Some thoughts on Biased Media and Economic Spin
Afternoon everyone. I'm gonna start today with my local paper (Anderson Independent Mail http://www.andersonindependent.com) which ran for its front page story an AP wire story headlined,
"Rich get richer as gap widens." To quote the first paragraph for you:
The growing disparity is even more prounced in this recovering economy. Wages are stagnant, and the middle class is shouldering a larger tax burden. Prices for health care, housing, tuition, gas and food have soared.
First off this is a textbook example of media bias in action. if the story opening had read:
over two decades the income gap has steadily increased between the richest Americans and those those at the middle and botton of the pay scale," it wouldn't be so objectionable. But instead you can almost feel the venom with which this article was written, saliva falling on the keyboard, like the acidic drool from the creatures in "Alien."
Take a look at some of these figures: http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/#Head-1.htm
What they show is that between 1977 and 1999 (smack in the middle of the time period which the AP piece is discussing) is that the top 20% of american's paid 67% percent of the US's income tax. In 1999, the top 20% were projected to be paying over 79% of all income taxes, with the those in the second 20% would pay an additional 16%.
And we aren't not talking about Andrew Carnegie here, We're talking about 40% of all americans, paying 95% of income taxes! This wealthy 20% made $143,743 in 2002, and was making $132,000 in 1999.
Now that isn't to say that I don't have sympathy for the lowest 20%. But the AP report implies that the poor are getting poorer. And that was true, from 1977 until 1999. In fact, their total income fell from $10,000 to 8,400. But from 1999 to 2002, their income has increased from $8,400 to $9,990, the highest it's been since 1977.
I'm not going to say that this data can be used to bolster President Bush. I've always been a firm believer that the President has very little control over the economy, and that it's foolish to judge his presidency on that element of American life. But if we aren't going to use it to exonerate him, at the very least, I think the data doesn't provide any evidence which we can attack him with. Yet this is what the AP wire chooses to do. The AP wire, which is the benchmark of journalism, and a standard by which many papers, world-wide, hold themselves.
The thing is, if you asked that upper 20% about their class status, I would give you ten to one odds that over 80% of them define themselves as middle-class. I bet, also, if you interviewed the lowest 20%, you'd find a hefty portion of them, define themselves as middle-class, because, ultimately, America is a classeless society. While its apparent that we have economic stratification (and every country does. I'm gonna look for income differences between rich and poor in some other notable countries around the world, and see how our's stacks up.) I'm willing to bet, yet again, that if you asked that wealthy 20%, at least half of them would tell you, not only are they middle-class, but they actively dislike "upper-class" people.
The truth is that the income gap isn't the real issue. What we should be concerned about is seeing that every American is making more than they were before. Constant improvement is what's important. Focusing on keeping everyone "Equal" means punishing people for pulling away from the pack. If the upper 40% is increasing its income while at the same time being slammed with the burden of all most all of the country's costs, then more power to them.
"Rich get richer as gap widens." To quote the first paragraph for you:
Over two decades, the income gap has steadily increased between the richest Americans, who own homes and stocks and got big tax breaks, and those at the middle and bottom of the pay scale, whose paychecks buy less.
The growing disparity is even more prounced in this recovering economy. Wages are stagnant, and the middle class is shouldering a larger tax burden. Prices for health care, housing, tuition, gas and food have soared.
First off this is a textbook example of media bias in action. if the story opening had read:
over two decades the income gap has steadily increased between the richest Americans and those those at the middle and botton of the pay scale," it wouldn't be so objectionable. But instead you can almost feel the venom with which this article was written, saliva falling on the keyboard, like the acidic drool from the creatures in "Alien."
Take a look at some of these figures: http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/#Head-1.htm
What they show is that between 1977 and 1999 (smack in the middle of the time period which the AP piece is discussing) is that the top 20% of american's paid 67% percent of the US's income tax. In 1999, the top 20% were projected to be paying over 79% of all income taxes, with the those in the second 20% would pay an additional 16%.
And we aren't not talking about Andrew Carnegie here, We're talking about 40% of all americans, paying 95% of income taxes! This wealthy 20% made $143,743 in 2002, and was making $132,000 in 1999.
Now that isn't to say that I don't have sympathy for the lowest 20%. But the AP report implies that the poor are getting poorer. And that was true, from 1977 until 1999. In fact, their total income fell from $10,000 to 8,400. But from 1999 to 2002, their income has increased from $8,400 to $9,990, the highest it's been since 1977.
I'm not going to say that this data can be used to bolster President Bush. I've always been a firm believer that the President has very little control over the economy, and that it's foolish to judge his presidency on that element of American life. But if we aren't going to use it to exonerate him, at the very least, I think the data doesn't provide any evidence which we can attack him with. Yet this is what the AP wire chooses to do. The AP wire, which is the benchmark of journalism, and a standard by which many papers, world-wide, hold themselves.
The thing is, if you asked that upper 20% about their class status, I would give you ten to one odds that over 80% of them define themselves as middle-class. I bet, also, if you interviewed the lowest 20%, you'd find a hefty portion of them, define themselves as middle-class, because, ultimately, America is a classeless society. While its apparent that we have economic stratification (and every country does. I'm gonna look for income differences between rich and poor in some other notable countries around the world, and see how our's stacks up.) I'm willing to bet, yet again, that if you asked that wealthy 20%, at least half of them would tell you, not only are they middle-class, but they actively dislike "upper-class" people.
The truth is that the income gap isn't the real issue. What we should be concerned about is seeing that every American is making more than they were before. Constant improvement is what's important. Focusing on keeping everyone "Equal" means punishing people for pulling away from the pack. If the upper 40% is increasing its income while at the same time being slammed with the burden of all most all of the country's costs, then more power to them.
1 Comments:
brilliant as always, david!
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home