August 07, 2009


Obama vs Mathematics:

But President Obama promised that he would raise taxes only on those in “rich” households.

That’s where the arithmetic gets especially interesting. Funding the new health-care plan on the backs of households making $200,000 or more per year would require permanently increasing their annual total tax payments by about 50 percent. So, for example, a household that currently pays $50,000 in federal income taxes would need to pay another $25,000. Remember, however, that Social Security and Medicare already face enormous shortfalls. Shoring up these programs — another Obama campaign promise — would require collecting 328 percent more tax revenue from the rich. No, we didn’t forget a decimal point: That is three hundred and twenty-eight percent.

Most households making between $200,000 and $500,000 per year would not have enough money to pay their federal, state, and local tax bills, much less eat. Rich households in California or New York would not be able to pay their tax bills regardless of their incomes. And a family of four living in a low-tax state (South Dakota) would need to gross almost $900,000 per year to have enough income left over to reach the poverty line. In fact, there is no mathematical configuration of taxes on the current rich alone — including additional levies on the “super-rich” making more than $1 million per year — that is compatible with putting the nation’s entitlement programs and the new health-care plan on a sustainable course.

Posted by: Sarah at 12:23 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Oh yes, there is a math that can make this work! If Big brOther says two plus two is five, it is. Ask the ecOnOmists who believe in the One (or at least pretend to do so in order to please their bOsses). The number-manipulators can always justify the dreams of Great Leaders. The Five-Year Plans always worked on paper but were ruined by wreckers. Similarly, maaaad mobs of atavists are all that stand in the way of the Four-Year Plan of Hopenchange. Where's the civilian security fOrce when the peOple need it to secure their right to freeee health care?

Posted by: kevin at August 08, 2009 01:58 PM (h9KHg)

2 If you've got the math skillz, the gOvernment wants you!

So the new data sleuths come from backgrounds like economics, computer science and mathematics.

They are certainly welcomed in the White House these days. “Robust, unbiased data are the first step toward addressing our long-term economic needs and key policy priorities,”
Peter R. Orszag, director of the Office of Management and Budget, declared in a speech in May. Later that day, Mr. Orszag confessed in a blog entry that his talk on the importance of statistics was a subject “near to my (admittedly wonkish) heart.”

National Review is not a statisticians' journal. We are certain there are thousands of prOfessionals who can disprove its claims, just as every true Soviet scientist believed in Marr and Lysenko.

Posted by: kevin at August 10, 2009 12:08 AM (h9KHg)

3 ... just as every true Soviet scientist who believed in Marr and Lysenko could disprove the claims of capitalist linguists and geneticists.

Every true USSO statistician will love to be among the Alphas crunching the numbers determining gOvernment health care policy:

The President has made it very clear that policy decisions should be driven by evidence – accentuating the role of Federal statistics as a resource for policymakers ...

In health care, bending the curve on cost growth will require more information about how we’re spending our health dollars, the health outcomes we’re producing, and how specific interventions rank against alternative treatments.

Number wOrkers of the wOrld! This is your chance to grab pOwer! Jump on the bandwagOn now!

Posted by: kevin at August 10, 2009 12:19 AM (h9KHg)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
47kb generated in CPU 0.0139, elapsed 0.0923 seconds.
49 queries taking 0.0821 seconds, 200 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.