andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2013 andrew_gelman_stats-2013-1693 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining

1693 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-25-Subsidized driving


meta infos for this blog

Source: html

Introduction: This post is by Phil. This DC Streets Blog post gives a concise summary of a report by “The Tax Foundation”. The money shot is here , a table that shows what fraction spending on roads in each state in the U.S. is covered by local, state, and federal gas taxes, tolls, registration fees, etc. (Click on the ‘rank’ table heading to put it in useful order). The national average is 51%, and in no state do drivers directly pay more than 80% of the cost of the roads and highways. That means that, nationwide, half the cost of the roads is paid out of general government funds. Even if it were 100% this still wouldn’t cover additional government costs of driving (such as military spending to protect the oil supply, and law enforcement costs, etc.) but I’ll ignore those in this post. Of course, most of the general funds that make up the difference are themselves paid by people who drive, so this isn’t as grossly unfair as it seems. But it’s still pretty unfair, and it is a huge “market di


Summary: the most important sentenses genereted by tfidf model

sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore

1 This DC Streets Blog post gives a concise summary of a report by “The Tax Foundation”. [sent-2, score-0.154]

2 The money shot is here , a table that shows what fraction spending on roads in each state in the U. [sent-3, score-0.647]

3 is covered by local, state, and federal gas taxes, tolls, registration fees, etc. [sent-5, score-0.349]

4 (Click on the ‘rank’ table heading to put it in useful order). [sent-6, score-0.159]

5 The national average is 51%, and in no state do drivers directly pay more than 80% of the cost of the roads and highways. [sent-7, score-0.962]

6 That means that, nationwide, half the cost of the roads is paid out of general government funds. [sent-8, score-0.705]

7 Even if it were 100% this still wouldn’t cover additional government costs of driving (such as military spending to protect the oil supply, and law enforcement costs, etc. [sent-9, score-0.725]

8 Of course, most of the general funds that make up the difference are themselves paid by people who drive, so this isn’t as grossly unfair as it seems. [sent-11, score-0.367]

9 As a crude approximation, what if all gas taxes, tolls, and registration fees were doubled. [sent-13, score-0.645]

10 All other things being equal, drivers would then be paying the cost of the roads. [sent-14, score-0.506]

11 Except all other things wouldn’t be equal: there would be a stronger incentive to shift to more efficient cars and to drive less, which would reduce the gas tax revenue. [sent-15, score-0.765]

12 So the first-order effect suggests you would have to _more_ than double the taxes and fees in order to have the drivers pay for the roads. [sent-16, score-1.009]

13 But with people driving less, and driving lighter cars, the roads wouldn’t degrade as quickly, so the repair costs would be lower. [sent-17, score-1.195]

14 And with fewer and smaller cars on the road there would be fewer road expansion projects, and fewer lanes of roadway to maintain. [sent-18, score-1.088]

15 So the second-order effect would be in the direction of needing less money. [sent-19, score-0.249]

16 Perhaps simply doubling all of the fees and taxes would be enough after all. [sent-20, score-0.677]

17 Are there any good arguments for charging drivers much less than the cost of the roads? [sent-21, score-0.726]

18 Actually, let me refine that question: I’m sure there are good _political_ arguments that explain why politicians haven’t made this happen, but are there any good environmental, social, or economic arguments? [sent-22, score-0.277]


similar blogs computed by tfidf model

tfidf for this blog:

wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)

[('roads', 0.362), ('fees', 0.296), ('drivers', 0.256), ('taxes', 0.219), ('gas', 0.204), ('tolls', 0.188), ('cars', 0.184), ('driving', 0.178), ('cost', 0.167), ('fewer', 0.155), ('costs', 0.153), ('registration', 0.145), ('road', 0.134), ('unfair', 0.134), ('arguments', 0.134), ('drive', 0.113), ('equal', 0.102), ('wouldn', 0.099), ('tax', 0.098), ('less', 0.097), ('spending', 0.097), ('state', 0.094), ('table', 0.094), ('paid', 0.093), ('lanes', 0.088), ('dc', 0.088), ('degrade', 0.085), ('government', 0.083), ('would', 0.083), ('pay', 0.083), ('distortion', 0.082), ('nationwide', 0.082), ('concise', 0.082), ('refine', 0.082), ('streets', 0.079), ('doubling', 0.079), ('enforcement', 0.079), ('repair', 0.079), ('lighter', 0.077), ('grossly', 0.075), ('charging', 0.072), ('post', 0.072), ('order', 0.072), ('needing', 0.069), ('oil', 0.069), ('rank', 0.067), ('protect', 0.066), ('heading', 0.065), ('funds', 0.065), ('politicians', 0.061)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

