andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2012 andrew_gelman_stats-2012-1485 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: Uberbloggers Andrew Sullivan and Matthew Yglesias were kind enough to link to my five-year-old post with graphs from Red State Blue State on time trends of average income by state. Here are the graphs : Yglesias’s take-home point: There isn’t that much change over time in states’ economic well-being. All things considered the best predictor of how rich a state was in 2000 was simply how rich it was in 1929…. Massachusetts and Connecticut have always been rich and Arkansas and Mississippi have always been poor. I’d like to point to a different feature of the graphs, which is that, although the rankings of the states haven’t changed much (as can be seen from the “2000 compared to 1929″ scale), the relative values of the incomes have converged quite a bit—at least, they converged from about 1930 to 1980 before hitting some level of stability. And the rankings have changed a bit. My impression (without checking the numbers) is that New York and Connecticut were
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 Uberbloggers Andrew Sullivan and Matthew Yglesias were kind enough to link to my five-year-old post with graphs from Red State Blue State on time trends of average income by state. [sent-1, score-0.201]
2 Here are the graphs : Yglesias’s take-home point: There isn’t that much change over time in states’ economic well-being. [sent-2, score-0.135]
3 All things considered the best predictor of how rich a state was in 2000 was simply how rich it was in 1929…. [sent-3, score-0.917]
4 Massachusetts and Connecticut have always been rich and Arkansas and Mississippi have always been poor. [sent-4, score-0.468]
5 My impression (without checking the numbers) is that New York and Connecticut were historically industrial but Connecticut is now much more suburban. [sent-7, score-0.246]
6 I think one reason NY is not so rich is that, as a rich state, it’s been heavily taxed for about 100 years in order to pay for improvements in the rest of the country. [sent-8, score-1.17]
7 From 1924: “Such a system of National Highways will be paid for out of general taxation. [sent-10, score-0.121]
8 The 9 rich densely populated northeastern States will pay over 50 per cent of the cost. [sent-11, score-1.366]
9 Over 40 per cent will be paid for by the great wealthy cities of the Nation. [sent-13, score-0.847]
10 The farming regions of the West, Mississippi Valley, Southwest and South will pay less than 10 per cent of the cost and get 90 per cent of the mileage. [sent-17, score-1.473]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('cent', 0.354), ('rich', 0.342), ('connecticut', 0.295), ('converged', 0.22), ('per', 0.2), ('rankings', 0.192), ('mississippi', 0.192), ('yglesias', 0.182), ('state', 0.163), ('pay', 0.161), ('states', 0.145), ('graphs', 0.135), ('farming', 0.122), ('paid', 0.121), ('changed', 0.113), ('arkansas', 0.11), ('taxed', 0.11), ('northeastern', 0.11), ('southwest', 0.11), ('sullivan', 0.11), ('densely', 0.106), ('highways', 0.103), ('historically', 0.096), ('roads', 0.094), ('populated', 0.093), ('industrial', 0.093), ('hitting', 0.093), ('afford', 0.093), ('wealthy', 0.091), ('valley', 0.091), ('ny', 0.089), ('incomes', 0.086), ('everywhere', 0.084), ('regions', 0.082), ('massachusetts', 0.082), ('cities', 0.081), ('heavily', 0.08), ('improvements', 0.078), ('matthew', 0.076), ('west', 0.075), ('south', 0.075), ('gain', 0.07), ('predictor', 0.07), ('trends', 0.066), ('feature', 0.065), ('always', 0.063), ('blue', 0.06), ('relative', 0.059), ('rest', 0.057), ('checking', 0.057)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0000001 1485 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-06-One reason New York isn’t as rich as it used to be: Redistribution of federal tax money to other states
Introduction: Uberbloggers Andrew Sullivan and Matthew Yglesias were kind enough to link to my five-year-old post with graphs from Red State Blue State on time trends of average income by state. Here are the graphs : Yglesias’s take-home point: There isn’t that much change over time in states’ economic well-being. All things considered the best predictor of how rich a state was in 2000 was simply how rich it was in 1929…. Massachusetts and Connecticut have always been rich and Arkansas and Mississippi have always been poor. I’d like to point to a different feature of the graphs, which is that, although the rankings of the states haven’t changed much (as can be seen from the “2000 compared to 1929″ scale), the relative values of the incomes have converged quite a bit—at least, they converged from about 1930 to 1980 before hitting some level of stability. And the rankings have changed a bit. My impression (without checking the numbers) is that New York and Connecticut were
