From Nobel Prize Winning Economist Paul Krugman - The Big Dither

[DamnYankee]

I have not changed the way I debate. And will not do so because you cannot comprehend sarcasm without having a smilie face to label it.

In that case, given our history of conversations, I will continue to berate you when you are not clear.

 

[DamnYankee]

Too silly.

O'Reilly .. lecturing Krugman on economics?

Too fucking silly.

Did the Bush tax cuts stimulate job creation as Bush said they would?

Why waste time .. Hell to the no, they didn't.

Krugman was right .. AGAIN.

End of story.

So to be perfectly clear, you do not agree that flattening the progressive tax rate would strengthen the economy, which would then yield job creation. Is that your position?

 

[Cancel3]

In that case, given our history of conversations, I will continue to berate you when you are not clear.

And I will continue to laugh that you do not understand.

 

[DamnYankee]

And I will continue to laugh that you do not understand.

Like a hyena.

 

[Cancel3]

Like a hyena.

No, like a man watching something funny.

 

[blackascoal]

So to be perfectly clear, you do not agree that flattening the progressive tax rate would strengthen the economy, which would then yield job creation. Is that your position?

What I think is that Americans are the biggest whiners on the planet. We pay the lowest taxes in the indusdtrial world and still we whine like children.

To coin a phrase .. freedom ain't free.

Before I answer your question we should be clear that this has nothing whatsoever to do with the O'Reilly/Krugman debate.

The flat tax has pros and cons both worth discussing. However, I'm a democratic socialist so my perspective is always from what is in the best interests of society, not individuals. Flat taxation would certainly be more efficient, and as it intends to do, eliminate the IRS, H&R Block and the entire tax industry. But we're talking huge losses in revenue at a time when this nation can least afford it. What happens to social security and every other safety net for Americans?

Let them eat cake?

What happens to funding for education and defense?

Do you agree with Ron Paul who believes America should break up into smaller nation-states? Everybody for themselves?

Without question the rich will get richer .. but doesn't that put greater burden on the middle class?

Charity deductions will be eliminated. How does that work for charities?

Taxation is a necessary function of government. My concern is what are my tax dollars being used for, not that I have to pay taxes. If the goals and direction are good and universally beneficial to all Americans, I'm cool.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

To coin a phrase .. freedom ain't free.

well taken out of context. I'm pretty sure that when this phrase was 'coined', they weren't talking about buying freedom with tax dollars, but with spilt blood.

The flat tax has pros and cons both worth discussing. However, I'm a democratic socialist so my perspective is always from what is in the best interests of society, not individuals. Flat taxation would certainly be more efficient, and as it intends to do, eliminate the IRS, H&R Block and the entire tax industry. But we're talking huge losses in revenue at a time when this nation can least afford it. What happens to social security and every other safety net for Americans?

puts it right square in the lap of the individual, who is supposed to be best qualified and has their own interests for retirement survival at heart.

Taxation is a necessary function of government. My concern is what are my tax dollars being used for, not that I have to pay taxes. If the goals and direction are good and universally beneficial to all Americans, I'm cool.

would you feel comfortable if your tax rate was elevated to 40%? 75% how about 95%

 

[blackascoal]

well taken out of context. I'm pretty sure that when this phrase was 'coined', they weren't talking about buying freedom with tax dollars, but with spilt blood.

Not sure which "they" you're talking about but the they I'm talking about used the phrase during the Civil Rights Era and they weren't just talking about spilt blood.

Additionally, I am fully aware of how this phrase has been used in the past but this is how I apply it today to the incessant whining about taxes.

puts it right square in the lap of the individual, who is supposed to be best qualified and has their own interests for retirement survival at heart.

'nuff said .. then I'm out.

That is the sane false assertion promoted when they were trying to sell the uber-ridiculous notion of privatized social security .. which, thank the Gods, never happened. In fact, any assertion you have that starts with the individual first .. I'm out.

would you feel comfortable if your tax rate was elevated to 40%? 75% how about 95%

You know anyone .. ANYWHERE who has a 95% tax rate?

Let me answer the sane question of would I be comfortable if my tax rate increased .. the answer is, properly used, YES.

 

[DamnYankee]

What I think is that Americans are the biggest whiners on the planet. We pay the lowest taxes in the indusdtrial world and still we whine like children.

To coin a phrase .. freedom ain't free.

Before I answer your question we should be clear that this has nothing whatsoever to do with the O'Reilly/Krugman debate.

The flat tax has pros and cons both worth discussing. However, I'm a democratic socialist so my perspective is always from what is in the best interests of society, not individuals. Flat taxation would certainly be more efficient, and as it intends to do, eliminate the IRS, H&R Block and the entire tax industry. But we're talking huge losses in revenue at a time when this nation can least afford it. What happens to social security and every other safety net for Americans?

Let them eat cake?

What happens to funding for education and defense?

Do you agree with Ron Paul who believes America should break up into smaller nation-states? Everybody for themselves?

