Re: The 'working poor' scam

From: Jim Blair (see_at_sig.com)
Date: 07/01/04 

Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2004 18:25:07 +0000 (UTC)

royls@telus.net wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 21:45:14 +0000 (UTC), Jim Blair <see@sig.com>
>wrote:
>
>>To check on the
>>accuracy of PK's claims about how Hubbard collected his data, I emailed
>>Glen Hubbard. Krugman and Hubbard disagree about how Hubbard got the
>>data: Krugman said it is from people who PAID taxes in EACH YEAR from 1979
>>to 1988. But Hubbard says it is from IRS data on people who FILED a
>>return in both of the years 1978 AND 1988.
>>
>>This is quite a difference in the data base. But who am I to believe?
>>The guy who did the study? Or the guy who wants to discredit it?

royls@telus.net wrote:
>
>It's only a difference of degree in any case.

Hi,

But quite a big difference! Krugman claimed that by screening out anyone
who missed PAYING income tax for any one year during the interval, about
half of the population would be excluded.

It was by considering the extra work that would be needed to sift through
the data to weed out those who missed paying income tax in any one year,
to make the study less valid, that caused me to question Krugman's claim.
So I sent an e-mail to Hubbard to ask him about it.

Any study done over a decade interval (or even a year interval) must
exclude those who were not present at each end of the studty, and the
longer the interval the more are excluded. Note that the Gottschalk study
also excludes both the young and the old. And (I say) these are the two
most income mobile age agoups.

>....Hubbard himself admits
>that his study eliminated all the data on people whose incomes were
>too low for them to file in 1978, and stayed that low until 1988. He
>simply chopped off the bottom of the distribution.
>
>-- Roy L

People who never filed with the IRS didn't get counted. But remember that
lots of people FILE who don't PAY taxes (a point Krugman confuses). Poor
people file either to get back money that was withheld from their
paychecks or to claim the Earned Income Tax Credit.

Any study is likely to exclude some people. I mean even the census does.

                     ,,,,,,,
_______________ooo___(_O O_)___ooo_______________
                       (_)
jim blair (jeblair@facstaff.wisc.edu) Madison Wisconsin
USA. This message was brought to you using biodegradable
binary bits, and 100% recycled bandwidth. For a good time
call: http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/4834

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The working poor scam
    ... > who missed PAYING income tax for any one year during the interval, ... The problem is that if you're not careful, you bias ... Right...and has Hubbard made the text of the paper available for perusal? ... > Any study is likely to exclude some people. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: The working poor scam
    ... > You copied this from Paul Krugman, ... > accuracy of PK's claims about how Hubbard collected his data, ... > Hubbard didn't claim this shows SOCIAL mobility, just INCOME mobility. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: The working poor scam
    ... "sinister" wrote: ... He classified them according to income quintile, ... That would be true IF Hubbard had done that, ... >> You copied this from Paul Krugman, ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: The working poor scam
    ... >accuracy of PK's claims about how Hubbard collected his data, ... >Glen Hubbard. ... Krugman and Hubbard disagree about how Hubbard got the ...
    (sci.econ)