If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Not news: Only 39% of Americans view the Simpson-Bowles plan favorably. News: 25% view the Panetta-Burns plan favorably. Fark: There is no Panetta-Burns plan   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 162
    More: Silly, Americans  
•       •       •

7855 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Dec 2012 at 9:25 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



162 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-12-05 06:56:04 AM
Eight per cent view Panetta-Burns favorably -- not sure if subby is as stupid as people surveyed, or just piling on the joke......
 
2012-12-05 07:14:06 AM

colinspooky: Eight per cent view Panetta-Burns favorably


and 17 percent oppose it. 8+17 = 25% of the respondents have an opinion on something that doesn't exist.

/not submitter
 
2012-12-05 07:22:15 AM

log_jammin: and 17 percent oppose it. 8+17 = 25% of the respondents have an opinion on something that doesn't exist.

/not submitter


Your math is correct, and the situation is absurd as hell. But subby did specifically say "25% view the Panetta-Burns plan favorably, to which colinspooky was referring, I'm sure. ;)
 
2012-12-05 07:28:09 AM

mamoru: Your math is correct, and the situation is absurd as hell. But subby did specifically say "25% view the Panetta-Burns plan favorably, to which colinspooky was referring, I'm sure. ;)


Oh I know. that's why I didn't go "OMG! U R SO WRONG!!!"
 
2012-12-05 07:29:12 AM
Another plan hot off the presses. Link, .pdf
 
2012-12-05 07:54:25 AM
How many people do you know who own computers, have immediate access to the web and, yet, ask you inane questions that they could answer themselves with a ten second google search? Yeah, I thought so. Me too.
 
2012-12-05 07:58:47 AM
and these people vote
 
2012-12-05 08:04:16 AM
The Panetta Burns plan does exist; I first read it about more than three weeks ago. It's pretty off-the-radar, though, so I'm hardly surprised that neither anybody in here nor the article writer have heard of it. But that was back before a quarter of all people started to notice it. It's getting pretty played out now, a lot of people I know have moved on to more interesting and unique plans. The Gromley-Hinckson, for example, or if you really want something obscure, Kanes-Tyrex or Indigo-Montoya.
 
2012-12-05 08:18:32 AM

mamoru: log_jammin: and 17 percent oppose it. 8+17 = 25% of the respondents have an opinion on something that doesn't exist.

/not submitter

Your math is correct, and the situation is absurd as hell. But subby did specifically say "25% view the Panetta-Burns plan favorably, to which colinspooky was referring, I'm sure. ;)


quite...........
 
2012-12-05 08:20:18 AM
I'm mostly opposed to the "release the hounds" portion of the Panetta-Burns plan.
 
2012-12-05 08:31:13 AM
Maybe they were saying Panetta Boo-urns?
 
2012-12-05 08:32:56 AM

Sybarite: I'm mostly opposed to the "release the hounds" portion of the Panetta-Burns plan.


This is why I said I was for it.
 
2012-12-05 08:39:10 AM
I'm in favor of a Pancetta Bowls plan.

Maybe with some pasta.
 
2012-12-05 08:47:26 AM
The Panera-Bread plan calls for a charred sandwich and bland soup. I cannot support this debacle.
 
2012-12-05 08:52:47 AM
*bangs head on desk repeatedly*

MorrisBird: The Panera-Bread plan calls for a charred sandwich and bland soup. I cannot support this debacle.


I suggest trying their cheese danish and hot chocolate plan.

Also, stock up on your insulin.
 
2012-12-05 08:52:57 AM
I once had panini burns when I tried to iron my shirt while making punch.
 
2012-12-05 08:53:22 AM
Lunch.
 
2012-12-05 09:27:17 AM
What I'm getting out of that number is "One person in four is so tired of pollsters that they just make up stuff to mess with them."
 
2012-12-05 09:27:56 AM

make me some tea: and these people vote


Not only that, but the vast majority voted for either a Democrat or a Republican.
 
2012-12-05 09:29:43 AM

MorrisBird: How many people do you know who own computers, have immediate access to the web and, yet, ask you inane questions that they could answer themselves with a ten second google search? Yeah, I thought so. Me too.


How do I post pictures to Fark? I want to "this" this.
 
2012-12-05 09:30:20 AM

Pocket Ninja: The Panetta Burns plan does exist; I first read it about more than three weeks ago. It's pretty off-the-radar, though, so I'm hardly surprised that neither anybody in here nor the article writer have heard of it. But that was back before a quarter of all people started to notice it. It's getting pretty played out now, a lot of people I know have moved on to more interesting and unique plans. The Gromley-Hinckson, for example, or if you really want something obscure, Kanes-Tyrex or Indigo-Montoya.


So it's the hipster plan?

MorrisBird: The Panera-Bread plan calls for a charred sandwich and bland soup. I cannot support this debacle.


img.photobucket.com

I favor the Pantera-Bread plan myself. It takes things to a new level.
 
2012-12-05 09:30:29 AM
I could go for Panini Genoa plan right about now.
 
2012-12-05 09:31:26 AM
25.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-12-05 09:31:30 AM
I, for the record, throw my support behind the Erskine-Moles plan. Only a fool would disagree with it.
 
2012-12-05 09:31:37 AM

make me some tea: and these people vote


well, only half the population votes so theres a 50% they don't. 78% of people know that.
 
2012-12-05 09:32:25 AM
I fully support the Kobayashi-Maru Plan myself.
 
2012-12-05 09:33:14 AM
If you SO insists on following the Panties-Burn plan, please consult your doctor about STD treatments.
 
2012-12-05 09:33:39 AM
Well, after winning the White House again, Liberals are being honest that they just want to tax and spend America into oblivion.
 
2012-12-05 09:34:06 AM

Pocket Ninja: The Panetta Burns plan does exist; I first read it about more than three weeks ago. It's pretty off-the-radar, though, so I'm hardly surprised that neither anybody in here nor the article writer have heard of it. But that was back before a quarter of all people started to notice it. It's getting pretty played out now, a lot of people I know have moved on to more interesting and unique plans. The Gromley-Hinckson, for example, or if you really want something obscure, Kanes-Tyrex or Indigo-Montoya.


I imagine the Indigo-Montoya plan involves looking for the 6 fingered man.

/ my name is Indigo Montoya; you killed my father, prepare to die!
 
2012-12-05 09:34:10 AM
Not taken in account apparently: the fact that a percentage of the American population have a negative opinion of Leon Panetta and would oppose any plan he is associated with, regardless of its content.

/personally I'd cast a wary eye upon it
//does the Panetta-Burns plan originate in North Korea...I hear there is a unicorn lair there
 
2012-12-05 09:34:20 AM
I tried the Pitney-Bowes plan but it just didn't deliver.
 
2012-12-05 09:34:21 AM
I wish they would have had party affiliation attached to the responses. Some people still think Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11.
 
2012-12-05 09:34:46 AM
I fully support the Curtis-Chase-Tap deficit reduction plan.
 
2012-12-05 09:35:08 AM
Who the f burned the pancetta?
 
2012-12-05 09:35:36 AM

Pocket Ninja: The Panetta Burns plan does exist; I first read it about more than three weeks ago. It's pretty off-the-radar, though, so I'm hardly surprised that neither anybody in here nor the article writer have heard of it. But that was back before a quarter of all people started to notice it. It's getting pretty played out now, a lot of people I know have moved on to more interesting and unique plans. The Gromley-Hinckson, for example, or if you really want something obscure, Kanes-Tyrex or Indigo-Montoya.


