I think this is a classic example of lying by omission and preying on American ignorance.
Let’s just assume that all the stats are true.
Take the U.S. wages for example:
The Reality: Real wages and take-home pay both down.
Working Americans are making less under Joe Biden, with inflation-adjusted hourly wages down 2.0%. Recent real wage increases have been more than offset by a decrease in the average work week. The result? Since January 2021, real weekly earnings have shrunk 4.4%. American paychecks are lighter thanks to Bidenomics.
That very first link is probably the most misleading stat out of all them. The initial view just shows real wages increasing (which certainly doesn’t fit their argument). You have to click the 5Y time horizon to include Jan 2021, when Biden came into office. When you do that it shows that wages were falling as precipitously as they rose at the beginning of the pandemic. That is, the only reason wages are down relative Joe Biden’s inauguration month is because they were too high to begin with because of the effects of the pandemic on the economy. So, to argue that it’s Joe Biden’s policies that have resulted in lower wages relative to his inauguration obscures the fact that the starting point is too high and the result of not-Biden’s policies.
In the very next sentence, they talk about real wage increases, which is just another way of saying inflation-adjusted hourly wages. It’s weird that they say they’re down and then up right after another. Anyway, second link shows the average working week falling from 34.6 hrs to 34.1, a decrease, and argue that as a result, that real weekly earnings have fallen from 397.9 (after you adjust the graph to start in 2021) to 381.22 in 1982-1984 dollars.
But wait! That graph looks oddly familiar…it looks like there’s a relationship between real wages and average weekly earnings. As I said earlier, real wages were decreasing because they were too high in the first place, falling from the inflationary effects of the pandemic shutdowns. So, it only follows that real weekly earnings would fall, too. If the hourly wages fall, so too do the weekly wages.
But this website insists
- The economy prior to Biden’s inauguration was in better shape while not mentioning that inflationary pressures of the pandemic are the starting point. This is the lie by omission.
- That Biden’s policies have resulted in the current decline in economic state relative to that of his inauguration. This is both a lie and preys on American ignorance.
The Roosevelt Institute does a better analysis with their Bidenomics Brief. Their analysis starts in 2019, before the pandemic, because that’s the intellectually honest thing to do.
Then why leave up the post? It’s misleading and preying on Americans, your words. If it’s all lies, why give it a platform? If it’s mixed lies and truth, why not find a better source? Would having a discussion about lies be productive talks? Would having discussions around better sources not provide better discourse?
Right, so let’s say I remove the post (which I’m not going to do), but the actual website stays up. What have I accomplished? At the very least I’ll have removed my criticism of the post that someone could stumble upon randomly. I mean, they may not see it anyway, but if I remove the post, they’ll definitely never see it, the chance won’t exist.
Also, just because I believe it’s deceptive, doesn’t mean others do. It’s entirely possible (and I genuinely hope) someone more informed comes along and sets me right. If someone disagrees with my criticism, then we have a discussion about that, too. As far as quality of sources goes, this is infinitely better than Not The Bee or other satire sites, and the discussion from it can be productive if others want it to be. It might be fruitful to discuss why starting economic analysis is 2021 is generally not a good idea, for example.
This reads as a bad faith argument that says “I’m in charge and this article I don’t agree with that’s also putting down my political opponent gets to stay up. I believe that debate about truthfulness is as important or more important than debate over agreed upon truth.” I don’t feel this article has any less bias just because it’s not from Not The Bee. It’s an obviously biased article AS YOU POINT OUT but in the name of debate it must stay. In 6 months when nobody has proven you wrong, you’ll have given further reach to an article you don’t believe in and not everyone is going to read your comment. Is the community better for it?
Debate about truthfulness is at least as important as debates over agreed upon truth. It’s a fundamental question that’s rarely asked these days. Agreed upon truth take certain frames for granted, and those frames may be wrong.
In 6 months when nobody has proven you wrong, you’ll have given further reach to an article you don’t believe in and not everyone is going to read your comment. Is the community better for it?
It’s certainly not worse off for it.
I guess you’re right. This community has hit rock bottom. Thanks for all you do and don’t do to keep it this way.
Thank you for your contributions and lack thereof to improving it.
Read the rules on the sidebar and maybe things will make more sense to you.
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Dang. First impression is the site is slick on mobile. Second impression coming later.
lol. That was my first impression as well. It’s a nice looking site. I still need to finish reading it
Its some slick animations right there.
I’ve been traveling back from Disney world today. As such I haven’t read it all but it seems to match fact check by ny post