Ep 15: Zach Heltzel’s Coming Out Video: a response to mean, bullying liberals

Some people call it “brave” when someone comes out of the closet as gay. But that’s not brave, not in today’s liberal society! These days, there are plenty of things much more scary than coming out as gay… coming out as conservative, for example!

This has inspired Zach Heltzel to make his own brave “coming out” video, and admit to his fans something very personal that you might never have otherwise guessed about him. No, it’s not that he’s a conservative! (You already knew that.) It actually something much more controversial, and in some people’s eyes, much worse….

 

Make sure you subscribe to our Youtube Channel to get notified about the latest episodes of Heltzel’s View.

Video direct link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNd0-cJbaQE

Liberal statistics predict no effect of tax cuts on economic growth

Top tax rates and average growth

Earlier this week, we reported that liberal statistics were refusing to show that tax hikes destroy the stock market. Well, they are at it again: this time, statistics are maliciously showing that cutting taxes does not lead to economic growth!

This graph shows countries that have implemented policies of cutting the top marginal tax rates over the 30 or so years.  It compares the amount of the tax cut with the percentage of of GDP growth arising after the tax cut.

Now, any good conservative knows that more tax cuts for the rich always, always, always lead to more economic growth no matter what.  That’s just intuitively obvious, and we hear it on Fox News over and over again, therefore it cannot be wrong.

SO WHAT’S WRONG WITH THESE DUMB COMMUNIST STATISTICS?

Somehow, this graph is showing that there is no relationship between the size of the tax cut on the top income earners, and the amount of GDP growth that follows!

One of two things is possible: either tax cuts on top income earners really don’t have much of an effect on economic growth compared to the wide variety of other things that can impact a country’s economy…… or, these statistics are simply skewed by some kind of mysterious liberal bias!!!

 

graph data source: Piketty, Thomas, Emmanuel Saez, and Stefanie Stantcheva (2011), “Optimal Taxation of Top Labor Incomes: A Tale of Three Elasticities“, CEPR Discussion Paper 8675, December.
graph found via: voxeu.org

Mitt Romney was right about all you deadbeat losers.

Deadbeat Loser Graph

Mitt Romney has gotten a lot of flack about saying 47% of the people are pathetic losers. Well, he was right. In fact, according to some estimates 96% of you are deadbeat leeches and should just go F yourselves. Deal with it.

The above graph makes it clear that many of you who claim to be good conservatives living the American Way are actually low-life scum sucking off the government teat. Look at the huge percentage of people who claim to be do-it-yourself, hard-working Americans who actually secretly are taking money from communist programs like the “Home Mortgage Interest Deduction.” See how many people claim that they are responsible for their own success while underhandedly sucking money from the system through student loans and lifetime learning tax credits. Losers! Traitors! Scum!

I know it’s not a popular thing to say in an election year, but Real Conservatives will be behind this.  In fact, when Kenyan Muslim Socialist Barack Obama wins the upcoming election, I predict that all of our great leaders, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, and Jesus Christ, will go on local radio stations across the country to agree with that we at Liberal Bias are stating here and now: the reason Obama won is because most Americans have devolved into losers who Ronald Reagan and the other Founding Fathers would be ashamed of.

Are you one of those sickening lowlifes who uses a mortgage interest deduction in your taxes? Deadbeat lowlife slug!

Does your employer make a tax-free contribution to your health-insurance plan? You are nothing more than a festering gob, you tit! Your type makes me puke!

A real conservative doesn’t take socialist tax deductions. That’s for poor people and racial minorities. If you take a single deduction on your taxes then Mitt Romney will see you with his All-Seeing Eye and know that you are a simpering whining leech sucking life and other vital fluids from the virtuous wealthy people that made this country great. And you’re probably part foreign, to boot.

So suck it up and deal. Real conservatives know that not only welfare and food stamps, but also mortgage deductions, student loans, and Veteran’s benefits are all for WEAK PUSSIES.

 

Anybody who tells you anything differently is just suffering from liberal bias!!!

 

Graph Data Source: Social and governmental issues and participation study, 2008
Graph Found Vial: The Century Foundation

Romney’s tax plan for middle America

Misleading Romney Tax Graph

This graph is designed to scare people. Our goal at Liberal Bias is to show true, wholesome conservatives how to read a graph like this so that it does not upset you too much.

Liberals will point to the left 5 bars of this graph, and say, “Look, Romney will raise taxes on people making less than $200,000 per year!”

