Taxes, Lies, and the King Kong Effect

 "Figures don't lie, but liars figure" - Some Unknown Sage

This morning I was reading about how you can lie--or at least mislead--with perfectly accurate numbers and graphics.  People commonly present accurate numbers in a way that gives a completely inaccurate impression.  The book I was reading quoted an editorial in 2003 by the Wall Street Journal which lamented the tax burden of wealthy Americans, saying, "taxpayers with incomes over $200,000 could expect on average to pay about $99,000 in taxes."

This is technically true, but entirely deceiving, because it implies that once you hit an income of $200,000, you can expect to make pay nearly half your income in taxes.  That's not true.  The figure of $99,000 is the average tax for everyone with an income of over $200,000--from a doctor who makes exactly $200,000 all the way up to Bill Gates and Warren Buffett.  These ultra-rich people pay millions in taxes, and that drives the average way up, even for people with very high incomes.  I had a professor in grad school who called this the King Kong effect.  If you took 14 normal-sized gorillas, and then King Kong, and computed the average weight of all 15 gorillas in your sample, your average would be a whole lot more than the average (normal) gorilla weighs, because King Kong is skewing the average.  In the same way, most people making around $200,000 per year (the gorillas) would pay much less than $99,000 in income taxes, and those with very highest incomes (the King Kongs) would pay far more.  And they will still be very, very rich.

But I don't want to suggest that only anti-tax crusaders play this game.  This afternoon, I saw this rather compelling video: Why Obama Now?  The video shows a figure based on the one below (I should point out that, while the video is based on a speech by President Obama, this graphic was not cited in the speech--I'm calling foul on the makers of the video and the graphic, not the speech the video is based on).

From ReadyThinkVote.com

Here we have people against tax cuts for the rich, using the same tactic used by the Wall Street Journal when arguing for those cuts.  But what is exaggerated here are tax cuts, not taxes.  A more honest chart would continue showing higher and higher incomes, instead of lumping vastly different incomes together on the right.  A chart like that would show a gradual rise in tax cuts with income, not a sudden jump at the top 1%.  Of course, if that chart were drawn to the same scale as this one, and included the highest-paid CEOs, it would be around 75 feet across.  Those folks get paid a lot.

But that's a whole other issue, and I want to be clear that this post isn't about taxes or income distribution.  It's about deception.  Statements like the Wall Street Journal's, and charts like the one above, are deceiving--whether deliberate or not, I don't know.  But whatever side of the tax issue you're on, I hope you'll agree that deception is wrong.  Truth is what matters, not ideology.  As far as I'm concerned, the whole point of having an ideology is that it reflects what I think is true and right.  If I have to resort to deception to serve my ideology, then I've lost sight of the truth.  And then I've missed the point entirely.

The Impostors of Reason

With its seven-inch wingspan, the owl butterfly is an impressive bug by any standard.  But what is really striking are its fake eyes.  It has eyespots on the underside of its wings, which mimic the eyes of an owl. Since owls prey on the birds that eat butterflies, the sight of those fake eyes is likely to give any would-be predator pause.  The butterfly is able to survive because the bird doesn't take the time to discover the deception. If the bird stopped and watched the butterfly for a while, it would realize how harmless it actually is. 

As for the owls it imitates, they have been symbols of wisdom and reason in western culture ever since the ancient Greeks associated them with Athena.  Owls actually aren't particularly wise or reasonable birds, but owls and reasoning do have one thing in common: they both have impostors.  The imposters of reason are things like anger, hard-heartedness, rudeness, and smugness.  People commonly mistake these things for rationality, when they're really nothing of the sort. They are impostors.  Like owl butterflies, they draw their power from shock and credulity. The more they're mistaken for the real thing, the more powerful they become.

Critical Thinking: What it is, and Why it's Not Just a Catchphrase

I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves: and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is, not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. 