I've researched Indigo-Montoya an found it closely related to a Saul.

Could it be Saul Alinski?
 
2012-12-05 09:36:02 AM

MorrisBird: How many people do you know who own computers, have immediate access to the web and, yet, ask you inane questions that they could answer themselves with a ten second google search? Yeah, I thought so. Me too.


When I was a teenager I naively thought that in the future people wouldn't espouse incorrect facts because they could easily verify them on the internet. How wrong that was. I had a guy telling me last week that the unemployment rate in Saudi Arabia is 0%.
 
2012-12-05 09:36:24 AM
take the average farker on the street, some sort of math for hours per week. subtract the hours they sleep, hygiene - dress time, commute, work, time for the 100 chores everyone does every week, time for other responsibilities they have in life. average farker has very little time to themselves to keep up with the events of the day, their personal interests/hobbies/recreation and what's going on in the world. and still some jerkoff has to bust peoples balls because they don't know everything about everything. morans. actually, newpaper reporter = elitist morans. the wurst kind of moran.

i spit on elitist newspaper reporter moran. pa-tooooiie!
 
2012-12-05 09:37:08 AM
Divorced mistresses to Princes of Wales?
 
2012-12-05 09:38:27 AM

LarryDan43: Could it be Saul Alinski?


Gesundheit!
 
2012-12-05 09:38:41 AM
I has a sad.
 
2012-12-05 09:39:29 AM
What do you want to bet that the 25% consists entirely of Honey Boo Boo & Jersey Shore viewers?

\I fully suppport the Snooki-BooBoo deficit reduction plan...
 
2012-12-05 09:40:34 AM
Something like half of Americans also thing the Fiscal Cliff would increase the deficit. Americans don't know anything about specific bills.
 
2012-12-05 09:41:09 AM
39% of people favor screwing over the middle class to finance more tax cuts for the rich???

Let's remind ourselves of what the bipartisan Simpson Boyles plan is:

What the co-chairmen are proposing is a mixture of tax cuts and tax increases - tax cuts for the wealthy, tax increases for the middle class. They suggest eliminating tax breaks that, whatever you think of them, matter a lot to middle-class Americans - the deductibility of health benefits and mortgage interest - and using much of the revenue gained thereby, not to reduce the deficit, but to allow sharp reductions in both the top marginal tax rate and in the corporate tax rate.

It will take time to crunch the numbers here, but this proposal clearly represents a major transfer of income upward, from the middle class to a small minority of wealthy Americans. And what does any of this have to do with deficit reduction?

Let's turn next to Social Security. There were rumors beforehand that the commission would recommend a rise in the retirement age, and sure enough, that's what Mr. Bowles and Mr. Simpson do. They want the age at which Social Security becomes available to rise along with average life expectancy. Is that reasonable?

The answer is no, for a number of reasons - including the point that working until you're 69, which may sound doable for people with desk jobs, is a lot harder for the many Americans who still do physical labor.

But beyond that, the proposal seemingly ignores a crucial point: while average life expectancy is indeed rising, it's doing so mainly for high earners, precisely the people who need Social Security least. Life expectancy in the bottom half of the income distribution has barely inched up over the past three decades. So the Bowles-Simpson proposal is basically saying that janitors should be forced to work longer because these days corporate lawyers live to a ripe old age.


Of course, they also want to kill various other pieces of the social safety net. Cuts to Medicaid are heavily mentioned currently.

In an age where we are intentionally devaluing the dollar, they want to also reduce cost of living increases for Social Security. You're not even going to be able to afford the good cat food, people.

It's hard to believe such a large percentage of people are too stupid to realize that all the "fiscal cliff" talk is the current excuse to fark over everyone else all for MOAR TAX CUTS! to benefit the rich.
 
2012-12-05 09:41:16 AM

beta_plus: Well, after winning the White House again, Liberals are being honest that they just want to tax and spend America into oblivion.


beta_plus

Smartest
Funniest
2012-12-05 09:33:39 AM
(favorite: desperate troll)
 
2012-12-05 09:41:19 AM

iheartscotch: Pocket Ninja: The Panetta Burns plan does exist; I first read it about more than three weeks ago. It's pretty off-the-radar, though, so I'm hardly surprised that neither anybody in here nor the article writer have heard of it. But that was back before a quarter of all people started to notice it. It's getting pretty played out now, a lot of people I know have moved on to more interesting and unique plans. The Gromley-Hinckson, for example, or if you really want something obscure, Kanes-Tyrex or Indigo-Montoya.

I imagine the Indigo-Montoya plan involves looking for the 6 fingered man.

/ my name is Indigo Montoya; you killed my father, prepare to die!


You keep saying that word, "plan". I do not think it means what you think it means.
 
2012-12-05 09:42:48 AM
I found that the dog fetches cat video link in the article was more interesting.
 
2012-12-05 09:43:38 AM
Excellent!
 
2012-12-05 09:44:47 AM

KrispyKritter: take the average farker on the street, some sort of math for hours per week. subtract the hours they sleep, hygiene - dress time, commute, work, time for the 100 chores everyone does every week, time for other responsibilities they have in life. average farker has very little time to themselves to keep up with the events of the day, their personal interests/hobbies/recreation and what's going on in the world. and still some jerkoff has to bust peoples balls because they don't know everything about everything. morans. actually, newpaper reporter = elitist morans. the wurst kind of moran.

i spit on elitist newspaper reporter moran. pa-tooooiie!


The average Farker spends 117 hours a week on Fark, 23 hours a week fighting in the War on Christmas, and 16 hours a week perpetrating various welfare and Medicare frauds. They have plenty of time to keep abreast of current events.

\also, the average Farker spends only .07 hours a week on hygiene.
 
2012-12-05 09:46:02 AM
I am all in favor of the Masseth-Testa plan.
/what you haven't heard of it??
//EVERYBODY has heard of it.
 
2012-12-05 09:49:31 AM

iheartscotch: Pocket Ninja: The Panetta Burns plan does exist; I first read it about more than three weeks ago. It's pretty off-the-radar, though, so I'm hardly surprised that neither anybody in here nor the article writer have heard of it. But that was back before a quarter of all people started to notice it. It's getting pretty played out now, a lot of people I know have moved on to more interesting and unique plans. The Gromley-Hinckson, for example, or if you really want something obscure, Kanes-Tyrex or Indigo-Montoya.

I imagine the Indigo-Montoya plan involves looking for the 6 fingered man.

/ my name is Indigo Montoya; you killed my father, prepare to die!


Hehhehheh

he's blue
 
2012-12-05 09:50:11 AM

Pants full of macaroni!!: Pocket Ninja: The Panetta Burns plan does exist; I first read it about more than three weeks ago. It's pretty off-the-radar, though, so I'm hardly surprised that neither anybody in here nor the article writer have heard of it. But that was back before a quarter of all people started to notice it. It's getting pretty played out now, a lot of people I know have moved on to more interesting and unique plans. The Gromley-Hinckson, for example, or if you really want something obscure, Kanes-Tyrex or Indigo-Montoya.

So it's the hipster plan?

MorrisBird: The Panera-Bread plan calls for a charred sandwich and bland soup. I cannot support this debacle.

