Thursday, September 22, 2011

Tax Test

Take this test on the relationship between taxes and GDP that I picked up over at Angry Bear.  There are only 3 questions, and no tricks.


  1. It may not be a trick, but it is partisan and a similar test could be devised that would come to a different conclusion.

    I did not take the test because I knew before hand that it was going to be a not trick, and I did not care to be not tricked.

    Charts, man!

  2. Would it be non-partisan if the conclusion was the opposite?

  3. A very interesting and telling exercise.

    "I'm sad to say I'm confident most economics professors in the United States would get the three questions wrong."

    The Uncle Miltie scourge has spread that thoroughly? I hope otherwise but can't say I'm surprised, given how many sheeple buy into trickle down.

    "I'm also sad to say, I think it is no more possible to explain the US economy without knowing these facts than it is to produce a useful theory of the solar system assuming turtles all the way down."

    I'm trying to imagine this guy struggling to explain the questions, the graphs and then the answers to Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann. It's like a Saturday Night Live skit, only with a very scary edge to it.

    Myste, despite what Republicans and libertarians say, facts aren't partisan. Facts are what they are.

    I expect Paul Ryan could grab a napkin and draw something, a la Picasso, to "prove" the opposite of the correct answers to those questions. All Ryan would really prove is that you should never buy a car from him. Or a winning lottery ticket. Or property in Florida.

  4. Did you know that Paul Ryan use to drive the Oscar Meyer Wienermobile?

  5. Mr. Anderson,

    Despite what Republicans and libertarians say, facts aren't partisan. Facts are what they are.

    No one claims that facts are partisan, Mr. Anderson. There is more than one view of data. Visit the Heathen Republican's site. He has tons of charts and graphs proving just about the opposite of everything our friendly Critter proves.

    I have seen our Critter back up his arguments with debate. He does exceptionally well. However, charts themselves will say what we need them to say.

    I don't dispute facts, never have. Each side seems to own their own facts and each sides are the opposite of the other sides. In fact, in most cases. both sides are correct.

  6. My experience has been when both sides are correct they are using different facts, not the same facts.

  7. Jerry Critter asked, "Did you know that Paul Ryan use to drive the Oscar Meyer Wienermobile?"

    Oh? Over or into whom?

    Myste, you wrote, "It may not be a trick, but it is partisan. . ." the "it" meaning that three-chart quiz. Your perception is that it's partisan and was presented for a partisan purpose. Maybe, maybe not. But either way the facts are what they are, independent of any motive that might be behind presenting them.

  8. The "facts" are what they are is a grand-sounding statement. The facts are what our chart du jour tells us they are. If you want the complete opposite facts using different views of the numbers, you can usually find them at The Heathen Republican.

    I take the liberal economic position in almost every case, but rarely because of "facts."

    I have so many charts and tables saved off to my computer. I have also done analyses of CBO data myself, to make certain points. I don't think the points I and others make are proven by the "facts," though. They stand or fall based on something else. It is a big topic, and and argument I will certainly lose unless I invest more time than I have or am willing to invest, so consider this my backward concession for now.

  9. The problem isn't with the facts so much(assuming they are indeed facts) as with the explanation of what the charts (facts) mean.

  10. I speak from the heart and off the cuff. As a fan of the late Mayor Daly, (not the racist stuff) I always quoted his "Duh experts. Whadda dey know?"

    Look at the results of tax cuts and borrowning, you know, Reaganomics, the last 40 years. Been good for China. Not us.

  11. Myste, facts are what they are. You're mistaking spin and hype for honest analysis and/or advocacy. There is a difference.

    And don't tell me it's all subjective; it's not. We see what eight years of trickle-down and full bore subversion of oversight and regulation did. There's nothing subjective about Bush's worst record of job creation of any president since the early 1930s, and vacuuming of wealth to the top from those below.