3 ms·
>In 2014, states spent between $5 and $216 per capita... Collectively, these incentives amounted to nearly 40% of state corporate tax revenues for the typical s
by kryogen1c 7y ago
>In 2014, states spent between $5 and $216 per capita... Collectively, these incentives amounted to nearly 40% of state corporate tax revenues for the typical state, but some states' incentive spending exceeded their corporate tax revenues
studies that need a painfully clear understanding of statistics that start off making muddy, unclear statements like this are really hard to take seriously. What is a typical state? are you comparing california and vermont? is typical a median or mean? the tax incentive data involving faang and walmart is going to be preposterously different than single-location small businesses.
This abstract strongly incentivizes me to not read the article.
- dsr_ 7y agoThe odds of a random HN reader eventually writing an economic paper are fairly low, while the odds of the original authors writing another paper are high. Perhaps you should tell them what you think.
- hogFeast 7y agoDon't bother. It is basically a meta-analysis. There was nothing interesting in it (just generally, this seems like a very hard area...econometrics does very well in these areas but I doubt it would ever make sense to conclude: no incentive can be good). Love the snarky reply you got...funny that those kind of comments are usually from people who haven't read the paper.
- draw_down 7y agoOk, what are those incentives exactly? Just say you don’t want to read it.