2 0.40004545 636 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-29-The Conservative States of America
Introduction: After noting the increasing political conservatism of people in the poorer states, Richard Florida writes : The current economic crisis only appears to have deepened conservatism’s hold on America’s states. This trend stands in sharp contrast to the Great Depression, when America embraced FDR and the New Deal. Liberalism, which is stronger in richer, better-educated, more-diverse, and, especially, more prosperous places, is shrinking across the board and has fallen behind conservatism even in its biggest strongholds. This obviously poses big challenges for liberals, the Obama administration, and the Democratic Party moving forward. But the much bigger, long-term danger is economic rather than political. This ideological state of affairs advantages the policy preferences of poorer, less innovative states over wealthier, more innovative, and productive ones. American politics is increasingly disconnected from its economic engine. And this deepening political divide has become pe
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
Introduction: Charles Murray wrote a much-discussed new book, “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010.” David Frum quotes Murray as writing, in an echo of now-forgotten TV personality Tucker Carlson , that the top 5% of incomes “tends to be liberal—right? There’s no getting around it. Every way of answering this question produces a yes.” [I’ve interjected a “perhaps” into the title of this blog post to indicate that I don’t have the exact Murray quote here so I’m relying on David Frum’s interpretation.] Frum does me the favor of citing Red State Blue State as evidence, and I’d like to back this up with some graphs. Frum writes: Say “top 5%” to Murray, and his imagination conjures up everything he dislikes: coastal liberals listening to NPR in their Lexus hybrid SUVs. He sees that image so intensely that no mere number can force him to remember that the top 5% also includes the evangelical Christian assistant coach of a state university football team. . . . To put it i
5 0.19383232 536 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-24-Trends in partisanship by state
Introduction: Matthew Yglesias discusses how West Virginia used to be a Democratic state but is now solidly Republican. I thought it would be helpful to expand this to look at trends since 1948 (rather than just 1988) and all 50 states (rather than just one). This would represent a bit of work, except that I already did it a couple years ago, so here it is (right-click on the image to see the whole thing): I cheated a bit to get reasonable-looking groupings, for example putting Indiana in the Border South rather than Midwest, and putting Alaska in Mountain West and Hawaii in West Coast. Also, it would help to distinguish states by color (to be able to disentangle New Jersey and Delaware, for example) but we didn’t do this because the book is mostly black and white. In any case, the picture makes it clear that there have been strong regional trends all over during the past sixty years. P.S. My graph comes from Red State Blue State so no 2008 data, but 2008 was pretty much a shift
6 0.18221912 1577 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-14-Richer people continue to vote Republican
7 0.1615134 201 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-12-Are all rich people now liberals?
8 0.14000005 2010 andrew gelman stats-2013-09-06-Would today’s captains of industry be happier in a 1950s-style world?
9 0.12769303 312 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-02-“Regression to the mean” is fine. But what’s the “mean”?
10 0.12764759 8 andrew gelman stats-2010-04-28-Advice to help the rich get richer
11 0.12290762 488 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-27-Graph of the year
12 0.12110749 673 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-20-Upper-income people still don’t realize they’re upper-income
13 0.1206232 2255 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-19-How Americans vote
15 0.11479077 125 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-02-The moral of the story is, Don’t look yourself up on Google
16 0.10806261 647 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-04-Irritating pseudo-populism, backed up by false statistics and implausible speculations
17 0.1063336 1693 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-25-Subsidized driving
18 0.10324043 159 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-23-Popular governor, small state
19 0.10016838 362 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-22-A redrawing of the Red-Blue map in November 2010?