Your response should be: “Why are you engaging in class warfare? When you divide people up by talking about rich people and poor people, you are just dividing America. You should just treat every individual as a citizen and stop trying to divide us!”

In that way, you can ignore the left 5 bars.

Liberals will point to the right 2 bars of this graph, and say, “Look, Romney is giving huge breaks to people making more than $500,000 per year! How is that fair?”

Your response should be: “Why do you hate success?  Haven’t these people suffered enough, putting their skill and sweat  and tears into making a successful business? They should be rewarded for how awesome they are!”

In that way, you can ignore the right 2 bars.

The only bar you SHOULD be looking at is the $200,000 – $500,000 per year bar.  Those are the people who Romney has defined as middle class.

And as you can clearly see: his plan lowers taxes on the middle class.

Anyone who tells you any differently is just spreading liberal bias!!!!

 

Graph found via: finance.yahoo.com

 

European unemployment weirdly contradicts conservative values!

Biased Unemployment Numbers

This graph compares the tax rate on the highest income earners in several European countries to the unemployment rates in those countries. We also threw in the good ol’ U.S.A  just for comparison.

As we all know, one of the most fundamental facts that is unquestionably true about conservative economics is that lowering taxes on the rich will cause unemployment to drop, because rich people will say, “Oh Noes, look at all of this extra money I have! I must hire people immediately!”

And yet somehow, the above graph does not seem to reveal this fact.  Weirdly, the graph seems to show absolutely no relationship at all between the top income tax rate that a country has and the unemployment rate that the country has!

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU, STUPID EUROPEAN COUNTRIES?

WHY ARE YOU CONTRADICTING CONSERVATIVE VALUES???

Clearly, something is up. Since it is logically impossible for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan to be wrong, there is only one other possibility: the European Countries’ unemployment numbers must be wrong.

Conservative Values!Luckily, we were able to remove the errors from this data, and produce the ideologically correct conservative graph to the right. (Click to enlarge.)

If Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan and all of the other great conservative thinkers are correct–and they undoubtedly are–then THIS is what the graph should look like!!  Notice the clear relationship that shows that increasing taxes on the rich increases unemployment, while decreasing taxes on the rich decreases unemployment.  That is what the graph should show!

These new unemployment numbers have been estimated using the same methods that Paul Ryan used to create his budget. These methods are known to be Ideologically Pure, and not encumbered by liberal bias.

Now, naturally, Sweden and Denmark might be shocked to discover that they actually have unemployment rates of more than 25%.  Bet they didn’t realize that. But hey, that’s the punishment you get when you tax the job creators.

In this corrected and unbiased, ideologically approved conservative graph, there is a clear relationship between top income rates and unemployment just like Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are always talking about!  This is what a good graph should look like!!

Obviously, the first graph can be ignored. Only look at the second  “adjusted” graph.

What of the first graph?  Well… by refusing to reflect the values that we all have been told by our conservative leaders, it is clearly exhibiting a liberal bias!!!!

 

Graph Data Source: 2012 Eurostat Data (top graph only)
Data Found Via: PrimeEconomics.org

Income quintiles have a liberal bias

Liberal Tax Hikes

When a liberal looks at this graph, she sees “evidence” that the Republican tax plan would raise taxes on poor people while the Democrat tax plan would raise taxes on rich people.

But when I look at this graph, all I see is…… CLASS WARFARE!!!!

There is a very important lesson that this graph can teach you, despite it being infected with liberal bias.

The lesson is this: Any time you see any graph that divides up the data by “quintiles” (as shown at the bottom of this graph), you should stop looking at the graph immediately and simply say this:

That is class warfare,  WHY DO YOU HATE SUCCESS??

All of this “quintile” nonsense is just a fancy, elitist way of saying “I’m going to compare rich people to poor people” and we all know that no good can come of that sort of thing.

Quintiles = Liberal Bias

Everything else can be ignored.

Graph Data Source: Tax Policy Center
Graph Found Via: The Century Foundation

Lying graph implies that Romney would raise taxes

Misleading Romney Tax Plan Graph

If you were to believe the data in this graph, you might get the idea that Mitt Romney’s tax plan would result in an increase in taxes on middle-class and poor Americans, while only decreasing taxes for the most wealthy people in America.  Since only liberals raise taxes, doesn’t that mean that Mitt Romney is therefore a secret under-cover liberal?