[img.photobucket.com image 209x272]

I favor the Pantera-Bread plan myself. It takes things to a new level.


Now that's just a vulgar display of flour.

/ba dum tish
 
2012-12-05 09:50:53 AM
I'm in favor of the Webly-Vickers plan
 
2012-12-05 09:51:06 AM
MorrisBird:

How many people do you know who own computers, have immediate access to the web and, yet, ask you inane questions that they could answer themselves with a ten second google search? Yeah, I thought so. Me too.

Which Simpson, Jessica or OJ?

I thought Paul Bowles was dead.
 
2012-12-05 09:51:17 AM

Pants full of macaroni!!: I favor the Pantera-Bread plan myself. It takes things to a new level.


I can't support it. It's such a vulgar display of flour.


/not my joke.
 
2012-12-05 09:52:37 AM

Pocket Ninja: The Panetta Burns plan does exist; I first read it about more than three weeks ago. It's pretty off-the-radar, though, so I'm hardly surprised that neither anybody in here nor the article writer have heard of it. But that was back before a quarter of all people started to notice it. It's getting pretty played out now, a lot of people I know have moved on to more interesting and unique plans. The Gromley-Hinckson, for example, or if you really want something obscure, Kanes-Tyrex or Indigo-Montoya.


I hear the BooBoo-Kardashian plan is polling very well.
 
2012-12-05 09:53:01 AM
We already have proof positive that the American people are uninformed about political issues.

img24.imageshack.us
 
2012-12-05 09:53:04 AM

CheekyMonkey: What do you want to bet that the 25% consists entirely of Honey Boo Boo & Jersey Shore viewers?

\I fully suppport the Snooki-BooBoo deficit reduction plan...


I do not support the Snooki-BooBoo deficit reduction plan, as there will there ever be a time when there are too few Snooki's or Honey Boo Boo's.
 
2012-12-05 09:53:12 AM
I favor the Wallace and Gromit plan, and have for some time.
 
2012-12-05 09:53:53 AM

iheartscotch: Pocket Ninja: The Panetta Burns plan does exist; I first read it about more than three weeks ago. It's pretty off-the-radar, though, so I'm hardly surprised that neither anybody in here nor the article writer have heard of it. But that was back before a quarter of all people started to notice it. It's getting pretty played out now, a lot of people I know have moved on to more interesting and unique plans. The Gromley-Hinckson, for example, or if you really want something obscure, Kanes-Tyrex or Indigo-Montoya.

I imagine the Indigo-Montoya plan involves looking for the 6 fingered man.

/ my name is Indigo Montoya; you killed my father, prepare to die!


I think you meant "prepare to dye."
 
2012-12-05 09:53:55 AM

hdhale: Not taken in account apparently: the fact that a percentage of the American population have a negative opinion of Leon Panetta and would oppose any plan he is associated with, regardless of its content.

/personally I'd cast a wary eye upon it
//does the Panetta-Burns plan originate in North Korea...I hear there is a unicorn lair there


Agreed. I'd like to think I'd honestly admit "never heard of it" had I been a part of this survey but I don't like admitting ignorance more than any other man so I might have simply assumed I'd disagree with it with it based on Panetta's attachment to it based on my past knowledge of him.
 
2012-12-05 09:55:26 AM
Relevant


Link
 
2012-12-05 09:59:59 AM
If only I was not part of the population, I would say you all deserve this government, you earned it.
More accurately, we failed to earn a better government.
 
2012-12-05 10:00:15 AM
I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, to learn that a quarter or our citizenry would have an opinion about something that doesn't even exist. Are these people Farkers?
 
2012-12-05 10:01:02 AM
i.imgur.com
 
2012-12-05 10:01:49 AM

St_Francis_P: Maybe they were saying Panetta Boo-urns?


I was saying Boo-urns
 
2012-12-05 10:04:12 AM
The Monty-Burns plan is available here.
 
2012-12-05 10:07:56 AM
This thread makes me happy in so many ways.
 
2012-12-05 10:08:35 AM
Who's playing in the Simpson-Bowle?
 
2012-12-05 10:08:36 AM
You like that statistic, don't you?

I do.

Why?

Because 9% think it's too high, AND SHOULDN'T BE CUT! 9% of respondents could not fully
get their arms around the question. There should be another box you can check for, "I
have utterly no idea what you're talking about. Please, God, don't ask for my input."
 
2012-12-05 10:08:55 AM

Driedsponge: CheekyMonkey: What do you want to bet that the 25% consists entirely of Honey Boo Boo & Jersey Shore viewers?

\I fully suppport the Snooki-BooBoo deficit reduction plan...

I do not support the Snooki-BooBoo deficit reduction plan, as there will there ever be a time when there are too few Snooki's or Honey Boo Boo's.


Too few Snooki's whats? Too few Honey Boo Boo's whats?

\also, the plural of Honey Boo Boo is Honeys Boo Boo, not Honey Boo Boos...
 
2012-12-05 10:10:21 AM

KrispyKritter: take the average farker on the street, some sort of math for hours per week. subtract the hours they sleep, hygiene - dress time, commute, work, time for the 100 chores everyone does every week, time for other responsibilities they have in life. average farker has very little time to themselves to keep up with the events of the day, their personal interests/hobbies/recreation and what's going on in the world. and still some jerkoff has to bust peoples balls because they don't know everything about everything. morans. actually, newpaper reporter = elitist morans. the wurst kind of moran.

i spit on elitist newspaper reporter moran. pa-tooooiie!



The author didn't pass judgement on anyone in the peice. They just reported the facts. And in this case the facts tell you a lot. They give you a good idea about just how much people are prone to lie to opinion polls, and how much the specific wording of the polls can affect the outcome of the poll.
 
2012-12-05 10:10:38 AM
Leon Panetta.
Leon Burns.
Leonard Bernstein.
The truth is out there
 
2012-12-05 10:11:15 AM

MorrisBird: How many people do you know who own computers, have immediate access to the web and, yet, ask you inane questions that they could answer themselves with a ten second google search? Yeah, I thought so. Me too.


I've thought this and brought it up in conversations many, many times. With that said, you did just ask a question impossible to answer by simply going to the computer.....or did you?

I suppose my gmail contact list would be a good start.
 
2012-12-05 10:11:40 AM

sxacho: Leon Panetta.
Leon Burns.
Leonard Bernstein.
Leon(ardo) DaVinci
The truth is out there

 
2012-12-05 10:11:51 AM
Are you saying that people are ignorant mongrels? You don't say...
 
2012-12-05 10:18:18 AM
What it says to me is that there are some people who just oppose stuff whether it is a good idea or not or even whether they have heard of it or not. This portion of negative votes shold be removed from any tally.

do the same with the positive and split the undecided 50/50.
 
2012-12-05 10:18:59 AM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: We already have proof positive that the American people are uninformed about political issues.

[obama wins.jpg]


content.ytmnd.com

Happy Holidays. I got you exactly what you need.
 
2012-12-05 10:22:05 AM
Did they interview these people? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_JJLLfTR8I
 
2012-12-05 10:29:24 AM
while interested in keeping costs contained it's worth while to note that ignorance is in fact, free.

I fear for 'murica
 
2012-12-05 10:30:46 AM
I'm not in favor of hyphenated plans, so I would also have responded negatively to the Panetta-Burns plan despite never having heard of it. People from different political parties should not work together, it's un-American. I mean, anti-American. Uh, not American.
 
