<p>^ I guess you’re saying the dumb harvard kids don’t know anything about economics so shouldn’t be protesting alongside other occupiers who, in contrast, have a deep understanding of economics?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What do you mean by higher placement? Do you mean high scores on the AP economics exam? A lot of people don’t even take economics in high school. I don’t think that’s a good measure of who can make it to Wall Street.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Students at Harvard and many other colleges and universities skip out on courses at all levels…including higher ones if they feel their their time is better spent elsewhere whether it is protesting, sleeping-in, partying, balancing ridiculous overloads (6-8 intermediate/advanced/grad-level courses with heavy workloads in one semester)*, or self-studying the materials in question. </p>
<p>So long as they make up for that skipped class(es) and get a reasonable outcome (at least 3.0), what’s the harm? Knew dozens of elite university/LAC students who managed fine despite skipping some or even most of their classes. </p>
<p>In fact…there’s a small insidious student subculture among some of these students which is of the persuasion that if someone needs to attend every class to get a B or better…then they’re not very smart to begin with. </p>
<ul>
<li>Knew a few college/high school classmates who did that in college and managed to do respectably/well.</li>
</ul>
<p>I was just being facetious. They are clearly bright enough to be there but being bright doesn’t mean you know anything about certain things.</p>
<p>Economics is a body of social science and you have to learn the thinking to understand the social science. It doesn’t mean that it’s all correct or that there aren’t other schools of thought (I’m in the other schools of thought camp myself). But to get your foot in the door, you have to understand the basics; even if you don’t agree with it or your feelings are hurt by it.</p>
<p>It’s a bit amusing to think about their walkout. I thought about students doing that in a physics class with students that don’t like the law of gravitation. Are they going to walk out in protest?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>When I was touring our medical school recently I was told that, on average, medical students only attend class something like 50% of the time, preferring to self-study the material. I was shocked. The people who are designing our new medical school were trying to find innovative ways to entice the students to class.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I do believe those with higher incomes do reach a point where they will make a lifestyle or business change in order to hold onto their post-tax dollars. Many of my friends and neighbors own small and medium-size businesses, and all have in some way cut their workforce. I know several wives who are now working in their husbands dental or medical offices. My sprinkler service is a family owned business and both sets of parents have come out of retirement to help. According to my neighbor who is on the board of our local chamber of commerce business expansion and new businesses are basically non-existent. </p>
<p>A friend in Spokane is remodeling her kitchen with tippy-top appliances. Last weekend her husband and contractor drove to Missoula (no sales tax Montana) to pick up the appliances.</p>
<p>One neighbor, an orthodontist is quietly offering to a 25% discount if you pay in cash.</p>
<p>A colleague of H we fondly call D&G (not Dolce and Gabbana but Doom and Gloom) offers to pay cash if he can receive a 10% discount. He will start haggling down from 10% and frequently manages some reduction for cash payment. Im guessing a lot of that cash never makes it to the companys books.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Knew plenty of engineering/CS students…even at MIT who’d skip a similar ballpark percentage of registered courses. Somehow, they all managed to graduate in respectable to great standing…including a few who managed to get a masters tacked on within 4 years. </p>
<p>One uncle (CivE) who attended Columbia SEAS in the mid-late’50s recounted skipping nearly all of his engineering classes except to take the midterm and final. However, unlike the above-mentioned students, he admits his college years were “spent in a fog” and his GPA was quite mediocre…even by STEM standards. Didn’t hurt him that much as he passed his PE license and worked as a civil engineer for the next 5+ decades. </p>
<p>He did regret wasting that educational opportunity and showed some deep respect when he heard how I dragged myself to classes even when I was hungry, tired, or seriously sick because skipping even one class was so distasteful to my sensibilities.</p>
<p>Tututaxi, yes they may cut their workforce but they don’t cut their own income and anyone who is cutting now isn’t cutting because of higher taxes, they are cutting because business is bad because the economy is lousy and people aren’t spending. </p>
<p>These small businesses and mom and pops aren’t major job creators either. That is a fallacy. As one small business opens another closes because small businesses have an incredibly hard time succeeding in any economy. </p>
<p>The real job creators in this country our large corporations and the government, not small business and not the individual who happens to command a very large salary. </p>
<p>For as long as I can remember (and I am 54) the wives of doctors and dentists have been the office managers for their doctor husbands.</p>
<p>A friend in Spokane is remodeling her kitchen with tippy-top appliances. Last weekend her husband and contractor drove to Missoula (no sales tax Montana) to pick up the appliances.</p>
<p>They drove about 6 hours and a total of 400 miles? How much were the appliances? The sales tax rate in Spokane is between 8-9% even on $20k worth of appliances that seems like a lot of effort. I bet on $20k worth of appliances a local store would have discounted enough to save them the trip.</p>
<p>My view? A bunch of spoiled kids who have been given every conceivable advantage in life.</p>
<p>Many of whom have never worked a day in their lives.</p>
<p>But suddenly, because they got into Harvard, they have all the answers to the world’s problems, notwithstanding the fact that a year ago they were asking their mother to give them $5 to go to Starbucks.</p>
<p>Political correctness gone mad.</p>
<p>Those protestors are the usual left wing protestors. The protests in Egypt were made up of people from all the political spectrums, and from all walks in life. These protestors are young people. As Churchill once said, “if you are young, and you are not a liberal, you don’t have a heart, but if you are old, and still liberal, you don’t have a brain”.</p>
<p>The capitalist system has raised billions out of poverty. The standard line seems to be that the evil West have exploited the third world, and that is why they are poor. The reverse is true. When I was young, China and India refused to be part of the western world, and went their own way. They were independent, yes, but their entire population lived in dire poverty. Once they joined the western economic system, their rise has been astounding.</p>
<p>I suggest that these kids go back to class. They might learn something.</p>
<p>Oh, please. They are college kids doing what college kids do.</p>
<p>I agree with this-</p>
<p>Starting Up Job Growth
Small businesses drive job growth. This claim is trotted out by pundits so often
that one might forget it’s an empirical claim rather than a political slogan. Indeed,
because it’s an empirical claim, it is useful to test its validity before building all
manner of economic policy around it. The testable hypothesis behind the claim is that
economies with a larger share of big firms will, all else being equal, be associated with
a lower rate of job growth.
