patrick.net

rootvg says

There used to be a halo over these people that isn't there anymore for a variety of reasons

No, there is only one reason, news died when 60 minutes turned it into entertainment. Fox is the best at entertainment by far since that was the intent from the beginning and they don't even try to pretend they do any actual news. NBC,CBS,ABC,CNN are burdened by the legacy of having had actual real news departments at one time and haven't make the commitment yet to simply turn their news departments into pure entertainment divisions, but instead try to provide entertaining news which is neither fish nor fowl.

bob2356 says

Fox is the best at entertainment by far since that was the intent from the beginning and they don't even try to pretend they do any actual news.

Oh, they pretend to do actual news, in fact they insist that some of their programs are actual news.

bob2356 says

rootvg says

There used to be a halo over these people that isn't there anymore for a variety of reasons

No, there is only one reason, news died when 60 minutes turned it into entertainment. Fox is the best at entertainment by far since that was the intent from the beginning and they don't even try to pretend they do any actual news. NBC,CBS,ABC,CNN are burdened by the legacy of having had actual real news departments at one time and haven't make the commitment yet to simply turn their news departments into pure entertainment divisions, but instead try to provide entertaining news which is neither fish nor fowl.

I still say there's room for a network that reports straight down the middle and CNN would be my personal choice to be transformed in that way. They have the history, they have the depth and talent, some of the original crowd is still there (people make fun of Wolf as the hapless U-boat commander but he's been there a LONG time) and I just think they could be great again.

ABC News stinks. Disney's been starving them since it bought out ABC Cap Cities. It's become a very budget conscious operation, very cartoonish. I can't stand to watch it.

leoj707 says

The real headline to this study should be---

"Watching Comedy 'Fake' News Show Leaves Americans More Informed Than Any For-Profit News Outlet"

This is because they actually make insightful COMMENTARY about the stories.

Vicente says

This is because they actually make insightful COMMENTARY about the stories.

And what a sad state our news media has come to when one of the best sources of truth is a comedy show setting the record straight through commentary on the stories covered by the news networks.

leoj707 says

bob2356 says

Fox is the best at entertainment by far since that was the intent from the beginning and they don't even try to pretend they do any actual news.

Oh, they pretend to do actual news, in fact they insist that some of their programs are actual news.

I insist that I look like Robert Redford. No one believes that either.

bob2356 says

I insist that I look like Robert Redford. No one believes that either.

God, we are a bunch of old geezers here, aren't we?

bob2356 says

I insist that I look like Robert Redford. No one believes that eithe

Your problem is that you don't have Rupert Murdoch backing your claim. If you did I bet you could get a good 20-40 million Americans believing that you look like Robert Redford.

bob2356 says

leoj707 says

bob2356 says

Fox is the best at entertainment by far since that was the intent from the beginning and they don't even try to pretend they do any actual news.

Oh, they pretend to do actual news, in fact they insist that some of their programs are actual news.

I insist that I look like Robert Redford. No one believes that either.

I do like Brit Hume and Charlie Krauthammer. Brit was at ABC in the glory days and KNOWS old school journalism. I suspect that's why he's there.

rootvg says

still say there's room for a network that reports straight down the middle and CNN would be my personal choice to be transformed in that way.

BBC and NPR is the closest you are going to get. Oddly enough sometimes I find the best reporting is aljazeera.com. Strange but true.

leoj707 says

bob2356 says

I insist that I look like Robert Redford. No one believes that eithe

Your problem is that you don't have Rupert Murdoch backing your claim. If you did I bet you could get a good 20-40 million Americans believing that you look like Robert Redford.

Damn, you're right. I screwed that up.

bob2356 says

rootvg says

still say there's room for a network that reports straight down the middle and CNN would be my personal choice to be transformed in that way.

BBC and NPR is the closest you are going to get. Oddly enough sometimes I find the best reporting is aljazeera.com. Strange but true.

I'm glad you mentioned NPR. It isn't (or at least, isn't anymore) the reflexively leftist outlet so many conservatives purport it to be. Something happened there, which may be the firing of Juan Williams and subsequent exit of Vivian Schiller. They're dancing on the head of a pin (will be, considering what's about to happen in Congress) and seem to have gotten religion.

You're right. If I want to really know what's going on, NPR is there. And, it's good reporting and their people are educated and literate and know their business. Imagine that!

rootvg says

You're right. If I want to really know what's going on, NPR is there. And, it's good reporting and their people are educated and literate and know their business. Imagine that!

Yeah, in these studies NPR consistently comes out on top as being lowest bias, and best info.

rootvg says

We still have the income tax but our personal rates continue to be much lower than what's accepted as normal even in places like Canada.

The US has so many taxes going to so many different places that the total tax burden is actually higher than many countries with a higher tax rate.

