Only in America
N_Fiddledog @ Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:20 pm
I thought this was cute. Supposedly it's by a Canadian.
$1:
TOP-11 “ONLY IN AMERICA” OBSERVATIONS — BY A CANADIAN*
1) Only in America could the rich people – who pay 86% of all income taxes – be accused of not paying their “fair share” by people who don’t pay any income taxes at all.
2) Only in America could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General, and roughly 18% of the federal workforce is black while only 12% of the population is black.
3) Only in America could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner, the head of the TreasuryDepartment and Charles Rangel who once ran the Ways and Means Committee, BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.
4) Only in America can they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.
5) Only in America would they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege while we discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just ‘magically’ become American citizens.
6) Only in America could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country’s Constitution be thought of as”extremists.”
7) Only in America could you need to present a driver’s license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.
Only in America could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company(Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes(Nike).
9) Only in America could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year – for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn’t have nearly enough money.
10) Only in America could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.
11) Only in America can a man with no background, no qualification sand no experience … and a complete failure at his job … be re-elected.
1) Only in America could the rich people – who pay 86% of all income taxes – be accused of not paying their “fair share” by people who don’t pay any income taxes at all.
2) Only in America could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General, and roughly 18% of the federal workforce is black while only 12% of the population is black.
3) Only in America could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner, the head of the TreasuryDepartment and Charles Rangel who once ran the Ways and Means Committee, BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.
4) Only in America can they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.
5) Only in America would they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege while we discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just ‘magically’ become American citizens.
6) Only in America could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country’s Constitution be thought of as”extremists.”
7) Only in America could you need to present a driver’s license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.
Only in America could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company(Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes(Nike).9) Only in America could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year – for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn’t have nearly enough money.
10) Only in America could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.
11) Only in America can a man with no background, no qualification sand no experience … and a complete failure at his job … be re-elected.
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=169355
Gunnair @ Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:30 pm
Sounds like a Free Republic propaganda piece...
N_Fiddledog @ Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:37 pm
I think originally it was a comment under a CNS news piece.
I got it from IOwntheWorld, which is this kind of angry humor, and off-beat news, possibly Libertarian (minus the Paul-bots) blog.
sandorski @ Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:47 pm
Gunnair Gunnair:
Sounds like a Free Republic propaganda piece...
Indeed. The first few points were too dumb for me to continue reading.
N_Fiddledog @ Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:52 pm
sandorski sandorski:
Gunnair Gunnair:
Sounds like a Free Republic propaganda piece...
Indeed. The first few points were too dumb for me to continue reading.
I know, don't you hate that when facts won't line up with your indoctrination - but I'd think you'd be used to it by now.
Gunnair @ Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:57 pm
N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
sandorski sandorski:
Gunnair Gunnair:
Sounds like a Free Republic propaganda piece...
Indeed. The first few points were too dumb for me to continue reading.
I know, don't you hate that when facts won't line up with your indoctrination - but I'd think you'd be used to it by now.
Oh those crazy cherry picked 'facts'...
sandorski @ Thu Jan 31, 2013 11:52 pm
N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:
sandorski sandorski:
Gunnair Gunnair:
Sounds like a Free Republic propaganda piece...
Indeed. The first few points were too dumb for me to continue reading.
I know, don't you hate that when facts won't line up with your indoctrination - but I'd think you'd be used to it by now.
What Facts?
All I saw were a bunch of dumb, tired, or debunked arguments.
CanadianJeff @ Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:47 am
Then maybe it's time to actually start respecting those who's views are not your own. Even if his facts are cherry picked Fiddledog presented things he sees as facts.
That says a lot about the type of character he is. It's forgotten far too much in politics. I save my ridicule for those who truly and honestly earn it.
It's your choice but learning to love your oponent is valuable. I just wish I could master the next trick of always being the most critical of my own facts before anyone ele's.
Freakinoldguy @ Fri Feb 01, 2013 2:57 am
I thought numbers 9 through 11 was refering to George W. Bush and the Republicans 
so, I guess it's about how you percieve things.
Psudo @ Fri Feb 01, 2013 3:50 am
None of these points claim to demonstrate that these things are unique to America. They just assume you'll trust them on it. So how trustworthy are they on the verifiable facts?
$1:
1) Only in America could the rich people – who pay 86% of all income taxes – be accused of not paying their “fair share” by people who don’t pay any income taxes at all.
They did specify income taxes, not taxes generally, which puts this in the right ballpark. In 2009, the top 25% of personal income tax returns accounted for 87.3% of all personal income tax revenue. That includes everyone making $66,193 or more that year. 2008, 2006, and 2005 would each round to 86%. [1, 2] Those same sources say the bottom 50% pays only 2-3% of the revenue, which suggests the 47% figure is about right.However, the set of people who accuse the rich of not paying their "fair share" and the set of people who pay no income taxes are not the same set of people. I'm going to be paying zero income taxes in April, and I think the rich are paying their fair share already.
