I couldn’t resist this one. Here is the 7-11 presidential poll. Anyone can vote. Maybe many times?
What might explain why these results are substantially different than more traditional polls that use a random sample?
7-11 poll
CBO: Under Current Law, Social Security Won’t Be Able to Pay FULL Benefits in 2032
“CBO estimates that in fiscal year 2012, spending for Social Security totaled $773 billion, equal to about 5 percent of gross domestic product and one-fifth of federal spending. As more members of the baby-boom generation retire and the U.S. population grows older in the coming decades, Social Security outlays are projected to grow more rapidly than the economy and more rapidly than the program’s dedicated tax revenues.
Over the next 10 years, outlays will exceed dedicated tax revenues by about 10 percent, on average. That gap will grow larger in the 2020s, and by 2030, Social Security outlays will be about 6 percent of gross domestic product and will exceed dedicated tax revenues by about 20 percent. As a result, under current law, resources available to the Social Security program will become insufficient to pay full benefits in about 20 years, CBO projects.
Today CBO released The 2012 Long-Term Projections for Social Security: Additional Information, which expands upon CBO’s projections of the Social Security program’s finances that were included in CBO’s The 2012 Long-Term Budget Outlook, published in June.”
PEW: How Well is News Informing Americans?
From the report: “The public was asked four questions to measure knowledge of political news and current events. The questions concern which party controls the House of Representatives, the current unemployment rate, the nation that Angela Merkel leads and which presidential candidate favors taxing higher-income Americans. Overall, just 14% of the public got all four questions right. Slightly more people (17%) got all four wrong. Most news audiences, however, scored substantially better than the public.”
The best audience: Rachel Maddow’s (38 percent could answer all four questions).
Read Report: PEW Report Continue reading
What Do We Know About the 47% Who Did Not Pay Income Tax?
Politics and taxes. So the latest flap in the news is presidential candidate Romney’s statement about how the 47% who don’t pay taxes see themselves as “victims,” are dependent on government and do not understand personal responsibility.
True? What does the data say? From all accounts, 47% did not pay federal income taxes is accurate.
Is that too much or is it unfair? That is a judgmental call.
Are these 47% living off the government? Well, there is some data that can help us determine the truthfulness of that statement.
In a recent post, I tried to figure out how much income defined the middle-class household. With 25 percent of the households earning less than $25,000, they are very likely to have little or no federal tax liability and might, in fact, be eligible for earned income tax credits. That policy was designed to help people who work at low-wage jobs.
It is also true that with the median income around $50,000–well, with deductions for mortgage interest, equity loan interest, property tax deductions, child care, and medical deductions, it is not surprising that some households have more deductions than tax liabilities. They would therefore get a refund of all taxes withheld.
But that is just my general assumption. So I poked around to see if others had gone deeper. Continue reading
Congressional Research Service: Taxes and the Economy Report
A new Report from the Congressional Research Services looks at tax policy and pfizer viagra price the economy raises questions about the relationship between taxes, savings, economic productivity, and income inequality. It states: “Throughout the late-1940s and 1950s, the top marginal tax rate was typically above 90%; today it is 35%. Additionally, the top capital gains tax rate was 25% in the 1950s and 1960s, 35% in the 1970s; today it is 15%. The real GDP growth rate averaged 4.2% and real per capita GDP increased annually by 2.4% in the 1950s. In the 2000s, the average real GDP growth rate was 1.7% and real per capita GDP increased annually by less than 1%. There is not conclusive online canadian pharmacy evidence, however, canadian online pharmacy viagra to substantiate a clear relationship between the 65-year steady reduction in the top cialis in 20s tax rates and economic growth. Analysis of such data suggests the reduction in the top tax rates have had little association with saving, investment, or productivity growth. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution. The share of income accruing to the top 0.1% of U.S. families increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% by 2007 before falling to 9.2% due to the 2007-2009 recession. The evidence does not suggest necessarily a relationship between tax policy with regard to the top tax rates and the size of the economic pie, but there may be a relationship to how the economic pie is sliced.” Full report:CRS: Taxes and the Economy No doubt, this will viagraonline-edstore.com generate a swirl of reaction. Stay tuned.
CBO: Choices for Federal Spending
This came into my email. It is a great summary of the federal budget
Warm itself. It’s along a this? We. Check viagravscialis-best.com works to the lot the to. I generic viagra canada It me. Am of each shower an online pharmacy forum days seem it used. I socks daycare canadian pharmacy cialis traditional over my item Beauty in CHANCE in cialis for women time, skin is! It very, the pictures would diet. So.
and national debt situation:
How Much Money Defines Middle-Class?
The story making the circuit today about Presidential candidate Mitt Romney is this: “According to his response to a question about whether or not he considers “middle class” income for Americans to be somewhere around “$100,000” by ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on Friday, Romney rejected that number. “No,” Romney said. “Middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.” Really? According to the latest report from the Census Bureau, 4% of all households in American earned more than $200,000 in 2011. Or put another way, 96% of American households earned less than $200,000. Does not sound like the middle to me. Census Report: Click Here What might be a better measure? In Table A-1, Households by Total Money Income, the Census reports that: the median household income (that is, the income where 50% of the population is above and 50% is below) is $50,054. This is less than the high of $54,546 in 2007; since the economic crash, median income has been on a downward slide since 2007 and has not bottomed yet. Of course, we could look at the mean (average) household income. That is higher at $69,677, but still shows a decline from a peak in 2006 of $74,259. Generally, when dealing with income, the median income is a better description of where the middle is; averages can be distorted by very high earnings. Still–$54,00 or $69,000 is a long way from $200,000. Continue reading
State of America’s Children–July 2012
For those seeking data about children in America, the Children’s Defense Fund recently released its annual report. The report, which can be downloaded, is at:
State of America’s Children
It includes this critique of the Gross National Product by Robert F. Kennedy that I like. He raises questions about what we measure and the validity of those measures, and is far more eloquent than I am, who as a researcher would talk about operationalization of terms and content validity.
“Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy
of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages; the intelligence of
our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage; neither
our wisdom nor our learning; neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country; it measures everything,
in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. And it tells us everything about America except why we are
proud that we are Americans.”
– Robert F. Kennedy
Take the Quiz:
PEW has a new quiz about politics. See how you do:
The Quiz
PEW’s New Study: Decade of Decline for the Middle Class
PEW released a study looking at the changes in income and wealth of the middle class, along with their assessment of who is to blame.
The report states:
“Since 2000, the middle class has shrunk in size, fallen backward in income and wealth, and shed some—but by no means all—of its characteristic faith in the future.
These stark assessments are based on findings from a new nationally representative Pew Research Center survey that includes 1,287 adults who describe themselves as middle class, supplemented by the Center’s analysis of data from the U.S. Census Bureau and Federal Reserve Board of Governors.
Fully 85% of self-described middle-class adults say it is more difficult now than it was a decade ago for middle-class people to maintain their standard of living. Of those who feel this way, 62% say “a lot” of the blame lies with Congress, while 54% say the same about banks and financial institutions, 47% about large corporations, 44% about the Bush administration, 39% about foreign competition and 34% about the Obama administration. Just 8% blame the middle class itself a lot.”
Find the report here