Even so, the top federal rate in Canada is 29%, but it starts at 132k the top federal tax rate in the US will be 39.9% next year starting at something like 388k. Plus Fica. At 132k in the US you would be in the 28%+fica bracket. Remind me again about much lower tax brackets.

If you want to go back to 1950, you'll need tariffs and it WON'T happen. You can't go to someone to whom you owe trillions of Dollars, tell them you're gonna put their nuts in a vise and get away with it.

Liberal Fail, the protests in the middle east are not about removing those in power. A hungry mob is an angry Mob. Obama's lack of policy on commodities is more to blame for the middle east protests than the leaders Libya or Egypt ruling class are. The protests were spun by the Western press and Liberal agitators with in, as a protest of democracy. That was not the case for the majority of those involved. A hungry Mob is an angry mob.

But really I'm not the least bit surprised that Fox news viewers aren't with the Liberal agenda. "Informed" is subjective, I'm sure you folks aren't very "Informed" from their perspective.

bob2356 says

The US has so many taxes going to so many different places that the total tax burden is actually higher than many countries with a higher tax rate.

There is so much misinformation on these boards...its sickening. Where did you get this?

Total Taxation of % of GDP:
Canada: 38.4%
US: 28.2%

Canada also spends has universal health care, but spends less on healthcare as a % of GDP. It also has a higher median income, longer life expectancy, lower infant mortality, identical literacy rates, lower unemployment, and a surplus.

The US has higher average family income, lower taxes, and a deficit.

How is it possible for Canada to have a higher median income but lower average income? Simple. As it is well known, the lion's share of income in the US is concentrated at the top. That is, simply the difference between how a median and a mean is calculated.

Those Marxist socialist bastards up North. We should bomb them. That will teach them to spend on social programs instead of the military industrial complex.

Everyone knows the news before they watch tv, unless they are complete luddites, in which case they watch Maury instead of news programs.
The shows are for "inside baseball" type "analysis" that is of course just everyone's opinion.
At least on Fox they do allow the "token liberal" to speak on their shows. They have Bob Beckel, Kirsten Powers (imagine, she was fucking weiner and HE dumped her!) and assorted other liberal suspects. They do have a liberal voice on Fox.
Personally I can't listen to Shep because he's a dimwit and of course he is actually a closet liberal anyway.
O'Reilly is completely annoying so I don't watch him either.
I actually prefer Fox Business which is a straight up "we like money, keep your hands off it Uncle Sam" network. They have assholes of course too, like Liz Claman oh god what an annoying bitch.
The thing with Fox is at least it's fun to hear them review the most inane thing Biden or Obama or someone said today. "Can you believe this?" and it's funny.
No one takes TV news seriously. That's for the drudgereport or michael savage of course.

I remember Liz Claman when she was absolutely nobody, in Cleveland.

Kirsten is a lib but when she's on I can't stop watching her.

Shep was always annoying. I think he's gonna jump ship and if I had to guess where he's headed, I would say NBC. He would be a perfect fit. He increasingly does not fit at Fox and Ailes has made some very subtle comments to that effect.

CaptainShuddup says

But really I'm not the least bit surprised that Fox news viewers aren't with the Liberal agenda. "Informed" is subjective, I'm sure you folks aren't very "Informed" from their perspective.

FUCK YEAH!

And did you see those stupid questions with a clear liberal bias???

Check it out...

To the best of your knowledge, have the opposition groups protesting in Egypt been successful in removing Hosni Mubarak?

Which party has the most seats in the House of Representatives right now?

Some countries in Europe are deeply in debt, and have had to be bailed out by other countries. Tothe best of your knowledge, which country has had to spend the most money to bail out European countries?

Only a dumb liberal would think that an "informed" person could answer questions like that. Where are all the questions about Obama's birth certificate and the faked moon landing?

okie dokie ... just a few questions ....

What is the control system that was used in this study that would keep all pink-o libgressives that were asked:
"Yes, I watch ONLY Fox news!"
"No, I do not know that answer!"
"No, I don't know that one either"
"Nope .. lol .. I guess I'm an idiot ..."
"Yep, I rely on Fox news for all media!!"

You see, my good people, those on the left think and act like that, and they feel they should do whatever it takes to destroy normal/America/Christianity/(fill in hatred target) ... so, fibbing to some tele-caller does not scratch their moral fiber one little bit.

Yes, this is what goes on.
No, I don't really care because I do not react to polls.

The fact is the poll should say, "here is what people who answer polls said to these question." And there should be a list of the exact questions and the exact answers to choose from. Now THAT is still crap, but honester crap.

Bap33 says

And there should be a list of the exact questions and the exact answers to choose from.

There is, follow the link the whole methodology is there.