same-blog 1 0.99999994 1693 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-25-Subsidized driving

Introduction: This post is by Phil. This DC Streets Blog post gives a concise summary of a report by “The Tax Foundation”. The money shot is here , a table that shows what fraction spending on roads in each state in the U.S. is covered by local, state, and federal gas taxes, tolls, registration fees, etc. (Click on the ‘rank’ table heading to put it in useful order). The national average is 51%, and in no state do drivers directly pay more than 80% of the cost of the roads and highways. That means that, nationwide, half the cost of the roads is paid out of general government funds. Even if it were 100% this still wouldn’t cover additional government costs of driving (such as military spending to protect the oil supply, and law enforcement costs, etc.) but I’ll ignore those in this post. Of course, most of the general funds that make up the difference are themselves paid by people who drive, so this isn’t as grossly unfair as it seems. But it’s still pretty unfair, and it is a huge “market di

2 0.14529586 708 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-12-Improvement of 5 MPG: how many more auto deaths?

Introduction: This entry was posted by Phil Price. A colleague is looking at data on car (and SUV and light truck) collisions and casualties. He’s interested in causal relationships. For instance, suppose car manufacturers try to improve gas mileage without decreasing acceleration. The most likely way they will do that is to make cars lighter. But perhaps lighter cars are more dangerous; how many more people will die for each mpg increase in gas mileage? There are a few different data sources, all of them seriously deficient from the standpoint of answering this question. Deaths are very well reported, so if someone dies in an auto accident you can find out what kind of car they were in, what other kinds of cars (if any) were involved in the accident, whether the person was a driver or passenger, and so on. But it’s hard to normalize: OK, I know that N people who were passengers in a particular model of car died in car accidents last year, but I don’t know how many passenger-miles that

3 0.12607929 988 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-02-Roads, traffic, and the importance in decision analysis of carefully examining your goals

Introduction: Sandeep Baliga writes : [In a recent study , Gilles Duranton and Matthew Turner write:] For interstate highways in metropolitan areas we [Duranton and Turner] find that VKT (vehicle kilometers traveled) increases one for one with interstate highways, confirming the fundamental law of highway congestion.’ Provision of public transit also simply leads to the people taking public transport being replaced by drivers on the road. Therefore: These findings suggest that both road capacity expansions and extensions to public transit are not appropriate policies with which to combat traffic congestion. This leaves congestion pricing as the main candidate tool to curb traffic congestion. To which I reply: Sure, if your goal is to curb traffic congestion . But what sort of goal is that? Thinking like a microeconomist, my policy goal is to increase people’s utility. Sure, traffic congestion is annoying, but there must be some advantages to driving on that crowded road or pe

4 0.12347312 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

5 0.1090374 814 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-21-The powerful consumer?

Introduction: Economist David Backus writes : A casual reader of economic news can’t help but get the impression that the way to get the economy moving is to have people spend more — consume more, in the language of macroeconomics. Seems obvious, doesn’t it? At the risk of making the obvious complicated, I’d say it’s not so obvious. It’s also not obvious that consumption has gone down since the crisis, or that saving has gone up. So what’s going on with the labor market? I’ll get to the rest of the explanation, but first some background. The other day, I posted posted this remark from Backus: This is from my area of work, macroeconomics. The suggestion here is that the economy is growing slowly because consumers aren’t spending money. But how do we know it’s not the reverse: that consumers are spending less because the economy isn’t doing well. As a teacher, I can tell you that it’s almost impossible to get students to understand that the first statement isn’t obviously true

6 0.1063336 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

7 0.098032281 636 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-29-The Conservative States of America

8 0.094557166 1541 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-19-Statistical discrimination again

9 0.093142591 1577 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-14-Richer people continue to vote Republican

10 0.091236822 693 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-04-Don’t any statisticians work for the IRS?

