The Fiscal Cliff Bill in One Chart

Comments (9)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Vicki says:

    A picture is worth a thousand words.

  2. August says:

    Given that the main goal was averting a course change I’m not surprised. But those two line do need to cross sometime soon.

  3. Studebaker says:

    Holy Cow!

    This graph makes me want to liquidate my portfolio of government bonds and invest the proceeds in cases of Pork & Beans, 50-lb. bags of rice and 1,000-round surplus boxes of .223 ammo for my old AR-15!

    Maybe I’ll use my tax refund to purchase an old “off the grid” cabin made out of straw bales I saw advertised in Ruidoso, New Mexico. Instead of calling it my Y2Kabin, it my Fiscal Cliff Dwelling.

  4. bart says:

    What Studebaker says, except I’d prefer an AR-10.

  5. Neil Caffrey says:

    Utterly mind boggling.

  6. Kyle says:

    Studebaker, I’ll bring my home-made water purifier and lifetime supply of hand sanitizer!

  7. Carol Livingstone says:

    Please note that the graph is deceptive in that it does not extend the Y-axis down to 0%. By showing only 10-26% on the Y-axis, you made the difference between the lines seem much larger.

  8. Dano says:

    @CarolLivingstone: That would just create junk space. It has no little lightning line to 0%, each bar accounts for 2%, and the percentages are clearly marked, so I’d say it’s sound. I get why you’d want to have the bottom zero and see how close it is to “doubling” the other figure, but that would make already minute changes even more minute — THEN they’d be accused of being unfair by making the blue and red lines imperceptible when they could have shown a slight difference. Since 18% is the historical norm for revenue to GDP and it never really deviates much (still around 18% when our top marginal tax rates were around 90%), it makes absolute sense and fairness to put 18% in the middle, and “zoom in” as far as you can whilst still seeing the entire green line, which looks a lot like that above.