Two polls, big differences; who to believe.

In the "information era," we like facts. We like to know (quantitatively, if possible) the opinions of people around us are. This data is frequently found by newspapers or organizations conducting surveys or polls, which the community generally accept as correct. From newspapers and internet blogs one can easily discover that the public's opinion on political ideas or occurrences is one of the most polled topics. The problem when searching for the truth, which I previously stated is known to be of great importance in this age, is that different polls often contradict one another-sometimes fairly significantly.

For instance, early in 2010 there was a senate race in Massachusetts to replace Senator Ted Kennedy. Republican Scott Brown was running against Martha Coakley, a democrat. On January 9, 2010, Public Policy Polling released survey information concerning this race. (1) In this statement, they said, " The race to replace Ted Kennedy in the US Senate is looking like a toss up, with Republican Scott Brown up 48-47 on Martha Coakley." As you can see, this poll clearly states that the race is a fairly even match between the two. In the poll it states that Scott Brown may have a slight hand up on Martha Coakley, but frankly, the difference is fairly negligible.

The next day, on the tenth of January, 2010, The Boston Globe magazine released a poll of its own. (2)In this poll, made public one day later, stated "Democrat Martha Coakley, buoyed by her durable statewide popularity, enjoys a solid, 15-percentage-point lead over Republican rival Scott Brown as the race for the US Senate enters the homestretch, according to a Boston Globe poll of likely voters."

Why is there such a difference between these polls? How could one clearly state that the race between these two politicians "is looking like a toss up," and another, which came out one day later show that one politician "enjoys a solid, 15-percentage-point lead" over the other? Is it possible that over one day the standings changed this much? That's probably not the case, simply because these polls were most likely administered at about the same time (since they were published one day apart); even if the view of the general public did change during the evening of January ninth, the chances are slim that the findings of a legitimate and evenly sampled poll (involving either telephones using random-digit-dialing, or the internet) could be published by the next morning.

Well, after we conclude that the possibility of having a serious overnight change in public opinion is highly unlikely, we can move on to the question of sampling error. One doesn't have to be a statistician to know that a coin flipped fifty times won't yield twenty-five heads and twenty-five tails without question. Because you can't flip the coin an infinite amount of times, there's going to be a sampling error. The same concept is true in polling: because you can't survey every single person, you're not going to get the exact truth. Having said all this, could a fifteen percent discrepancy be a sampling error? No. A sampling error is generally accepted as plus or minus three percent-not fifteen percent.

While the Public Policy Polling poll did disclose information including how many people they polled ("744 likely voters"), and the questions they asked, they did not include the demographics of the poll. In the poll by The Boston Globe, no information was included concerning the poll except for the actual "15-percentage-point" statement. There is a possibility that one or both of these polls were administered to areas that lean heavily one way or the other as far as politics go.

After seeing each of these polls, how would the politicians involved react to the information? It obviously matters which poll they see. For instance, if Scott Brown saw the poll that showed him as being far behind, he may re-evaluate his own campaign and send a few polls of his own out that make him look a little better. He also may (depending on the background of the poll) be able to discover what groups of people he needs to convince. Polls support the democratic process by helping politicians know what the public thinks and help them know what they need to do to please the public. This is a basic principle of democracy.

Frankly, there are many polls that take place all the time, and unless you have a lot of time to research the background of each poll, you're probably going to just have to figure out which source you find reliable and trust it.

(1) Click here to see the first poll.

(2) Click here to see the second poll. (out of commission, sorry)

A tribute to Landon Kunzelman

You know, nobody reads this blog anyway, so I'm going to make a little post here about someone who means a lot to me and has helped me out a ton. My cousin, Landon Kunzelman, is the greatest guy ever. He's leaving for his mission in eight days. He'll be speaking Spanish and serving in San Bernardino, California.

Landon has meant a lot to me for years. We went to EFY together, we've been on amazing trips together throughout the years, and we recently almost died together on a hike in the Rockies (I'm going to tell that whole story in another post). In addition to all this, Landon has been a great mentor to me in many ways, including spiritually.

This is fairly short and personal, but I really felt like writing my thoughts down concerning Landon and this is the perfect place. I wish him the best of luck on his mission and I'll pray for him!