2012-12-05 10:31:31 AM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: We already have proof positive that the American people are uninformed about political issues.

[img24.imageshack.us image 150x113]


i48.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-05 10:31:49 AM

Nemo's Brother: Did they interview these people? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_JJLLfTR8I


You mean an uninformed electorate? Unpossible. Actually, that was just a bunch of deliberately misleading butthurt, racist BS. One would have got the same answers from tea partiers.
 
2012-12-05 10:32:14 AM

Dr.Weir: I fully support the Kobayashi-Maru Plan myself.


Under the current 2 party system im America...we are all neck deep on Kobayashi-Maru.
 
2012-12-05 10:33:12 AM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: We already have proof positive that the American people are uninformed about political issues.

[img24.imageshack.us image 150x113]



I think that point was made in 2004.
 
2012-12-05 10:33:33 AM
If only they had somehow managed to imply that Obama liked the Panetta-Burns plan, they could probably have gotten unfavorable ratings for it close to 45-50%.
 
2012-12-05 10:34:18 AM
Reminds me of when Howard Stern was interviewing black people by asking them what they thought of Obama's policies (which were actually things McCain was running his platform on) and the interviewees went at length agreeing with it. This was followed by them dinging policies they were told were from McCain but were actually from Obama.
 
2012-12-05 10:34:19 AM
This is simply a trick to make people look stupid. "Panetta-Burns' nonexistent policy proposals were supported by 8 percent and opposed by 17 percent of the voters surveyed."

I imagine that the questions were something like "Do you support or oppose the following policy which is part of the Panetta-Burns act: blah blah blah". Those surveyed simply agreed or disagreed with the policy. They assumed that "Panetta-Burns" existed because most people would consider that as a prerequisite for being asked whether or not you support it's policies.

If someone came up to you and said "do you support the Hoot-Smalley act?" You may say you don't know because you've never heard of it. If someone came up to you and said "Do you support the Hoot-Smalley act which gives tax breaks to the most wealthy 2% of Americans to stimulate the economy?". You are more likely to say yes or no. You know whether or not you support tax breaks for the wealthy so there's no need to go look up the Hoot-Smalley act before you answer the question. You are assuming that the person speaking to you is talking about something that is not made up.
 
2012-12-05 10:34:25 AM

JackieRabbit: I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, to learn that a quarter or our citizenry would have an opinion about something that doesn't even exist. Are these people Farkers?


Farkers are these people.

/watch yer logic
 
2012-12-05 10:35:48 AM

numbquil: This is simply a trick to make people look stupid. "Panetta-Burns' nonexistent policy proposals were supported by 8 percent and opposed by 17 percent of the voters surveyed."

I imagine that the questions were something like "Do you support or oppose the following policy which is part of the Panetta-Burns act: blah blah blah". Those surveyed simply agreed or disagreed with the policy. They assumed that "Panetta-Burns" existed because most people would consider that as a prerequisite for being asked whether or not you support it's policies.

If someone came up to you and said "do you support the Hoot-Smalley act?" You may say you don't know because you've never heard of it. If someone came up to you and said "Do you support the Hoot-Smalley act which gives tax breaks to the most wealthy 2% of Americans to stimulate the economy?". You are more likely to say yes or no. You know whether or not you support tax breaks for the wealthy so there's no need to go look up the Hoot-Smalley act before you answer the question. You are assuming that the person speaking to you is talking about something that is not made up.


No tricks necessary.
You, unlike most 'Mericans, are over thinking.
 
2012-12-05 10:36:31 AM

JackieRabbit: Nemo's Brother: Did they interview these people? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_JJLLfTR8I

You mean an uninformed electorate? Unpossible. Actually, that was just a bunch of deliberately misleading butthurt, racist BS. One would have got the same answers from tea partiers.


This is what Democrats actually believe.
 
2012-12-05 10:36:48 AM

KarmicDisaster: I'm in favor of the Webly-Vickers plan


I'm a Garand-Browning advocate myself.
 
2012-12-05 10:40:39 AM
I prefer the Saffir-Simpson plan.
 
2012-12-05 10:41:07 AM
I don't like Panetta-Burns all that much myself, because typically the bread is dry and half-stale and they pile on way too much mayo.
 
2012-12-05 10:41:18 AM
I'm fully in support of the Weyland-Yutani plan, which involves taking off and nuking the entire site from orbit. It is, after all, the only way to be sure.
 
2012-12-05 10:42:44 AM

BullBearMS: It will take time to crunch the numbers here


Krugman: "I'm talking out of my ass here.."
 
2012-12-05 10:44:51 AM

sxacho: Leon Panetta.
Leon Burns.
Leonard Bernstein.
The truth is out there


i.imgur.com

i.ytimg.com
 
2012-12-05 10:46:45 AM
make me some tea:

and these people vote

I don't. Voting is for suckers.

Y'all must mean this plan (Wikipedia link). Cute. Yet another deckchair-rearranging plan.

Why should the world's most militarily powerful country care about its notional national debt? E.g., there are a few countries in Africa that have tyrannical but inefficient governments, abundant mineral resources and tribally dived armies we could knock over with the downdraft from an Apache 'copter: at this point colonizing or clientelizing them could only benefit their people by sharing our technology, administrative skill, health care and better-than-most rights and freedoms, and would pay for itself through safer and more efficient extraction techniques. Take Burundi for example:

"Burundi is one of the five poorest countries in the world. It has one of the lowest per capita GDPs of any nation in the world and a low gross domestic product largely due to warfare, corruption, poor access to education and the effects of HIV/AIDS[citation needed]. Burundi is densely populated and experiences substantial emigration.

Cobalt and copper are among Burundi's natural resources, while coffee and sugar are two of its main exports."

We could greatly alleviate their civil warfare, corruption and education problems and greatly slow the rate of HIV increase by safer-sex education, distributing cheap or free condoms and making sure their hospitals and clinics have enough new disposable needles to go around (reuse of dirty or badly sterilized needles being a major cause of HIV in the Third World); control of Burundi's cobalt, coffee and copper would pay for this. It's pretty much a win-win deal.

The Hutu-Tutsi strife would be harder to deal with (and is not my area) but my hunch is the experience of American blacks would be useful, helping to submerge ethnic divisions into the broader category of black Burundians or even black Africans. Black Americans differ greatly among themselves in height, body shape, skin tone, nasal breadth, indeed most of the visible props used to separate Hutu from Tutsi, yet they are all Black; Malcolm X even had light eyes, reddish hair and freckles. By simply being there black Americans would model cooperation in many ways.

If capitalism is not evil per se then colonialism isn't either: it all depends on how it's done. And instead of wrangling over how to divide the pie we have we should make the pie bigger and go from there.
 
2012-12-05 10:46:53 AM

cubic_spleen: I'm fully in support of the Weyland-Yutani plan, which involves taking off and nuking the entire site from orbit. It is, after all, the only way to be sure.


Actually, that's the Ripley-Hicks plan. The Weyland-Yutani plan is much worse.
 
2012-12-05 10:48:37 AM

numbquil: This is simply a trick to make people look stupid. "Panetta-Burns' nonexistent policy proposals were supported by 8 percent and opposed by 17 percent of the voters surveyed."

