Ira Stoll on Obama's Fact-Challenged Tax Claim
On CBS News's "60 Minutes" Sunday night, President Obama said, "Taxes are lower on families than they've been probably in the last 50 years. So I haven't raised taxes." As of Monday morning, neither the Washington Post's Pinocchio-awarding Fact-Checker, nor the Annenberg Public Policy Center's FactCheck.org, nor the Tampa Bay Times' Pulitzer-Prize-winning Politifact.com had risen to this opportunity, writes Ira Stoll, "so let us take a stab."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
stab
I'm waiting....
They realized they just had an anti-Obama article a couple of hours ago and need to insert an anti-Romney one to keep balanced.
No, you don't get it. There is no balance between statist/non-statist here. Why do you assume that "balance" means only on the Dem/Rep axis?
As good a summary as I have seen of the impending fiscal and economic catastrophe. Very straightforward:
http://online.wsj.com/article/.....93610.html
Ye gods. I knew most of that, but to read it all together. . .very distressing.
What's particularly irksome is the continued growth of government during a prolonged economic downturn.
Not just growth, but explosive new heights of growth during the worst economy in at least thirty, if not eighty, years.
We should have a measure of government growth, like we measure GDP. Say, WTF: Weighted Treasury Foolishness.
I'm sure it would be pretty easy to calculate the percentage of GDP that comes from government spending and is therefore worthless.
Very nice. I'll be sharing that one.
A government budget isn't like a household budget... except when it is, or something.
It's a huge problem in many areas, this idea that government is somehow different in kind than its citizens: Government has powers and rights that no individual could ever have. Government accounting is somehow superior than that for everyone else. And so on.
If people would drop this set of delusions, we'd do a whole lot better.
Well, that statement is quite true, since government can absorb a lot more debt than a household and has the power of taxation. If fedgov were a household it would have gone broke and become a trailerparkhold in 1960.
Of course, now we're bumping up against the limits of what even the fedgov can borrow.
Unlike you, the fedgov can pull out a pistol and extract whatever "income" it decides it 'needs'.
There are limits even to that. Fedgov could seize 100% of the real assets of every US citizen and it would only barely pay off the debt right now, forget it in a few years.
I picked the wrong week to quit bath salts.
Maybe we could use a Consultant-In-Chief, as Suderman mocks MR for being.
Is there more to this post?
Is that all there is
My friend?
Then let's keep dancing...
Charles Hugh Smith took a good shot at it earlier this summer:
http://www.oftwominds.com/blog.....e7-12.html
Of course, we have no way of knowing just what Obama was referring to here--it's a throwaway line we typically see from people like Tony here on the boards, with no real reference to back it up, and vaguely based on the question-begging notion that high taxes in general are the default position of government.
I bet they don't include the employer-paid part of the payroll tax.
Since Reason apparently too busy to provide a link to the article the post is supposed to be about, here it is:
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfro...../id/457361
Gilbert,
Thank you!
Hmmm, if 47% that didn't pay federal income tax in 2008 STILL don't pay income tax in 2012, I suppose you could say he didn't raise their taxes.
lol dude you gotta love them bought and paid for politciains.
http://www.AnonPlanet.tk
Uhhhhhhh....come again?
Paul Ryan: 'Do you want Barack Obama to be re-elected? Then don't vote for Ron Paul.'
I promise baby, I won't hit you again.