Graphs Can Lie - Simple ways you're being manipulated

This morning I saw the following post on Twitter:

It looks like the US is really giving the UN waaaaaay more money than the other countries, right? And in truth, it is. 22% is obviously bigger than Germany's 6.3%.

But we need to stop and think about percentages for a minute. If I say I'll give you half of the money in my pocket, the amount you get is really dependent on how much money I have in my pocket. It also has a much larger effect on me given how much money I have in the bank when I say this.

For example, I have $100 in my pocket. I give you half and you now have $50. Sweet! But what if I had just pulled ALL the remaining money out of my bank account and stuck it into my pocket? That's a huge loss for me.

Now imagine I have $1,000 in my pocket, and I give you half. I also happened to have $15,000 saved and sitting in my bank account.

In these two examples, you get less money in the first situation ($50) than in the second ($500), but I lost more money in the first situation (50% of my total worth vs. 3.33%).

This is an important concept with looking at percentage graphs flashed in front of you on TV.

Yes, the United States outpaces other countries in UN funding, but the US has waaaaayyy deeper pockets. If we look at the SAME numbers in a different context, we get a much different story.

Now let's look at the exact same numbers presented NOT as a percentage of the total UN budget, but as a percentage of gross domestic product GDP (in US dollars).

The United States gives 0.0036% of it's GDP to the UN.

What I'm trying to convey here is that although the US gives more money overall than other countries, it's not all that much based on what it has in the bank.

Now let's look at how much money the US gives per capita:

The US gives $2.05 GDP per capita to the UN

Here we see other countries are giving MORE in relation to their overall bank account and contributors than the US.

Want to know where the US is spending all that money, per person?

The US spends $1,865 GDP per capita on defense.

Now THESE are charts that Fox News can have and post as much as they want.

For all of those folks that care, this data was compiled in Excel (check out the sweet graphics) using data pulled directly off the UN 2015 contributions report and data from 2015 GDP reports on data.un.org.

Chuck Grassley works for Chuck Grassley

March 11, 2016

Dear Ms. Lamb:

Thank you for taking the time to contact me.  As your Senator, it is important for me to hear from you.

I appreciate hearing your thoughts on the loss of Justice Antonin Scalia, as well as efforts to fill his seat on the Supreme Court of the United States.  Iowans, as well as all Americans, are currently engaged in a serious discussion on this topic.

As Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I take very seriously the advice of my predecessors, on the appropriateness for the Senate to withhold consent on any nominee to the Supreme Court, should the President not follow the example of his predecessors, such as President Lincoln, who abstained from making a nomination during a presidential election year until after the people voted.  In 1992, while serving as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, then-Senator Joe Biden spoke on the Senate floor about the proper actions of the Senate in this very circumstance.  My friend and colleague stated "Senate consideration of a nominee under these circumstances is not fair to the president, to the nominee, or to the Senate itself...Where the nation should be treated to a consideration of constitutional philosophy, all it will get in such circumstances is partisan bickering and political posturing from both parties and from both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue."

I share the concerns of my friend Vice President Biden.  We know that a nominee will not ultimately get confirmed, and because election season is well underway, no matter the qualifications of any potential nominee, the hyper-political environment would cause harm to the court, to the nominee, and to the nation.

It is important to remember that Congress is a coequal branch of government, and our founders sought to protect each branch of government from undue influence from either of the other two.  In response to the current Administration's continuing efforts to use the Judicial branch in order to bypass Congress and undermine the process of representative government, the people made their voices heard in 2014 by revoking the previous majority in the Senate, and increasing the majority ranks in the House of Representatives.

The Senate's decision to express its constitutional right to withhold consent from a nominee until after the next President is sworn in will allow the nominee to receive fair consideration, as opposed to attempts from each party to promote its electoral agenda.

On March 1st, I met with President Obama at the White House to reiterate the Senate's position on this issue. We also took the opportunity to discuss many issues of mutual interest, such as the opioid epidemic that is devastating our country, criminal justice reform, and issues facing Puerto Rico.

I want to sincerely thank you again for sharing your views with me.  I understand that many Americans, especially Iowans, feel passionately about this issue.  Although there may be disagreements between people of good will, it is important for us to continue to have a respectful discussion.  Please keep in touch.

Sincerely,

Chuck Grassley