I imagine that the questions were something like "Do you support or oppose the following policy which is part of the Panetta-Burns act: blah blah blah". Those surveyed simply agreed or disagreed with the policy. They assumed that "Panetta-Burns" existed because most people would consider that as a prerequisite for being asked whether or not you support it's policies.

If someone came up to you and said "do you support the Hoot-Smalley act?" You may say you don't know because you've never heard of it. If someone came up to you and said "Do you support the Hoot-Smalley act which gives tax breaks to the most wealthy 2% of Americans to stimulate the economy?". You are more likely to say yes or no. You know whether or not you support tax breaks for the wealthy so there's no need to go look up the Hoot-Smalley act before you answer the question. You are assuming that the person speaking to you is talking about something that is not made up.


If the question had been "Do you support Congress agreeing on a plan other than the ones that have been suggested", and the answer was:

8% No, I want to go over the cliff.
17% Yes, any agreement is better than no agreement.
75% I don't know, I'd have to see the agreement.

would you consider those answers dishonest?

"Wanna get raped repeatedly with a left handed crescent wrench"?
"Um, no thanks"
"Haha! Liar. There's no such thing as a left handed crescent wrench!"
 
2012-12-05 10:49:55 AM

KrispyKritter: take the average farker on the street, some sort of math for hours per week. subtract the hours they sleep, hygiene - dress time, commute, work, time for the 100 chores everyone does every week, time for other responsibilities they have in life. average farker has very little time to themselves to keep up with the events of the day, their personal interests/hobbies/recreation and what's going on in the world. and still some jerkoff has to bust peoples balls because they don't know everything about everything. morans. actually, newpaper reporter = elitist morans. the wurst kind of moran.

i spit on elitist newspaper reporter moran. pa-tooooiie!


Or, 25% of people could stop lying and admit that they don't know what is in the supposed 'plan'. Because they don't, because it doesn't exist.

This does not require any time or effort, only honesty and integrity.
 
2012-12-05 10:50:31 AM

numbquil: This is simply a trick to make people look stupid. "Panetta-Burns' nonexistent policy proposals were supported by 8 percent and opposed by 17 percent of the voters surveyed."

I imagine that the questions were something like
"Do you support or oppose the following policy which is part of the Panetta-Burns act: blah blah blah". Those surveyed simply agreed or disagreed with the policy. They assumed that "Panetta-Burns" existed because most people would consider that as a prerequisite for being asked whether or not you support it's policies.

If someone came up to you and said "do you support the Hoot-Smalley act?" You may say you don't know because you've never heard of it. If someone came up to you and said "Do you support the Hoot-Smalley act which gives tax breaks to the most wealthy 2% of Americans to stimulate the economy?". You are more likely to say yes or no. You know whether or not you support tax breaks for the wealthy so there's no need to go look up the Hoot-Smalley act before you answer the question. You are assuming that the person speaking to you is talking about something that is not made up.


Well, you don't have to "imagine" what questions were asked since the actual questionnaire is linked in the article. The point of the article is that people had an opinion on a piece of legislation that does not exist. If people are being honest, you would expect 100% to answer "Not Sure". Your imagination notwithstanding, the question was not posed as a policy question:

Q7
Do you support or oppose the Panetta-Burns
plan?
Support ........................................................... 8%
Oppose ........................................................... 17%
Not sure .......................................................... 75% 

This is not a "trick to make people look stupid", it is a question exposing people's stupidity.
 
2012-12-05 10:52:13 AM
Panetta and Burns don't have a plan yet? WHAT THE HELL IS TAKING THEM SO LONG?
 
2012-12-05 10:54:44 AM
i.imgur.com

In my household we are 100% in favor of the Somacandra/Loki the Cat plan, which involves lots of snuggling on the bed, nose kisses, blankets and petting.

/man
/not afraid to show my sensitive kitty-snuggle side 
/I also sound fat
 
2012-12-05 10:54:47 AM
Nevermind I didn't see the link. People are either stupid or just don't answer surveys honestly.
 
2012-12-05 10:57:42 AM

CorruptDB: This is not a "trick to make people look stupid", it is a question exposing people's stupidity.


They do a fine job of that by themselves.

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-12-05 10:58:13 AM
d2tq98mqfjyz2l.cloudfront.net
 
2012-12-05 10:59:11 AM
scratch.mit.edu
 
2012-12-05 10:59:28 AM

Another Pretentious Nickname: I'm not in favor of hyphenated plans, so I would also have responded negatively to the Panetta-Burns plan despite never having heard of it.


I would be interesting in subscribing to your newsletter if I wasn't also opposed to multiple word Fark logins.
 
2012-12-05 11:01:41 AM

beta_plus: Well, after winning the White House again, Liberals are being honest that they just want to tax and spend America into oblivion.


The GOP controlled house is liberal? I did not know that
 
2012-12-05 11:03:08 AM
Did anyone here see Jimmy Kimmel's man-on-the-street interviews, asking people on the day after the election if they had voted for the Vice President yet?

Several people responded "yes", while others said, "not yet, but I will later".

Yes...these people vote.

Honestly, I think the people who are against democracy are on to something.
 
2012-12-05 11:04:13 AM

The One True TheDavid: If capitalism is not evil per se then colonialism isn't either: it all depends on how it's done. And instead of wrangling over how to divide the pie we have we should make the pie bigger and go from there.


Well that certainly went off on a tangent.
 
2012-12-05 11:10:28 AM
i.imgur.com

In related news, there is also no museum in Iskenderun.
 
2012-12-05 11:10:45 AM

theMightyRegeya: Honestly, I think the people who are against democracy are on to something.



t3.gstatic.com
"Democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49%."-Thomas Jefferson

At least one of the founders agrees with you.....
 
2012-12-05 11:13:23 AM
www.smtexas.net
 
2012-12-05 11:14:19 AM
It's a tragedy when pancetta burns.
racheleats.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-12-05 11:14:56 AM
They all agree, which is why we don't have a democracy in America.
It's a Republic for a reason.
And that reason is "people are stupid".
 
2012-12-05 11:20:38 AM
www.sportshollywood.com
 
2012-12-05 11:24:51 AM

ds615: They all agree, which is why we don't have a democracy in America.
It's a Republic for a reason.
And that reason is "people are stupid"


and whenever anyone wants to argue that point I just tell them to say the pledge, it's in the farking pledge....

I pledge alligence
to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the republic for which it stands

/albeit a democratic republic......
 
2012-12-05 11:29:56 AM

mamoru: log_jammin: and 17 percent oppose it. 8+17 = 25% of the respondents have an opinion on something that doesn't exist.

/not submitter

Your math is correct, and the situation is absurd as hell. But subby did specifically say "25% view the Panetta-Burns plan favorably, to which colinspooky was referring, I'm sure. ;)


Your statements about the statistics regarding a debt-reduction plan that does not exist are correct.
 
2012-12-05 11:37:50 AM

Sybarite: I'm mostly opposed to the "release the hounds" portion of the Panetta-Burns plan.


But that's my favorite part! It's essential to the successful execution of the plan!

I still propose splitting earned and non-earned income into two returns* with the same bracket levels, with the first $x of either being untaxed(IE standard exemption), because it encourages saving, but still hits those rich enough to live on capital gains with the higher rates. Actually, it'd encourage those who earn their money through labor to invest, and those who earn most of their income through investment to work(some). Win-Win.

