- by New Deal democrat
The lead story on CNN's Money section as I write this is titled Economists: extend Bush tax cuts.
OMG! The scholars have repudiated the Democratic position! Whatever will we do?!?
For starters, expose the fact that CNN is lying -- CNN, did you hear me, LYING -- about the results of its own survey.
According to CNN,
In a CNNMoney survey that asked 15 economists to rank the impact of moves Congress could make to help the U.S. economy, nine endorsed some kind of extension of the Bush tax cuts.
But five of the economists wanted to extend the tax cuts for all taxpayers, while four endorsed the Obama administration's call to extend the cuts for all but those in the upper income tax bracket.
So, let's do a little second grade math, OK?
CNN surveyed 15 economists.
5 said extend all of the Bush tax cuts
+4 said extend the Bush tax cuts only for those earning less than $250,000
___
9 That's the sum when I was back in second grade.
That means, 6 economists were against any extension of the Bush tax cuts.
When I went to second grade 6 > 5 > 4.
That means that the plurality of economists did not want any extension of any of the Bush tax cuts. Two-thirds wanted at least some of the tax cuts to be terminated. Only 1/3 of all the economists wanted the Bush tax cuts extended in their entirety.
So CNN decided to embrace the 1/3 minority in its headline, ignoring that the majority of economists wanted some changes, and the largest number wanted the cuts to expire altogether.
Our liberal media at work.
8 comments:
It appears to me to be a matter of bias and perspective and not at all a lie. CNN said nine endorsed some kind of extension (true). A lie would have been to say economists vote in the majority for full extension. Is the glass half full or half empty? They could have reframed the argument to fit your personal biases, but then that wouldn't be fair to those who hold opposing biases. It's a no win. Really don't understand the point here...
9 wanted some kind of extension of the tax cuts. Don't see any lying here at all. I do, however, see a damage-control spin attempt by one economist.
When the headline says:
"Economists: Extend Bush Tax Cuts"
I would read that to mean all of them, that's why they are at the very least misleading the public.
I didn't feel mislead by the headline.
Misleading? Yes. A lie? No.
Hardly seems like much of a story though, or an article to get worked up about. As you'd expect, a third want them gone; a third want them to stay; and a third want a compromise.
Since Obama supports keeping the Bush cuts in place for incomes under $250K, the correct, spin-neutral headline should have been"nine out of 15 economists support ending tax cuts for income over $250K. That 1) accurately represents the most accurate statement about what the economists said, and 2) directly addresses the policy issue actually at hand, i.e., Obama's decision to support continuing the cuts for <250K and ending above that.
What Anon @11:43 PM said.
15 whole economists. That's a sample of what, 0.01% of the profession? How's that relevant anyway?
Post a Comment