- Thomas Jefferson

Once I had a bumper sticker that said, “Think for yourself, or you're not thinking at all.”  I admired this sentiment a great deal, which is not surprising, since I had come up with it myself. Yes, I'm a little embarrassed to say it now, but I made my own bumper sticker.  I even bought some special paper to print it on. But the ink wasn't made for life in the elements, so it faded pretty quickly, and I didn't replace it. It's not that I didn't still believe it; it's just that I thought it was incomplete. After all, what good does it do to tell people to think for themselves, when so many people are terrible at thinking? I briefl considered making a twin bumper sticker that said, “...but think carefully.”  And then I thought, “That's ridiculous!”, and peeled the first one off.

As silly as my twin bumper stickers would have been, I do think both ideas are important. We live in a country where people are allowed, and even expected (in theory), to think for themselves. That being the case, you would think we would put more effort into teaching people how to think; not what to think, but how think, and how to think clearly and effectively. This sounds like a good idea, but it's pretty vague.  What exactly would we teach?  One of the first step in clear thinking is to define terms, so let me start by doing that.  The word “thinking" covers a huge range of mental processes, including concept formation, memory, decision-making, visual thinking, creative thinking, and so on.  I'm talking about something more specific. I'm talking about the kind of careful thinking that's aimed at deciding what to believe. This kind of thinking proceeds by carefully and honestly weighing the evidence for beliefs before accepting them. I'm tempted to call this “rationality” but that term, like "thinking" is also a little ambiguous. In economics, rationality is used to mean something like “optimal decision-making or action.”   Economists imagine ideal worlds in which there is an optimum way for “rational agents” to proceed in order to “maximize their utility”. This optimal strategy could easily include lying, and need not have much to do with what's true or morally right. That's not the kind of rationality I'm talking about here. What I'm interested in is honest, deliberate thinking aimed at finding what is really true, or what is really right...or at least getting as close to those things as possible.

Critical Thinking

This kind of deliberate thinking is already taught in school, though not nearly enough. It was once known as informal logic or reasoning, but these days it's usually called critical thinking. Most people have heard that term, because it's become an educational buzzword.  That's unfortunate, because it means it's in danger of being emptied of meaning by people who repeat it--parrotlike--because they like the sound of it.  But critical thinking isn't just some new educational fad that will soon go the way of New Math. It has roots going back as far at least as far as Socrates, and still has some very important lessons to offer. 

Rumble on Sesame Street

It was ugly. And it all started with Big Bird. As everybody knows by now, in the first debate between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, Romney declared that, if elected, he was going to stop the federal subsidy to PBS...even though he loves Big Bird. This was a tiny part of a long debate, but it got folks pretty heated up. A lot of people love PBS, and apparently a lot of people really hate it, or at least hate the fact that any of their taxes help support it. As I write, this debate is causing big arguments and bulging blood vessels. If you happen to read this years from now, that may seem strange, but it's true. I know, because Big Bird got me into the biggest, nastiest online fight I've ever been in. I don't mean a heated debate. I'm talking about a scathing, name-calling rumble. If it had happened face to face, I think punches might have been thrown.

This bothered me, because I don't normally get into arguments that nasty. Before it was all over, I had been called unpatriotic, a weakling, and a budding Nazi. But it what really got my dander up was being called irrational. I may not always be rational, but I try hard to be, and spend a downright unhealthy amount of time thinking about what rationality is...and what it isn't. That's what the argument made me think about, and what I want to think about in my next few posts. But first, a little more about the Rumble on Sesame Street. I won't get too detailed, because there's nothing more boring than hearing someone tell you, “So then I just said to him, I said....blah, blah, blah...” But I spend a lot of time on this blog talking about civility and rationality, and this argument was a spectacular breakdown of both, so it's worth looking at what went wrong. (Just to be clear, I'm not saying everyone who doesn't support government subsidies for PBS is like the guy I'm describing here.  Some of them are very smart and nice, and I can disagree with them without getting into a fight). 

Here's how it started. I'm one of the PBS lovers, so as soon as the debate was over, I started thinking up ways to show people that federal spending on PBS is actually quite minuscule compared to the entire federal budget. I had soon worked out that if you imagined federal spending this year in terms of height—the height of the Empire State Building, which is 1445 feet tall—then federal spending on PBS would amount to a little more than a tenth of an inch. I was rather proud of this image, so, when I saw a comment thread about PBS, I threw it in there.