I wonder if they asked what the Fox viewers what they thought about Obama's posse having a prostitute swingers party in Columbia.

Now now Leo, 2 of those questions are LIBERAL questions!

I know that because they are about WORLD EVENTS and Real Americans only know how to spell the names of places we are currently engaged in ground combat. And you can't SERIOUSLY expect anyone watching Fox News to remember particulars about a Republican election outcome, being fair & balanced about Obama is their mission not covering election outcomes.

This question is not a LIBERAL question:

K8. According to the figures, about what percentage of Americans are currently unemployed?

But you know, getting the number on that right doesn't matter. What matters is that most of the people unemployed are LAZY and DESERVE it, except for your friends and family who have fallen on hard times BECAUSE OF OBAMA! Assigning blame to shiftless layabouts and of course OBAMA is what really matters not discussing economics and dull statistics.

Bap33 says

You see, my good people, those on the left think and act like that, and they feel they should do whatever it takes to destroy normal/America/Christianity/(fill in hatred target)

I think you are confusing the "left" with The Party of 'No!' who want to do whatever it takes to destroy Democrats even if it means destroying normal/America/Christianity/(fill in any target).

CaptainShuddup says

I wonder if they asked what the Fox viewers what they thought about Obama's posse having a prostitute swingers party in Columbia.

All the questions and methodology for the survey is in the link. It is good to know though that you are commenting on something that you have not taken the minimal effort to learn about.

Vicente says

But you know, getting the number on that right doesn't matter. What matters is that most of the people unemployed are LAZY and DESERVE it, except for your friends and family who have fallen on hard times BECAUSE OF OBAMA! Assigning blame to shiftless layabouts and of course OBAMA is what really matters not discussing economics and numbers.

See, now you understand why it is a liberal question.

If it is not a loaded question that assumes some sort of blame Obama conclusion then it is of course a liberal question.

leoj707 says

Bap33 says

And there should be a list of the exact questions and the exact answers to choose from.

There is, follow the link the whole methodology is there.

Leo, I figured as much when I made my first point, and you will see that I still call the results crap, since there is no way to form a control group. And, seriously, I don't listen or care what polls say. (either side). I think that is just propaganda most times.

Maybe I used the wrong term (?) Maybe I made a good point that the information is useless since any annon person can answer any way they choose, and may I add that any annon poll taker/caller can click whatever box their politics drives them to. I happen to think polls are crap. That's pretty much it.

There is nothing about these polls that would keep my example above from being true. Is there?

david1 says

bob2356 says

The US has so many taxes going to so many different places that the total tax burden is actually higher than many countries with a higher tax rate.

There is so much misinformation on these boards...its sickening. Where did you get this?

Total Taxation of % of GDP:
Canada: 38.4%
US: 28.2%

I see Canada sitting at 33% on the graph not 38%. So there is a 5% difference. Go read the notes of the OECD report. It does NOT include the employer part of FICA. That's 7.65% of income. Canada's taxes include health care so you would have to back that out to compare apples to apples. What do you suppose the total cost of non government health care is in the US as a percentage of GDP? Less than 5%, I don't think so. Schools, police, fire, roads are included in Canada's 33%. You pay those in property taxes in the US. The OECD doesn't look at property taxes. What to you suppose the total of all property taxes for these items are in the US as a percentage of GDP? Less than 5%, I don't think so. Is the total of property taxes PLUS medical less than 5%, I really, really don't think so.

I appreciate you actually helping make my point. You are correct. There is so much misinformation on these boards, thanks for providing a concrete example.

Actually, here are the taxes included in the OECD report:

"The tax revenues are primarily grouped into the following high level categories essentially representing the different bases on which taxes are charged:

Taxes on income, profits and capital gains
Social security contributions
Taxes on payroll and workforce
Taxes on property
Taxes on goods and services
Other taxes"

http://www.oecd.org/document/35/0,3746,en_2649_37427_46661795_1_1_1_37427,00.html

This chart is Total tax revenues as a percentage of GDP, including Property taxes and employer FICA contributions. I am not sure where you found that these were excluded. Please provide link.

I am not sure why you wouldn't include medical expenses - it is a service that Canada provides through its tax revenues that the US does not - we are talking about revenues, not expenditures. That Canada chooses to provide health care for its citizens is immaterial to the discussion. We could apply your methodology to the military for example, and back that out so we can compare "apples to apples."

And actually, Canada's taxes are 31% of GDP, and the US is 24.8% by the OECD report. The numbers I quoted above were from a different source. I made the statement and then looked for the chart as backup after. I apologize for the confusion, however, BOTH sources confirm that Canada has higher taxes as a % of GDP than the US. Again, both sources include ALL taxes.

bob2356 says

BBC and NPR is the closest you are going to get. Oddly enough sometimes I find the best reporting is aljazeera.com. Strange but true.

