In budget rhetoric, do Rendell's numbers add up?

[larrymeyer]

And people will buy this F turds numbers

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/lo...s_add_up_.html

In budget rhetoric, do Rendell's numbers add up?
By Mario F. Cattabiani and Angela Couloumbis

Inquirer Staff Writers

HARRISBURG - If Gov. Rendell has said it once, he's said it a hundred times - or literally close to that.

The 16 percent income-tax hike he is pushing to help fill this year's massive budget hole would affect only "five out of 10" Pennsylvanians.

But in true campaign-style hyperbole, it's what the governor isn't saying that's the most telling.

According to Rendellian math - grudgingly confirmed by his aides - the list of those who would not pay the added income taxes include Pennsylvanians in diapers and Pull-Ups, those behind bars, and those on the unemployment lines hoping to pay taxes again sometime soon.

In all, roughly 6.6 million Pennsylvanians - or about half the state population - now pay income taxes, and they would all pay the higher rate.

"That's five of 10 - absolutely accurate," Rendell press secretary Chuck Ardo said, doing his best to hold back a smile.

It is, his critics say, typical Rendell - skew the numbers to make the point, the whole truth be damned.

"My 8-year-old son will be relieved that his allowance is safe," said Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati (R., Jefferson), who compared Rendell to a snake-oil salesman.

It's not the only liberty Rendell has taken with budget numbers in a year when the economy is in the tank, state revenue is plummeting, and the deficit is exploding.

Just recently, he said Pennsylvanians would surely support his income-tax hike if they only knew what was at stake and how little it would cost them. Or, by his math, $4.80 a week for someone earning $50,000 yearly. He maintained it would be a small price to save necessary state programs.

The fine print: That worker would wind up paying nearly $750 over the three-year period that the hike would last before reverting back to the lower rate.

Then there is the overall budget figure itself.

Rendell says he has made $2 billion in cuts to the $29 billion spending plan he introduced in February.

Common subtraction has it that $29 billion - $2 billion = $27 billion. Rendell's math tells you that $29 billion - $2 billion = well, just about $29 billion.

How so?

Rendell argues that he has made steep and painful cuts to state spending, but acknowledges that much of it has been offset by mandatory increases out of his control, such as paying for higher welfare costs.

"Luckily, he doesn't teach math at the University of Pennsylvania," Steve Miskin, spokesman for House Republicans, said of the governor and sometime Penn government professor.

The state is facing a $3.2 billion deficit this year, and Rendell and Republicans have been arguing for months over the best way to plug it. The governor is advocating a mix of cuts and tax increases, including the income-tax hike. The GOP is dead set against the income-tax increase and is advocating steeper cuts instead.

In the meantime, the deadline to pass a budget came and went July 1 without even the pretense of a deal in the works. And the two sides continue to take swipes at each other's plans to deal with the crisis.

Just last week, the administration found itself on the defensive over claims that without a tax hike, as many as 800 state troopers could be laid off.

The president of the Pennsylvania State Troopers Association called it an unrealistic scare tactic.

"It's clearly politics at its best - or at its worst," said Bruce Edwards, whose group represents 4,400 troopers.

Scarnati was even more blunt.

"When selling snake oil, you have to raise the hype level of fear to nuclear doomsday," said Scarnati. "But the price of snake oil just keeps going down because he can't sell any."

Ardo, however, insisted that the governor wasn't trying to mislead.

"The governor uses numbers to make a point," he said. "His numbers are not inaccurate, although sometimes they do not tell the whole story."

[cgbudde]

Tipocal politician. If I used his math then I don't have to worry about money because I am a millionaire.

I for one do not buy this, I have seen too many politicians lie about numbers to scare people or to make them believe our economy is fine. A good example of this is unemployment, they always tell you new claims went down less people on unemployment now, what they forget to tell you is more people are still out of work because they do not count those who's unemployment claims are over not that they found work

[larrymeyer]

Originally Posted by cgbudde

Tipocal politician. If I used his math then I don't have to worry about money because I am a millionaire.

I for one do not buy this, I have seen too many politicians lie about numbers to scare people or to make them believe our economy is fine. A good example of this is unemployment, they always tell you new claims went down less people on unemployment now, what they forget to tell you is more people are still out of work because they do not count those who's unemployment claims are over not that they found work

Are you saying Fat Eddies Numbers are correct !!!

[1861]

Sounds like obama promising no one making under 250,000 a year would see their taxes go up .

[cgbudde]

Originally Posted by larrymeyer

Are you saying Fat Eddies Numbers are correct !!!

In his own mind. I am saying he can't add, but he can lie. Sorry for the confusion.

[dsnover]

If the Gov't thinks this years' budget is bad, wait till the full effect of unemployment and the housing market hits _next_ year. This is nothing. 16% is a cakewalk compared to what they will say they have to do next year. And the year after. That's why it's 'temporary'.... because it will have to go higher next year.

[WhiteFeather]

Lots of people / business in this state are hurting, maybe its about time the state spending goes on a diet for a change, instead of the Citizens having to get another pay cut just to pay for bigger government spending.

raising your taxes = pay cut for you


Citizens are learning how to buy smart and save for items they really want, instead of just pulling out the charge card and living beyond their means, time big government learns this lesson.

summoning up Gov Rendell's statements

Figures don't lie, but liars can figure.

[shefearsnothing]

Words can not express.... my husband is not getting a fucking paycheck until that asshole signs off on the budget. Hell, even the DEMOCRATS don't want the tax increase! WTF does that tell you?!

[cgbudde]

Originally Posted by shefearsnothing

Words can not express.... my husband is not getting a fucking paycheck until that asshole signs off on the budget. Hell, even the DEMOCRATS don't want the tax increase! WTF does that tell you?!

Your husband not getting paid sucks. I worked for New York State for a few yrs as an investigater and every yr it was the same BS no budget no pay.

But just like NY's governor I can bet you Rendell is getting his pay and his exspense account.

[ALS]

Originally Posted by dsnover

If the Gov't thinks this years' budget is bad, wait till the full effect of unemployment and the housing market hits _next_ year. This is nothing. 16% is a cakewalk compared to what they will say they have to do next year. And the year after. That's why it's 'temporary'.... because it will have to go higher next year.

From what I'm reading we are about to go into a double dip recession and don't look before late 2011 until we come out. The next wave of foreclosures are suppose to start hitting in the fall through next year.

10% unemployment give me a F-ing break. Minimum top is at least 11.5-12% and up to 13% plus at present calculations by people much smarter than me.

They can't get a handle on what the real numbers are since the powers at be keep massaging the unemployment numbers they are putting out every week/month.

When you look at the chart for unemployment look at the U6 column. That is closest to the total unemployment rate not the ADJUSTED rate.
June's real unemployment rate is 16.8% not the 9.5% they are reporting.
The unemployment rate numbers you hear about from the 1930's were calculated as the U6 numbers are today.

If we would get to the worst numbers of the Great Depression 25% unemployment. That would be just north of 14.0% unemployment as it is calculated with Governments new math in 2009.

Also the Government stopped reporting the M3 numbers a few years ago so it could hide blatantly obvious inflation the U.S..

This way we can just lie and short change the SSI retirement checks and the automatic union wage increases. The Government and corporate dollar goes that much farther if our CPI index is massaged downward by at least 33-50%