11 0.091131002 663 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-15-Happy tax day!

12 0.090828307 336 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-11-Mankiw’s marginal tax rate (which declined from 93% to 80% in two years) and the difficulty of microeconomic reasoning

13 0.090298191 633 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-28-“The New Tyranny: Carbon Monoxide Detectors?”

14 0.088671744 68 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-03-…pretty soon you’re talking real money.

15 0.088414565 323 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-06-Sociotropic Voting and the Media

16 0.088305056 2261 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-23-Greg Mankiw’s utility function

17 0.084185496 338 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-12-Update on Mankiw’s work incentives

18 0.082413256 673 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-20-Upper-income people still don’t realize they’re upper-income

19 0.081583247 2341 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-20-plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose

20 0.077018037 67 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-03-More on that Dartmouth health care study


similar blogs computed by lsi model

lsi for this blog:

topicId topicWeight

[(0, 0.112), (1, -0.069), (2, 0.068), (3, 0.031), (4, -0.011), (5, 0.005), (6, 0.03), (7, -0.004), (8, -0.008), (9, 0.026), (10, -0.064), (11, -0.028), (12, 0.011), (13, 0.038), (14, 0.015), (15, 0.019), (16, 0.057), (17, 0.015), (18, -0.025), (19, 0.036), (20, 0.09), (21, 0.029), (22, -0.003), (23, 0.074), (24, -0.051), (25, 0.019), (26, -0.023), (27, -0.015), (28, 0.032), (29, 0.026), (30, 0.022), (31, -0.03), (32, -0.003), (33, -0.019), (34, 0.017), (35, -0.003), (36, 0.012), (37, -0.042), (38, 0.031), (39, 0.011), (40, 0.01), (41, -0.05), (42, -0.042), (43, 0.006), (44, 0.016), (45, 0.031), (46, 0.01), (47, -0.025), (48, -0.02), (49, -0.009)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

same-blog 1 0.95965034 1693 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-25-Subsidized driving

Introduction: This post is by Phil. This DC Streets Blog post gives a concise summary of a report by “The Tax Foundation”. The money shot is here , a table that shows what fraction spending on roads in each state in the U.S. is covered by local, state, and federal gas taxes, tolls, registration fees, etc. (Click on the ‘rank’ table heading to put it in useful order). The national average is 51%, and in no state do drivers directly pay more than 80% of the cost of the roads and highways. That means that, nationwide, half the cost of the roads is paid out of general government funds. Even if it were 100% this still wouldn’t cover additional government costs of driving (such as military spending to protect the oil supply, and law enforcement costs, etc.) but I’ll ignore those in this post. Of course, most of the general funds that make up the difference are themselves paid by people who drive, so this isn’t as grossly unfair as it seems. But it’s still pretty unfair, and it is a huge “market di

2 0.75335747 645 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-04-Do you have any idea what you’re talking about?

Introduction: We all have opinions about the federal budget and how it should be spent. Infrequently, those opinions are informed by some knowledge about where the money actually goes. It turns out that most people don’t have a clue. What about you? Here, take this poll/quiz and then compare your answers to (1) what other people said, in a CNN poll that asked about these same items and (2) compare your answers to the real answers. Quiz is below the fold. The questions below are from a CNN poll. ======== Think about all the money that the federal government spent last year. I’m going to name a few federal programs and for each one, I’d like you to estimate what percentage of the federal government’s budget last year was spent on each of those programs. Medicare — the federal health program for the elderly Medicaid — the federal health program for the poor Social Security Military spending by the Department of Defense Aid to foreign countries for international development

3 0.73302191 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

4 0.72837883 311 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-02-Where do our taxes go?

