Alan De Smet ([info]alan_de_smet) wrote,
@ 2008-09-27 22:07:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:politics

Comparing McCain and Obama's tax plans

I found this Washington Post graph comparing McCain and Obama's tax plans enlightening in ways that a simple chart would have failed at.

(Via Mark Evanier's news from me.)


(Post a new comment)


[info]aaron_pike
2008-09-28 04:17 am UTC (link)
Er ... you are aware that there are some fundamental flaws in the mathematics of the bottom line, yes?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]alan_de_smet
2008-09-28 05:08 am UTC (link)

The "Average cut"? line? No, I had no idea. I had no particular reason to distrust the chart. I didn't really look real close at that data point, since I really don't care. To take a wild guess, is "average" defined as "the average of the 9 numbers above?" Doing that by hand, I get roughly the "Average cut" entries. If that's what they did, it's meaningless garbage. But the rest of the chart yet stands as enlightening.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]valleyviolet
2008-09-29 10:32 pm UTC (link)
So, the only thing I have to ask is, how did they turn "0%" change into -$12? I mean, seriously, what?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]valleyviolet
2008-09-29 10:35 pm UTC (link)
Also, their paragraph is annoying. Yes, the difference in the top .1% is stark. What about the bottom 60%? It seems pretty major for them too as far as % of money they need to live!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…