Donkeys can't do math.

[acmegeek]

As a last minute effort, I came up with a concept that should help people see the real issues a little clearer. When you boil it all down, the real issue is a math issue.

So here's what I came up with:

Real elephants remember that most donkeys can't do math.

Please check this site out and if you can, pass it on, I want this to make the rounds as fast as possible. My goal is to popularize the phrase: "Donkeys can't do math"

I am very open to suggestions/criticism/etc...

The web site is: http://www.DonkeyMath.com

Thanks!

[Jeremy]

great idea ;D

[Knightskye]

Heh, cool. :)

But I don't think people are too familiar with the symbols for the political parties.

And even if they went there, they'd probably go, "He's better than McCain/Bush."

[Razmear]

Hmmmm,
According to your math a 4% tax increase on 100% of those making 250,000 or more would bring in 12457225000 in revenue.
12.4 Trillion dollars would pay off the national debt with a bit left over.
Now that I see the numbers, I'd say lets do it for a year, pay off the debt, then reset the tax rate back to what it was.

eb

[Danke]

Hmmmm,
According to your math a 4% tax increase on 100% of those making 250,000 or more would bring in 12457225000 in revenue.
12.4 Trillion dollars would pay off the national debt with a bit left over.
Now that I see the numbers, I'd say lets do it for a year, pay off the debt, then reset the tax rate back to what it was.

eb

:confused:

12457225000 = 12.4 Billion (rounded down)

[slacker921]

Both candidates voted for the bailout.
Both candidates support more pre-emptive war which is bankrupting us.
Both candidates support the redistribution of wealth (stimulus checks, bailout, etc)
Both parties have created massive increases in federal government spending.
Both parties have continued with deficit spending for decades.

So your "donkey vs elephant" argument should stick because there should be a massive difference between the two candidates and between the two parties. But there simply isn't.

We're running a debt of over $10,507,219,000,000 and will be running a deficit next year of well over $1,000,000,000,000 .. and we currently have over $99,200,000,000,000 in unfunded entitlements (medicare, medicaid, social security, etc.. little things..) ... and yet neither candidate is really addressing this.

So I'll be voting for the only candidate on my ballot who comes close to saying he'll deal with these issues. The only real conservative on the NC ballot who opposes the continuation of pre-emptive wars, who opposed the bailout, who opposes the redistribution of wealth through "stimulus" packages, the only one who promises to drastically reduce the size of the federal government ... is Bob Barr.
(and before you Baldwin supporters and Barr haters start typing... Barr is the only choice on the NC ballot besides Obama and McCain)

[mediahasyou]

add it:

http://topronpaulsites.com

[acmegeek]

Thanks for checking my math... I guess I should add some commas. Those huge numbers always trip me up as well.

And as far as candidates go, my only emphasis is that you vote against a donkey who clearly can't do or doesn't care to do the math.

Does anyone here have a good digg or reddit account that they can submit this with? I haven't done that yet, but need to.

[acmegeek]

I just submitted it to digg and reddit:

http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Donkeys_can_t_do_math

http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/7aqcu/donkeys_cant_do_math/

Thanks!

[jonahtrainer]

Oh, just make it all up.

[Ozwest]

I always rely on the Colorado Jack-elope...

[tangent4ronpaul]

Suggestions:

Yeah - add comma's to those numbers.

Fellow American patriots, I am a citizen, a father, a husband, a patriot, and
change to:
Fellow American patriots, I am a citizen, a father, a husband and
(you implied you were a patriot in the first 3 words, second use of patriot in sentence is redundant - also no comma before an "and" )

But, as you may have figured out, I am quite against these kinds
Change to:
As you may have figured out, I am against these kinds
(remove but and quite)

These programs create self-perpetuating cycles of poverty and need, destroy the middle class, and in the end eliminate real jobs.
(bold me)

"A single point" - para needs a re-write. Goes from specific individuals resources (tax dollars) to the general everyone's resources in agregate.

wishes that the power to make the decisions of how to use resources, be in the hands of many.
Change to:
wishes that the power to make the decisions of how to use our resources, be in the hands of many.
(added our, also not really true - the decision is in the hands of a few, but supposedly for the benefit of many).

real defining element can no, should not, and is not your
change to
real defining element can not, should not, and is not your
(no -> not)

So this plan will bring in a bit less than 10 Billion per year and is the "solution"? - ROTFLMA! - Congress gave away 15 times that LAST WEEK!

How about adding something along the lines of: Every year a quarter Trillion (250 Billion) of our tax dollars are paid in interest to countries holding our debt - mainly China and Saudi Arabia. Paying off a 25th of our national debt would bring that same 10 Billion dollars into the Federal governments pocket in the form of interest we would not have to pay out.

hope that helps,

-t

[NorthernMI4RonPaul]

How about an idea that doesn't cost the taxpayers any $$ or put us more in debt?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8e44fztvBYs

[acmegeek]

Tangent,

Thanks! I will make those changes and plan to email it to that big list of 7000 MSM contacts tomorrow morning... should be fun.

Please spread this if you like it!

In liberty,

[Knightskye]

Hmmmm,
According to your math a 4% tax increase on 100% of those making 250,000 or more would bring in 12457225000 in revenue.
12.4 Trillion dollars would pay off the national debt with a bit left over.
Now that I see the numbers, I'd say lets do it for a year, pay off the debt, then reset the tax rate back to what it was.

eb

Did you mean to write out 12 billion or 12 trillion?

12,457,225,000

[acmegeek]

Hello everyone, I added the commas and made the grammar/typo fixes that tangent suggested... Let me know what you think!

[RoyalShock]

I take some issue with your assumption that the tax increase will result in job losses. How do you know it won't instead result in inflation? Or a reduction in salaries and benefits for employees and employers? Or more likely a mixture of the three?

You say that math has no bias. But the way it is presented does.

I think it is a worthy endeavor to try and quantify the results of Obama's tax plan. But I guess what I'm saying is that you are underthinking the consequences and have come up with a scenario that is too absolute.

[acmegeek]

yes, you are correct, I am making a pretty big assumption. It could go many ways, but if employers have less capital to grow/maintain their businesses, it will affect the lower and middle classes. The key point here is that donkey math in general, most often fails to consider the real trickle-down consequences. This was a rushed effort, so I might have done a better job if I had more time. In fact, I might keep this going if Obama gets in... it is a valid point that needs to be delved into more. Thanks for checking it out!

[acmegeek]

Evening bump... :)

[Knightskye]

Evening bump... :)

Evening to you. :D