I actually think those earning the highest paychecks(actors, athletes) are paying their fair share, it's the 15% cap on capital gains that is killing the fairness of the system, allowing Romney and Buffet types to pay far less.

*Work type deductions would go on the earned income portion of the return, investment deductions on the non-earned, and personal type deductions(home mortgage, healthcare, etc...) either split evenly or onto the highest marginal rate.
 
2012-12-05 11:38:12 AM

poot_rootbeer: It's a tragedy when pancetta burns.
[racheleats.files.wordpress.com image 500x375]


This aggression will not stand!

/crispy bits of pancetta on top of potato leek soup is better than politics. yuuuummmmm
 
2012-12-05 11:49:20 AM

dittybopper: cubic_spleen: I'm fully in support of the Weyland-Yutani plan, which involves taking off and nuking the entire site from orbit. It is, after all, the only way to be sure.

Actually, that's the Ripley-Hicks plan. The Weyland-Yutani plan is much worse.


You are correct, sir or madam! I stand corrected.

*stands correctedly*
 
2012-12-05 11:50:09 AM
I can get behind the seymour-tatas plan
 
2012-12-05 12:01:37 PM

Thisbymaster: I can get behind the seymour-tatas plan


But what about the Schowyer-Nutz PLan?
 
2012-12-05 12:08:56 PM

Pocket Ninja: The Panetta Burns plan does exist; I first read it about more than three weeks ago. It's pretty off-the-radar, though, so I'm hardly surprised that neither anybody in here nor the article writer have heard of it. But that was back before a quarter of all people started to notice it. It's getting pretty played out now, a lot of people I know have moved on to more interesting and unique plans. The Gromley-Hinckson, for example, or if you really want something obscure, Kanes-Tyrex or Indigo-Montoya.


Part of the real problem with the people who didn't appreciate the Pannetta-Burns plan is that they were reading the PDF version. You can't fully appreciate it that way. Digital copies lose all the warmth and soul. Look, get yourself a copy done in quill and ink, failing that some sort of printing press on parchment. And then really read it, man. You'll get it, trust me.
 
2012-12-05 12:22:55 PM
I'm fairly wonky, and I honestly have no clear idea what is in the Simpson-Bowles plan. How is it even possible that 35% of all people approve of it?

log_jammin: colinspooky: Eight per cent view Panetta-Burns favorably

and 17 percent oppose it. 8+17 = 25% of the respondents have an opinion on something that doesn't exist.

/not submitter


To be fair, only 23% of respondents approve of the Simpson-Bowles plan, while 16% oppose it and 61% had no opinion. The headline was doubly wrong; it should have read something to the effect of "39% of respondents have an opinion on the Simpson-Bowles plan, and 25% of respondents have an opinion on the non-existent Panetta-Burns plan."

Basically, the overwhelming majority of people have never heard of either plan. A surprising number of people are willing to lie to strangers instead of exposing their ignorance to a stranger.
 
2012-12-05 12:30:43 PM
I suspect that among the people who constituted the 14% difference (out of total polled) between the numbers of people who had opinions on the real and imaginary plans, even most of those people expressed an opinion on the real plan not because they actually had one, but because they did faintly recall hearing the term "Simpson-Bowls Plan" and therefore felt like they should have an opinion on it.
 
2012-12-05 12:36:46 PM

cubic_spleen: dittybopper: cubic_spleen: I'm fully in support of the Weyland-Yutani plan, which involves taking off and nuking the entire site from orbit. It is, after all, the only way to be sure.

Actually, that's the Ripley-Hicks plan. The Weyland-Yutani plan is much worse.

You are correct, sir or madam! I stand corrected.

*stands correctedly*


unconfirmable without pics
 
2012-12-05 12:39:57 PM

Avery614: ds615: They all agree, which is why we don't have a democracy in America.
It's a Republic for a reason.
And that reason is "people are stupid"

and whenever anyone wants to argue that point I just tell them to say the pledge, it's in the farking pledge....

I pledge alligence
to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the republic for which it stands

/albeit a democratic republic......


Actually, it's a representative democracy. The top priority when setting up the system here in the US was to ensure that "the people" couldn't vote to take away the power or anything else from the people running the system. If the majority of "the people" decide to do something to upset things then the representatives will go ahead and veto it.
 
2012-12-05 12:47:30 PM

Avery614: ds615: They all agree, which is why we don't have a democracy in America.
It's a Republic for a reason.
And that reason is "people are stupid"

and whenever anyone wants to argue that point I just tell them to say the pledge, it's in the farking pledge....

I pledge alligence
to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the republic for which it stands

/albeit a democratic republic......


Sure. And the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a democracy and a republic! It's right in the farking name of the country!

Do you know what other country was a democracy and republic at the same time? The German Democratic Republic (i.e., East Germany from 1945 to 1989).

There's one other country I can think of that's both a democracy and a republic. It's the United States! The United States is two things! Can you count to two? One... Two! Ha ha! I knew you could. One Two! Very good.
 
2012-12-05 01:39:53 PM

The Larch: I'm fairly wonky, and I honestly have no clear idea what is in the Simpson-Bowles plan. How is it even possible that 35% of all people approve of it?log_jammin: colinspooky: Eight per cent view Panetta-Burns favorably

and 17 percent oppose it. 8+17 = 25% of the respondents have an opinion on something that doesn't exist.

/not submitter

To be fair, only 23% of respondents approve of the Simpson-Bowles plan, while 16% oppose it and 61% had no opinion. The headline was doubly wrong; it should have read something to the effect of "39% of respondents have an opinion on the Simpson-Bowles plan, and 25% of respondents have an opinion on the non-existent Panetta-Burns plan."

Basically, the overwhelming majority of people have never heard of either plan. A surprising number of people are willing to lie to strangers instead of exposing their ignorance to a stranger.


It's worse than that. Since 25% of people claimed to have an opinion on a nonexistent plan, it's possible that as few as 14% of respondents actually knew anything about the Simpson-Bowles plan.
 
2012-12-05 01:49:11 PM
The PPP PDF includes cross-checks. Romney voters tended insignificantly more likely to express an opinion on the non-existent plan, but their support compared to the extant plan dropped off more sharply than Obama voters. However, "very liberal" voters had a very strong tendency to express an opinion --about two in five. Men were more likely than women to express an opinion, and tended much more likely to oppose the nonexistent plan (cue "mansplaining" jokes, ladies). Hispanics and "other" (asian?) tended more likely to opine than Whites or Blacks. 18-29 years olds were a lot more likely to sound off (both for AND against) than older groups.

Kudos to PPP for pointing out how stupid we Americans collectively tend to be.

Rapmaster2000: When I was a teenager I naively thought that in the future people wouldn't espouse incorrect facts because they could easily verify them on the internet. How wrong that was. I had a guy telling me last week that the unemployment rate in Saudi Arabia is 0%.


I'm wondering if high-data plan smart phones are going to start impacting that at some point -- whether having such verification being just a few moments away at all time will make a difference.

Of course, knowing when something is likely to fail a fact check and thus deserves one requires a bit of metacognition, which probably runs into the Dunning-Kreuger effect....

numbquil: I imagine that the questions were something like "Do you support or oppose the following policy which is part of the Panetta-Burns act: blah blah blah".


