Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

danluu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 109 posts

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#21

Post by initramfs »

blharr wrote: post #12
hsuduebc2 wrote: post #5

I never understood why taxes or similiar absolute points aren't gradients instead.

I think because the gradient is simply too confusing for laypeople to understand. Even for a simple system like US social security that has a gradient. For every $2 you make over the limit, you lose $1 in benefits. I've heard countless times misconceptions of people thinking they'd be losing money (as in literally having less money net) by working.

I agree, but almost everyone today can use a computer or smartphone. They can type in their income, and the computer can calculate it, providing them an average number of what their percentage of actual taxable income was- I think Turbo Tax and other software might do something like this.

They don't have to understand how it works to do their own taxes.

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#22

Post by ajsnigrutin »

mnahkies wrote: post #3

The UK tax system also has a bunch of unfortunate cliffs, and tapers that create >60% marginal tax rates and worse. There's a calculator here that illustrates it well https://tax-cliffs.britishprogress.org/calculator The childcare cliff edge is probably the worst, but the personal allowance taper isn't ideal either as it's compressed over a relatively short income range And of course all the thresholds remain frozen,…

Same in slovenia for eg. kindergarten prices, 1eur over the line, 90eur more per month in fees.

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#23

Post by forbiddenlake »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #8

[ EDIT: Since the undated article is actually from Feb 2020, predating the expansion of federal health insurance subsidies, I withdraw everything I said below. ] ---------------------------------- The opening story is fabricated and/or bullshit. Last year (2025) there was no limit on income for health insurance subsidies. That ended for this year, but last year there would have been no reason for anyone who knew what…

The post is from February 2020.

I can't see a date on the post (on mobile) but the archives link has month and year.

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#24

Post by encoderer »

blharr wrote: post #12
hsuduebc2 wrote: post #5

I never understood why taxes or similiar absolute points aren't gradients instead.

I think because the gradient is simply too confusing for laypeople to understand. Even for a simple system like US social security that has a gradient. For every $2 you make over the limit, you lose $1 in benefits. I've heard countless times misconceptions of people thinking they'd be losing money (as in literally having less money net) by working.

You might just be taking people too literally.

I've heard the same thing -- if they take a job they will lose money. What they really mean is that if they take a job (trade time for money), they will lose some of the pension they have already earned. This is a real economic loss (even if they might have a few more bucks at the end of the week) to say nothing of their lost time.

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#25

Post by TimorousBestie »

KylerAce wrote: post #7
hsuduebc2 wrote: post #5

I never understood why taxes or similiar absolute points aren't gradients instead.

Because that's harder to write the laws for

I hear this explanation a lot but I think it's a convenient fiction. Lawmakers, at least in the US, don't seem to write their own legal texts very often. Sometimes they don't even read them [1]! Congress has no problem producing monstrously complicated laws, in any case.

I think it's likely that politicians and their funding sources have found ways to profit off of these discontinuities. The infamous Medicare "donut hole" [2] was arguably a "benefit discontinuity" of the sort mentioned by the author and pharmaceutical companies profited off of it (more than a hypothetical Medicare structure without a donut hole, not relative to the spending cap that replaced it—which profits them even more).

[1] https://www.pennstatelawreview.org/penn-statim/dont-be-silly... (2013) ...which argues that this is a good thing!

[2] https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/what-is-the-medica...

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#26

Post by jameshart »

irishcoffee wrote: post #10
dvh wrote: post #6

Would test score problem be solved if teachers graded individual questions, not entire test?

The reddit explanation in the post addresses your question I believe. If someone is at a 28 or 29 a few "charity" points can be found in subjectively-graded tests.

I think that really just reflects the fact that on subjectively graded tests the score really doesn’t have that many significant figures of accuracy. That a regrading can find 3 to 5 points by being more generous - or presumably take 3 to 5 off by being harsher - says that really you could save a lot of effort by treating the final grades as bucketing into 10 point bands and treating 25-35 as the actual cutoff.

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#27

Post by rvba »

dvh wrote: post #17
irishcoffee wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reddit explanation in the post addresses your question I believe. If someone is at a 28 or 29 a few "charity" points can be found in subjectively-graded tests.

If you grade individual questions, you don't know the total score.

The incentive to find the extra point would partially disappear.

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#28

Post by degamad »

bostik wrote: post #13
blharr wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think because the gradient is simply too confusing for laypeople to understand. Even for a simple system like US social security that has a gradient. For every $2 you make over the limit, you lose $1 in benefits. I've heard countless times misconceptions of people thinking they'd be losing money (as in literally having less money net) by working.

This does happen in Finnish tax system. Your tax rate (percent with one decimal) is calculated based on your annual gross income. Rates are supposed to be calculated smoothly, and they are certainly calculated for each individual separately. In reality they are step functions. It is surprisingly common to have people refuse promotions because if would put them above an income tax threshold, bump up their rate, and en…

Are you talking about this tax system? https://nordisketax.net/pages/en-GB/taxation/?country=finlan...>

Because that is a marginal system, (and unless they've messed up the calculations, which they haven't in this case) you should never end up with less from earning more. Can you give an example of two income amounts where the lower income ends up with more money after-taxes than the higher income?

Or is it the additional municipal, church, or health levies mentioned on that page which have the discontinuities?

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#30

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

forbiddenlake wrote: post #23
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #8

[ EDIT: Since the undated article is actually from Feb 2020, predating the expansion of federal health insurance subsidies, I withdraw everything I said below. ] ---------------------------------- The opening story is fabricated and/or bullshit. Last year (2025) there was no limit on income for health insurance subsidies. That ended for this year, but last year there would have been no reason for anyone who knew what…

The post is from February 2020. I can't see a date on the post (on mobile) but the archives link has month and year.

Well then, I take it all back.
Post reply on HN