SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) defended his oft-cited statistic showing that the three richest billionaires in the U.S. own more wealth than the poorest 50 percent of the country, after Washington Post writer Glenn Kessler claimed the fact was "not especially meaningful." (Photo: Sarah Silbiger/Getty Images)
After Sanders Points Out Poorest Have Zero or Negative Wealth, WaPo Fact Checker Slammed for Calling That Fact 'Not Especially Meaningful'
The notion "that it's 'not meaningful' that the bottom 50 percent of earners have no net worth because they have a bunch of debt—is a completely nonsensical take," wrote one journalist
Jul 01, 2019
Critics of massive wealth inequality in the United States defended a statistic frequently cited by 2020 presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday after Glenn Kessler, author of the Washington Post's "Fact Checker" column, claimed the fact that the bottom half of the country has zero or negative wealth was "not especially meaningful."
The statistic in question was brought up most recently by Sanders during the Democratic primary debate last week:
"We have three people in this country owning more wealth than the bottom half of America," Sanders said.
The statement, Kessler said, is factually true--but he rejected Sanders's suggestion that the inequality evidenced by the fact means that a major correction to the U.S. economy is required.
"This snappy talking point is based on numbers that add up, but it's also a question of comparing apples to oranges," Kessler wrote. "But people in the bottom half have essentially no wealth, as debts cancel out whatever assets they might have. So the comparison is not especially meaningful."
Critics denounced Kessler's suggestion that the notion of 50 percent of the population of the world's richest country carrying so much debt that any wealth they own is canceled out, could hold no meaning about the state of the nation's economic system.
The column, wrote Sanders's speechwriter, David Sirota, should be filed under "things you can't make up."
"Glenn Kessler's logic here--that it's 'not meaningful' that the bottom 50 percent of earners have no net worth because they have a bunch of debt that's obscuring all the assets they do have--is a completely nonsensical take," wrote journalist Matthew Chapman.
Kessler's dismissal of the plight of middle-income and lower-income Americans was indicative of the desire of many to ignore "perfectly correct data" which "point out ugly truths" about the United States, wrote Greg Greene, a blogger for Planned Parenthood Action.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Critics of massive wealth inequality in the United States defended a statistic frequently cited by 2020 presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday after Glenn Kessler, author of the Washington Post's "Fact Checker" column, claimed the fact that the bottom half of the country has zero or negative wealth was "not especially meaningful."
The statistic in question was brought up most recently by Sanders during the Democratic primary debate last week:
"We have three people in this country owning more wealth than the bottom half of America," Sanders said.
The statement, Kessler said, is factually true--but he rejected Sanders's suggestion that the inequality evidenced by the fact means that a major correction to the U.S. economy is required.
"This snappy talking point is based on numbers that add up, but it's also a question of comparing apples to oranges," Kessler wrote. "But people in the bottom half have essentially no wealth, as debts cancel out whatever assets they might have. So the comparison is not especially meaningful."
Critics denounced Kessler's suggestion that the notion of 50 percent of the population of the world's richest country carrying so much debt that any wealth they own is canceled out, could hold no meaning about the state of the nation's economic system.
The column, wrote Sanders's speechwriter, David Sirota, should be filed under "things you can't make up."
"Glenn Kessler's logic here--that it's 'not meaningful' that the bottom 50 percent of earners have no net worth because they have a bunch of debt that's obscuring all the assets they do have--is a completely nonsensical take," wrote journalist Matthew Chapman.
Kessler's dismissal of the plight of middle-income and lower-income Americans was indicative of the desire of many to ignore "perfectly correct data" which "point out ugly truths" about the United States, wrote Greg Greene, a blogger for Planned Parenthood Action.
Critics of massive wealth inequality in the United States defended a statistic frequently cited by 2020 presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday after Glenn Kessler, author of the Washington Post's "Fact Checker" column, claimed the fact that the bottom half of the country has zero or negative wealth was "not especially meaningful."
The statistic in question was brought up most recently by Sanders during the Democratic primary debate last week:
"We have three people in this country owning more wealth than the bottom half of America," Sanders said.
The statement, Kessler said, is factually true--but he rejected Sanders's suggestion that the inequality evidenced by the fact means that a major correction to the U.S. economy is required.
"This snappy talking point is based on numbers that add up, but it's also a question of comparing apples to oranges," Kessler wrote. "But people in the bottom half have essentially no wealth, as debts cancel out whatever assets they might have. So the comparison is not especially meaningful."
Critics denounced Kessler's suggestion that the notion of 50 percent of the population of the world's richest country carrying so much debt that any wealth they own is canceled out, could hold no meaning about the state of the nation's economic system.
The column, wrote Sanders's speechwriter, David Sirota, should be filed under "things you can't make up."
"Glenn Kessler's logic here--that it's 'not meaningful' that the bottom 50 percent of earners have no net worth because they have a bunch of debt that's obscuring all the assets they do have--is a completely nonsensical take," wrote journalist Matthew Chapman.
Kessler's dismissal of the plight of middle-income and lower-income Americans was indicative of the desire of many to ignore "perfectly correct data" which "point out ugly truths" about the United States, wrote Greg Greene, a blogger for Planned Parenthood Action.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.