Nope. However, your choice to "imagine" rather than "look it up" provides some discouragingly disconfirmatory evidence for my smart phone conjecture. So, you've got that going for you.

CorruptDB: Well, you don't have to "imagine" what questions were asked since the actual questionnaire is linked in the article.


Of course, there's the possibility SOME of the people might learn to look things up....

numbquil: Nevermind I didn't see the link. People are either stupid or just don't answer surveys honestly.


FTFY. I'm fairly confident the options aren't exclusive.
 
2012-12-05 01:53:15 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Another plan hot off the presses. Link, .pdf


From the plan: Tax on alcoholic beverages at a uniform $16 per proof gallon

Current rate is 5 cents per 12 oz. For 5% beer their proposal comes to 15 cents per 12 oz.

Those bastards.
 
2012-12-05 01:58:43 PM

Avery614: sxacho: Leon Panetta.
Leon Burns.
Leonard Bernstein.
The truth is out there

[i.imgur.com image 490x480]

[i.ytimg.com image 480x360]


You mean the,"Carter-Coolidge Coincidenza".
 
2012-12-05 02:09:04 PM

rufus-t-firefly: The Stealth Hippopotamus: We already have proof positive that the American people are uninformed about political issues.

[img24.imageshack.us image 150x113]

[i48.photobucket.com image 480x360]


Er, who is that?
 
2012-12-05 02:19:24 PM

elchupacabra: rufus-t-firefly: The Stealth Hippopotamus: We already have proof positive that the American people are uninformed about political issues.

[img24.imageshack.us image 150x113]

[i48.photobucket.com image 480x360]

Er, who is that?


Nevermind, Google-Fu worked for at least the name. Next question: is she fapping in that pic? Couldn't find a context to the picture.
 
2012-12-05 02:27:45 PM

olddeegee: You mean the,"Carter-Coolidge Coincidenza".


Glad to see I'm not the only old fart that enjoyed that....

www.motifake.com
 
2012-12-05 02:32:49 PM

Somacandra: [i.imgur.com image 500x338]

In my household we are 100% in favor of the Somacandra/Loki the Cat plan, which involves lots of snuggling on the bed, nose kisses, blankets and petting.

/man
/not afraid to show my sensitive kitty-snuggle side 
/I also sound fat


OMG! Why are 2 of my cats at your house?

Is one about 19 lbs and the other about 7 lbs?
 
Ant
2012-12-05 02:46:20 PM

KrispyKritter: take the average farker on the street, some sort of math for hours per week. subtract the hours they sleep, hygiene - dress time, commute, work, time for the 100 chores everyone does every week, time for other responsibilities they have in life. average farker has very little time to themselves to keep up with the events of the day, their personal interests/hobbies/recreation and what's going on in the world. and still some jerkoff has to bust peoples balls because they don't know everything about everything. morans. actually, newpaper reporter = elitist morans. the wurst kind of moran.

i spit on elitist newspaper reporter moran. pa-tooooiie!


If you don't know about something, don't pretend like you do. Just say "I don't know enough to give an opinion about that".
 
2012-12-05 02:50:08 PM

That Guy...From That Show!: Actually, it's a representative democracy


Yeah but that covers a few forms of government and still falls under the "Democratic Republic" umbrella(I think). We use a presidential republic if I recall correctly. Representative democracy also includes the constitutional monarchy and parliamentary republic flavors, not sure if they also fall under the "Democratic Republic" umbrella.

The Larch: Sure. And the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a democracy and a republic! It's right in the farking name of the country!

Do you know what other country was a democracy and republic at the same time? The German Democratic Republic (i.e., East Germany from 1945 to 1989).

There's one other country I can think of that's both a democracy and a republic. It's the United States! The United States is two things! Can you count to two? One... Two! Ha ha! I knew you could. One Two! Very good.


You forgot the democratic republic of Congo, but yeah the good ol' U.S.A. is the most popular one.
 
2012-12-05 02:51:22 PM

beta_plus: Well, after winning the White House again, Liberals are being honest that they just want to tax and spend America into oblivion.


As opposed to the GOP plan of borrow and spend. Neither side wants smaller government, they just want bigger government in different ways. The GOP wants handouts to defense contractors and billion dollar companies, the Democrats want handouts to the poor so they can get food and medicine.
 
2012-12-05 02:53:01 PM

The Larch: Democratic People's Republic of Korea


Be careful with that one, throw people's in front of republic and all kinds of shiat can happen.....

From wiki because I'm leaving soon/lazy....

A People's Republic is a title used by certain republican states. It has been often used by countries adhering to communism, such as China. However, the term is not unique to communist states. Many countries adopted the title given its rather generic nature. Bangladesh, established as a liberal democracy, proclaimed a people's republic given the background of mass participation in the country's independence movement and liberation war.
 
2012-12-05 02:53:07 PM

KrispyKritter: take the average farker on the street, some sort of math for hours per week. subtract the hours they sleep, hygiene - dress time, commute, work, time for the 100 chores everyone does every week, time for other responsibilities they have in life. average farker has very little time to themselves to keep up with the events of the day, their personal interests/hobbies/recreation and what's going on in the world. and still some jerkoff has to bust peoples balls because they don't know everything about everything. morans. actually, newpaper reporter = elitist morans. the wurst kind of moran.

i spit on elitist newspaper reporter moran. pa-tooooiie!


They have time for honey boo-boo, but not quite enough to read up on how our debt, interest, and economy work. I'd say that's a matter of priorities, not of time.
 
2012-12-05 03:12:38 PM

BullBearMS: 39% of people favor screwing over the middle class to finance more tax cuts for the rich???

Let's remind ourselves of what the bipartisan Simpson Boyles plan is:

What the co-chairmen are proposing is a mixture of tax cuts and tax increases - tax cuts for the wealthy, tax increases for the middle class. They suggest eliminating tax breaks that, whatever you think of them, matter a lot to middle-class Americans - the deductibility of health benefits and mortgage interest - and using much of the revenue gained thereby, not to reduce the deficit, but to allow sharp reductions in both the top marginal tax rate and in the corporate tax rate.

It will take time to crunch the numbers here, but this proposal clearly represents a major transfer of income upward, from the middle class to a small minority of wealthy Americans. And what does any of this have to do with deficit reduction?

Let's turn next to Social Security. There were rumors beforehand that the commission would recommend a rise in the retirement age, and sure enough, that's what Mr. Bowles and Mr. Simpson do. They want the age at which Social Security becomes available to rise along with average life expectancy. Is that reasonable?

The answer is no, for a number of reasons - including the point that working until you're 69, which may sound doable for people with desk jobs, is a lot harder for the many Americans who still do physical labor.

But beyond that, the proposal seemingly ignores a crucial point: while average life expectancy is indeed rising, it's doing so mainly for high earners, precisely the people who need Social Security least. Life expectancy in the bottom half of the income distribution has barely inched up over the past three decades. So the Bowles-Simpson proposal is basically saying that janitors should be forced to work longer because these days corporate lawyers live to a ripe old age.

Of course, they also want to kill various other pieces of the social safety net. Cuts to Medicaid are ...


What a crock of wrong. What terrible source could be that far off-the-mark on the details of this tax plan, which

*mouses over link*
*link ends in "krugman"*

Ah.
 