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.116), (1, -0.077), (2, 0.111), (3, 0.098), (4, 0.014), (5, -0.034), (6, -0.029), (7, 0.001), (8, -0.035), (9, 0.047), (10, -0.027), (11, -0.031), (12, -0.012), (13, 0.081), (14, 0.101), (15, 0.048), (16, 0.06), (17, -0.007), (18, -0.007), (19, -0.007), (20, 0.072), (21, -0.005), (22, -0.011), (23, -0.019), (24, 0.022), (25, 0.004), (26, -0.058), (27, 0.047), (28, 0.065), (29, 0.034), (30, 0.098), (31, -0.069), (32, -0.008), (33, 0.044), (34, -0.005), (35, 0.004), (36, 0.039), (37, -0.007), (38, -0.027), (39, -0.008), (40, -0.008), (41, -0.033), (42, -0.113), (43, 0.062), (44, 0.043), (45, -0.0), (46, -0.092), (47, -0.048), (48, -0.079), (49, -0.027)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.97846532 1485 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-06-One reason New York isn’t as rich as it used to be: Redistribution of federal tax money to other states
Introduction: Uberbloggers Andrew Sullivan and Matthew Yglesias were kind enough to link to my five-year-old post with graphs from Red State Blue State on time trends of average income by state. Here are the graphs : Yglesias’s take-home point: There isn’t that much change over time in states’ economic well-being. All things considered the best predictor of how rich a state was in 2000 was simply how rich it was in 1929…. Massachusetts and Connecticut have always been rich and Arkansas and Mississippi have always been poor. I’d like to point to a different feature of the graphs, which is that, although the rankings of the states haven’t changed much (as can be seen from the “2000 compared to 1929″ scale), the relative values of the incomes have converged quite a bit—at least, they converged from about 1930 to 1980 before hitting some level of stability. And the rankings have changed a bit. My impression (without checking the numbers) is that New York and Connecticut were
2 0.86156392 636 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-29-The Conservative States of America
Introduction: After noting the increasing political conservatism of people in the poorer states, Richard Florida writes : The current economic crisis only appears to have deepened conservatism’s hold on America’s states. This trend stands in sharp contrast to the Great Depression, when America embraced FDR and the New Deal. Liberalism, which is stronger in richer, better-educated, more-diverse, and, especially, more prosperous places, is shrinking across the board and has fallen behind conservatism even in its biggest strongholds. This obviously poses big challenges for liberals, the Obama administration, and the Democratic Party moving forward. But the much bigger, long-term danger is economic rather than political. This ideological state of affairs advantages the policy preferences of poorer, less innovative states over wealthier, more innovative, and productive ones. American politics is increasingly disconnected from its economic engine. And this deepening political divide has become pe
Introduction: Charles Murray wrote a much-discussed new book, “Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010.” David Frum quotes Murray as writing, in an echo of now-forgotten TV personality Tucker Carlson , that the top 5% of incomes “tends to be liberal—right? There’s no getting around it. Every way of answering this question produces a yes.” [I’ve interjected a “perhaps” into the title of this blog post to indicate that I don’t have the exact Murray quote here so I’m relying on David Frum’s interpretation.] Frum does me the favor of citing Red State Blue State as evidence, and I’d like to back this up with some graphs. Frum writes: Say “top 5%” to Murray, and his imagination conjures up everything he dislikes: coastal liberals listening to NPR in their Lexus hybrid SUVs. He sees that image so intensely that no mere number can force him to remember that the top 5% also includes the evangelical Christian assistant coach of a state university football team. . . . To put it i
4 0.7408464 536 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-24-Trends in partisanship by state
