On Saturday, 6 Aug 2011, Yahoo! linked on its from page to an opinion piece by Daniel Gross on the action of the S&P to downgrade US National Debt. First, shame on Yahoo for linking this on the front page as news rather than commentary. That's irresponsible at best.
Second, the "facts" in paragraphs 5 and 6 are, at best, broad-brush and imprecise. At worst they are partisan fabrications. For example, if you look at this chart:
You'll find that person income taxes are about average when compared to every year since 1950 when compared to GDP. Corpoarte taxes may be at an all-time low, but that trend was started under Reagan and continued by every president since him, including St. Bill Clinton.
However, what that graph also shows is that the last time the overall tax percentage was this low was at the end of the Clinton administration. That seems irrelevant until you look at this graph:
While taxes as a percent of GDP were at the lowest point of the previous 5 decades, tax -revenue- was at its highest point ever, which caused the Clinton surplus.
Read that again, and check the statistics. It is an utter falsehood to say that the only way to produce more revenue is to raise taxes, and to say that it's the majority opinion in this case is also a massive falsehood. S&P did not change the US rating because Republicans wanted what they wanted. This is what their report says:
This is a horrible case not merely of bias in reporting but of actual misrepresentation of the facts, and Yahoo! and Daniel Gross ought to issue a retraction.
Second, the "facts" in paragraphs 5 and 6 are, at best, broad-brush and imprecise. At worst they are partisan fabrications. For example, if you look at this chart:
You'll find that person income taxes are about average when compared to every year since 1950 when compared to GDP. Corpoarte taxes may be at an all-time low, but that trend was started under Reagan and continued by every president since him, including St. Bill Clinton.
However, what that graph also shows is that the last time the overall tax percentage was this low was at the end of the Clinton administration. That seems irrelevant until you look at this graph:
While taxes as a percent of GDP were at the lowest point of the previous 5 decades, tax -revenue- was at its highest point ever, which caused the Clinton surplus.
Read that again, and check the statistics. It is an utter falsehood to say that the only way to produce more revenue is to raise taxes, and to say that it's the majority opinion in this case is also a massive falsehood. S&P did not change the US rating because Republicans wanted what they wanted. This is what their report says:
We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process.It is unconscienably-partisan of Daniel Gross to read that statement (if he did) and interpret it to say that this is a Republican failure: plainly, -short-term- agreement on cutting entitlements and on raising -revenue- (not raising tax rates) is what S&P used to determine its action.
This is a horrible case not merely of bias in reporting but of actual misrepresentation of the facts, and Yahoo! and Daniel Gross ought to issue a retraction.
Posts