$1:
2) Only in America could people claim that the government still discriminates against black Americans when they have a black President, a black Attorney General, and roughly 18% of the federal workforce is black while only 12% of the population is black.
As of the 2010 census, 12.6% of the US population self-identified as black or African American. That's up from 12.3% in 2000. [3]Eric Holder is the only African-American head of a federal department right now (1 of 15, or 6.67%), though there are 3 other African-Americans in Cabinet-level positions (4 of 23, or 17.4%). [4] As of 2008, 337,742 federal employees (excluding postal workers and the military) were black out of 1,916,726 total (17.6%). [5]
It's worth noting that the employment-population ratio is 7.7 percentage points higher for whites than for blacks (51.7% vs. 59.4%). [6]
I dispute the claim that statistical outcomes prove anything about racial bias in the process, so I reject the conclusions he arrives at. Even if statistical outcomes did prove something, the numbers above include two examples suggesting anti-black bias and two suggesting pro-black bias; an inconclusive mixed bag. But the list's author did provide essentially accurate information.
$1:
3) Only in America could they have had the two people most responsible for our tax code, Timothy Geithner, the head of the TreasuryDepartment and Charles Rangel who once ran the Ways and Means Committee, BOTH turn out to be tax cheats who are in favor of higher taxes.
Timothy Geithner was opposed to extending the Bush tax cuts pretty much his entire term as head of the Treasury Department, and there was an issue where he had to pay some $34,000 in back taxes (Medicaid and Social Security self-employment payroll taxes) before he took that position [7]. But "tax cheat" is a stretch; his seemingly (and self-described) unintentional mistake was caught by an audit and he had to pay interest on what he owed (not pay a fine or spend time in jail, as one would expect of a tax cheat). [8]The story is similar for Charles Rangel -- the list's author is stretching a bit.
$1:
4) Only in America can they have terrorists kill people in the name of Allah and have the media primarily react by fretting that Muslims might be harmed by the backlash.
Hate crimes against Muslims spiked in the years following 9/11, so the concern was warranted. In 2000, there were 36 Muslim victims of hate crime [9], and in 2002 there were 174 [10] Innocent Muslims were harmed by the backlash. Also, 31 innocent Muslims were killed in the 9/11 bombings themselves [11]. The idea that 9/11 was Muslims attacking non-Muslims was (and is) worth disputing.Incidentally, the media in France has arguably been ignoring hate crimes and rioting by Muslims out of a misguided sense of cultural sensitivity. For example, that argument has been made here: [12] So, clearly it is not "Only in America."
$1:
5) Only in America would they make people who want to legally become American citizens wait for years in their home countries and pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege while we discuss letting anyone who sneaks into the country illegally just ‘magically’ become American citizens.
When immigration was a hot topic during the Bush Administration, the most reasonable Democrats proposal was to charge illegal aliens the same fees that people who wait in line paid in order to re-enter the line. If memory serves. That policy doesn't eliminate unfairness against those who follow the process properly, but the author exaggerates the extent of it. Also, it's a lot more practical a policy than the "self-deportation" alternative pushed by Republicans.$1:
6) Only in America could the people who believe in balancing the budget and sticking by the country’s Constitution be thought of as”extremists.”
Nobody is thought an extremist for those reasons alone. Radically narrow definitions of what "sticking by the country's Constitution" means or bizarre expressions of one's views are the reasons people are thought to be extremists.$1:
7) Only in America could you need to present a driver’s license to cash a check or buy alcohol, but not to vote.
Nothing to fact check.$1:
8) Only in America could people demand the government investigate whether oil companies are gouging the public because the price of gas went up when the return on equity invested in a major U.S. oil company(Marathon Oil) is less than half of a company making tennis shoes(Nike).
Oil companies did have record profits and high prices in unison for a few years there. That's not proof of anything, but it is suspicious. I don't know where to find corporate return on investment numbers for comparison, or when that comparison was claimed to be true.$1:
9) Only in America could the government collect more tax dollars from the people than any nation in recorded history, still spend a Trillion dollars more than it has per year – for total spending of $7-Million PER MINUTE, and complain that it doesn’t have nearly enough money.
This might be true in the sense that most nations in history didn't collect taxes in dollars, but in other currencies. The Roman Empire used to collect more revenue than their number system could properly depict, so it was generally understood that the revenue figures were always in thousands of denarii. They also deficit-spent quite readily. Also, there is more wealth to go around than any time in history, and the USA has a pretty massive chunk of that wealth. Fair comparisons wouldn't put the USA at the top of history's most-taxed populations, of its most spend-happy governments, or of its worst deficit spending.$1:
10) Only in America could politicians talk about the greed of the rich at a $35,000.00 a plate campaign fund-raising event.
The hypocrisy is amusing, but I imagine most nations have similar problems.$1:
11) Only in America can a man with no background, no qualifications and no experience … and a complete failure at his job … be re-elected.