Introduction: Matthew Yglesias discusses how West Virginia used to be a Democratic state but is now solidly Republican. I thought it would be helpful to expand this to look at trends since 1948 (rather than just 1988) and all 50 states (rather than just one). This would represent a bit of work, except that I already did it a couple years ago, so here it is (right-click on the image to see the whole thing): I cheated a bit to get reasonable-looking groupings, for example putting Indiana in the Border South rather than Midwest, and putting Alaska in Mountain West and Hawaii in West Coast. Also, it would help to distinguish states by color (to be able to disentangle New Jersey and Delaware, for example) but we didn’t do this because the book is mostly black and white. In any case, the picture makes it clear that there have been strong regional trends all over during the past sixty years. P.S. My graph comes from Red State Blue State so no 2008 data, but 2008 was pretty much a shift
Introduction: Jeffrey Frankel, identified as a former member of President Bill Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers, writes (link from here ): As a rule, one should judge people on their merits, not on the supposed attributes of the racial, socioeconomic, or geographic groups to which they belong. Yet statistical relationships sometimes are so strong that it is worth pondering their significance. . . . The unspoken truth is that, compared to “blue-staters,” those who live in red states exhibit less responsibility, on average, in their personal behavior: they are less physically fit, less careful in their sexual behavior, more prone to inflict harm on themselves and others through smoking and drinking, and more likely to receive federal subsidies. An unspoken truth, huh? Wow, that really sucks! Something should be done about it. Good thing that this Harvard professor and former member of Bill Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisors is on the case: Statistical analysis shows that sta
7 0.7098487 201 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-12-Are all rich people now liberals?
8 0.70458484 362 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-22-A redrawing of the Red-Blue map in November 2010?
10 0.69064045 159 andrew gelman stats-2010-07-23-Popular governor, small state
11 0.67049003 187 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-05-Update on state size and governors’ popularity
12 0.65210205 456 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-07-The red-state, blue-state war is happening in the upper half of the income distribution
13 0.65062088 196 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-10-The U.S. as welfare state
14 0.64315891 19 andrew gelman stats-2010-05-06-OK, so this is how I ended up working with three different guys named Matt
16 0.62660038 460 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-09-Statistics gifts?
17 0.61559725 1577 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-14-Richer people continue to vote Republican
18 0.61419779 1587 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-21-Red state blue state, or, states and counties are not persons
19 0.61014462 97 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-18-Economic Disparities and Life Satisfaction in European Regions
20 0.60915631 1169 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-15-Charles Murray on the new upper class
topicId topicWeight
[(2, 0.03), (16, 0.107), (20, 0.013), (21, 0.021), (24, 0.11), (27, 0.012), (45, 0.017), (48, 0.012), (57, 0.219), (67, 0.03), (72, 0.012), (76, 0.029), (86, 0.017), (89, 0.01), (93, 0.021), (99, 0.238)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.96426582 1542 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-20-A statistical model for underdispersion
Introduction: We have lots of models for overdispersed count data but we rarely see underdispersed data. But now I know what example I’ll be giving when this next comes up in class. From a book review by Theo Tait: A number of shark species go in for oophagy, or uterine cannibalism. Sand tiger foetuses ‘eat each other in utero, acting out the harshest form of sibling rivalry imaginable’. Only two babies emerge, one from each of the mother shark’s uteruses: the survivors have eaten everything else. ‘A female sand tiger gives birth to a baby that’s already a metre long and an experienced killer,’ explains Demian Chapman, an expert on the subject. That’s what I call underdispersion. E(y)=2, var(y)=0. Take that, M. Poisson!
