7/24/2011
- Name: John Lott
- Location: Virginia, United States
About Me
My commentary on a broad array of economics and crime related issues.
Most of my posts are now at the Crime Prevention Research Center. Our work is very important and you will find the latest information available there. Please click here or go to crimeresearch.org to get that information.
E-mail: johnrlott@crimeresearch.org
Academic Papers
- Terms of Use
Copyright 2005 by John R. Lott, Jr. All rights reserved
My Op-eds
More Books of Mine
- "Norway Gunman Fired For 1.5 Hours On Island"
- KRAUTHAMMER: Obama as demagogue
- So what happened during the debt ceiling shutdown ...
- So what happened during the debt ceiling shutdown ...
- Is China's economy growing so quickly because it i...
- The personal cost of redistricting?
- Last year that Republicans Controlled Congress and...
- Apparently it isn't just Republicans who don't tru...
- Fox News website is the top news website
- Majority of Americans Against Raising Debt Ceiling
Dumbing Down the Courts: How Politics Keeps the Smartest Judges Off the Bench
Straight Shooting: Firearms, Economics and Public Policy
Are Predatory Commitments Credible? Who Should the Courts Believe?
Reviews of Freedomnomics
Other Web sites
Previous Posts
Book Reviews
- For a list of book reviews on The Bias Against Guns, click here.
Interesting Past Topics
-Research finding a drop in violent crime rates from Right-to-carry laws
-Ranking Economists
-Interview with the Washington Post
-Debate on "Guns Reduce Crime"
-Appalachian law school attack
-Sources for Defensive Gun Uses
-The Merced Pitchfork Killings
-Fraudulent website pretending to be run by me
-Steve Levitt's Correction Letter
-Ian Ayres and John Donohue
-Other issues regarding Steve Levitt
-National Academies of Science Panel on Firearms
-Baghdad murder rate
-Arming Pilots
-General discussion of my 1997 and 2002 surveys as well as related surveys
-Problems with Wikipedia
-Errata for Gun Books
-US Supreme Court Wire
-Futures for Financial Markets
-judgepedia
Links
Economist and Law Professor David D. Friedman's Blog
Larry Elder's The Elder Statement
Economist Robert G. Hansen's Blog
Firearmstruth.com -- a media-watchdog website
A debate that I had with George Mason University's Robert Ehrlich on guns
Lyonette Louis-Jacques's page on Firearms Regulation Worldwide
An interview concerning More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws
The End of Myth: An Interview with Dr. John Lott
Art DeVany's website, one of the more innovative economists in the last few decades
St. Cloud State University Scholars
Bryan Caplan at George Mason University
Alphecca -- weekly review on the media's coverage of guns
Xrlq -- Some interesting coverage of the law.
Career Police Officer
Gun Law News
Georgia Right-to-Carry
Darnell's The Independent Conservative Blog
Robert Stacy McCain's Blog
Clayton Cramer's Blog
My hidden mathematical ability (a math professor with the same name)
geekwitha45
My Old AEI Web Page
Wrightwing's blog
Al Lowe's blog
St. Maximos' Hut
Dad29
Elizabeth Blackney's blog
Eric Rasmusen
Your "Economics" Portal to the World by Larry Low
William Sjostrom
Dr. T's EconLinks.com
Interview with National Review Online
Blog at Newsmax.com
Pieces I have written at BigGovernment.com
Data
- Johnlott.org
(description of book, downloadable data sets, and discussions of previous controversies)
Updated Media Analysis of Appalachian Law School Attack
Journal of Legal Studies paper on spoiled ballots during the 2000 Presidential Election
Data set from USA Today, STATA 7.0 data set
"Do" File for some of the basic regressions from the paper
5 Comments:
Boehner says "It's not in the best interests of our country to raise taxes during this difficult economy" but whose interests is he really talking about?
It's easy to hide behind the broad label of "our country" but I think the millions of people that would be negatively impacted by more drastic spending cuts would beg to differ.
When Boehner said "the president demanded $400 billion more which was going to be nothing more than a tax increase on the American people," he was only 2% correct.
Those "American people" were the top 2% only. And Boehner knew it. He chose those words to gloss over the reality underlying them.
In other words, it was a politically-motivated untruth. At least it was a 98% lie.
Dear BuzzMega:
Possibly you should learn what the term "lie" means. Here is a question for you: why should someone who makes five times more income pay 49 times more in taxes? Is that fair? Apparently, you don't think that is a big enough difference. See here:
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/op-eds/FoxNewsClassWarfare121510.html
Dear Mr. Lott,
That's an intentional distortion. Five times more income with one family of four seeing $60K and another family of four seeing $300K? That is the most sophistry I've seen from you. You could as well have picked a family of eight who earn $40K versus a family of eight who earn $200K. Then the wealthier family would pay infinitely more taxes.
My wife and I see under $150,000 per year. And the other day we sat down to discuss what would be a fair increase on OUR tax rate. To help this country bridge these very hard times, largely caused by policies and economic momentums created by the pre-Obama crowd.
We agreed that for us, we could manage with a 5% rise in our tax rate. And we assume that those who see more money annually could pay commensurately more, too.
Boehner signed onto that Grover Norquist pledge. "Never, ever raise taxes."
But if Boehner signed a pledge to never, ever drive faster than the speed limit, and an accident in his house demanded he get the injured person to the emergency room ASAP, I doubt the pledge would carry any weight.
As a means to avoid doing the right thing, and to be able to boast that one has "kept his word" this blanket policy makes sense.
Sometimes, you have to put your principles aside and do what's right.
Dear BuzzMega:
How exactly is that a distortion? I actually didn't allow all the credits and deductions that are phased out completely at higher incomes. Including any of those would have made the ratio even much more lopsided. Play with the turbotax calculator yourself and you will see that it is very easy to come up with even more lopsided ratios. Here is the problem if someone makes 5 times more money should they pay 5 times more taxes? Ten times more taxes? I bet you that if you take the income numbers discussed and you treat both individuals similarly, you will find it impossible to get the ratio down to even remotely close to a 10-to-1 difference in taxes. Give it a try. I will be interested to see your results.
Post a Comment
<< Home