2012-12-05 03:22:41 PM

Avery614: That Guy...From That Show!: Actually, it's a representative democracy

Yeah but that covers a few forms of government and still falls under the "Democratic Republic" umbrella(I think). We use a presidential republic if I recall correctly. Representative democracy also includes the constitutional monarchy and parliamentary republic flavors, not sure if they also fall under the "Democratic Republic" umbrella.\


True.

We're pretty much whatever is convenient for what person or group wants to say or do so people will say that the USA is a "democracy", "democratic republic", "presidential republic", "constitutional republic", or "representative democracy", "Polyarchy", etc... and I can see aspects of all of those except for the "democracy" part, that's a real long stretch.

For instance, all that democracy bit they told people about since the beginning will all go away if it appears that a 3rd party candidate or a "renegade" party candidate wins the popular vote. Then, the core of our system will show itself since it was set up for such an event since the beginning. 

All the blah blah blah by people saying we're democratic and therefore have more freedom completely ignores the fact that as each week goes by there's less and less of it...and, well, when there's water leaking out of a bucket eventually there won't be any left.
 
2012-12-05 03:40:29 PM
I view destruction of Title 26 USC favorably.

Only one tax .... 15% straight across the board. No 501(c)3s, no fluctuating tax rates, no penalties for making a buck, corporations and individuals all the same ... 15%.

Bonus, ability to plan ahead with certainty.
 
2012-12-05 03:47:48 PM

Clemkadidlefark: I view destruction of Title 26 USC favorably.

Only one tax .... 15% straight across the board. No 501(c)3s, no fluctuating tax rates, no penalties for making a buck, corporations and individuals all the same ... 15%.

Bonus, ability to plan ahead with certainty.


Except that this 15% flat tax scheme has been studied relentlessly for for over 30 years and each time the same conclusion was reached: it won't work. For a flat tax to work, the federal rate would have to be north of 25% for everyone; it would have to be a regressive tax, which would impact poorer taxpayers the most. And it would require would require deep cuts in federal programs, including defense. This would mean that most block grants and other payments to the states would have to go. They, in turn, would have to increase their tax rates to make up for this. Some experts estimate that a flat tax plan would result in an overall tax liability of around 50% for a family earning $50K per year.

So, I think I will support the Balz-Deep plan. My wife is with me on this.
 
2012-12-05 03:51:21 PM

urbangirl: cubic_spleen: dittybopper: cubic_spleen: I'm fully in support of the Weyland-Yutani plan, which involves taking off and nuking the entire site from orbit. It is, after all, the only way to be sure.

Actually, that's the Ripley-Hicks plan. The Weyland-Yutani plan is much worse.

You are correct, sir or madam! I stand corrected.

*stands correctedly*

unconfirmable without pics


Check my profile: I'm a sir.
 
2012-12-05 03:59:49 PM

Avery614: Glad to see I'm not the only old fart that enjoyed that....


So, 14.50 a day and .35 a wack. So just about 41 times a day?

That was close.
 
2012-12-05 05:49:31 PM

Avery614: olddeegee: You mean the,"Carter-Coolidge Coincidenza".

Glad to see I'm not the only old fart that enjoyed that....

[www.motifake.com image 336x400]


Guido Sarducci was a real highlight of absurd humor. The mythical country of Doo Dah, with a capital city of the same name. You know: Doo Dah, Doo Dah
 
2012-12-05 06:03:32 PM

Avery614: ds615: They all agree, which is why we don't have a democracy in America.
It's a Republic for a reason.
And that reason is "people are stupid"

and whenever anyone wants to argue that point I just tell them to say the pledge, it's in the farking pledge....

I pledge alligence
to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the republic for which it stands

/albeit a democratic republic......


Like the Congo or the former East Germany. But Best Korea is one up: they're a Democratic People's Republic

However that's not reflected in our country's official name; we're just United States, like Mexico. But you'll be pleased to know that Nazi Germany was GROSS.
 
2012-12-05 06:13:05 PM

That Guy...From That Show!:

We're pretty much whatever is convenient for what person or group wants to say or do so people will say that the USA is a "democracy", "democratic republic", "presidential republic", "constitutional republic", or "representative democracy", "Polyarchy", etc... and I can see aspects of all of those except for the "democracy" part, that's a real long stretch.


The USA is an colony of International Finance with an oligarchical structure underlaying a facade of representative government. And I'm not speaking only of the Electoral College. Since y'all brought it up.

The New World Order is not really dominated by the USA. Ask the World Bank.
 
2012-12-05 07:17:25 PM

beta_plus: Well, after winning the White House again, Liberals are being honest that they just want to tax and spend America into oblivion.


... By returning tax levels to what they were during the longest economic expansion in America's history.
 
2012-12-05 07:20:28 PM

Quick Fixer: *mouses over link*
*link ends in "krugman"*

Ah.


Ad hominum attack instead of attempting to present evidence to counter? Good luck convincing anyone who doesn't share your biases.
 
2012-12-05 07:26:08 PM
OK, so who would Burns be anyway?
 
2012-12-05 07:27:41 PM

The One True TheDavid: The USA is an colony of International Finance with an oligarchical structure underlaying a facade of representative government. And I'm not speaking only of the Electoral College. Since y'all brought it up.


On a higher level with larger scope regarding the world, yes. I have no disagreements regarding this. In fact, it's pretty darned overt.
 
2012-12-05 08:04:06 PM

urbangirl: I has a sad.


If this makes you sad, wait until you find out that half of the people have an IQ under 100.
 
drp
2012-12-05 09:09:11 PM

Pocket Ninja: The Panetta Burns plan does exist; I first read it about more than three weeks ago. It's pretty off-the-radar, though, so I'm hardly surprised that neither anybody in here nor the article writer have heard of it. But that was back before a quarter of all people started to notice it. It's getting pretty played out now, a lot of people I know have moved on to more interesting and unique plans. The Gromley-Hinckson, for example, or if you really want something obscure, Kanes-Tyrex or Indigo-Montoya.


Inigo, not Indigo.

I'm telling you, you're messing up the name, now get it right!
 
2012-12-05 09:28:14 PM

Epoch_Zero: beta_plus: Well, after winning the White House again, Liberals are being honest that they just want to tax and spend America into oblivion.

beta_plus

Smartest
Funniest
2012-12-05 09:33:39 AM
(favorite: desperate troll)


Now I remember why I have you green. Your retardation and total failure to grasp basic math makes you incredibly entertaining.
 
2012-12-05 09:31:58 PM
images.hollywood.com
You don't know about Panetta-Burns? That's all they're talking about upstairs.
 
2012-12-05 09:34:17 PM

drp: Pocket Ninja: The Panetta Burns plan does exist; I first read it about more than three weeks ago. It's pretty off-the-radar, though, so I'm hardly surprised that neither anybody in here nor the article writer have heard of it. But that was back before a quarter of all people started to notice it. It's getting pretty played out now, a lot of people I know have moved on to more interesting and unique plans. The Gromley-Hinckson, for example, or if you really want something obscure, Kanes-Tyrex or Indigo-Montoya.

Inigo, not Indigo.

I'm telling you, you're messing up the name, now get it right!


Too late, someone already came up with a variation, the Rusty-Montoya.
 
2012-12-06 10:46:39 AM
So, the grade we give the media for educating the Public on ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT little items in the past and next 4 years, is,,,

/but you all "know" Baby boo boo
//what a society
 
Displayed 162 of 162 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report