Possibly. However, this graph is still very misleading for the following reasons:

1) What this graph calls “tax increases” is actually the result of Romney eliminating socialist tax-deduction programs that allowed poor people to pay lower taxes for the wrong reasons, like because they wanted to get educations or they are too poor to afford stuff. Therefore, even though the taxes on the poor people are increasing, they are not technically “tax increases” because poor lazy entitlement Kenyan socialism welfare etc.

2) The only taxes that matter are the taxes on the rich people because those are the people who create jobs. Have you ever gotten a job from a poor person? No. Therefore, the only lines that matter are the top lines, which are decreasing. The bottom lines might be increasing but that doesn’t matter because poor lazy entitlement Kenyan  socialism welfare etc.

3) Finally, notice that the lines are moving closer together. The system that Romney is moving us toward is more “fair” because “fair” is defined as everyone paying exactly the same tax rate. Some liberals might point out that a cheeseburger is 2% of the daily income of a person who is getting paid minimum wage and a cheeseburger is 0.0000000002% of the daily income of Mitt Romney, BUT THAT DOESN’T MATTER. They should still both pay exactly the same tax rate. Because that’s fair. How do we know? Because we defined “fair” as “paying the same tax rate.” It’s common sense.

So do not let the above graph deceive you: what it is really telling you is that Romney’s Tax Plan will DECREASE EVERYONE’S TAXES (everyone that matters, anyway).

Anybody who tells you anything else is just spreading liberal bias!!!!

 

Graph Data Source: Tax Policy Center
Graph Found Via: The Century Foundation

Reagan tax cuts had a liberal bias!

Reagan was a liberal.

The Tax Reform Act of 1986 is one of Reagan’s crowning achievements. Widely known as one of his two biggest tax cuts, every good conservative knows that this heroic act of Ronald Reagan simplified the tax code, lowered taxes, and therefore lead to prosperity, success, wealth, sunshine, unicorns, and basically has been the root cause of every single good thing that happened in the 1990’s.  Some people say that Clinton is responsible for the budget surplus during Bill Clinton’s term as President… but we know better! It was the 1986 Reagan Tax Cuts!

Yet somehow… something seems very wrong with this graph.

According to this graph, in the years following the enactment of the 1986 Tax Reform Act, the effective tax rate (that is, the percentage of income actually paid by people, after all loopholes, breaks, deductions, and other fancy stuff has been applied) of the bottom 80% of income earners (red, green, blue, and yellow lines) went down… but the effective tax rate of the top 20% of income earners actually went up!

How is this possible? Could it be that somehow, in some unknown sinister way, Reagan actually increased taxes on the rich??

It turns out that sneaky little things like an increase in the Capital Gains tax, a strengthening of the Alternative Minimum tax, and the closing of loopholes and deductions are responsible for this “effective tax rate” increase.  The end result was that although the official tax rates for the richest people in the country went down, the wealthiest people in the country ended up actually paying a higher percentage of their income as tax.

This kind of graph can lead to all kinds of trouble.

For example, an evil liberal might look at this graph and say: “Obama has proposed closing loopholes so that the wealthy pay more in taxes. If Reagan did it, then why don’t conservatives want Obama to do it?”

Or, an anti family, anti-values liberal might look at this graph and say: “Obviously, the wealth of the Reagan years didn’t trickle down, but was actually taken from rich people through increased taxes!”

Or, a nature-worshipping, un-American liberal might look at this graph and say: “This shows that Reagan actually never decreased taxes on the wealthy, as is usually claimed. His policies were exactly the same types of tax changes that Republicans are now calling class warfare… now that Obama wants to do it.”

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU, REAGAN TAX CUTS? WHY ARE YOU SO MESSED UP?

Clearly, this graph cannot represent reality.  Instead, it is another example of statistics that have been infected with liberal bias!!!

 

Graph Data Source: Econ Data Us
Graph Found Via: US Budget Blog

Median family net worth has liberal bias!

Biased Wealth.

This graph presents this data in a very suspicious and biased way. By looking at this graph, you might get the impression that Obama’s policies have not been a disastrous war on job creators and have not been a huge burden on small businesses and people who are rich enough to call themselves “small businesses” for tax purposes.

