scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Kip Hagopian

Bio: Kip Hagopian is an academic researcher. The author has contributed to research in topics: Income inequality metrics & Per capita income. The author has an hindex of 2, co-authored 2 publications receiving 10 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal Article
TL;DR: Class Wars: A Parable on Once upon a time in the land of America, there lived triplet brothers named Tom, Dick, and Harry Class as discussed by the authors, who were employed as carpenters making $ 2 5 per hour, working 50 weeks a year.
Abstract: Class Wars: A Parable ONCE UPON a time in the land of America, there lived triplet brothers named Tom, Dick, and Harry Class. They were 4 5 years old, had virtually the same aptitude (skill), and were raised in the same home. Each was married and had two children. All three were employed as carpenters making $ 2 5 per hour, working 50 weeks a year. While they were almost identical in most respects, they had somewhat different preferences and values. For example, Tom, who worked 20 hours a week, had a different work ethic from his brothers, Dick and Harry, who each worked 60 hours per week. Neither Tom's nor Dick's wives worked, while Harry's wife worked 40 hours per week as an office manager making $50,000 per year (the same hourly rate as her husband). Tom and Dick spent all of their income, and were relying on Social Security to take care of them when they retired. Harry and his wife, on the other hand, saved most of her after-tax income over many years, gradually accumulating $300,000. They invested this money in bonds and real estate that produced $25,000 a year in interest and rental income. This was the income of each family: Family Tom Dick Harry Work hours per Week: 20 60 100 Annual Wages Husband: $25,000 $75,000 $75,000 Wife: 0 0 50,000 Investment Income: 0 0 25,000 Total Income: $25,000 $75,000 $150,000 Despite their different priorities, the Class families were close; so much so that when a new housing tract was developed in their community, they each bought an equal-priced home on the same private street. Theirs were the only houses on the street. One day the brothers decided to pool their funds for the purpose of improving their street. Concerned about crime and safety, and desirous of a more attractive setting for their homes, the three families decided to: install a gate at the street's entrance to deter burglars; add lighting for safety and additional security; repave the street's surface to repair damage; and install landscaping to beautify the approach to their homes. The work was done for a total cost of $30,000. The brothers were quite happy with the outcome and felt the $30,000 was a worthy expenditure given the benefits provided each family. But when it came time to divide up the bill, the problems began. Harry thought it would be simple to divide the bill. Since the benefits to each family were equal, each brother should pay one-third, or about $10,000. But Tom and Dick objected. "Why should we pay the same as you?" they said. "You make much more money than we do." Harry was puzzled. "Why is that relevant?" he asked. "My family makes more money than yours does because my wife and I work long hours and we earn extra money on our savings. Why should we be penalized for working and saving?" Harry looked at Tom and said, "I'm no smarter or more talented than you are. If you and your wife worked harder and saved more you would make as much as my family does." To which Tom replied, "I don't work more because I value my leisure time more than I value money. And I don't save because I prefer the gratification of consumption today more than I will when I'm too old to enjoy it." Tom was adamant. How could Harry, who was clearly "rich," ask him to pay the same amount, when it was obviously harder for him to do so? Dick thought for a moment, and then said, "I've got an idea. Our aggregate income is $250,000, and $30,000 is 12 percent of that amount. Why don't we each pay that percentage of our income? Under that formula, Tom would owe $3,000, I would owe $9,000, and Harry would owe $18,000. Since I make three times as much as Tom, I would pay three times as much. Harry, who makes twice as much as me and six times as much as Tom would pay two times as much as me and six times as much as Tom. …

5 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: In this article, the authors show that much of what has been reported about income inequality is misleading, factually incorrect, or of little or no consequence to our economic well-being.
Abstract: GN OCTOBER 201 I, the Congressional Budget Office published a report, "Trends in the Distribution of Household Income between 1979 and 2007," showing that, during the period studied, aggregate income (as defined by the cBo) in the highest income quintiles grew more rapidly than income in the lower quintiles This was particularly true for the top one percent of earners. This 030 study has been cited by the media and politicians as confirmation that income inequality has increased "substantially" during the period studied, and has been used to support President Obama's claim that income inequality is a serious and growing problem in the United States that must be addressed by raising taxes on the highest income earners. We will show that much of what has been reported about income inequality is misleading, factually incorrect, or of little or no consequence to our economic well-being. We will also show that middle-class incomes are not stagnating; in fact, middle-class incomes have risen significantly over the 29 years covered by the CBO study. Lastly, we will address assertions that the rich are not paying their "fair share" of taxes. In our view, Americans should care about the well-being of the nation as a whole rather than whether some people earn more than others. To that end, the focus of public policy should not be on equality of income but on equality of economic opportunity. Policies designed to reduce income inequality inevitably involve redistribution of income through increases in transfer payments and marginal tax rates. But these policies discourage hiring and investment, which depresses economic growth and opportunity. In sharp contrast, policies designed to enhance equality of opportunity will increase economic wellbeing for all, most particularly those in lower income households. Income inequality PERHAPS THE MOST important question left out of almost every discussion about income inequality is, "Why should we care about it?" Many of those who worry about high income inequality argue that it is an indicator of social injustice that must be remedied through redistribution of income (or wealth). Unfortunately, those who make this claim have not provided any generally accepted criteria for determining when an economic system is unjust. Nor have they provided a convincing argument that such injustice is widespread in the U.S. (In considering this issue, it is worth noting that Greece, Spain, and Italy all have substantially lower income inequality than the U.S. The same is true for Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh.) Measuring inequality using the Gini coefficient. There are at least five methodologies used to measure income inequality. The most commonly used is the Gini coefficient (also called the Gini index) developed by Italian statistician Corrado Gini. The Gini coefficient is a method of measuring the statistical dispersion of (among other things) income, consumption, and wealth. The figure of merit for the Gini coefficient for income inequality ranges from zero to -r.o, where zero represents total equality (all persons have identical incomes) and no represents total inequality (one person has all of the income). By this measure, the U.S. has substantially higher income inequality than almost all other industrialized nations. In zo 1 o, the Census Bureau reported that the U.S. Gini coefficient was .469, while the average Gini coefficient for the 17 European Union nations was .31. (1) The U.S. Gini coefficient cited here comes from an annual report of the Census Bureau, which uses what it calls "money income" in its measurement of income inequality.2 Money income, which is the definition of income typically used in public references to inequality, consists of cash income only, does not subtract taxes, and excludes the value of noncash transfer payments (such as nutritional assistance, Medicare, Medicaid, and public housing), as well as many other components of income. …

