My Home About Me

David Cay Johnston, the New York Times' tireless class warrior, produces this morning another in his long series of slanted stories about how seemingly objective tax data show American civilization falling into the clutches of an ever-narrower population of "the rich." This morning's instalment is typical. Starts with pure statistics that are presumably true, but narrowly selected to make his point. Then quickly pivoting to "expert" quotations that quickly exploit whatever credibility was gained with the statistics to drive home sheer opinion.

Prof. Emmanuel Saez, the University of California, Berkeley, economist who analyzed the Internal Revenue Service data with Prof. Thomas Piketty of the Paris School of Economics, said such growing disparities were significant in terms of social and political stability.

?If the economy is growing but only a few are enjoying the benefits, it goes to our sense of fairness,? Professor Saez said. ?It can have important political consequences.?

No surprise how this Berkeley/Paris joint venture feels about the data they've processed -- but when it comes to political or moral judgments of that type, is Saez any kind of expert? Seems to me his sense of fairness is no more highly developed than mine -- and Johnston never asked me for a quote.

And then there's the quote from a liberal labor-funded think tank, of course (having quickly run out of socialist professors to ping):

Robert Greenstein, executive director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, an advocacy group for the poor, said that the data understates the widening disparity between the top 1 percent and the rest of the country.

Johnston can't allow him to miss any opportunity to shave points. He calls CBPP "an advocacy group for the poor" -- which exaggerates and glamorizes the think tank's own avowed mission, to work on "policy and public programs that affect low- and moderate-income families and individuals." Both Johnston's and the group's descriptions deceive by leaving out the political orientation. CBPP is quoted constantly in the Times, almost invariably with the warning label "liberal". But not for Johnston, who is beyond the need for such disclosures, he being on such a high-minded and data-driven mission.

The contrary view? Actually, none is represented in Johnston's story. Treasury secretary Paulson is quoted as agreeing that income disparites are growing, and offering a benign explanation for it. Another Treasury official is quoted as neither denying or affirming Johnston's point, but merely noting that the top rungs of the income ladder are currently bearing an increased share of the tax burden. How's that for objectivity?

Thanks to reader Jameson Campaigne for the link.

Amateur Investors   assets   bailout   bottom   capitulation   climactic   credit crunch   Currency ETFs   day trading   Deron Wagner   DJIA chart   Dow 1929 Crash   economic data   Emini's Nas 100   emini's S&P 500   emini's S&P 500e   ETFs (exchange trade funds)   ETFs (exchange traded funds)   inflation   International ETFs