Journalists like NBC’s Katy Tur seem desperate to convince Americans that any benefit they might see from the Republican tax cut package that passed late last year, is, as Nancy Pelosi would say, “crumbs” — but keep falling victim to an insular coastal culture that renders them incapable of understanding what even a couple of extra bucks in a paycheck means to middle Americans.
At a stop in Ohio yesterday, President Trump brought a man on stage who said he’d be using his $1,000 to provide for a new baby. Another woman said she’d use the extra money to pay off some of the bills she’s racked up sending her child to college, and would put some of the money toward a down payment on a home.
Tur was scandalized and questioned whether the speakers had any concept of how much those projects cost.
Gentleman at Ohio Trump event says he’s going to save to start a family with his 1,000 dollar one time bonus.
Average cost to give birth to one child in Ohio is $5,836.
— Katy Tur (@KatyTurNBC) February 5, 2018
Woman who just spoke says she’s going to use her $1,000 bonus and tax cut to help buy a home and pay for her two kids who are going to college.
In Hamilton Co, Ohio (where they are) avg home is $277,582
Avg cost of private college nationally ~35,000
Public $19,000— Katy Tur (@KatyTurNBC) February 5, 2018
Neither speaker appeared to be under the impression that that extra money would wipe out their obligations, or pay off their debt. But Tur insisted that they’d be left destitute anyway.
A thousand dollars could go a long way to a down payment for someone using the FHA’s lending program, which allows borrowers to put around 3.5% down on a home and still qualify for a 30 year mortgage. Placed in a savings account, or used in a CD, a thousand dollars could earn a return that most certainly could be used to help defray college costs, pay down medical bills, or help someone afford a new home or a new car.
This is some monumentally absurd, condescending analysis.
If you got $1,000 and chose to save it, it would absolutely help with a future purchase, starting a family, or college tuition for kids. It doesn’t PAY for it, and no one thinks it does. https://t.co/r4DX5l3ytf
— Steve Krakauer (@SteveKrak) February 5, 2018
But the fact-checking didn’t stop with NBC. CBS, too, tried to convince someone with an even smaller return — just a few bucks per paycheck — that they’d see no benefit from the tax cuts. Instead, their chosen victim calmly explained that she’d actually put that money to good use.
Glad she mentioned how other workers quoted are getting hundreds of $’s more per paycheck thanks to tax reform. No one is saying she’s “thrilled;” she told AP she was pleasantly surprised, having thought she’d get nothing, then explained how her small tax cut would help her. https://t.co/UPtScQgXko
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) February 6, 2018
The media aren’t simply providing information here, they’re actively campaigning against a Trump Administration policy.
After all, how else would you explain the difference between how they’ve covered the Trump tax cut and how they covered a $40-per-paycheck bump from an Obama era policy. Back then, media outlets breathlessly covered a White House initiative that asked Americans what “#40dollars” means to them. Outlets like Mashable encouraged the White House to fight for the payroll tax cut on Twitter. CNN reprinted many of the tweets.
It’s also strange when you compare the Democrats’ and media’s reaction to a mere $100 or $180 extra per year when just one presidential term ago, they were claiming that an extra $15 to $50 per month (or an extra $150 per year) spent on birth control would bankrupt America’s women, forcing them into pregnancy at such an alarming rate that the Health and Human Services department had no choice but to force old nuns to provide their caretakers with comprehensive plans that provided birth control for free.