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-26-Tough love as a style of writing
10 0.90682399 1436 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-31-A book on presenting numbers from spreadsheets
11 0.9024353 617 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-17-“Why Preschool Shouldn’t Be Like School”?
12 0.8942678 1798 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-11-Continuing conflict over conflict statistics
13 0.88967943 693 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-04-Don’t any statisticians work for the IRS?
14 0.8882215 30 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-13-Trips to Cleveland
15 0.88200724 559 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-06-Bidding for the kickoff
16 0.87918222 865 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-22-Blogging is “destroying the business model for quality”?
17 0.87869489 1879 andrew gelman stats-2013-06-01-Benford’s law and addresses
18 0.87381589 788 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-06-Early stopping and penalized likelihood
19 0.87006116 2210 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-13-Stopping rules and Bayesian analysis
20 0.86348569 1231 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-27-Attention pollution