What We Think and Why: Two Guests Explain Their Political Beliefs

For this post, I'm just going to come to the podium, introduce the topic being discussed, and then shut up and listen while other people get up and talk.  I've always been amazed by how much people misunderstand each other.  We tend to think those on the opposite end of the political spectrum are more extreme, more sinister, and less intelligent than they really are. We think they do what they do because they're mean and stupid, when in fact, they're often doing it because they genuinely think it's the right thing to do.  And they think we're mean and stupid.

Now that social media has come along, I think we're missing a great opportunity to explain to other people what we really think, and just as importantly, why we think it.  Of course, what people usually do when politics comes up on social media sites is to take sides and have a big, playground feud with name-calling, scapegoating, and hurt feelings all around.  But surely it doesn't have to be this way. At least, maybe we can use it to increase understanding, too.  So, I put together an online survey asking people to briefly explain--in the most polite, thoughtful way possible--what their political beliefs are, and why they believe them.  I also asked them if areas where the other side has a point, how they are most commonly misunderstood, and how they think public debate could be made more civil and productive.  So far, the volume of responses has been underwhelming (2 people), but the quality has been excellent.  One is a moderate, and the other is a moderate liberal. If you read these, and feel like explaining why you believe what you do, I'm linking to the survey at the bottom. If I get some more responses, I'll post them here.  It would be nice to get some other views, especially conservative and libertarian ones.  And now, I'll yield the floor to my guests.

First Guest (Moderate)

1. Where do you live?

Arkansas

2. How would you describe your political views?

Moderate

3. How would you describe your religious beliefs?

Christian (Protestant)

I'm a Christian who thinks many modern interpretations of Christianity are off in a significant way.

4. Please briefly describe your basic views about politics. Try to politely explain what you believe, and why. Please be as clear and specific as possible. If you say you believe something, please explain why you believe it. Be friendly! This is not the place to say why the other side is wrong. The point is not to convince others you're right, but to help them understand how you see things.

I think both sides of any political argument can usually learn something from the other, and the reason our country's so divisive is there's not enough respect for our collective differences. The truth is often found somewhere in between. I think each extreme stance is a direct response to the opposite extreme and that both extremes have way more in common than they'd care to admit. I think there's a difference between standing up for your beliefs (i.e. living your life according to your moral code) and denying someone else the right to theirs because of what you believe. Or at least, there should be a difference. I think science and theology aren't mutually exclusive. I think Christians' (or any faith's) refusal to acknowledge scientific advancements or to accept current scientific understanding is killing religious faith. I also believe that scientific arrogance is triggering that response. The only things science proves are the scientific reasons or causes of things in our physical world. It's not within the purview of science to disprove matters of faith and I believe scientists who claim otherwise are overstepping their boundaries. I also believe extreme conservative Christians who refuse to consider different interpretations of the Bible will eventually render their own faith obsolete. There's no reason our understanding or perception of God can't grow with our understanding of science and perception of the world in which we live. I believe God doesn't allow bad things to happen to good people. I believe we live in a physical world where natural things happen, and I believe each of us has been given the gift of free will. I believe that free will often results in people making poor decisions, which then have a negative (and sometimes devastating) effect on others. It's up to each of us to choose how to respond and grow from those experiences. I believe that what I believe doesn't really matter to anyone besides myself, my family and friends, and anyone upon whom I have the opportunity to have an impact. I believe my beliefs have more impact if I reserve them for when they really matter instead of waving them around like a showy flag. I believe I should leave a positive impact on this world and show respect for others. I believe this is a brilliant idea.

5. How do you feel that others most commonly misjudge your views? In other words, what are the biggest misconceptions or misunderstandings others have about people with your political views?

My conservative friends think I'm delusional and that I've lost touch with my beliefs when I voice a liberal stance on something they perceive as "un-Christian." My liberal friends think I'm ignorant or obviously closed-minded when I voice a conservative stance something.

