This explains it--and one for the archives

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
I've been wondering how liberalshere come back with insane opinions like doubling utility rates saves money among others--now I'm see why--from WSJ

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...5282190930932412.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop


Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?
Self-identified liberals and Democrats do badly on questions of basic economics.

By DANIEL B. KLEIN

Who is better informed about the policy choices facing the country?liberals, conservatives or libertarians? According to a Zogby International survey that I write about in the May issue of Econ Journal Watch, the answer is unequivocal: The left flunks Econ 101.

Zogby researcher Zeljka Buturovic and I considered the 4,835 respondents' (all American adults) answers to eight survey questions about basic economics. We also asked the respondents about their political leanings: progressive/very liberal; liberal; moderate; conservative; very conservative; and libertarian.
Rather than focusing on whether respondents answered a question correctly, we instead looked at whether they answered incorrectly. A response was counted as incorrect only if it was flatly unenlightened.
Consider one of the economic propositions in the December 2008 poll: "Restrictions on housing development make housing less affordable." People were asked if they: 1) strongly agree; 2) somewhat agree; 3) somewhat disagree; 4) strongly disagree; 5) are not sure.
Basic economics acknowledges that whatever redeeming features a restriction may have, it increases the cost of production and exchange, making goods and services less affordable. There may be exceptions to the general case, but they would be atypical.

Therefore, we counted as incorrect responses of "somewhat disagree" and "strongly disagree." This treatment gives leeway for those who think the question is ambiguous or half right and half wrong. They would likely answer "not sure," which we do not count as incorrect.
In this case, percentage of conservatives answering incorrectly was 22.3%, very conservatives 17.6% and libertarians 15.7%. But the percentage of progressive/very liberals answering incorrectly was 67.6% and liberals 60.1%.

The pattern was not an anomaly.

The other questions were: 1) Mandatory licensing of professional services increases the prices of those services (unenlightened answer: disagree). 2) Overall, the standard of living is higher today than it was 30 years ago (unenlightened answer: disagree). 3) Rent control leads to housing shortages (unenlightened answer: disagree). 4) A company with the largest market share is a monopoly (unenlightened answer: agree). 5) Third World workers working for American companies overseas are being exploited (unenlightened answer: agree). 6) Free trade leads to unemployment (unenlightened answer: agree). 7) Minimum wage laws raise unemployment (unenlightened answer: disagree).

How did the six ideological groups do overall? Here they are, best to worst, with an average number of incorrect responses from 0 to 8: Very conservative, 1.30; Libertarian, 1.38; Conservative, 1.67; Moderate, 3.67; Liberal, 4.69; Progressive/very liberal, 5.26.
Americans in the first three categories do reasonably well. But the left has trouble squaring economic thinking with their political psychology, morals and aesthetics.
To be sure, none of the eight questions specifically challenge the political sensibilities of conservatives and libertarians. Still, not all of the eight questions are tied directly to left-wing concerns about inequality and redistribution. In particular, the questions about mandatory licensing, the standard of living, the definition of monopoly, and free trade do not specifically challenge leftist sensibilities.

Yet on every question the left did much worse. On the monopoly question, the portion of progressive/very liberals answering incorrectly (31%) was more than twice that of conservatives (13%) and more than four times that of libertarians (7%). On the question about living standards, the portion of progressive/very liberals answering incorrectly (61%) was more than four times that of conservatives (13%) and almost three times that of libertarians (21%).
The survey also asked about party affiliation. Those responding Democratic averaged 4.59 incorrect answers. Republicans averaged 1.61 incorrect, and Libertarians 1.26 incorrect.
Adam Smith described political economy as "a branch of the science of a statesman or legislator." Governmental power joined with wrongheadedness is something terrible, but all too common. Realizing that many of our leaders and their constituents are economically unenlightened sheds light on the troubles that surround us.
Mr. Klein is a professor of economics at George Mason University. This op-ed is based on an article published in the May 2010 issue of the journal he edits, Econ Journal Watch, a project sponsored by the American Institute for Economic Research. The article is at: http://econjwatch.org/articles/economic-enlightenment-in-relation-to-college-going-ideology-and-other-variables-a-zogby-survey-of-am

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

--but IMO in defense of liberals I do give them high marks on running spell checker and reading from telepromter :)
 

kcwolf

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 1, 2000
7,224
21
0
Iowa City
This is your idea of something to be saved for the ages.? :142smilie

I had hoped you might actually try and make a case for not using renewable energy. I'm way off the mark. I had this wild notion fossil fuels didn't last forever. I also had this ridiculous idea buying oil from our enemies was a bad thing.

