Capitalism: A true story?

The purpose of this blog is to encourage people to think for themselves, and not to accept as fact everything they see and hear. I use the word lemmings to describe these people; they follow blindly without questioning. I see articles, videos, and news items daily that spout alleged facts. I hear, or participate in, conversations where I hear unfounded assertions. This blog’s purpose is not to persuade you one way or another; it is to encourage you to research things for yourself. I sincerely hope you enjoy my blog.-Pete

Like most people on Friday after work, I went to the gas station to top off for the weekend ahead. The station I use has installed televisions on top of the pumps, presumably to keep you from watching your hard-earned money spin away on the dial. Lo and behold, I see a commercial for Michael Moore’s new movie, Capitalism. The voiceover primarily states that Michael Moore tells the truth about important topics in his movies. I decided to check out some facts about Mr. Moore’s accuracy of statements in his newest movie, “Capitalism: A love story”.

Regarding his movie “Fahrenheit 9/11”, Mr. Moore claims that his movie irreparably harmed President Bush’s popularity: " From Fahrenheit on, Bush's approval rating never was better, it only got worse" (Moore, 2009). Fahrenheit 9/11 came out at the end of June 2004, when Bush's approval rating was at 48 percent. However, his approval rating climbed through the rest of the summer and hit 53 percent around Election Day in early November. After the election, Bush's approval peaked at 57 percent during the first week of February 2005. Here we see that the next eight months after the movie’s release, the president’s approval rating increased, not decreased. Mr. Moore’s claims are just flat out wrong on this one.

The next statement Mr. Moore makes is that the majority of Americans want a single-payer health care system. Put simply, the government would be responsible for paying all of your health care. Mr. Moore cites the Kaiser Foundation’s July 2009 poll on this matter. Let us look, shall we? The poll asks each participant to what degree he or she favored or disfavored eight different types of plans. Each plan received a favor/do not favor rating. In July, single-payer was favored by a narrow margin; 50% to 46%, compared to itself. This was the first time in six months that this was true. Among all eight plans, however, single payer rated the lowest score. This clearly shows that Mr. Moore’s claims of a majority were gratuitous at best, and that Americans were clearly thinking anything is better than single payer health care. Here is more evidence of another inaccurate claim by Mr. Moore.

In the fifties, “ A lot of people got rich -- and they had to pay a top tax rate of 90 percent” Mr. Moore says in the film (Moore, 2009). That sounds like an awful lot, does it not? Look what I found out though; the top marginal tax rates were over 90 percent in the fifties. Therefore, it appears this might be true. Look closer though. Mr. Moore says “ …top tax rate” while, in the fifties, it was the top marginal tax rates that were over 90 percent. What is the difference? Exactly this; under Mr. Moore’s formula, a person making $500,000 would have to pay $450,000 in taxes. The 90 percent marginal tax rates, however, apply only to money earned in excess of $300,000 in the fifties. Anything below that and the taxes started at only 20 percent on the first $2,000 of income and graduated on up to the highest rate after $300,000. The result is that a person would have had to make in excess of $2.3 million dollars a year to pay an actual 90% in taxes. This shows Mr. Moore’s statement is misleading at best. By the way, in case you wanted to know, in 2009, the top marginal rate was 35 percent on income above $372,958. Would you say that is quite a difference from 90 percent?

At this point, you might start thinking that Michael Moore’s films lack a certain familiarity with the actual truth. Let me point out this piece of information where the facts back up Mr. Moore. He cites a statistic that the top 1% of the wealthy has more financial wealth than the bottom 95%. This gets into semantics; it depends on whose definition of financial wealth you use. Two of the three most accepted definitions support Mr. Moore’s statement, while one definition disagrees, but minimally. Even if the exact numbers are not very correct, the truth is the top 1% has a hugely disproportionate share of the financial wealth. This is a true statement.

What of the claim that President Obama’s top campaign contributor was Goldman Sachs? That is partially true. Goldman Sachs was in fact the top private contributor to the President’s campaign-University of California employees were first, but they are public contributors. Mr. Moore is right about that assertion.

I heard a commercial stating Mr. Moore's movie tell the truth. I checked some facts. I will not say what I believe. My belief is irrelevant. I am just trying to encourage you to question and research things for yourself. That is the purpose of my blog. Remember, the truth is out there…you just have to look for it.

References

Adair, B. (2009, October 1). Politifact-Michael Moore movie gets a fact-check. Retrieved October 2, 2009, from politifact.com: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/oct/01/michael-moore-movie-factcheck/

Moore, M. (2009, September 29). Retrieved October 2, 2009, from Michael Moore.com.

Moore, M. (Director). (2009). Capitalism: A love story [Motion Picture].