"The Progressivity of Taxes and Transfers."

From Harvard econprof Greg Mankiw:

Because transfer payments are, in effect, the opposite of taxes, it makes sense to look not just at taxes paid, but at taxes paid minus transfers received. For 2009, the most recent year available, here are taxes less transfers as a percentage of market income (income that households earned from their work and savings):

Bottom quintile: -301 percent
Second quintile: -42 percent
Middle quintile: -5 percent
Fourth quintile: 10 percent
Highest quintile: 22 percent

Top one percent: 28 percent

The negative 301 percent means that a typical family in the bottom quintile receives about $3 in transfer payments for every dollar earned.

The most surprising fact to me was that the effective tax rate is negative for the middle quintile. According to the CBO data, this number was +14 percent in 1979 (when the data begin) and remained positive through 2007. It was negative 0.5 percent in 2008, and negative 5 percent in 2009. That is, the middle class, having long been a net contributor to the funding of government, is now a net recipient of government largess.

And by "now" he means 2009. It's now 2012. What is it now?

ADDED: Had to correct "lawprof" to "econprof." I know he's an econprof. I'm like Obama the other day saying that the people fainting in the crowd could be helped by "paralegals." Once you get law in your head, it seeps in everywhere, often inappropriately!

"Whether competition among governments is good or bad comes down to the philosophical questions of what you want government to do and how much you fear government power."

Econprof N. Gregory Mankiw explains a really basic point about federalism for NYT readers:

If the government’s job is merely to provide services, like roads, schools and courts, competition among governmental producers may be as good a discipline as competition among private producers. But if government’s job is also to remedy many of life’s inequities, you may want a stronger centralized government, unchecked by competition.

A really basic point, as I said, but it's a point everyone should have down pat.

"Penile length alone can explain over 15% of the between-country variation in 1985 GDP."

"Startlingly the male organ coefficients are statistically significant at
the 1% level in all model specifications."

Scholarship!

"Take care of the ____ run and the ____ run will take care of itself."

Full in the blanks with the words “long” and “short.” A test originally proposed to distinguish conservative and liberal economists. I wonder if it more generally distinguishes conservatives and liberals.

"I Can Afford Higher Taxes. But They’ll Make Me Work Less."

Professor Mankiw explains how things work.

Time for Obama to move out of the lefty-senator, campaign-promiser role and listen to economists.

Harvard econ-prof Greg Mankiw offers prez-elect Obama 4 items of advice on economics.

1. "Listen to your economists... They will often give you advice quite different from what you will hear from congressional leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid."

2. "Embrace some Republican ideas." That's what Bill Clinton did.

3. "Pay attention to the government’s budget constraint." You can't give people all those things you promised during the campaign when "the laws of arithmetic are ignored."

4. "Recognize your past mistakes." You were a lefty senator. The time for that is over. Listen to your economic experts who will tell you why.