tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6976144462093297473.post6446184933912612962..comments2024-03-26T19:10:00.791-04:00Comments on West Coast Stat Views (on Observational Epidemiology and more): Sympathy for the financially ineptJosephhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10760453165301871031noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6976144462093297473.post-20906345037456217502011-05-20T08:36:07.891-04:002011-05-20T08:36:07.891-04:00Andrew: True. And, in general, I think eras of wa...Andrew: True. And, in general, I think eras of wage growth over time are much better for personal happiness as you can partially grow oneelf out of a bad decision or two. The reverse, wage contraction, is ugly even for people who are well compensated.Josephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10760453165301871031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6976144462093297473.post-34975887802337867152011-05-19T10:12:57.490-04:002011-05-19T10:12:57.490-04:00My guess is that objection comes from some combina...My guess is that objection comes from some combination of: (a) They don't find it easy to come up with that extra $2500 right now, especially given that for years they've been spending freely, (b) Cutting back on personal spending would be an admission that maybe they were living beyond their means, and that's not a good image to have of oneself, (c) They don't like the idea of that money going to the government where it will be spent on things they don't like. If only the feds could get their spending under control, the tax increase wouldn't be necessary.<br /><br />It's gotta be much more pleasant to think that the federal government's spending is out of control, than to think that one's personal household spending is out of control.Andrew Gelmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02715992780769751789noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6976144462093297473.post-90240629752707071092011-05-19T09:27:01.194-04:002011-05-19T09:27:01.194-04:00What strikes me as odd is how small these tax incr...What strikes me as odd is how small these tax increases are relative to take home income. <br /><br />Felix Salmon give the example of that couple getting a 15% raise. So an increase of $37,500 in income.<br /><br />Clinton era taxes: $14,850<br />Current taxes: $12,375<br /><br />That is a difference of less than $2,500. Now imagine that they live in a state without an income tax (Florida or Texas, both large states). That really is their full marginal tax cost unless they spend the money as FICA no longer applies to incomes this high. <br /><br />In other words, people are fighting to the death over a tax increase of about 1% of gross income for people in this income range. <br /><br />Seriously. <br /><br />I get that people cannot use increases in salary to compensate for these increases (due to stagnant or declining wages) but that is a very different conversation.Josephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10760453165301871031noreply@blogger.com