4 ms·

> LUCKY graduate students The overall tenor of your post is a bit disingenuous. The data tells us that getting a PhD does not substantially improve your materi

> LUCKY graduate students The overall tenor of your post is a bit disingenuous. The data tells us that getting a PhD does not substantially improve your material existence, or at least that the picture is murky. The data also tells us that the science that comes out of the research performed during those PhDs has an enormous positive ROI for society. So in other words, phd students are under-paid take a lifelong financial hit to provide large but diffuse benefits to society, benefits that most students won't be able to capture because, well, that's the nature of basic science.. > You can argue that graduate students and universities are just another special interest lobbying the government for a tax exemption that benefits them Since everything's a special interest, we might as well throw the money at oil executives? No, of course not. Some of those special interests really are worth investing in. Roads, schools, and labs provide enormous and measurable, if diffuse, value. > You could further argue that it's unfair to ask blue-collar workers in fly-over states to pay higher taxes because of the impact of such a subsidy. This bill will most harm the public and low-endowment universities in those flyover states. The schools those workers' children will attend will be less well-staffed and there will be fewer opportunities for funded graduate programs. > You could easily make the same argument for active-duty armed service members. Frankly, I'd support a tax reduction on those people Good news: they already receive very large tax exemptions. As they should; the armed services are also an important special interest...

Nrsolis 9y ago
If you don't think earning a PhD substantially improves your material existence, I'd beg to differ. There are plenty of folks who don't have PhD's who would be better positioned in the job market if they had the talent and opportunity to earn one. For every student lucky enough to earn a spot doing research there are plenty that don't have the opportunity and have to go out into the real world and earn a living. I meet plenty of PhD's in my regular practice. Not every person earns a PhD and stays in academia. PLENTY earn that degree and use it as a stepping stone to a high-paying job in the private sector. As for oil executives: they're not going to be the biggest winners here. Shareholders likely will be. That repatriated capital is going to lead to a huge share buyback and dividends. Wanna know who's going to get a large chunk of that? PENSION FUNDS for state employees. If you think CALPERS doesn't stand to benefit from this surging stock market you're not paying attention. I wonder if you realize how much you sound like a lobbyist? Without a tax subsidy, there is a calamity. Every time someone warns that a tax increase will affect investment or job creation or cause a shift in the deployment of capital, people in favor of said increase downplay those fears. All the folks who said that a $15 minimum wage would kill job creation....were those folks wrong? And here we are, hearing that the removal of a special tax treatment will massively impact graduate education. Well, maybe. Maybe not. I guess we will have to see. So the cost to a student to receive a PhD goes up a bit. Big deal. Is that gonna kill research entirely? There is already a glut of PhDs here in the USA. Maybe a few less isn't such a bad thing.
- throwawayjava 9y ago
  > There are plenty of folks who don't have PhD's who would be better positioned in the job market if they had the talent and opportunity to earn one. Cool anecdotes and all, but there's data on this question and you're wrong. PhDs do not increase lifetime earnings. This isn't a case of dueling anecdotes. It's a normal fact we can verify with data. > As for oil executives: they're not going to be the biggest winners here. Shareholders likely will be. And I suppose oil executives store their fortunes in bold bars...? > PENSION FUNDS for state employees This is such a BS excuse for favoring capital. It is, in fact, possible to write tax code that differentiates between the two. The current tax bill does not, in fact, actually do so. And worse, it even rolls back benefits that did differentiate between "filthy rich" and "working class saving for retirement"! > I wonder if you realize how much you sound like a lobbyist? Says the one conflating upper class investment income with pension funds while defending a policy that slashes retirement benefits and dismissing hard facts with personal anecdotes about how well-off people making 30k/yr are...
  - Nrsolis 9y ago
    AHEM. https://www.wes.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/blog_20140722-02-Work-Life-Earnings.jpg https://www.wes.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/blog_20140722...
    - throwawayjava 9y ago
      PhD programs are not full of modal students; what you want to do is compare the average PhD with the average person who did not get a PhD but would've been accepted into a program. On that note, compare students' industry offers after undergraduate to their post-graduate incomes, and account for opportunity cost
      - Nrsolis 9y ago
        Sounds like a great research project. Let me know what you find.
    - 9y ago
Nrsolis 9y ago
And no: members in the US armed services do NOT receive large tax exemptions. They pay taxes on their income just like everyone else does. That includes state income tax as well.
- throwawayjava 9y ago
  > And no: members in the US armed services do NOT receive large tax exemptions https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/tax-breaks-for-the-military https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/tax-breaks-for-the-military Additionally, and in direct analogy, GI Bill tuition is not taxed. > They pay taxes on their income just like everyone else does. Not on combat pay, and spouses get special treatment regardless of status. > That includes state income tax as well. And don't forget about commissaries, most especially in the states without income tax.
  - Nrsolis 9y ago
    You're joking right? Have you served time in the military? I did and know a thing or two about how the government taxes service-members. Combat pay is a tiny portion of a service-member pay. And no, spouses don't get special treatment. You're making things up to justify your argument. Go ahead and read that list over again slowly and tell me if you think that list compares to the large governmental subsidy that is provided to support non-taxation of tuition for graduate students. Because I know that list front and back and none of those minuscule allotments compare to treating $50K of tuition per year as tax-free income.
    - throwawayjava 9y ago
      > Combat pay is a tiny portion of a service-member pay. Yes. > and tell me if you think that list compares to the large governmental subsidy that is provided to support non-taxation of tuition for graduate students. From my original post: >> Additionally, and in direct analogy, GI Bill tuition is not taxed. It's not just comparative. It's Literally. Identical. > And no, spouses don't get special treatment. You're making things up to justify your argument https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Spouses_Residency_Relief_Act_(MSRRA) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Spouses_Residency_Rel... Mind you, I'm not claiming that these benefits should go away, or even that they're enough. But claiming that military members don't receive as many benefits as grad students is absurd.

