Quantcast

«

»

Jul 18 2012

I get e-mail! Noboma fo fou mo yrs

The following is an e-mail I received from family. Feel free to go nuts in the comments.  Everything presented as it was, with names removed.

These are all govt stats & are only the tip of the iceberg.  What did you expect from a couple disbarred lawyers whose only “job” had been a inner city community worker?   Sure will be interesting to see if anyone but non caucasians vote for oboma husain for four more years of these stats.

He is the most inexperience President in our history.  He is the most corrupt President in our history.  He is the most destructive to our Constitution in our history.  Noboma fo fou mo yrs.

Subject: Stats

 

You decide – 4 more years????

CHECK ON THE DIFFERENCE IN YOUR INHERITANCE TAX OBAMA WANTS?

17 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    Jasper of Maine

    I wonder what part of “inherited a collapsing economy” that these people don’t understand?

  2. 2
    eric

    ‘Inherited,’ ‘collapsing,’ and ‘economy.’ Two syllables or less, please.

  3. 3
    Makoto

    I personally love charts that start at an arbitrary point in order to show that some point on the chart is extremely high, while in reality it’s a minor blip. But that’s my smallest issue with this whole set of charts and “facts”…

  4. 4
    mythbri

    It’s easy to keep numbers down if you don’t count two wars as “costs”. *cough* Bush *cough*

  5. 5
    Robert B.

    So, the national debt’s too big, but we can’t raise taxes? Awesome.

    Employment is down, AND welfare spending is up? How about that.

    Cabinet secretaries aren’t complete corporate tools anymore? What horror!

    Oh, and the racism. Can’t forget the racism.

  6. 6
    feralboy12

    You may also notice a couple of classics from How To Lie With Statistics, most notably the setting of an arbitrary bottom point on graphs at something other than zero. This makes any increase in the relevant number look gigantic, way out of proportion to the actual increase. It’s easiest to see in the “Food Stamp Presidency” graph.
    Also note how the welfare spending chart doesn’t even include the Obama years, ending with that large increase in the years 2000-2008. Perhaps you’re not supposed to look too closely at the key at the bottom there.
    And the blame gets shifted back and forth from Obama to Congress, whichever is convenient.

  7. 7
    Robert B.

    Also note how the welfare spending chart doesn’t even include the Obama years, ending with that large increase in the years 2000-2008.

    Aw man, I missed that one. That’s egregious.

  8. 8
    tynk

    I love the last line the best…

    “CHECK ON THE DIFFERENCE IN YOUR INHERITANCE TAX OBAMA WANTS?”

    yea… the estate tax would be on estates valued at over $3.5 million.
    the income tax rate changes would be on incomes over $200k (single) and $250 (joint).

    The capital gains and dividends would simple make it so the higher range income earners would have dividends taxed at the same rate as other income.

    So yea…

  9. 9
    vel

    hmmm, like me, you have ignorant liars for family members. I’ve just commented on a similar email sent to me by family and suspect I’ll never hear from them again.

    Tell these people that they are wrong. They can vote and affect far more people than just you.

  10. 10
    Kaoru Negisa

    CHECK ON THE DIFFERENCE IN YOUR INHERITANCE TAX OBAMA WANTS?

    What do they mean *your* inheritance tax? I somehow suspect that the majority of people receiving this don’t have estates worth more than $5 million, which is the minimum your estate has to be worth in order to qualify to pay that tax (http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=164871,00.html)

    Sure, I suppose if you’re worried that the government will take 55% of your moonshine still and that assault rifle “collection” you’ve been keeping in a concrete bunker for the past 20 years with your gold commemorative coins…

  11. 11
    Randomfactor

    They’re this nuts now, just wait’ll Obama gets re-elected in November. Stock up on rabies vaccine.

  12. 12
    TheSecretAtheist

    Glad I’m not the only one who noticed the terribly misleading graphs…

  13. 13
    Scr... Archivist

    What’s the “Bureau of Land”? It sounds like an avant-garde art-furniture exhibit.

  14. 14
    Zeno

    How cute: To avoid saddling George W. with too much of the debt, the chart was keyed to Speakers of the House instead, thereby highlighting that Democrat Nancy Pelosi was Speaker when George tanked the economy. As if the Speaker was the head of the look-the-other-way executive branch as Wall Street raped and pillaged. Gotta shift that blame!

    I used to get this sort of unmitigated crap from family members on a regular basis, until they got tired of my detailed multi-page refutations. My research didn’t change any ossified minds, but it stemmed the flow of nonsense into my in-box.

  15. 15
    captainahags

    On the flip side is that the debt reduction under Clinton is attributed to Gingrich- very cute indeed.

  16. 16
    Kristjan Wager

    A question: Is the income tax the last picture mention the average income tax, or is it perhaps on the last earned dollar? (the US still have a progressive income tax after all).

    Oh, and as a Scandinavian, it’s required that I make fun of US tax complains. Since I am in the highest income bracket, my taxation on the last earned kroner (approx 6 per $) is 61%. The total tax for my income is in the region of just over 50%

    And I am, of course, not going into inheritage taxes (depends on your relation to the person in question, but up to 40%), sales taxes/VAT (25%) etc.

  17. 17
    kagerato

    It’s the highest marginal rate, not the average rate. Basically they’re fear mongering about the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, which gave the vast majority of the benefits to the rich. (Obama and most of Congress wants to extend the segment of the cuts that benefits the poor and middle class, but Republicans have constantly taken an all-or-nothing stance.)

    The maximum marginal rate was once ~90%, back in the 50s. The tax structure, including exemptions, was a bit different back then. Yet a very rich person not making optimal use of exemptions could easily have paid an average tax rate of 60 to 70 percent during those times.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>