Introduction: Mark Palko links to a blog by Megan McArdle which reproduces a list entitled, “What You Paid For: 2009 tax receipt for a taxpayer earning $34,140 and paying $5,400 in federal income tax and FICA (selected items).” McArdle writes, “isn’t it possible that the widespread support for programs like Social Security and Medicare rests on the fact that most people don’t realize just how big a portion of your paycheck those programs consume?” But, as Palko points out, the FICA and Medicare withholdings are actually already right there on your W-2 form. So the real problem is not a lack of information but that people aren’t reading their W-2 forms more carefully. (Also, I don’t know if people are so upset about their withholdings for Social Security and Medicare, given that they’ll be getting that money back when they retire.) I’m more concerned about the list itself, though. I think a lot of cognitive-perceptual effects are involved in what gets a separate line item, and what doesn

5 0.72608906 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

6 0.72019523 1728 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-19-The grasshopper wins, and Greg Mankiw’s grandmother would be “shocked and appalled” all over again

7 0.71296912 67 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-03-More on that Dartmouth health care study

8 0.70937449 1378 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-13-Economists . . .

9 0.70559973 338 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-12-Update on Mankiw’s work incentives

10 0.70260406 495 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-31-“Threshold earners” and economic inequality

11 0.70121729 1037 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-01-Lamentably common misunderstanding of meritocracy

12 0.70085031 1677 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-16-Greenland is one tough town

13 0.69909704 630 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-27-What is an economic “conspiracy theory”?

14 0.69508225 1079 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-23-Surveys show Americans are populist class warriors, except when they aren’t

15 0.69052076 988 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-02-Roads, traffic, and the importance in decision analysis of carefully examining your goals

16 0.68834138 336 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-11-Mankiw’s marginal tax rate (which declined from 93% to 80% in two years) and the difficulty of microeconomic reasoning

17 0.68602097 2261 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-23-Greg Mankiw’s utility function

18 0.68331349 814 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-21-The powerful consumer?

19 0.68180037 100 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-19-Unsurprisingly, people are more worried about the economy and jobs than about deficits

20 0.67799497 92 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-17-Drug testing for recipents of NSF and NIH grants?


similar blogs computed by lda model

lda for this blog:

topicId topicWeight

[(2, 0.044), (7, 0.01), (9, 0.03), (15, 0.021), (16, 0.037), (24, 0.163), (43, 0.014), (72, 0.076), (84, 0.034), (86, 0.015), (93, 0.126), (95, 0.018), (99, 0.213)]

similar blogs list:

simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle

same-blog 1 0.9551838 1693 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-25-Subsidized driving

Introduction: This post is by Phil. This DC Streets Blog post gives a concise summary of a report by “The Tax Foundation”. The money shot is here , a table that shows what fraction spending on roads in each state in the U.S. is covered by local, state, and federal gas taxes, tolls, registration fees, etc. (Click on the ‘rank’ table heading to put it in useful order). The national average is 51%, and in no state do drivers directly pay more than 80% of the cost of the roads and highways. That means that, nationwide, half the cost of the roads is paid out of general government funds. Even if it were 100% this still wouldn’t cover additional government costs of driving (such as military spending to protect the oil supply, and law enforcement costs, etc.) but I’ll ignore those in this post. Of course, most of the general funds that make up the difference are themselves paid by people who drive, so this isn’t as grossly unfair as it seems. But it’s still pretty unfair, and it is a huge “market di

2 0.9268384 1432 andrew gelman stats-2012-07-27-“Get off my lawn”-blogging

Introduction: Jay Livingston critiques the recent pronouncements of sociologist and cigarette shill Peter Berger, who recently has moved into cultural criticism of New York’s mayor for living with “a woman to whom he is not married” (this is apparently a European sort of thing, I guess they don’t have unmarried partners in the parts of the U.S. where Berger hangs out). But what impresses me is that Berger is doing regular blogging at the age of 84 , writing a long essay each week. That’s really amazing to me. Some of the blogging is a bit suspect, for example the bit where he claims that he personally could convert gays to heterosexual orientation (“A few stubborn individuals may resist the Berger conversion program. The majority will succumb”)—but, really, you gotta admire that he’s doing this. I hope I’m that active when (if) I reach my mid-80s. (As a nonsmoker, I should have a pretty good chance of reaching that point.) P.S. More rant at the sister blog. P.P.S. In comments,

