Digg

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Economic illiteracy from the WSJ

salon.com — The paper's latest editorial tries to debunk Barack Obama's claims about his tax plans, but makes a laughable assertion in doing so.

Bury

texasred54 39 days ago

179 diggs
digg it

20 Comments
Who Dugg It?

texasred54, on 10/13/2008, -2/+26It is so simple.
an0nymous, on 10/13/2008, -3/+31The WSJ article is on the front page.. let's get this one their as well.
ThatJohnnyQuest, on 10/13/2008, -2/+29Man, the wingnuts are getting scared!
- Blinker1315, on 10/14/2008, -3/+4The Wall Street Journal is consistently the best paper in the country. It gives readers a choice between the opposing views of the The New York Times and the Journal. I go with the latter.
  - homercles337, on 10/14/2008, -1/+4The WSJ is Murdock's most recent "project." I think that qualifies it as the worst paper in the country. Whats wrong with getting your news from NPR, BBS, and PBS? These are head and shoulders above all the other biased ***** out there.
  - Kizilbash, on 10/14/2008, -1/+3The WSJ is just one of Murdoch's rags now.
scorpie, on 10/13/2008, -9/+0That picture has nothing to do with the article.
(It's Elizabeth Dole from another article at salon.com)
- Arishia, on 10/13/2008, -0/+3lol
paintgrl, on 10/13/2008, -2/+29Payroll taxes are the key word here. Payroll taxes squeeze the life out of the middle class, that is why Obama's tax plans will really work for the middle class, because he addresses the problem of payroll taxes.

FTA: But Obama’s plan just doesn’t deal with income taxes, as the author or authors of that editorial know perfectly well. And with good reason — as William G. Gale and Jeffrey Rohaly of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center pointed out in 2003, most Americans pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes:

In 2003, workers and employers each owe 6.2 percent Social Security tax on the first $87,000 of a worker’s earnings, and a 1.45 percent Medicare tax on all wages. Although the statutory obligation to pay payroll taxes is split between the worker and the employer, most economists believe that workers bear most or all of the economic burden.

About 74 percent of filers owe more payroll taxes (including the employer portion) than individual income taxes, including 85 percent of those with income below $40,000. Among returns with wage earnings, 83 percent have higher payroll taxes than income taxes, including 97 percent of those with AGI below $40,000 and 90 percent of those with income below $100,000. If only half of employer payroll taxes are attributed to workers, 48 percent of filers and 53 percent of wage earners pay more in payroll taxes than income taxes, including 76 percent of wage earners with income below $40,000.
nedzeve, on 10/13/2008, -2/+30The Wall Street Journal you say? Newspaper of both the greedy bastards who tanked the economy and right politicians who preached deregulation for decades? That Wall Street Journal? I can't see why they would want to misinform about a candidate who's promising to bring about change....
col381, on 10/13/2008, -2/+21Wall Street Journal - would that be the same Wall Street Journal that is owned by Rupert Murdoch who also just *happens* to own FOX NEWS, who just *happen* to be the most right wing biased news source in the country (if not the world!)

Nah, surely that's just a co-incidence!!!

Oh and BTW - when something is an OPINION piece, then that is what you get, not necessarily FACTS, you get OPINIONS.....
It's sad really, the WSJ was quite a reputable newspaper until Murdoch got his slimy fingers into it.
jackieblu, on 10/13/2008, -3/+14Obama/Biden 08 - yeah baby!
niradg, on 10/13/2008, -2/+15Nice. It's great to see BS debunked so quickly.
JenniferInMO, on 10/14/2008, -2/+13FTA:

"Notice the qualifier the WSJ used in that last sentence? Not “more than a third of all Americans already pay no taxes at all,” but more than a third of all Americans already pay no income taxes at all.”

How nice of the author to let the WSJ off the hook by accusing it of "economic illiteracy" when it is clearly a case of misleading its readers. The WSJ doesn't make rookie mistakes, but it does spin and spin it does a lot. In this case, the difference in the two comparisons is clearly intentional. Shame on the WSJ.
ScienceDoc, on 10/14/2008, -1/+15From the moron that brought you FOX News.
homercles337, on 10/14/2008, -1/+14What do you expect? Rupert Murdoch is pulling the strings at the WSJ. Scum breeds scum.
jackieblu, on 10/14/2008, -1/+8Winners never cheat, cheaters never win!
Obama/Biden
kw7777777, on 10/14/2008, -1/+4They felt bad for attacking McCain....so they tried to do a "hit job" on Obama to get back in good favor with the McCain/Palin camp. Nice try! Obama '08
kwelte57, on 10/14/2008, -1/+4The WSJ does not want change, they want to maintain the status quo. You can definately lump WSJ and FOX news together.
vault, on 10/14/2008, -0/+4Yes salon.com is a much better source than the Wall Street Journal when it comes to the economy. Kids...
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Economic illiteracy from the WSJ

Login or register to add a comment