Strictly speaking, not even in America. Everyone has some background, and everyone ever re-elected (President or otherwise) has had at least a thin resume.With looser definitions, you've pretty much defined "politician" here (with a thin minority of exceptions). I'm sure some hard-core Democrats think of Bush from that description, and some hard-core Liberals think of Harper in those terms.
In general, there wasn't much to fact check. The logic rarely follows, but what few facts are there seem generally accurate.
CanadianJeff @ Fri Feb 01, 2013 5:13 am
Well I can't speak for others but when I say cherry picking I'm not calling the facts inaccurate so much as I'm claiming the individual is picking which facts suit their argument and ignoring the rest. The best example I can think of is cherry picking the bible. Just because you can pull a few versus out that speak of love and grace doesn't mean that's what the entire book endorses.
That being said I think it's best to take this on point by point and show some counter-facts to back up why I don't buy these arguments:
1. I think to truly be fair on this matter there a few things to keep in mind. Progressive taxes were designed from the start to create a system that put less burden on the poor. It's expected in these systems for the rich to bear a heavier burden of the taxes taken by government then the poor.
I also think it's important to state something as plain old common sense true. We all pay taxes every time we make a purchase. Everything from food to entertainment has a retail tax of some kind on it in today's age. According to the data already posted here by others income tax is only about 38% of federal income. We would all be lying to pretend that we pay no taxes. Also on a final note let's not pretend that most non income tax hits working people a lot harder then it does the rich.
Finally when it comes down to business tax I think it's also common sense that when costs rise for a business due to tax or other reasons it's almost always passed onto the consumer. I think it's safe to say the consumers pay most of the business tax out there through price increases.
Finally all the extra codes in tax law are often used openly by the rich to advocate for paying a stupidly lower rate then most others as warren buffet has pointed out before.
2.I think Psudo did a fair better job then I ever would in debunking this one.
3. Again hats off to Pusdo I have to admit as a side note however that Mr Geithner has made some of the best anti tax cut arguments I've seen out there.
4. Pusdo where do you keep finding the time for all this data gathering? I would like to add though that I feel anti-Burqa laws and anti blasphemy laws popping up all over have me worried that we are throwing our freedoms under the bus out of hate against the Muslims.
5. Frankly there may be no easy answers to this issue but to suggest that anyone is advocating a "magic pass" to illegal border jumpers is more then a little bit of a mistrust. It also gleefully ignores how many people are happy to hire the Hispanics waiting outside the local home depot or how many are hired on as cheap janitorial labor.
6. Who's calling anyone an extremist simply for proposing a balanced budget? For cutting certain social programs sure but never for the idea of a balanced budget.
7. I'm afraid I've never voted in America so I have no idea what ID if any is required. I have a hard time imagining there is no ID check of any kind however which is what this makes it sound like.
8. When both record profits and rising prices coincide it's not unreasonable for people to ask the government to ensure consumers are not being ripped off. Enforcing business law is part of what the government is meant to do. It can't do that if it doesn't ensure laws are being followed.
9 As already pointed out we don't know if they collected the most actual value then any other government in history but there is no denying it's current overspending habits are ironic with it's huge revenues.
10. I don't know what to say here other then I doubt that the majority of politicians attend 35000 a plate dinners and if they do I doubt they share conversation with the author at those events. I think the majority of politicians stay safely out of the 35000 plate greed category.
11. This is pure opinion and it sounds to be coming from a very sore loser indeed if being a senator is neither a qualification nor experience for office.
QBC @ Fri Feb 01, 2013 7:22 am
Wow, such debate over.......this. Must be a slow news day.
Gunnair @ Fri Feb 01, 2013 7:26 am
CanadianJeff CanadianJeff:
Then maybe it's time to actually start respecting those who's views are not your own. Even if his facts are cherry picked Fiddledog presented things he sees as facts.
That says a lot about the type of character he is. It's forgotten far too much in politics. I save my ridicule for those who truly and honestly earn it.
It's your choice but learning to love your oponent is valuable. I just wish I could master the next trick of always being the most critical of my own facts before anyone ele's.
That says a lot about the type of character he is. It's forgotten far too much in politics. I save my ridicule for those who truly and honestly earn it.
It's your choice but learning to love your oponent is valuable. I just wish I could master the next trick of always being the most critical of my own facts before anyone ele's.
I'd like to know what you read here to suggest there was any ridicule of NF and not the piece.
Appears to be a drive by bit of misplaced indignation, Jeff..........again.
Brenda @ Fri Feb 01, 2013 7:38 am
QBC QBC:
Wow, such debate over.......this. Must be a slow news day.
It did its job as my morning giggle
Public_Domain @ Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:13 am
This has been posted previously by Bart (even with the "supposedly by a Canadian" bit). I remember the mis-format with the damn smilie.
An the subject of the list itself, garbage.