State of the Union - Lies, damned lies, and statistics

Disraeli stated 'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics", and the President proved it in the State of the Union Address. In that speech he commented that not making his tax cuts permanent would cause "116 million American taxpayers [to] see their taxes rise by an average of $1,800". And I have no reason to not believe this statement to be factually true. However it is clearly a lie by statistics. It is my understanding at majority of Americans would would see their taxes increase by $400.00. So if the President wanted most Americans to know how this tax law he would have stated '116 million American taxpayers [to] see their taxes rise by a median amount of $400' or maybe even more clearly 'the average taxpayer will see an increase of $400 in their taxes'.

Lets say for example that the tax laws that will expire only increased taxes on incomes over 100,000. Then the President could still make his statement and it would still be true, but the averages taxpayer would not see any change int their income tax. Because most Americans make less than $100,000.

So next time you hear the word average in a statement, it is likely a lie, take a close look.

Blacks don't live as long as Whites.

It is hard to believe that people can get statistics so wrong, but people have been getting this wrong for a long time. There is a big difference between average age and maximum age. I have not researched this, but I assume that if you only look at men over 40 years of age you would find that the average age of black men is very close to that of white men.

Technorati Profile

Technorati Profile

The internet has no area codes.

"The internet has no area codes." Was the statment made by CIA Director General Hayden. This is very misleading at best and a lie at worst. Each piece of information on the Internet is wrapped in what is called an IP packet and each of these packets has 2 addresses associated with it. These addresses are very similar to a phone numbers. One is the address of the person sending the packet and one in the address of the person that will receive the packet. Buy looking at these addresses it is very easy to tell if a message if going to a computer that is in the US. It is possible that a from address could be spoofed to look like it was coming from a US address when it is not, but this can be fought against and is not different that what can be done with a phone by simply using calling cards that are located in the US.

General Gonzales' lies

On the Washington Journal of July 26th, 2006, Attorney General Gonzales told a lie. He stated that he does not need a warrent to make a search, if the search in reasonable. This statement is either a lie or the Attorney General is a very bad lawyer. The Forth Ammendment to the constitution of the United States reads:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Now let us assume that the General is correct and that no warrent is needed if a search is reasonable. This does seem to be what the 4th ammendment states right there in the phrase: secure ... against unreasonable searches and seizures. But now lets think of why the Founding Fathers put in that second sentence if warents aren't needed unless a search or seizure is unreasonable. It must be there for those cases where the search is unreasonable, right. But if that is the case then why require oath or affirmation and probable cause to be required for a warrent to be issued? Isn't this a statement of what is required for a search to be reasonable? This seems like the only choice though. Unless we assume that a warrent is only required if a search is unreasonable.