6. Please rate how important you consider each of the issues below. If there are other issues you find important, please list them in the "Other" section.

	Very Important (1)	Important (2)	Somewhat Important (3)	Not Very Important (4)	Unimportant (5)
Abortion	X
Crime		X
Economy and Jobs	X
Education	X
Environment	X
Ethnic Minority Issues		X
Foreign Relations	X
Gay Issues and Gay Marriage	X
Gender Issues				X
Global Issues	X
Government Spending		X
Gun Policy			X
Terrorism		X
Other (please specify):

7. Please list the top one to three political issues that are most important to you, and explain what you believe about them, and your reasons for those beliefs. Please remember that the point is not to prove you're right, but to explain your views to people who don't share them.

Abortion - I personally don't believe my life is my own. I believe I have a responsibility to make loving choices in everything I do and to accept responsibility for my actions. I don't always succeed but I must always strive. I believe there are natural consequences to all that we do, and one of the potential natural consequences of sex is pregnancy. As a woman, I believe we make our choice when we decide to have sex. If pregnancy results, it's our responsibility to make a loving choice and if we're not prepared to keep the baby, maybe the father is. If not, there are many adoption options. I believe abortion should be reserved for victims of rape and incest, though I admit proving who's a victim and who's not isn't always easy. Having said all this, I also believe both sides of this debate miss HUGE opportunities to work together to prevent the need for the argument in the first place. Sex Education and Personal Responsibility classes could go a long way toward that goal. Gay Issues and Gay Marriage - I believe conservative Christians are way off base here, and I believe how this debate turns out could have a huge impact on human rights in general. I don't believe the government has the right to restrict gay marriage rights any more than I believe they have the right to restrict mine. I don't think it matters whether you believe gay men and women were born gay or whether you believe they choose to be gay. The point is they should have the choice to be happy regardless of WHY that makes them happy. I have a dear friend who believes to the core that gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry because it's not Biblical, but in the next breath she'll state she wants a government whose role in her life is restricted in order to protect her rights as a human being. This woman is brilliant in so many ways yet she has no idea how contradictory these two stances are. Education - I believe education is the key to pretty much everything.

8. Are there areas where you think people of different political views might have a good point? If so, please explain.

Being the moderate that I am, I almost always see both sides of the argument. I may come down on one side of the fence over the other, but I can usually see the other point and find some truth in it.

9. Do you think there is too much partisanship or incivility in public debate? If so, do you have any suggestions for ways we could make public debate more constructive? Are there any other points you would like to make about this issue?

