BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Post Hoc (False Cause), Appeal to Emotion, and Appeal to Authority, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 21.3% saturation with 146 hits. Analysis detected 1,506 faulty-reasoning hits from 684 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 47.1% and a BS Rank of 57% (12,281 of 28,461 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 56.90% of the article peer group.

It doesn’t have to be like this. 
A benevolent society that supports each one of us as we pursue the dreams of our lifetimes; 
A thoughtful society that recognizes our inviolable right to a life of dignity; 
A compassionate society that provides quality medical care, child care, educational opportunities, effective aging services, agreeable housing, and decent workforce opportunities that pay a livable wage; 
An opportunity society in which each person has “a fair chance to make of himself all that in him lies,” as Teddy Roosevelt proclaimed in 1910. 
We can’t begin to approach these goals while wealth and power is concentrated in the tiniest portion of our population. 
The present tax structure facilitates this concentration of power. 
Thomas Jefferson set a high bar high with his famous words in the Declaration of Independence, and President Abraham Lincoln reaffirmed them 87 years later at Gettysburg. 
We are “all created equal” and we are all entitled to an equal opportunity in the game of life. 
Yet anyone with eyes can see how far short we have fallen. 
Everywhere, people struggle to get by, while a few amass fabulous riches and spend it on mansions, yachts and extravagances that are almost beyond comprehension. 
Franklin Delano Roosevelt warned us that “the test of our progress is not whether we add to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.” 
With that in mind, since the Great Depression, the tax code has required the wealthiest to pay a higher share of their income to the government to support programs that advance the common good. 
This tax structure funded our public programs through the post-war era until the mid-’70s, yielding a period of unprecedented prosperity. 
Then came a new theory  trickle-down economics. 
It proposed cutting the taxes on the wealthy in the hope that they would create new jobs and revenue, lifting the living standards of the rest of us. 
Beginning with the Reagan presidency, this theory was put to the test. 
But it was too good to be true. 
The government cut taxes for the richest but the wealth did not trickle down. 
Instead it concentrated at the top 1% and the social safety net shrank. 
You would think that the trickle-down theory would be firmly buried by the facts. 
But you would be wrong. 
Gov. 
Greg Gianforte is preparing a new version called the “flat tax.” 
This proposal lowers the state income tax on those at the top while doing nothing for working people and families. 
Taxpayers who earn more than $575,000 a year already pay the lowest effective state and local tax rate of any category of taxpayers. 
Yet the flat tax would lower it even more. 
The governor’s tax cuts would decrease state revenue by $130 million a year, at a time when Montana sorely needs those revenues. 
That tax revenue protects Medicaid and rural healthcare, funds our public schools, addresses the affordable housing crisis, provides residential property tax relief, and cares effectively for our aging population. 
It’s easy to fall into the trap of hopelessness. 
But it doesn’t have to be like this, and there’s something we can do about it. 
It’s simple. 
We can vote. 
The elections this November can change the direction of our state and our country. 
We have the power to choose a new set of officeholders, folks who are committed to the belief that government should be used to provide for the general welfare of all and not just for the few. 
The campaign for the midterms will begin in earnest after Labor Day. 
Find out where each candidate stands on the governor’s flat tax. 
It doesn’t have to be like this. 
And we can do something about it. 
Jon Ellingson serves as Vice Chair of the Board of Big Sky 55+. 
He is a former state legislator and was Senate Majority Leader during the 2005 session. 
His career includes work with former Attorneys General Mike McGrath and Steve Bullock and as the legal director of the Montana ACLU. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 14.3%Jon Ellingson: 5.2%Daily Montanan: 2.2%Confirmation Bias14.3%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 7.0%Jon Ellingson: 1.2%Daily Montanan: 2.6%Availability Heuristic7.0%This article: 4.1%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.6%Representativeness Heuristic4.1%This article: 2.9%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Hindsight Bias2.9%This article: 0.3%Jon Ellingson: 1.4%Daily Montanan: 0.6%Overconfidence Bias0.3%This article: 13.9%Jon Ellingson: 5.3%Daily Montanan: 2.9%Framing Effect13.9%This article: 8.6%Jon Ellingson: 2.1%Daily Montanan: 0.4%Loss Aversion8.6%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.8%Jon Ellingson: 2.1%Daily Montanan: 1.6%Optimism Bias5.8%This article: 4.5%Jon Ellingson: 0.4%Daily Montanan: 1.6%Pessimism Bias4.5%This article: 15.4%Jon Ellingson: 4.4%Daily Montanan: 6.4%Negativity Bias15.4%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 1.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.4%Jon Ellingson: 3.6%Daily Montanan: 0.7%In-Group Bias0.4%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 5.1%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.5%Halo Effect5.1%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.7%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 1.2%Recency Bias0.7%This article: 1.8%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Primacy Effect1.8%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 1.0%Daily Montanan: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 18.4%Jon Ellingson: 7.4%Daily Montanan: 2.2%Appeal to Authority18.4%This article: 9.5%Jon Ellingson: 2.8%Daily Montanan: 1.0%False Dilemma9.5%This article: 4.2%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.7%Slippery Slope4.2%This article: 2.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Circular Reasoning2.0%This article: 3.7%Jon Ellingson: 7.8%Daily Montanan: 2.9%Hasty Generalization3.7%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 2.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Bandwagon2.0%This article: 18.9%Jon Ellingson: 7.3%Daily Montanan: 3.8%Appeal to Emotion18.9%This article: 3.9%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.7%Begging the Question3.9%This article: 20.6%Jon Ellingson: 2.0%Daily Montanan: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)20.6%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 3.7%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 1.1%Anecdotal3.7%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 3.4%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.9%Ambiguity (Equivocation)3.4%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.3%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 1.5%Unattributed Quote5.3%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 21.3%Jon Ellingson: 4.7%Daily Montanan: 1.5%Biased Writer Voice21.3%This article: 16.7%Jon Ellingson: 10.9%Daily Montanan: 0.8%Indoctrination16.7%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 11.5%Daily Montanan: 0.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.6%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%Daily Montanan: 0.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.6%

684 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers8.9%attributed speech623writer words
Selected voice

Jon Ellingson

74%flagged-word coverage
50 attributed words82% of attributed speech98% writer coverage
0%12.5%25.0%Biased Writer Voice-23.4 ptsWriter: 23.4%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-18.3 ptsWriter: 18.3%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-5.8 ptsWriter: 5.8%Jon Ellingson: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.