Nrsolis 9y ago

If you don't think earning a PhD substantially improves your material existence, I'd beg to differ. There are plenty of folks who don't have PhD's who would be better positioned in the job market if they had the talent and opportunity to earn one. For every student lucky enough to earn a spot doing research there are plenty that don't have the opportunity and have to go out into the real world and earn a living. I meet plenty of PhD's in my regular practice. Not every person earns a PhD and stays in academia. PLENTY earn that degree and use it as a stepping stone to a high-paying job in the private sector. As for oil executives: they're not going to be the biggest winners here. Shareholders likely will be. That repatriated capital is going to lead to a huge share buyback and dividends. Wanna know who's going to get a large chunk of that? PENSION FUNDS for state employees. If you think CALPERS doesn't stand to benefit from this surging stock market you're not paying attention. I wonder if you realize how much you sound like a lobbyist? Without a tax subsidy, there is a calamity. Every time someone warns that a tax increase will affect investment or job creation or cause a shift in the deployment of capital, people in favor of said increase downplay those fears. All the folks who said that a $15 minimum wage would kill job creation....were those folks wrong? And here we are, hearing that the removal of a special tax treatment will massively impact graduate education. Well, maybe. Maybe not. I guess we will have to see. So the cost to a student to receive a PhD goes up a bit. Big deal. Is that gonna kill research entirely? There is already a glut of PhDs here in the USA. Maybe a few less isn't such a bad thing.

throwawayjava 9y ago
> There are plenty of folks who don't have PhD's who would be better positioned in the job market if they had the talent and opportunity to earn one. Cool anecdotes and all, but there's data on this question and you're wrong. PhDs do not increase lifetime earnings. This isn't a case of dueling anecdotes. It's a normal fact we can verify with data. > As for oil executives: they're not going to be the biggest winners here. Shareholders likely will be. And I suppose oil executives store their fortunes in bold bars...? > PENSION FUNDS for state employees This is such a BS excuse for favoring capital. It is, in fact, possible to write tax code that differentiates between the two. The current tax bill does not, in fact, actually do so. And worse, it even rolls back benefits that did differentiate between "filthy rich" and "working class saving for retirement"! > I wonder if you realize how much you sound like a lobbyist? Says the one conflating upper class investment income with pension funds while defending a policy that slashes retirement benefits and dismissing hard facts with personal anecdotes about how well-off people making 30k/yr are...
- Nrsolis 9y ago
  AHEM. https://www.wes.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/blog_20140722-02-Work-Life-Earnings.jpg https://www.wes.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/blog_20140722...
  - throwawayjava 9y ago
    PhD programs are not full of modal students; what you want to do is compare the average PhD with the average person who did not get a PhD but would've been accepted into a program. On that note, compare students' industry offers after undergraduate to their post-graduate incomes, and account for opportunity cost
    - Nrsolis 9y ago
      Sounds like a great research project. Let me know what you find.
  - 9y ago

Nrsolis 9y ago

And no: members in the US armed services do NOT receive large tax exemptions. They pay taxes on their income just like everyone else does. That includes state income tax as well.

throwawayjava 9y ago
> And no: members in the US armed services do NOT receive large tax exemptions https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/tax-breaks-for-the-military https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/tax-breaks-for-the-military Additionally, and in direct analogy, GI Bill tuition is not taxed. > They pay taxes on their income just like everyone else does. Not on combat pay, and spouses get special treatment regardless of status. > That includes state income tax as well. And don't forget about commissaries, most especially in the states without income tax.
- Nrsolis 9y ago
  You're joking right? Have you served time in the military? I did and know a thing or two about how the government taxes service-members. Combat pay is a tiny portion of a service-member pay. And no, spouses don't get special treatment. You're making things up to justify your argument. Go ahead and read that list over again slowly and tell me if you think that list compares to the large governmental subsidy that is provided to support non-taxation of tuition for graduate students. Because I know that list front and back and none of those minuscule allotments compare to treating $50K of tuition per year as tax-free income.
  - throwawayjava 9y ago
    > Combat pay is a tiny portion of a service-member pay. Yes. > and tell me if you think that list compares to the large governmental subsidy that is provided to support non-taxation of tuition for graduate students. From my original post: >> Additionally, and in direct analogy, GI Bill tuition is not taxed. It's not just comparative. It's Literally. Identical. > And no, spouses don't get special treatment. You're making things up to justify your argument https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Spouses_Residency_Relief_Act_(MSRRA) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Spouses_Residency_Rel... Mind you, I'm not claiming that these benefits should go away, or even that they're enough. But claiming that military members don't receive as many benefits as grad students is absurd.