My mistake.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Interesting. I plan to send a question or two to the researchers, the first being: did you monitor correct answers, and if so, what were those results? It's interesting that that wasn't even mentioned at all, not even a cursory mention? Leads me to believe those numbers would not sell an article to the Wall Street Journal (under Rupert Murdoch) and are being disregarded on purpose. What group of adults were questioned - how did you come about your survey population? As this was posted in the Wall Street Journal, I thought I'd check into it a bit more. I found this on the link to the survey, which sheds a little light on the mission of the survey, and the researchers own acknowledgment of bias in the survey:

A number of controversial interpretive issues attend our measure, including: (1) our designation of enlightened answers; (2) an asymmetry in sometimes challenging leftist mentalities without ever specifically challenging conservative and libertarian mentalities; (3) our simple eight-question test is merely a baseline and does not gauge the heights of economic enlightenment; and (4) a concern about response bias (namely, that less intelligent people would be less likely to participate in the survey).

As usual, in a survey, they are worded and designed to obtain a response for a reason. Appearing in the Wall Street Journal, I would guess the questions and participants might be established to obtain a sellable result. I was not disappointed. I downloaded the report, to try to learn more.

I learned they only included 8 of 16 questions asked of the respondents. Guessing they only included the 8 most embarrassing answers for liberals. And who were they asking, which is the ultimate question in looking at bias in the survey? Their premise being that liberals answered more of the questions wrong - sheer number of wrong answers?

When asked who they voted for in the last election, the respondent pool answered (by mean average): Obama 4.6, Nader 4.9, McKinney (green party candidate 5.56... and on the conservative side we had McCain 1.6 and Barr at 1.56. So, not only was the survey poll ridiculously populated with liberals (the green party candidate was the most supported candidate from the respondent pool?!?!), the trumpeted failings in the survey were based on a pool made up of nearly 90% liberals? And this is something showing any kind of real look at anything other than a liberal rip?

Hopefully I don't have to waste more time on this laughable "study." I do hope, however, that you do keep this one in the archives, Wayne, to show the extreme bias of right wing propaganda sites and publications such as Murdoch's Wall Street Journal, and how quickly the conservative fish get their lips hooked by them. I know you'd hoped to get this entered and nobody would look past the fluff, but that's not my nature, as you know.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention, and keeping the archives alive... :toast:
 

kcwolf

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 1, 2000
7,224
21
0
Iowa City
Good work Chad, as usual. What an embarrassing test.

DTB, have you sent in the application request for the Smithsonian? If not, :mj23:
 

Trampled Underfoot

Registered
Forum Member
Feb 26, 2001
13,593
164
63
I've been wondering how liberalshere come back with insane opinions like doubling utility rates saves money among others--now I'm see why--from WSJ



++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

--but IMO in defense of liberals I do give them high marks on running spell checker and reading from telepromter :)

It seems to me that you have a huge inferiority complex. Good luck with that.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
Interesting. I plan to send a question or two to the researchers, the first being: did you monitor correct answers, and if so, what were those results? It's interesting that that wasn't even mentioned at all, not even a cursory mention? Leads me to believe those numbers would not sell an article to the Wall Street Journal (under Rupert Murdoch) and are being disregarded on purpose. What group of adults were questioned - how did you come about your survey population? As this was posted in the Wall Street Journal, I thought I'd check into it a bit more. I found this on the link to the survey, which sheds a little light on the mission of the survey, and the researchers own acknowledgment of bias in the survey:

A number of controversial interpretive issues attend our measure, including: (1) our designation of enlightened answers; (2) an asymmetry in sometimes challenging leftist mentalities without ever specifically challenging conservative and libertarian mentalities; (3) our simple eight-question test is merely a baseline and does not gauge the heights of economic enlightenment; and (4) a concern about response bias (namely, that less intelligent people would be less likely to participate in the survey).

As usual, in a survey, they are worded and designed to obtain a response for a reason. Appearing in the Wall Street Journal, I would guess the questions and participants might be established to obtain a sellable result. I was not disappointed. I downloaded the report, to try to learn more.

I learned they only included 8 of 16 questions asked of the respondents. Guessing they only included the 8 most embarrassing answers for liberals. And who were they asking, which is the ultimate question in looking at bias in the survey? Their premise being that liberals answered more of the questions wrong - sheer number of wrong answers?

