Live data from Hacker News

Suspicious discontinuities (2020)

danluu.com

31–40 of 294 posts

Re: Suspicious discontinuities (2020)

#31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for…

If we all just followed the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law, society would be a lot worse than it currently is.

Perhaps we’d have better written laws

Re: Suspicious discontinuities (2020)

#33
post #23

I went to school at a relatively late age and started in community college. The school/state had a policy where any independent income earners making less than 35,000/year would not pay tuition. A single dollar over that would require paying full tuition of ~$60/unit or about $750 a semester. One year I worked a little more overtime during the holidays than usual and realized with a week to go in the year that I'd go…

An instructive image of the welfare trap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Welfare_trap.png People making $30K on welfare would need to make $81K at an actual job to have the same income after tax. More info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_trap

Something seems very off with that image. I've known a lot of different people who were on welfare over the years, and not one of them had a standard of living anywhere close to what someone who nets $60,000 a year does. That said, there is absolutely a cliff where you could risk a loss just by taking in more money.

Re: Suspicious discontinuities (2020)

#34
Also UK VAT. Companies only need to register for VAT when they turn over more than £85,000 in a year. This adds a great deal of extra complexity for running the company. Predictably a lot of companies earn just less than this amount. The graph is worth a thousand words:

https://www.economist.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1024,quality=8... (from https://www.economist.com/britain/2023/04/11/britains-tax-ta...)

Re: Suspicious discontinuities (2020)

#35

Haha, I recall seeing a similar plot with a "suspicious discontinuity" when I looked up data on home appraisal price vs sale price. I remember asking the loan officer why the contract was forwarded to the appraiser before they did the appraisal, because that might bias their assessment. She gave me a funny look and replied "that's kind of the point."

When I was selling, I must've gotten the only appraiser in the world that actually appraises rather than just follows the contract. Idiot lost me $15k on my house.

But yeah, it's _very_ clear their appraisal, which is usually _dead on_ with the offer, is a sham. I mean, even just considering the incentive structure (Who's going to hire an appraiser who causes deals to go sideways?), it's clear that they're just a middleman taking their cut.

Re: Suspicious discontinuities (2020)

#36
A similar fun example is the distribution of Elo ratings on a chess site, e.g. here's the weekly distribution on Lichess for Bullet games (less than 3 minutes):

https://lichess.org/stat/rating/distribution/bullet

It's easy to understand why this happens:

- Player ratings will fluctuate by small amounts as they win and lose individual games.

- People are happy to stop playing when their rating is at e.g. 1503, but if it's 1497, they'd rather play just one more game than leave it that way.

- At any given time, most accounts are not playing, so the distribution shows a bias towards values just over a 100 Elo threshold.

The other neat thing is that you can see this effect reduce as you look at longer time controls:

Blitz (less than 10 min): https://lichess.org/stat/rating/distribution/blitz

Rapid (less than 30 min): https://lichess.org/stat/rating/distribution/rapid

Which makes sense because the time and effort of gambling just one more game to get the rating back over the line is higher at the longer time controls.

Re: Suspicious discontinuities (2020)

#37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for…

If we all just followed the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law, society would be a lot worse than it currently is.

From what I hear, most of us don't follow either the letter or the spirit. A former project manager of mine had previously worked as a cop, and I asked him how he determined who to arrest — if I remember right (it was a while ago now), the answer was approximately "if they look sus, arrest first and figure out the exact offence later". What's the quote? Something along the lines of "as a kid I thought adults had it all figured out, then I became an adult and realised none of us know anything and we're all bluffing all the time"?

The reason we're not all in jail all the time is that we don't fully enforce almost any law, IMO because we all like to think of ourselves and most of our peers as the "goodies" even as we demand ever stronger crackdowns on ever broader ranges of behaviour. And also we don't like living in police states run by people who tell us we're actually all bastards.

Fully enforce road laws? The only people who won't lose their licences, will be people who aren't driving.

Littering? The fines would probably raise enough money to replace all taxation and then some.

Drug laws? In the UK, heroin users alone are a group nearly three times the size of the prison population, all class-A drugs combined are about 11x the UK prison population, all drugs of all categories are about 31x the prison population — and that's "this year" not "lifetime use" which matters given the length of the prison sentences for different categories: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeand...

Copyright infringement? Imagine if Google (or AltaVista) had been hit by the same sort of lawsuits sent against individuals engaged in P2P file sharing during the Wild West era of the internet.

Personal data protection? Even before GDPR, websites should've been asking for permission for tracking cookies.

Re: Suspicious discontinuities (2020)

#38
post #12

Haha, I recall seeing a similar plot with a "suspicious discontinuity" when I looked up data on home appraisal price vs sale price. I remember asking the loan officer why the contract was forwarded to the appraiser before they did the appraisal, because that might bias their assessment. She gave me a funny look and replied "that's kind of the point."

Yeah of course, the appraiser is a person who is paid to write down the predetermined number. The US federal government should nuke this industry as part of their crackdown on "junk fees". Either the appraiser serves a legitimate arms-length purpose or their whole line of business should go away.

Semi-related: the time an appraiser raised the estimated value after the couple removed all traces of the place being inhabited by black people:

https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/local/jacksonvil...

Reddit /r/nottheonion discussion: https://old.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/comments/igk83g/jackson...

Re: Suspicious discontinuities (2020)

#40
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An instructive image of the welfare trap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Welfare_trap.png People making $30K on welfare would need to make $81K at an actual job to have the same income after tax. More info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_trap

Something seems very off with that image. I've known a lot of different people who were on welfare over the years, and not one of them had a standard of living anywhere close to what someone who nets $60,000 a year does. That said, there is absolutely a cliff where you could risk a loss just by taking in more money.

The main feature of that image is "childcare" which seems to be a fixed subsidy of $16k (and "CHIP", ~$4k related to child health care).

I don't know what the former means and how these are calculated, but if you don't have children, this graph would look a lot less exciting.

Post reply on HN