@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:Okay. There's a couple of comments that I have not personally researched and don't know without qualification if they are true, but I suspect they probably are. Overall, I don't have a problem with any statement made. There will no doubt be exceptions to be found for each point, but I believe such statement made can most likely be defended as a true statement at least as I believe the writer intended it. In other words, I was not inspired to say "that isn't true" to any statement.
This is some kind of joke, right? You judge something to be true so long as it doesn't inspire you to say that it isn't? Given your boundless credulity, that's a pretty broad target you've set for yourself. And how can something be true "as the writer intended it?" Are you suggesting that you accept the
Costanza standard of truth?
Foxfyre wrote:Your turn. You indicated that none of it was factually correct.
Not so. I said: "As for the
Human Events piece, it is just the typical farrago of lies, distortions, wishful thinking, self-delusion, hypocrisy, and internet tough-guy-ism that I've come to expect from the conservative crankocracy." So it's not all lies. A lot of it is just good old-fashioned delusion.
Foxfyre wrote:So pick one or two statements and show us how they are not factually correct.
For anyone following along at home, the article in question can be found
here.
The author states: "They [i.e. the teabaggers] have had enough of Obama's proposed tax hikes and tax "surcharges" to pay for all his spending programs that will drive U.S. tax rates higher even than the welfare-state economies of Europe (New Yorkers, for instance, could face a combined federal-state income tax rate of nearly 60 percent)"
That's a preposterous falsehood. First of all, Obama hasn't proposed
any increase in income tax rates (which is what the author is talking about here). At most, the president has proposed allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire.
Secondly, New Yorkers wouldn't face a combined income tax rate of nearly 60 percent, even with the expiration of the Bush tax cuts. The New York state income tax rate tops out at 8.97% for those earning more than $500,000 a year.* The top federal tax rate is 35% (information found at
this site). The top rate before two rounds of Bush tax cuts was 39.6%. Even allowing for the pre-Bush rates to be reinstated and adding those percentages together, a New Yorker earning over half a million dollars would still only pay a little less than 50% -- even though it would be incredibly stupid to add those together, since: (1) those are marginal tax rates, not effective rates (a mistake that conservatives always seem to make); and (2) people who itemize their deductions are
allowed to deduct their state tax payments.
In short, it's an easily verifiable fact that a New Yorker, facing some fanciful Obama tax increase, will not pay a combined federal-state income tax rate of nearly 60 percent. That's simply not true. It is, indeed, a lie.
Foxfyre wrote: (I'm guessing wagers are being exchanged in IMs or Email as we speak with one side betting that you won't do it.)
You have a very active imagination.
*I'm not including New York City income taxes, but then that's because the author only referred to federal and state income taxes. In any event, city taxes would also be tax deductible on the filer's federal taxes.