When asked who they voted for in the last election, the respondent pool answered (by mean average): Obama 4.6, Nader 4.9, McKinney (green party candidate 5.56... and on the conservative side we had McCain 1.6 and Barr at 1.56. So, not only was the survey poll ridiculously populated with liberals (the green party candidate was the most supported candidate from the respondent pool?!?!), the trumpeted failings in the survey were based on a pool made up of nearly 90% liberals? And this is something showing any kind of real look at anything other than a liberal rip?

Hopefully I don't have to waste more time on this laughable "study." I do hope, however, that you do keep this one in the archives, Wayne, to show the extreme bias of right wing propaganda sites and publications such as Murdoch's Wall Street Journal, and how quickly the conservative fish get their lips hooked by them. I know you'd hoped to get this entered and nobody would look past the fluff, but that's not my nature, as you know.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention, and keeping the archives alive... :toast:

Sheez Chad How on earth can you find way to compare multiple question on econ to who did you vote for poll-- you will be teaching our children--correct?

Who you voted for poll has nothing tremotely to do with Econ poll---you grabbing at straws--but as with the budget deficit ordeal--thats all thats left to grab. I did not expect you to take such offense on attack "of liberals" knowledge on econ--could this be an admission :)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++

KC I said 100 times I'll be the 1st to use renewable energy when cost is competative--not when liberals /gore/gumby try to make it competative by raising price of other fuels.

--of course there will be a few radicals (as you did) that will try to find way of rationalizing --doubling cost is cheaper --as long as they aren't the ones paying it.
 
Last edited:

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Wayne, are you serious? You really don't understand my point? I guess if you don't, I hope I won't be teaching too many children that can't grasp my specific points, be it economic or otherwise.

You mention "my poll." It wasn't a poll. It was questions taken from YOUR SURVEY. IT ESTABLISHES THE POPULATION OF THE SURVEY. If you don't understand what that means, then maybe take an evening course this fall and learn about survey and polling techniques...

YOUR POINT, is that more liberals answered more questions wrong ON THIS SURVEY. THIS SURVEY was asked of a population of about 90% far left liberals, which is learned from looking deeper into the survey (which I can only assume you didn't do... why would you after you could bold your headlines...). And the thing you want to brag about and keep in the archives is that more liberals answered more economic questions wrong, meaning liberals don't understand basic economics. That's fine, I would even believe that. But this survey could not have anything remotely objective about it when you say more liberals answered more questions wrong, when only 1 out of 9 respondents were non-liberals.

I'm grabbing at straws? Are you serious? I use your post, your link, your information, and you say my observations OF YOUR SURVEY have nothing to do with YOUR SURVEY. I realize, you probably didn't research your own survey after getting your headline talking points, but then you ridicule me for researching YOUR SURVEY, and making sensible assessments of it?

And then you infer that I perhaps should not be teaching our children? I realize you probably don't want me teaching YOUR children. You'd prefer them to get their education from you and (no offense, believe me) your Chinese wife. Nothing wrong with that, it does give one or two views of the world. But, I'd hope that the kids I end up teaching will not just accept talking points, and actually research information they are asked to believe.

As for an admission, there's no doubt I lean the more liberal way. So, if you need that pointed out, I hope this helps.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Chad if you want "the facts " "in detail" here is source 100 page plus report from source.
:0008

http://econjwatch.org/articles/econ...d-other-variables-a-zogby-survey-of-americans

Thanks, Wayne. I was way ahead of you, I did use that link, have it downloaded on my computer, and actually went through the report before making my post. I stand by what I posted, and would guess you didn't put in half the time I did on this subject. So, I can continue to play this game as long as you like, but I'd submit that with each post, you are losing the battle. I'll be here on this one, as long as you care to fight whatever battle you are trying to fight...
 

kcwolf

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 1, 2000
7,224
21
0
Iowa City
I also took the time to research the topic. Chad has done a solid job. Sorry you had to be ridiculed after the points you made.

As I seeit, the major problem with the survey is that it is really a test of agreement with conservative economic theories, written under the assumption that their views are correct regardless of how disastrous application of their views has been in the real world. The only thing this study demonstrates is the ideological hackery of its authors.?

Using the same technique, one could ?prove? that conservatives know more about science than liberals. Science has typically been a strong suit for liberals.

Here is a sample test written from such a conservative perspective. To make things simple I?ll make this a true or false test, with all answers true from a conservative perspective on science:

1 ) An intelligent designer is responsible for the development of complex organisms.

2 ) Darwinists believe men descended from monkeys.