3 0.92048389 1397 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-27-Stand Your Ground laws and homicides

Introduction: Jeff points me to a paper by Chandler McClellan and Erdal Tekin which begins as follows: The controversies surrounding Stand Your Ground laws have recently captured the nation’s attention. Since 2005, eighteen states have passed laws extending the right to self-defense with no duty to retreat to any place a person has a legal right to be, and several additional states are debating the adoption of similar legislation. Despite the implications that these laws may have for public safety, there has been little empirical investigation of their impact on crime and victimization. In this paper, we use monthly data from the U.S. Vital Statistics to examine how Stand Your Ground laws affect homicides. We identify the impact of these laws by exploiting variation in the effective date of these laws across states. Our results indicate that Stand Your Ground laws are associated with a significant increase in the number of homicides among whites, especially white males. According to our estimat

4 0.91760314 1116 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-13-Infographic on the economy

Introduction: Gabriel Bergin writes: Just thought I’d share an infographic you might enjoy. I [Bergin] quite like what they did with the colored ranges of previous curves in the two middle graphs: I like it. Would it be possible to put the two long time series on the same scale? As it is, one starts in 1948 and the other starts in 1980. The only thing about the display that I really don’t like are those balls on the top indicating the duration of recessions. It looks weird to me to display a time duration in the form of the area of a ball.

5 0.91517836 1711 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-07-How Open Should Academic Papers Be?

Introduction: Richard Van Noorden reports in Nature that 95% of the authors submitting to the Nature Publishing Group choose more restrictive open-source licenses, CC-BY-NC-SA or CC-BY-NC-ND, even when given the opportunity to use a much more open license, CC-BY. (I include their data below.) How open should papers be? Should authors own their work or should universities? What if they’re paid for by a government research grant? For instance, should NIH go further in requiring openness than it already has? Personally, I don’t mind publishers trying to make a buck off my papers. But I don’t want to write something and then hand them the copyright, because then they’ll try to restrict the distribution. Creative Commons Licenses Here’s the license cheat sheet, straight from Creative Commons : CC-BY : This license lets others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon your work, even commercially, as long as they credit you for the original creation. This is the most accommodating of

6 0.90899539 1569 andrew gelman stats-2012-11-08-30-30-40 Nation

7 0.9037087 1281 andrew gelman stats-2012-04-25-Dyson’s baffling love of crackpots

8 0.90324265 1959 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-28-50 shades of gray: A research story

9 0.90304208 1503 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-19-“Poor Smokers in New York State Spend 25% of Income on Cigarettes, Study Finds”

10 0.89382344 683 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-28-Asymmetry in Political Bias

11 0.88873345 1210 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-12-Plagiarists are in the habit of lying

12 0.88669783 727 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-23-My new writing strategy

13 0.88364643 1123 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-17-Big corporations are more popular than you might realize

14 0.88133794 1619 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-11-There are four ways to get fired from Caesars: (1) theft, (2) sexual harassment, (3) running an experiment without a control group, and (4) keeping a gambling addict away from the casino

15 0.87757069 1182 andrew gelman stats-2012-02-24-Untangling the Jeffreys-Lindley paradox

16 0.87478143 268 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-10-Fighting Migraine with Multilevel Modeling

17 0.87035674 2208 andrew gelman stats-2014-02-12-How to think about “identifiability” in Bayesian inference?

18 0.86880308 500 andrew gelman stats-2011-01-03-Bribing statistics

19 0.86809325 190 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-07-Mister P makes the big jump from the New York Times to the Washington Post

20 0.86318189 2099 andrew gelman stats-2013-11-13-“What are some situations in which the classical approach (or a naive implementation of it, based on cookbook recipes) gives worse results than a Bayesian approach, results that actually impeded the science?”