Jimmer in the NBA: how will he do?

BYU Basketball: Jimmer and Jackson

This basketball season the BYU cougars have been basically unstoppable. Jimmer Fredette is headed for the NBA (probably going to be a lottery pick) as he's averaged around 26 points per game on the season so far. He became the all-time leading scorer in Mountain West Conference history, and he's practically the un-debated #1 guy in NCAA basketball. Jackson Emery, one of Jimmer's teammates is also phenomenal. This season he became the all-time leading stealer for BYU. He may not go to the NBA right away, but I bet after a few years of Euro-ball he'll come back and have a shot. Yes, I was at the game in the video below. Yes, I did take part in the first ever rushing of the Marriott Center basketball court.

The Obama-meter is looking a bit low.

People make promises and commitments when they seek political office. These promises, when directed toward a whole country, can become pretty lofty, and should often probably be redefined as goals. However, no candidate would be elected on a platform such as, “I have a goal to make sure citizens are well-informed of bills being passed.” Unwisely, President Barack Obama decided to make lofty promises when campaigning for his position of President of the United States. In one campaign speech he stated, “I’ll make our government open and transparent so that anyone can ensure that our business is the people’s business…when there is a bill that ends up on my desk as president, you the public will have five days to look online and find out what’s in it before I sign it.” (1) Fellow citizens of the United States of America, President Obama has not followed through on his promise to give us five days to view each bill before he signs them.

The first bill which President Obama signed was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act. This he signed only two days after its passage. On the 17^th of February after he took office, “Obama signed his 1,000-page $787 billion stimulus aimed at jolting the declining U.S. economy. He did so only one business day after it passed through Congress—without allowing for five days of public comment.” (1) On the 22 of May, 2009, Obama signed the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure Act. This he did a mere two days after Congressed finalized the bill. (2) His promise is clearly not being met. This lack of following through on his promises will cause him serious problems around re-election time.

One could argue that, as President, he will have the responsibility to occasionally sign emergency legislation without five days’ notice. I personally consider sticky situations such as those acceptable. Having said that, the bills he is signing right away are not emergency legislation. For instance, on February 4, 2009, “PolitiFact.com” posted an article that lays another instance of the President’s broken promise on the table. The article states, “Obama signed an expansion of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program which provides health coverage for low-income children…just hours after it was finalized in Congress…the bill’s provisions don’t kick in until April 1, 2009, almost three months from signing.” (2) This is not emergency legislation. The very fact that it didn’t go into effect until months later proves that it wasn’t any sort of emergency. Another possible argument in the President's defense could be that the text of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program was posted on a web site days before it was signed by President Obama. While this was a nice gesture by the Obama administration, it was only posted on February first, leaving only three days for the public to view it before its signing. (2) Not keeping his promises to the fullest like this essentially gives ammunition to those against Obama in future campaigns. This is not what we were promised. Obama said five days, why do we feel lucky for three?

Everyone seems to make promises that they aren’t exactly able to keep from time to time. I don’t know how we can change this sad truth, but it is time for change. It’s time for some integrity in the American political system. America knows this, and his broken promises will come back to haunt President Obama in the election of 2012.

(1) http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=91286

(2) http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/234/allow-five-days-of-public-comment-before-signing-b/

Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winner in economics: capitalism and "greed"

Take a look at this clip of Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize winner in economics. The clip is only about two and a half minutes long. Tell me what you think

.

After cross country season of my senior year, I ran a half marathon (13.1 miles) in Branson, MO with some friends from church: Scott Young, Dave Whittekiend, and Judd Boehme. It wasn't a huge race, not a ton of entries, but I managed to scrape up a first-place win with a time of about an hour, twenty-six minutes. The race was an out-and-back to a place called "Murder Rock."

Senior year cross country season

Senior year track season

Senior year track with my 4x400 team of Maurice, Alex, Davon, and me...so very, very close to state.

These pictures are of my cousin Landon, Uncle Joe, and me during the best week of my life in Glacier National Park. We escaped death by mere inches multiple times, climbed all over glaciers, and saw amazing wildlife. We were on top of the world...literally and figuratively.