If you look at this graph, you might come to the conclusion that the Obama recession has caused the wealth in all of the bottom 90% of income families to go down, but has caused the wealth in the top 10% of income families to actually increase. This might give you the weird impression that Obama does not have his boot on the neck of the successful. This might lead you to the erroneous conclusion that Obama has not completely annihilated the economic stability of the job-creator class. This might cause you to mistakenly suspect that Obama’s presidency hasn’t been a virtual apocalypse of businesses and successful business people.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU, STUPID MEDIAN WEALTH GRAPH?

WHY ARE YOU MAKING PEOPLE THINK OBAMA HAS BEEN GOOD FOR RICH PEOPLE?

Obviously, this graph presents this data in a needlessly confusing and complex way. There is simply no reason to break down these groups by income level.  That, after all, is class warfare.  Instead, the only graph that you should look at is this one:

Unbiased Graph

This graph simply combines all of the income groups together, as God intended, and shows how the overall median has changed over time.

This graph contains all of the information you really need: things were going up until Obama became president, and then things went down. That’s all you need to know.  Any more information than that will just expose you to liberal bias!!!!

 

Graph Source Data: Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Finances
Graph Found Via: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Shared prosperity has a liberal bias!

Unions and Economic Inequality

The bias in this graph is not with the data, but with the title. The actual data here is not biased, in fact: the data is great. It is wonderful. The actual data itself shows that conservatives are right about everything and that if only everyone adopted the conservative view then we would live in a perfect world.

What this graph clearly shows is that when union membership is high, people who work hard and do a good job in business are not rewarded as much as they could be. On the other hand, when union membership decreases, the people who work hard and do a good job in business are rewarded more for the wonderful, fantastic things that they do.

But the title and labels in the graph are horrifically biased, and skewed to somehow make it seem like success is actually bad.

THAT’S RIGHT I SAID IT!  Liberals think that success is bad.

The red line in the graph is labelled “share of income going to the top 10%.”  What it should really say is “the amount that we reward people for doing good deeds.”  Liberals want to use the extremely biased term “top 10%” to cause resentment and class warfare. But think about it: How did they get to be the top 10%?  By being successful, working hard, and being good at their jobs, obviously! Therefore, the label “top 10%” should be replaced with “awesome people who deserve lots of stuff.”

Moreover, the title of the graph uses the term “shared prosperity.” This is a nonsense term.  I suspect it is a  synonym for “communism” and “socialism” and “Hitler” and all of those other words that are essentially interchangeable. Cuba. Hip-hop Barbeque. You get the idea.

When people say “shared prosperity” they are trying to get you to think it is a good thing. Liberals who don’t think very hard about things see the word “share” and it makes them feel good, and they see the word “prosperity” and it makes them feel good, so they think “shared prosperity” is a good thing.

But you and I know better, don’t we? We know that anyone who “shares” their prosperity is just enabling lazy poor people to sit around and do nothing all day at the expense of the successful millionaires who actually deserve to have money.

Anyone who tells you anything else is just spewing liberal bias!!!!

 

Graph Data Source: Jon Melegrito’s analysis of Historical Statistics of the United States, unitedstates.com, Piketty and Saez, 2003, and The World Top Incomes Database
Graph Found Via: AFSCME.org

 

The dark art of graph reading

Unemployment and Tax Rates

Reading and understanding the meaning behind graphs and charts is very complex, which is why it should never be left to amateurs. For example, the above graph has been circulated around the web by liberals who claim that it shows that lowering taxes on the rich does not actually reduce unemployment.

Indeed, when viewed by inexperienced and irrational people, like liberals for example, it might appear that although the tax rate on the rich has been readily decreasing (red line), the unemployment rate has gone up and down in the same basic range with no obviously apparent pattern (blue line). Thus they conclude that decreasing taxes on the rich does not lead to a decrease of unemployment.

BUT DO NOT BE DECEIVED BY THIS LIBERAL WAY OF LOOKING AT THE GRAPH!

Reading graphs is actually a very exact and mysterious science, like medicine or numerology, and should only be practiced by people with a keen eye and intellect who know what to look for and what results they want to see.

A correct interpretation of this graph is as follows:

Unemployment and Taxes - Clarification

As you can see, each time that taxes on the rich were decreased there was a corresponding decrease in unemployment.  Now, it didn’t always happen right away… sometimes things take time to have their effect.  Plus, there are other ups and downs in unemployment that obviously were also influenced by other factors: world markets, regulation laws, fear of a black president, and so on.  But the fact remains that once you remove the “noise” in the unemployment rate, and account for the time delays, there exists a decrease in unemployment for every decrease in taxes on the rich.

