4 ms·

Read article with grain of salt because the author is currently working for The American Enterprise Institute, which is a well known right-wing entity that is p

Read article with grain of salt because the author is currently working for The American Enterprise Institute, which is a well known right-wing entity that is paid to produce "research" and propaganda. Also, evaluating the merits of the piece itself, I notice it's very carefully worded to imply a certain thing which is not actually backed up by facts or independent evidence, nor does it make an effort to separate correlation from cause. Which is a common hallmark of propaganda. For example, there may very well be a rise in businesses leaving California, but it could also be the case there's a rise in businesses coming into California, or starting up inside of California, or it may actually be a good thing that they're leaving, or even if it is bad in isolation there are other good things that come from it that are more than worth it. Overall, not a serious or trustable piece.

miked 15y ago
which is a well known right-wing entity that is paid to produce "research" and propaganda. Implication: "very carefully worded to imply" left-wing think tanks are not so paid. to imply a certain thing which is not actually backed up by facts or independent evidence 3 of the articles 5 paragraphs cite statistics, including links. 0 out of 2 of your paragraphs do. For example, there may very well be a rise in businesses leaving California, but it could also be the case there's a rise in businesses coming into California, or starting up inside of California, or it may actually be a good thing that they're leaving, or even if it is bad in isolation there are other good things that come from it that are more than worth it. In other words, you have absolutely no idea what the cause of business decline in CA is, you cite no data to support the claims you make, and then you accuse the author of creating propaganda. which is not actually backed up by facts or independent evidence, nor does it make an effort to separate correlation from cause. Which is a common hallmark of propaganda. Yup.

miked 15y ago

which is a well known right-wing entity that is paid to produce "research" and propaganda. Implication: "very carefully worded to imply" left-wing think tanks are not so paid. to imply a certain thing which is not actually backed up by facts or independent evidence 3 of the articles 5 paragraphs cite statistics, including links. 0 out of 2 of your paragraphs do. For example, there may very well be a rise in businesses leaving California, but it could also be the case there's a rise in businesses coming into California, or starting up inside of California, or it may actually be a good thing that they're leaving, or even if it is bad in isolation there are other good things that come from it that are more than worth it. In other words, you have absolutely no idea what the cause of business decline in CA is, you cite no data to support the claims you make, and then you accuse the author of creating propaganda. which is not actually backed up by facts or independent evidence, nor does it make an effort to separate correlation from cause. Which is a common hallmark of propaganda. Yup.