3 ms·
> higher-income households were also more likely to spend payouts on nondurables, which he speculates may be “lavish” spending, I find that expenses on recreati
by yunohn 5y ago
> higher-income households were also more likely to spend payouts on nondurables, which he speculates may be “lavish” spending, I find that expenses on recreation or lessons do not increase among parents across the socioeconomic spectrum and that only middle-income and, particularly, low-income families’ spending on education is responsive to payouts in the short term. This last result is aligned with a series of studies suggesting that lower-income parents may use cash transfers to “catch up” with their more affluent counterparts.
From the paper, linked in the article. Quite disingenuous to assume that low income families must be wasting money on substances, while the statistics always show that richer individuals obviously can afford and do spend more.
- prepend 5y agoIt seems obvious that richer families spend more. They have more to spend. I am assuming that everyone just spends more on stuff. The part of interest, that I don’t see in the paper, is if the ratios change with added income. Not the absolute amounts. What is of interest to me is that if someone spent 10% of their disposable income on education, do they spend 10% of their extra cash on education? Or is it different. Likewise for substances. What’s the baseline percent and the percent spent of extra cash. And then compare across socioeconomic classes. It’s frustrating to see such bonehead statements like people who get money spend money without describe other things of interest. I don’t think anyone debates that rich people spend more than poor people.
- yunohn 5y ago> It’s frustrating to see such bonehead statements Please be civil and consider whether you’re actually trying to have a good-faith discussion. > people who get money spend money without describe other things of interest Did you read the passage I quoted? And the table in the paper nearby? They clearly show the effects of the benefit on different categories of spending split across income groups, just like you’re asking.
- prepend 5y agoI did read your comment and the table and that’s why I commented. There’s questions but no answers. I wasn’t referring to you as being boneheaded and don’t want you to think that you’re targeted. I’m commenting on the paper and other discussion on the topic that seem to be cherry picking parts of data without questioning or digging into. Then I explained why as I think basic questions are missed and non-significant findings are presented as if they are significant.