This picture is of me at the Colorado National Monument with my friend Matt (he's taking the picture). If you look closely, you can see me on top of it wearing an orange shirt.

In this picture, my roommate Nate, his brother, Corey, my friend Devan, and I are waiting outside the Marriott Center hours and hours before it opens so we can get amazing seats at the BYU vs. SDSU game! It was the most amazing game I've ever witnessed!

This is a picture of me with my friends Allison and Shelby...Felicia, the third person in their trio is taking the picture.This picture is of my best friend (and fhe mom) from summer term, Alicia, and me after making smoothies at her place. I look a little goofy, but I needed a good picture to remember summer term.

America's Tax Bracket System: Unfair and Cumbersome

Here in America we have something we like to call “the American dream.” It’s really the idea that everyone has a fair chance: a chance for fame, glory, and, quite importantly, wealth. This makes money a driving force in this world in which we live. Society seems to revolve around the obtaining of money. In fact, when you look closely you can see that almost everything in this world seems to be backed up financially. How does this apply to the title of this article: “America's Tax Bracket System: Unfair and Cumbersome?” Many people have heard the cliché, “nothing in life is free.” That’s true, especially when it comes to running a country; this is where taxes enter the picture. Every year people prepare for April 15 by filling out tax returns. This is all fine and dandy, but there is a problem. The current tax system in America is flawed in that it is unfair to the wealthier people of the country, and that it is cumbersome for taxpayers. The method of taxing in the United States requires not that citizens pay a proportionally higher tax as they increase their annual income, but a disproportionately greater amount. (For a simple illustration of the tax brackets, see below.) How, may I ask, is this acceptable? I believe that it isn't, it must be reformed.

On April 19, 2009, the Washington Post ran an article entitled “A Progressively Unfair Tax System.” This article discussed the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) findings that “the richest 20 percent of taxpayers pay about 70 percent of all federal taxes…[and] 50 percent of households provide no individual income tax revenue at all.” (1) The government obtains this severely lopsided contribution of money by using a system that applies an increasing percentage of a tax as one’s annual income increases. I believe that a more fair and, frankly, simple way to generate income tax revenue is to convert to a flat tax. It would require all taxpayers to pay the same percent of their income, no matter how much they make. For instance, those making $100,000 annually would pay an amount proportional to the amount paid by those making $500,000 or $5,000,000 annually. Isn’t “fairness” a part of the traditional American dream? Then why punish those with more income by requiring such a disproportionately greater tax? Does this method not simply stifle the desire to work hard to receive more?

In addition to the fact that the tax bracket system is simply unfair, the system is very cumbersome and complex. On March 11, 2010, the New York Times ran an article entitled “The Growing Complexity of the U.S. Federal Tax Code.” In this article, a brief outline of the tax code’s growth was included. It stated “we find that the number of pages in the U.S. federal tax code have grown at a near exponential rate of 3.28% per year, which as of 2010, means that the U.S. tax code has ballooned to be 71,684 pages in length!" (2) Everyone knows that there are loopholes, deductions, and forms with which every tax payer has to deal. Many people, due to the difficult process of filling out their tax forms, simply hire an accountant to take care of the dirty-work for them. The flat tax system would be much simpler. For a brief run-down on the flat tax system, you can refer to the video below.

To many people, the move toward a flat tax could seem a little drastic and out-of-the-blue. It could easily be argued that the simplicity brought by a flat tax could have negative effects. It would decrease the work available to some accountants who obtain a significant percent of their income from providing tax filing services. In addition to that, it is arguable that with so many less forms, people may start trying (even more aggressively than they may already be) to evade paying their taxes all-together. Though these may be valid points, I believe that their negatives are outweighed by the simplicity and fairness brought on by a flat tax.

Throughout the mid to late nineteen hundreds, many countries throughout the world moved toward a flat tax system. A few of these countries include Hong Kong, Lithuania, Russia Romania, Slovakia, Macedonia, and Serbia. (3) America is known for innovation and progression. Maybe it’s time we lost the huge tax code, and started implementing an easier, fairer tax system that doesn’t punish those who work hard for their money.

(1) Click here to view the previously mentioned Washington Post article.

(2) Click here to view the previously mentioned New York Times article.

(3) http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/v29n4/cpr29n4-1.html