same-blog 2 0.9143756 1485 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-06-One reason New York isn’t as rich as it used to be: Redistribution of federal tax money to other states
Introduction: Uberbloggers Andrew Sullivan and Matthew Yglesias were kind enough to link to my five-year-old post with graphs from Red State Blue State on time trends of average income by state. Here are the graphs : Yglesias’s take-home point: There isn’t that much change over time in states’ economic well-being. All things considered the best predictor of how rich a state was in 2000 was simply how rich it was in 1929…. Massachusetts and Connecticut have always been rich and Arkansas and Mississippi have always been poor. I’d like to point to a different feature of the graphs, which is that, although the rankings of the states haven’t changed much (as can be seen from the “2000 compared to 1929″ scale), the relative values of the incomes have converged quite a bit—at least, they converged from about 1930 to 1980 before hitting some level of stability. And the rankings have changed a bit. My impression (without checking the numbers) is that New York and Connecticut were
3 0.90797079 1101 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-05-What are the standards for reliability in experimental psychology?
Introduction: An experimental psychologist was wondering about the standards in that field for “acceptable reliability” (when looking at inter-rater reliability in coding data). He wondered, for example, if some variation on signal detectability theory might be applied to adjust for inter-rater differences in criteria for saying some code is present. What about Cohen’s kappa? The psychologist wrote: Cohen’s kappa does adjust for “guessing,” but its assumptions are not well motivated, perhaps not any more than adjustments for guessing versus the application of signal detectability theory where that can be applied. But one can’t do a straightforward application of signal detectability theory for reliability in that you don’t know whether the signal is present or not. I think measurement issues are important but I don’t have enough experience in this area to answer the question without knowing more about the problem that this researcher is working on. I’m posting it here because I imagine t
Introduction: That’s ok , Krugman earlier slammed Galbraith. (I wonder if Krugman is as big a fan of “tough choices” now as he was in 1996 .) Given Krugman’s politicization in recent years, I’m surprised he’s so dismissive of the political (rather than technical-economic) nature of Hayek’s influence. (I don’t know if he’s changed his views on Galbraith in recent years.) P.S. Greg Mankiw, in contrast, labels Galbraith and Hayek as “two of the great economists of the 20th century” and writes, “even though their most famous works were written many decades ago, they are still well worth reading today.”
5 0.8833214 1044 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-06-The K Foundation burns Cosma’s turkey
Introduction: Shalizi delivers a slow, drawn-out illustration of the point that economic efficiency is all about who’s got the $, which isn’t always related to what we would usually call “efficiency” in other settings. (His point is related to my argument that the phrase “willingness to pay” should generally be replaced by “ability to pay.”) The basic story is simple: Good guy needs a turkey, bad guy wants a turkey. Bad guy is willing and able to pay more for the turkey than good guy can afford, hence good guy starves to death. The counterargument is that a market in turkeys will motivate producers to breed more turkeys, ultimately saturating the bad guys’ desires and leaving surplus turkeys for the good guys at a reasonable price. I’m sure there’s a counter-counterargument too, but I don’t want to go there. But what really amused me about Cosma’s essay was how he scrambled the usual cultural/political associations. (I assume he did this on purpose.) In the standard version of t
6 0.87990105 891 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-05-World Bank data now online
7 0.87969166 861 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-19-Will Stan work well with 40×40 matrices?
8 0.87162775 1018 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-19-Tempering and modes
9 0.86643994 1460 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-16-“Real data can be a pain”
10 0.86239982 1120 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-15-Fun fight over the Grover search algorithm
11 0.85916305 215 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-18-DataMarket
12 0.85700393 1036 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-30-Stan uses Nuts!
13 0.85649657 1870 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-26-How to understand coefficients that reverse sign when you start controlling for things?
14 0.84413838 989 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-03-This post does not mention Wegman
15 0.84086561 306 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-29-Statistics and the end of time
16 0.840096 816 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-22-“Information visualization” vs. “Statistical graphics”
17 0.83971083 2318 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-04-Stan (& JAGS) Tutorial on Linear Mixed Models
18 0.83595932 1146 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-30-Convenient page of data sources from the Washington Post
20 0.82694554 1328 andrew gelman stats-2012-05-18-Question 8 of my final exam for Design and Analysis of Sample Surveys