Appealing as this idea may be to supporters of small business, new research suggests
it’s flat-out wrong. John C. Haltiwanger, Ron S. Jarmin, and Javier Miranda use
longitudinal Census data on business dynamics to demonstrate that firm age distorts
the relationship between firm size and economic growth. It’s a classic spurious
relationship: When one controls for firm age, the negative association between firm
size and net growth disappears. The implication is that, if job growth is the goal, what
we need is many young firms, not many small ones.
Though start-ups account for only 3 percent of total employment, they provide almost
20 percent of newly created jobs. Although many start-ups fail and their employees
will lose their jobs, the start-ups that survive tend to grow extremely fast and more
than compensate for the number of failures. Popular perception is wrong: It’s startups—
not small businesses—that are the real heroes when it comes to job growth in
the United States.
John C. Haltiwanger, Ron S. Jarmin, and Javier Miranda. (2010). “Who Creates Jobs? Small vs. Large</p>
<p>
I think far more than 20K. How much is a Wolf 48in range and hood, Sub Zero refrig and Sub Zero refrig drawers, Fisher and Paykel dishwasher, top of the line warming drawer and microwave. They also picked up some lighting fixtures, fancy faucets and a new washer and dryer.</p>
<p>And as far as getting a better deal in Spokane – probably not. Businesses in Spokane have a hard time competing with similar businesses 20 miles away in Idaho. Washington state’s B&O tax, SUTA, and property tax are much much higher. Post Falls is thriving at Spokane’s expense.</p>
<p>How did they get the stuff back- did they rent a truck?</p>
<p>
Emily, I understand your point … if someone is making 1.1M and that additional 100K is taxed 20% more than the first 1M he/she may not be able to change their earnings but they can slightly alter their lifestyle by cutting their housekeeper from 5days/wk to 4days and decreasing the hours w/ their personal trainer. The government gets 20K at the expense of the housekeeper and trainer.</p>
<p>And at what income level do we start taxing the be-Jesus out of folks?? Annual incomes > 250K? 400K?, 700K?, 1Mil??</p>
<p>Depending on large corp and the government for jobs is not the answer. The salaries for those government jobs are paid by the taxpayers and guess who gets stuck paying to bail out for those large corporations when they go under.</p>
<p>
Tom do you know a contractor that doesnt own at least ONE truck? LOL</p>
<p>I just noticed that you wrote the husband and contractor drove to Missoula. I wonder if the cost of a 6 hour drive was built into the price of the job? If you multiply the hourly rate of the contractor x 6hrs plus the cost for using his truck (gas had to cost around $100) it would certainly mitigate much of the tax. Still seems like an awful lot of trouble to save around $1800 gross.
If they went to that much trouble on the appliances what did they do about the cabinets. The cabinets are the big cost in a kitchen remodel- if you are getting really good cabinets.</p>
<p>tutu, first, the next dollar after $1M isn’t taxed at 20% more and in none of the scenarios is anyone’s income going to be taxed at a higher rate from the first $. Say they decide it will only effect those earning over $500K. The first $500K is at the lower tax rate. It is only on earnings above that which will be taxed at 39% rather than 35%. No one in their right mind is going to decide not to earn an additional $50K, 100K, 500K, etc., because they are going to be taxed at a slightly higher rate on the additional $'s. If they do then they are idiots. </p>
<p>Also, no one earning more than a $1M is going to cut back on their housekeepers hours or their personal trainer because they are going to be taxed at a slightly higher rate. </p>
<p>You might not want that to be where jobs are created but that is where most of the job creation occurs.</p>
<p>"My view? A bunch of spoiled kids who have been given every conceivable advantage in life.</p>
<p>Many of whom have never worked a day in their lives."</p>
<p>Sounds a lot like Archie Bunker.</p>
<p>As far as skipping classes, since they are online, who cares? Even 40 years ago when I was in school and we didn’t have computers, I skipped classes - I got more out of reading the book then listening to most professors who were boring anyways.</p>
<p>Which part of OWS are these Harvard students supporting?</p>
<p>the assaults?
the rapes?
the attacks on police?
the trashing of businesses in Oakland?
forcing the NY businesses to cut their employees because they can’t get as many customers?
the congregation of homelessness?</p>
<p>but hey, we have to give them credit… at least they did something more than change their profile picture. Unfortunately, since they are admittedly in the basic econ class, they don’t really know enough about what they are protesting (which likely makes them similar to those in the streets).</p>
<p>If the Harvard students really want to protest something, how about they protest that government spending has increased dramatically in the last 10 years:</p>
<p>Federal government spending in 2000: $1.458 trillion
Federal government spending in 2011: $3.317 trillion</p>
<p>perhaps the Harvard students can use math to explain why raising the tax rate to Clinton levels will magically raise the additional $1.9 trillion that we need to cover the annual deficit? Or, perhaps they can use economics to explain why in some years in the 2000s, with lower tax levels than the 90s, the federal government actually got MORE revenue.</p>