Grabien Media’s Tom Elliott has been tracing the contagion of that claim that the Democrats’ $3.5 trillion spending bill will cost zero dollars put forward by President Joe Biden and echoed on the Sunday shows and in the Washington Post.
Terrifying news: A dangerous contagion is sweeping across Washington. It’s a virus that specifically targets victims’ hippocampus, particularly impacting the area of the brain responsible for … basic math. See for yourself! pic.twitter.com/wdj5lbUhvk
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 27, 2021
Reporters are also getting infected! https://t.co/DTCsRkn8pA pic.twitter.com/RL6RID8NFO
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 27, 2021
It’s even spreading inside the White House! pic.twitter.com/zpXUYAJcNP
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 27, 2021
Despite his affinity for vaccinations, I’m sad to report that even President Biden has become infected https://t.co/4hOXDaHiRS
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 27, 2021
Even fact-checkings are not immune! So sad to see! https://t.co/Gz0DvATT6r
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 27, 2021
Good that there’s nothing else that needs fact-checking … *cough* whips *cough*.
Sending prayers to @RepLowenthal — Hoping his wife & kids don’t catch this wretched affliction https://t.co/n9k8vRkeXK
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) September 27, 2021
Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler was responding to Brit Hume responding to WaPo op-ed columnist Catherine Rampell, pictured above with CNN’s Brian Stelter.
What idiocy. This woman is a columnist for the Washington Post. https://t.co/hoNn9pHnLo
— Brit Hume (@brithume) September 27, 2021
Uh, do people not understand gross cost versus net? $3.5 trillion is before tax increases and fees. Trump’s gross tax cut was $5.5 trillion before other tax increases etc reduced it to $2 trillion in net costs (ie, higher deficits) https://t.co/Kd7iV7l5gS
— Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) September 27, 2021
Uh …
The net cost is identical whether it’s paid for by taxes or borrowing. The idea—arrived at sometime on Friday afternoon, apparently—that we only measure cost when we are borrowing the money is absolutely preposterous. And you know it. https://t.co/7uLjlx0kKH
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) September 27, 2021
What Glenn is doing here is cynically mixing up ideas. If you raise taxes by $1 trillion and cut them by $2 trillion, you’ve cut taxes by $1 trillion. Likewise, if you increase spending by $2 trillion and cut it by $1 trillion, you’ve increased spending by $1 trillion. (2)
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) September 27, 2021
But you can’t mix-and-match those ideas so that a $3.5 trillion spending increase matched with a $3.5 trillion tax increase ends up “costing nothing.” It costs $3.5 trillion, and it’s paid for directly by taxpayers. This is so obvious it blows my mind it’s even being tried. (3)
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) September 27, 2021
Hey, easy. He’s “revealing the truth behind the rhetoric.”
— Matt Kent (@m4ttk3nt) September 27, 2021
I’m going to tell my wife I’m buying a new car and it’s not costing anything because I’m taking money from our bank account to pay for it.
— Blawgdawg29 (@gmarksim) September 27, 2021
Genius.
— Cardkillah (@Cardkillah) September 27, 2021
No, we get it. If I run a biz and sell something for more than it costs, I don’t say, “Woah, this cost nothing to make!” I say, “Good, I covered my costs.” It’s…weird…to say, “this $3.5 trillion proposal costs nothing,” rather than “We will pay for it with tax increases.”
— Marcvs Cicero (@CiceroMarcvs) September 27, 2021
JFC, dude. It's $3.5 trillion paid by the American taxpayer. Even if taxes and fees are raised to pay for it, it's still gonna cost. And if you *really* believe that this is getting "paid for" by taxes and fee increases, I'd like to sell you a very nice bridge.
— Jeff (@jeffinseak) September 27, 2021
Glenn you can’t be a fact checker with that tone. Plus, you are mixing terminology here, gross/net isn’t the proper way to explain it, you are saying funded vs unfunded. And even funded means based on projected revenues, not cash on hand.
— Mitchell Wexler (@MitchWex) September 27, 2021
It’s the slight of hand. Saying it won’t cost $3.5 trillion and then later on saying what you mean is “cost” in terms of net change in debt balance—If you mean net change in debt balance might be zero just say so.
— AB (@rufuslex52) September 27, 2021
From a fact checker. This is amazing.
— Faleristotle (@NickJFaleris) September 27, 2021
For the love of…Cutting taxes is not a "cost"; it's revenue. Increasing taxes to help pay for expenditures does not make expenditures=0. Maybe you guys should read up on rudimentary economics before saying absurd things?
— Eugene Slaven (@eslaven) September 27, 2021
Uh, do ppl not understand that reduction in tax contributions or "tax revenue" as some like to call it, is not a cost? Spending is cost and spending more then one collects is deficit spending. Tax cuts do not create deficit.
— Lucky Me (@Light_bound) September 27, 2021
https://twitter.com/PorterPints/status/1442484307323351046
The fact that you conflate tax cuts/raises and spending as if cutting taxes meant you are spending more money is frankly astonishing
— MrTate (@MrTate) September 27, 2021
We understand cost. Paying for something doesn’t mean it costs nothing and the money has to come from somewhere
— Mark Layton (@MHLayton) September 27, 2021
This is so intellectually dishonest that my mind is blown.
— Michael (@wholesickcru) September 27, 2021
Glenn, you're usually better with your state propaganda. I guess you're doing the best you can with what the administration has given you to work with
— Orb (@InfiniteOrb) September 27, 2021
The memo has gone out. Zero dollars!
Related:
Allow Jen Psaki to explain how the Dems’ $3.5 trillion package would cost ‘zero dollars’ https://t.co/vS8WkIJ2wf
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) September 27, 2021
Join the conversation as a VIP Member