“the average American makes only $33,000 a year -- which, adjusted for inflation, has not changed since 1988”
Click the image & expose the lie:
Click here to further expose this bald faced lie.
Click here to expose some more “Progressive” lies.
Furthermore, ObamaCare (which Granderson is dishonestly propagandizing for) will only make health insurance LESS affordable and make health care LESS available.
6 comments:
This is a question of individual income versus household income. It hardly constitutes lying.
Anonymous (Nov 29, 2011 12:32:00 PM)
Show me your source data.
You're just grasping at straws in a desperate attempt to excuse a bald faced LIAR!
You cite incorrect data. A few things:
They (the other "Anonymous") are not grasping at straws: they're pointing out that the data which you've posted - though it may be accurate - does not debunk Granderson's statement, whether or not it's true. The graph you cite represents median and mean household income increases from 1979 to 2007; Granderson is speaking about a lack of change in average American income per individual. Those are simply different things. To prove that, they'd just need to point to your source data, and then point to the labels which read "Mean Household Income" and "Median Household Income". As such, the other Anonymous comment is correct.
That issue aside, I'd like to point out another discrepancy: the article you're referring to considers change in household income, not absolute household income. The article states the income of those highest-receiving household (the so-called 1%) underwent a staggering growth of 275%, while the top 20% saw their income grow by 65%. The lower-earning households likewise experienced increase, but nothing approaching the overall shift for the highest-earners.
Quoting the article (p. IX): "As a result of that uneven income growth, the distribution of after-tax household income in the United States
was substantially more unequal in 2007 than in 1979:
The share of income accruing to higher-income households increased, whereas the share accruing to other
households declined. In fact, between 2005 and 2007,
the after-tax income received by the 20 percent of the
population with the highest income exceeded the aftertax income of the remaining 80 percent."
Now, when the wealthy experience a geometric income increase, the effect on overall median and mean household income growth will, of course, be quite visible, because their market share of income is far higher than everyone else's. This is especially visible for the 'mean,' explaining why it is much higher than the median. From the article (p. 2):
"Real (inflation-adjusted) mean household income, measured after government transfers and federal taxes, grew
by 62 percent between 1979 and 2007. Over the same
period, real median after-tax household income (half of
all households have income below the median, and half
have income above it) grew by 35 percent (see Figure 1).
Because the mean (or average) can be heavily influenced
by very high or very low incomes, the large gap between
mean and median income growth signals a pattern of
growth that was heavily weighted toward households with
income well above the median."
(Emphasis my own)
That is the data displayed in the graph you posted. This is very basic economics. It says nothing about individual income of the 'average American.' It doesn't reflect or refute Granderson's statement in the slightest. Why did you cite this article? You should read the article fully before you cite it.
Anonymous (Nov 30, 2011 11:15:00 PM),
1) If you have data supporting Granderson’s assertion that the income of the average American “has not changed since 1988” then SHOW ME THE SOURCE DATA!
Until then, household data will have to suffice as proof that Granderson LIED (as did every other so-called “Progressive” who has spewed this oft repeated BALD FACED LIE).
Granderson’s (CNN) source vaguely cites IRS data and offers NO LINK. I spent hours searching the IRS data and found NOTHING to support this LIE.
2) Click here to further debunk these oft repeated LIES (as well as the counterproductive Marxist insanity of being concerned with income distribution in the first place).
The above link demonstrates that income for ALL FIVE QUINTILES has risen at VERY COMPARABLE RATES!
3) Suggesting that there is any such thing as a “market share” for income reveals your fundamental ignorance as to how wealth is created. Economic growth is NOT a zero sum game. Economic growth is a rising tide which lifts ALL BOATS. If you want to ensure that no boats rise higher than others, the only thing you will “accomplish” is to ensure that all boats SINK! Witness the reign of the current Marxist-in-Chief.
Your ability to hyperlink to other sections of your very own blog and consider it supportive of the argument at hand is staggering. Amazingly, those sections then link to even more skewed data. Where'd you learn such skill?
Source: http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3695911547116301280&postID=6133407808297349458
Anonymous (Dec 1, 2011 2:07:00 PM),
Too bad you lack the skills required to even competently link to whatever the hell you’re talking about.
I’ll assume you’re referring to the following post:
http://sbvor.blogspot.com/2010/10/why-progressive-lies-make-my-blood-boil.html
In the above link, I took raw data from the CBO provided in Excel spreadsheet format and dropped it directly into Excel charts. I provided a direct link to the CBO data so that anybody and everybody could fact check my presentation. If you have a problem with that, then I can only assume you’re a mindless automaton programmed to blindly accept whatever so-called “journalists” (such as Granderson) tell you without ever making the slightest attempt to fact check the lying bastards.
I would pity you (except that you’re not worthy of pity). You’re just a damn fool.
Post a Comment