It's not strange at all. They have a very strong track record.

Bap33 says

leoj707 says

There is, follow the link the whole methodology is there.

Leo, I figured as much when I made my first point,

When people cite polls, studies, experiments, etc. often the accompanying link does not show the methodology, it just goes to an opinion piece.

Bap33 says

I happen to think polls are crap. That's pretty much it.

There is nothing about these polls that would keep my example above from being true. Is there?

Yes, there is. Polling is a rather complex science and your concerns are concerns of the polling community as well. Issues like lying on polls has been studied pretty extensively and is not as big of an issue as you may think. A poll is much more frequently corrupted by the people running it. That is why seeing the questions and methodology is important. Polls can be written to elicit a desired response to fill an agenda (see Rasmussen). Also, polls can be designed not to gather info, but used to change the minds of those polled. The Bush v. McCain push-poll in 2000 is a good example of this.

david1 says

This chart is Total tax revenues as a percentage of GDP, including Property taxes and employer FICA contributions. I am not sure where you found that these were excluded. Please provide link.

Go to the original chart you posted, look at the bottom. There is a link to the methodolgy. Only fica for the employee is included as per that link, property taxes are not mentioned as included at all. The next chart you post doesn't allow me to look at the methodology without being a member of the OECD, so I have no way to know. which OECD methodology and documents are correct? You are also saying there is a third chart showing Canada at 38% somewhere also? And another chart showing the US as 28% Yet all these charts include all the taxes? I'm sorry but now I'm confused.

I would agree that you wouldn't quibble over minor services, but of course you would back out a major service that isn't included. Health care is a big percentage of every countries gdp. Why wouldn't you? You pay for the health care, it's a burden on your income no matter if the money goes to the government or the insurance companies. Canada has a military so I don't see the point.

I lived in Canada 15 years ago and currently live in NZ. Both are high tax countries as per the OECD. Yet at the end of the day when everything is said and done my personal bottom line as an upper middle class taxpayer is that I actually payed as much or more taxes in the US when I added everything up. But I personally include the cost of health care since the money is gone from my pocket. That's the street level view. Every American I know overseas says the exact same thing. The US spends more for military/security than the rest of the world put together and the military is over half the general budget. That money isn't coming from the tooth fairy.

So something is distorting the statistics somewhere. Probably the fact that corporate taxes COLLECTED are about 13% (please don't bother to quote me the corporate tax RATE, it's meaningless) and taxes COLLECTED on people with over a million dollars a year income is about 20% are at the very low end in the OECD norms. Someone has to be picking up the slack for the dramatic reduction in taxes paid by the wealthy and corporations in the last 30 years.

So I will graciously amend my statement to say that for the vast majority of people excluding corporations and the wealthy, the tax burden can be as high or higher in the US than many of the "high tax" countries. Good enough?

leoj707 says

Bap33 says

I happen to think polls are crap. That's pretty much it.
There is nothing about these polls that would keep my example above from being true. Is there?

leo says,
"Yes, there is. Polling is a rather complex science and your concerns are concerns of the polling community as well. Issues like lying on polls has been studied pretty extensively and is not as big of an issue as you may think. A poll is much more frequently corrupted by the people running it. That is why seeing the questions and methodology is important. Polls can be written to elicit a desired response to fill an agenda (see Rasmussen). Also, polls can be designed not to gather info, but used to change the minds of those polled. The Bush v. McCain push-poll in 2000 is a good example of this."

leo, I said there is no way (for regular folks like us) to know that polls are square or not. You said that there is a way to know, but you didn't share the "how" part so we can discuss it. How can anyone know if a pollster's next question is generic or if the last answer dictates the next question? How can anyone know if a pollster marks the answer given by the polled. And, lastly, how can a pollster know the polled is reponding honestly? If the answer is where you said that lots of work and science goes into polls because they see the same potential I do, that is cool, but that does not improve the validity of a published poll in my opinion.

rootvg says

If you want to go back to 1950, you'll need tariffs and it WON'T happen.

Probably true. The cat (globalization) is out of the bag.

robertoaribas says

Because fighting for equal rights for blacks is so different than fighting for equal rights for gays?

Yes, and I think one of the biggest lessons we -- at least should have -- learned from the civil rights movement is that there is no such thing as separate-but-equal.

A civil union does not = a marriage.

CaptainShuddup says

But really I'm not the least bit surprised that Fox news viewers aren't with the Liberal agenda.

Typical of an ignorant commentator. If you read the article you would know the questions that were asked. Reality is measured by things like "who won the Republican Iowa primary". From your somewhat less than brilliant analysis, you've concluded that knowing the answer to this puts you with the "Liberal agenda". Frankly, that's just stupid. Sorry, "no insult" policy. Let's just revise that to illogical.