3 ) Evolution is just a theory?there is no evidence for it.

4 ) The earth is 6000 years old or less.

5 ) The Grand Canyon was created by Noah?s flood.

6 ) Global warming is a hoax.

7 ) The earth is cooling, not warming.

8 ) Dinosaurs and humans both lived together, like on The Flintstones.

9 ) The earth is the center of the universe.

10) The earth is flat.

Conservatives who answer true to all these questions could claim to understand more about science than liberals who would get these questions ?wrong.?

This would be as meaningful as their claims of knowing more about economics as your test provides.

DTB, the simple truth is the test you brought up holds no water what so ever. As Chad states, the parameters of the test are ridiculous. Conservatives may very well have a better grasp on economics, but through that bogus test nor the bogus test I presented.

Professionals in testing procedures are rightfully scoffing at it.

That's all I have to say on the matter.
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
The unintended humor in DTB's threads is always priceless. :142smilie

And this one was better than most thanks to Chad and KC. :toast:

Trench
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,485
161
63
Bowling Green Ky
Oh, I forgot these accents...
:0008 :0corn

No what you forgot was post the stats from link I gave you that back up your--opinion/interpretation.

--I have an idea we might get another one like your cheerleader kc's 50% increase is less--liberal logic.

We'll be waiting for your proof from your reading article--that changes fact all were asked same question on econ and liberals can in dead last by huge margin--kinda like the arguement here--unless you can prove otherwise. I'll change my mind if can show me they were asked diff questions--or used diff method of grading--but comparing it to poll on who voted for who--won't get any :00hour other than KC or the T brothers. :)
 
Last edited:

bleedingpurple

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 23, 2008
22,388
227
63
51
Where it is real F ing COLD
Reading the Neocon responses and basic lack of understanding to the subject matter of most threads around here leaves me very frustrated. The IQs and intellect of understanding is amazing. It is not worth reading anymore. Done reading threads started by the neocons. Very little offered.
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
No what you forgot was post the stats from link I gave you that back up your--opinion/interpretation.

--I have an idea we might get another one like your cheerleader kc's 50% increase is less--liberal logic.

We'll be waiting for your proof from your reading article--that changes fact all were asked same question on econ and liberals can in dead last by huge margin--kinda like the arguement here--unless you can prove otherwise. I'll change my mind if can show me they were asked diff questions--or used diff method of grading--but comparing it to poll on who voted for who--won't get any :00hour other than KC or the T brothers. :)
You still don't get it.

As Chad and KC adeptly pointed out, you can easily achieve any results you desire by phrasing the questions of ANY test to achieve those desired results. Pollsters do it every day.

This isn't rocket science.

Trench
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Wayne, I'm really not understanding what you don't get about what I posted. Let's start here... did you actually read through the entire report? I did, most of it. It's how I found the information that I put in my post. The fact that you won't understand what point I'm trying to make makes me think you haven't read the info that you posted.

You keep referring to "my poll." You ask me to put up stats from the link you gave me to back up my "opinion/interpretation." I did. Evidently you don't realize that yet, and think I'm adding something different to my "opinion/interpretation." I'm not. I'm using YOUR link, and the info in it, and posting that. If you don't believe me, I suggest you go back to YOUR link, and review the material in it. ALL of it. My info comes several pages down, and from the very first page of the report. "My poll" is nothing more than reporting who was asked the questions in the survey. And let me make this point again, as clearly as I can, which is no opinion, nor interpretation. It seems to be a fact, taken directly from your information:

The people surveyed for this report were apparently about 90% liberals. That means, the answering ratio was 9 liberals to every one conservative. The conclusion that is being reported - the only real conclusion from giving us the results of only 8 of the 16 questions - is that more liberals answered more questions wrong. Just a bigger number of wrong answers. On what planet would you figure you'd get more wrong answers from a group of 1, compared to a group of 9?

You keep trying to paint me as being wrong here, avoiding your info, some kind of nebulous challenge to back up my point. I have done it. Twice now. If you choose not to really look at what I'm saying, that's your choice. But it seems like you are the only one not understanding it, or perhaps avoiding really looking at it. Which is also your choice. But I suggest you take the time to try to understand it - since it was brought up by you.

I'm not going to get personal and try to embarrass or ridicule you, I'll leave that to you, if you like.

Asked and answered, counselor. It's your move. :0074
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Believe me, I could certainly be misreading the info here, would not be the first time. So, I'm happy to be corrected with something specific, if so. Otherwise, I do want to keep this one for the archives, per Wayne's wishes.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top