There's definitely too much partisanship and incivility in public debate. We could start by respecting our neighbors more. Insist on being right less often. Admit when we're wrong. Not that I'm always good at it because I do have a fair amount of pride, but I try to see reason in the end because I despise arrogance. ___________________________________________________ Second Guest (Moderately Liberal) 1. Where do you live? Arkansas 2. How would you describe your political views? Moderately Liberal 3. How would you describe your religious beliefs? Christian agnostic 4. Please briefly describe your basic views about politics. Try to politely explain what you believe, and why. Please be as clear and specific as possible. If you say you believe something, please explain why you believe it. Be friendly! This is not the place to say why the other side is wrong. The point is not to convince others you're right, but to help them understand how you see things. I believe that politics are corrupted by money and always have been, but that the Supreme Court's granting of personhood status to corporations has led to a supernova of corruption which threatens our entire nation. The current political atmosphere is poisonous to any sort of cooperation and accomplishment, and ensures that lawmakers spend more and more time raising money and less and less time representing their constituents. It's crucial that leaders on both sides begin to cooperate even if it means that they don't get re-elected. If they were the public servants they claim to be, they would care less about re-election than about doing what is right. Vick Snyder is a wonderful example of what a true public servant should be. I don't believe that continuing extreme tax breaks for the rich and for corporations has been or will be effective at increasing jobs. It's been tried and has only made things worse. Our political campaigns last far too long and spend an obscene amount of money. I firmly believe in separation of church and state, both for the protection of the state and for the protection of religious freedom. Anytime a given group's religious beliefs and practices are accepted as part of the state, other religious beliefs and practices are automatically discriminated against. This is completely un-American in my opinion. I think that the U.S. offensive war in Iraq was a terrible mistake which has cost our country dearly and which helped to sink our economy to a sorry state. Deregulation of the banking industry was also a terrible mistake, for which both parties are to blame. Once again the corrupting influence of big money. I believe that true leaders must stand up and do everything in their power to turn environmental destruction around before it's too late. True patriots do not object to paying reasonable taxes to support national infrastructure, defense, our elderly, etc. Every effort should be made to stop fraud and waste, but we must take care of the nation and its people, and the very wealthy should pay their fair share. 5. How do you feel that others most commonly misjudge your views? In other words, what are the biggest misconceptions or misunderstandings others have about people with your political views? In this part of the country, people with my political views are probably considered radical and deluded. Many people think that any degree of liberalism is somehow anti-Christian, when in fact, many Christians believe that Christ would be classified as a liberal if he were on Earth today. Anything other than conservatism is viewed as "bleeding-heart", and wanting to give away hard-earned money to lazy people. I think most conservatives believe that there are huge numbers of free-loaders getting "welfare" and that the U.S. gives away a large part of its wealth in foreign aid because of liberals. In fact, what most people think of as "welfare" doesn't exist anymore except in cases where children are concerned, and foreign aid is a small part of our budget. Conservatives seem to think of liberals as immoral hippies who want a Marxist government. I think one of the biggest misconceptions people have about people who support Pres. Obama as I do, is that we have been taken in by a Black Muslim who wants to destroy America. 6. Please rate how important you consider each of the issues below. If there are other issues you find important, please list them in the "Other" section. Very Important (1) Important (2) Somewhat Important (3) Not Very Important (4) Unimportant (5) Abortion X Crime X Economy and Jobs X Education X Environment X Ethnic Minority Issues X Foreign Relations X Gay Issues and Gay Marriage X Gender Issues X Global Issues X Government Spending X Gun Policy X Terrorism X Other (please specify): Unlimited political contributions, especially by corporations. 7. Please list the top one to three political issues that are most important to you, and explain what you believe about them, and your reasons for those beliefs. Please remember that the point is not to prove you're right, but to explain your views to people who don't share them. 1. Environment- I put this first because if we destroy the environment, none of the other issues will matter in the long run. 2. Economy and jobs-When people are unemployed and/or financially insecure, they are easy prey for demagogues who can stir them into irrational and dangerous actions. If the economy is not healthy, every other aspect of society suffers. 3. Education--Education is essential to the future of the nation and it's people. We have to have people who are educated to play a productive part in the modern world and we can't allow ourselves to fall even farther behind other developed nations. Educated people are able to make better choices for their own lives and thus for the nation as a whole. They have more stable families, and live longer, healthier lives. 8. Are there areas where you think people of different political views might have a good point? If so, please explain. I think it is true that there are people who cheat the system, and that we need better ways of detecting fraud of all sorts.Of course, there is government waste which needs to be addressed by honing in on specifics. I think the conservative idea that single-parent families are less likely to succeed is true because common sense and valid research both support this. I think that the conservative idea that people should show individual responsibility by buying health insurance if possible is a good one, though conservative leaders now disown the idea they came up with. 9. Do you think there is too much partisanship or incivility in public debate? If so, do you have any suggestions for ways we could make public debate more constructive? Are there any other points you would like to make about this issue? Yes, there is far too much of both. We could make public debate (pre-planned debates) more constructive if we agreed to have all questions independently fact-checked before the debate and if those facts were distributed to both the audience and the debaters beforehand. Otherwise, things can only improve if reasonable people of all beliefs push vocally for a more civil and fact-based discourse. Extremists of all stripes do vast harm to civil discourse. Educating people in recognizing propaganda techniques along with critical thinking skills would help to defeat those who make a living keeping the public stirred up with lies and hate-speech. Better science education would help people to understand issues concerning the environment, health care, and research. ____________________________________________________ Thanks to my guests for their thoughtful responses! Click here to take survey