Those are hard, numerical facts.

 

graph source: U.S. Department of Labor
found via: MetaGalacticLlamas.com

Being a conservative Republican makes you rich!

Sciencey Graphs

Liberal elitists are always saying that conservatives don’t understand science or history or other things that don’t matter, but here is a scientific study that we do understand and it is sure to make the liberals cry.

Everybody knows how science research works:You find something that you either love or hate that you want to make a point about, then you find a relationship between that thing and something that is either good or bad, and you assume that the first thing caused the second thing.

This is how all science is done. You don’t believe me? Let’s look at some examples.

Scientists find that children who use Facebook a lot also drink alcohol more. These scientists are parents who hate Facebook because they don’t understand it. And children drinking is bad. So, BAM! Using Facebook caused the drinking.

Another example? Scientists find that girls who read fashion magazines also worry a lot about their appearance. Scientists are liberal feminists, so they hate fashion magazines. And children worrying is bad, so BAM! Reading the magazine caused them to worry about their appearance.

See? That’s science.

Using this exact same widely accepted scientific method, we can conclude from the above graphs that being a Conservative Republican causes people to get rich.

As you can see in the graph, for most groups the distribution across income is fairly flat. With liberal Democrats, liberal Republicans, and moderate Independents it’s most obvious: there are about just as many low income people as high income people.  But among conservative Republicans, there is a huge difference: there are massively more rich than poor people in this group!

Obviously, being a conservative Republican makes you rich. (Interestingly, being a conservative Democrat makes you poor, because this combination is obviously a crime against nature.)

This is solid scientific method. If anyone comes at you with some kind of weird mumbo-jumbo about “correlation” and “causation” just remember: all that talk is just a bunch of liberal bias….

source: The 2000 and 2004 data are from the National Annenberg Election Survey; 2008 is from the Pew Research pre-election surveys.
via
: AndrewGelman.com

Upward mobility has a liberal bias!

Biased Upward Mobility

This graph has appeared on the radical ultra-left wing website “The New York Times” and is a perfect example of facts that are quite simply wrong.

According to this graph, not only do countries that have more wealth inequality have less upward mobility, but America has a super-low amount of mobility, less than other countries!

This is obviously ridiculous. Let me present the actual facts:

1) Rush Limbaugh, who is never wrong, has said, “There’s so many myths. The income gap getting wider — it isn’t. The rich getting richer — they aren’t. You know, people move in and out of all these financial categories constantly. They’re all fluid.” Therefore the idea that we do not have social mobility is just wrong.

2) Shelby Steele, senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, said “There must be a Republican message of social exceptionalism. America has more social mobility than any heterogeneous society in history.” I have never heard of this person but it sounds right to me.

3) Dick Morris, Fox News political analyst, has explained that even if there are more poor people now than in the past, they are different poor people because all of the old poor people have moved up! That’s social mobility.

So, obviously this fiction that the United States does not have good upward mobility is just a lie. The above graph is therefore just another example of facts and numbers showing a liberal bias!!!!

Source: Alan Krueger, the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
Via
: Paul Krugman at the New York Times

References to Conservative Facts can all be verified through: MediaMatters.org

American Exceptionalism! Yay!

Exceptional Income Growth

For a change of pace, today we thought we would highlight a graph that has not been infected with liberal bias: income growth rates under Democratic and Republican presidents. This graph shows reality conforming with Ideological Truth: under the socialist Democrats who don’t care about motivation or effort, everyone is rewarded the same (or the Job Creators are rewarded less!); under free-market liberty freedom Republicans, the job creators are rewarded more for the wonderful work that they do to make society great.

This graph has somehow miraculously been spun as somehow bad by the liberal media, but in a good and righteous conservative world: this is graph represents what America, liberty, freedom and happiness are all about!

source: Unequal Democracy, by L. M. Bartels
via:  Ezra Klein

The mega-rich have a liberal bias!

Liberal One-Percent

When you think of heathen liberal cesspools of sin, where do you think of? New York City, San Francisco, and Los Angeles, of course!

Yet in this stunning and revealing study it is shown that the top 1% of Job Creators (that’s the top 1% of the 1%) live in these unrepentant locales of liberalism! Why would the ultra-wealthy choose to live so close to centers of liberal “multiculturalism” and “open-mindedness”?

Obviously they must have a secret liberal bias!!!!!

source: Federal Election Commission
via:
The Sunlight Foundation