5 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide a systematic framework based on Nair's Innovation Helix model for studying the factors of a country's creative learning ecosystem (CLE), the quality of its education system (QES), and its innovative capacity (IC).
Abstract: Globally, governments recognize the importance of creativity and innovation for sustainable socioeconomic development, and many invest resources to develop learning environments that foster these capacities. This paper provides a systematic framework based on Nair's Innovation Helix model for studying the factors of a country's creative learning ecosystem (CLE), the quality of its education system (QES), and its innovative capacity (IC). The CLE factors are infrastructure/infostructure (physical and digital infrastructure), intellectual capital, interaction, integrity systems, incentives, and institutions. Using a composite CLE index for 113 countries, the findings indicate a strong correlation between a country's CLE, QES and IC. Through brief case studies of countries that measure highly in CLE, QES and IC, this study points out their higher education strategies and their best practices for other countries to emulate, in order to facilitate creativity and innovation through higher education.

43 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that other problems and specifically, lowered economic development are greater threats to humanity than global warming, and that global warming is not fundamental to human well-being.
Abstract: This paper challenges claims that global warming outranks other threats facing humanity through the foreseeable future (assumed to be 2085–2100). World Health Organization and British government-sponsored global impact studies indicate that, relative to other factors, global warming’s impact on key determinants of human and environmental well-being should be small through 2085 even under the warmest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenario. Specifically, over 20 other health risks currently contribute more to death and disease worldwide than global warming. Through 2085, only 13% of mortality from hunger, malaria, and extreme weather events (including coastal flooding from sea level rise) should be from warming. Moreover, warming should reduce future global population at risk of water stress, and pressures on ecosystems and biodiversity (by increasing net biome productivity and decreasing habitat conversion). That warming is not fundamental to human well-being is reinforced by lower bound estimates of net gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. This measure adjusts GDP downward to account for damages from warming due to market, health, and environmental impacts, and risk of catastrophe. For both developing and industrialized countries, net GDP per capita—albeit an imperfect surrogate for human well-being—should be (1) double the current US level by 2100 under the warmest scenario, and (2) lowest under the poorest IPCC scenario but highest under the warmest scenario through 2200. The warmest world, being wealthier, should also have greater capacity to address any problem, including warming. Therefore, other problems and, specifically, lowered economic development are greater threats to humanity than global warming.  2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. How to cite this article:

15 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors examined the effect of tax base composition on revenue volatility, with focus on state general sales tax and individual income tax and found that revenue volatility is significantly affected by how the tax base is composed.
Abstract: This study examines the effect of tax base composition on revenue volatility, with focus on state general sales tax and individual income tax. In doing so, extensive historical data (1992–2007) are presented on state taxation of various categories of sales and incomes that exhibit wide cross-state variations in taxable status, and revenue volatility is measured using the deviation-from-trend approach. Models of sales and income tax volatility are estimated using pooled OLS, and the analyses reveal that revenue volatility is significantly affected by how the tax base is composed. The paper concludes by discussing the policy implications of the results.

14 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors examine how the relation between taxpayers and their government affects tax evasion and examine how perceived influence over government policymaking affects firms' decisio-decision-making process in tax evasion.
Abstract: We examine how the relation between taxpayers and their government affects tax evasion. Specifically, we examine how perceived influence over government policymaking affects firms' decisio...

14 citations

01 Jan 2016
TL;DR: In this paper, a survey of 126 Arkansas high school teachers indicated that two variables, student's global literacy skills and integrity of the system, are seen as positive influences on Arkansas public schools innovation capacity and that the quality of the educational system moderates those relationships.
Abstract: We all have high hopes for our educational system. As they stress the need for 21 century learning, governments recognize the importance of innovation and creativity in schools and invest resources to develop learning environments that foster these qualities. This thesis adapts Crosling, Nair, and Vaithilingam’s (2015) model to provide a framework for studying factors that contribute to a creative learning ecosystem (intellectual capital development, 21 century literacies, climate for innovation, and integrity of the system), the quality of the educational system, and the system’s innovation capacity. A survey of 126 Arkansas high school teachers, indicates that two variables, student’s global literacy skills and integrity of the system, are seen as positive influences on Arkansas public schools innovation capacity and that the quality of the educational system moderates those relationships.

2 citations