Without question the rich will get richer .. but doesn't that put greater burden on the middle class?

Charity deductions will be eliminated. How does that work for charities?

Taxation is a necessary function of government. My concern is what are my tax dollars being used for, not that I have to pay taxes. If the goals and direction are good and universally beneficial to all Americans, I'm cool.

I don't see an answer to my question there.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Not sure which "they" you're talking about but the they I'm talking about used the phrase during the Civil Rights Era and they weren't just talking about spilt blood.

Additionally, I am fully aware of how this phrase has been used in the past but this is how I apply it today to the incessant whining about taxes.

My brother, what you don't seem to be understanding is that this nation was founded upon the belief that individual rights mattered the most. No matter how hard you try to bullywhip that out of people, that belief will still stick because of the independent foundation of this nation.

That is the sane false assertion promoted when they were trying to sell the uber-ridiculous notion of privatized social security .. which, thank the Gods, never happened. In fact, any assertion you have that starts with the individual first .. I'm out.

You and I have gone round about this before. I still stand by my belief that social security never has been and never will be the safety net for senior citizens. I have this on first hand experience because of the financial struggles of my grandmother who is on social security.

You know anyone .. ANYWHERE who has a 95% tax rate?

no, because there isn't one yet...however, france, germany, and belgium have personal income tax rates of over 50% and you can pretty much guarantee that with the worlds economic plummet and governments currently not able to see that cutting spending is the only way to save their budget/economy, it is sure to go up. The US has a high personal tax rate of 28% and that is going to go up on people with incomes above a certain level. US corporate income tax is at 40% and that too is going to go up.

Let me answer the sane question of would I be comfortable if my tax rate increased .. the answer is, properly used, YES.

so i'll have to ask again, but i'll be more open ended about it. What is the highest personal tax rate you'll be 'comfortable' with if it was all spent the way you wanted it to be?

 

[blackascoal]

My brother, what you don't seem to be understanding is that this nation was founded upon the belief that individual rights mattered the most. No matter how hard you try to bullywhip that out of people, that belief will still stick because of the independent foundation of this nation.

This country was also founded on a hell of a lot of other dysfunctional and outdated beliefs. Fast forward several hundred years and the role of society takes a much more important role .. as expected as the country became more cohesive and universal to all Americans .. instead of white men only.

You and I have gone round about this before. I still stand by my belief that social security never has been and never will be the safety net for senior citizens. I have this on first hand experience because of the financial struggles of my grandmother who is on social security.

And we shall continue to dance on this issue.

Imagine your grandmother without social security. Would she be one of those people not smart enough to save for her retirement? I mean no disrespect to your grandmother, but that's the mantra of the privatization crowd .. AND, Social Security is the BEDROCK of SURVIVAL for a great many seniors.

Imagine if we had been dumb enough to invest the lives of seniors in the stock market?

no, because there isn't one yet...however, france, germany, and belgium have personal income tax rates of over 50% and you can pretty much guarantee that with the worlds economic plummet and governments currently not able to see that cutting spending is the only way to save their budget/economy, it is sure to go up. The US has a high personal tax rate of 28% and that is going to go up on people with incomes above a certain level. US corporate income tax is at 40% and that too is going to go up.

Interesting choice of examples .. given that France is number 1 on the most recent Quality of Life Index, they all have lower costs of living, and all rate higher on health.

You're talking to the wrong person about the fear of taxes. I have no such fear. I do not put the interests of ME above the interests of the American people.

I call that shit "patriotism"

so i'll have to ask again, but i'll be more open ended about it. What is the highest personal tax rate you'll be 'comfortable' with if it was all spent the way you wanted it to be?

Not sure, haven't given it much thought.

I make a pretty good living doing work I have a passion for and I stand on the shoulders of Americans who come before me. I have a responsibility to this country and its people for the opportunities it has given to me and my family.

This ain't about me or any individual. This is about America.

Anything less is selfish and petty in my opinion.

 

[Minister of Truth]

What I think is that Americans are the biggest whiners on the planet. We pay the lowest taxes in the indusdtrial world and still we whine like children.

To coin a phrase .. freedom ain't free.

So what? Revolutionary Americans, like contemporary Americans, had the highest standard of living on the face of the Earth, and barely paid any taxes compared to their counterparts in England and elsewhere in Europe. They still got peeved whenever someone came up with a new idea for levying taxes upon them...

This is precisely why your socialism has nothing whatsoever to do with the American principles. Its not the unceasing debate about whether programmatic government is good or bad, but the idea that the individual owes his pocketbook to the rest of society and that his freedom is unimportant in the grander scheme of things.

 

[Bai Lan]

So what? Revolutionary Americans, like contemporary Americans, had the highest standard of living on the face of the Earth, and barely paid any taxes compared to their counterparts in England and elsewhere in Europe. They still got peeved whenever someone came up with a new idea for levying taxes upon them...

This is precisely why your socialism has nothing whatsoever to do with the American principles. Its not the unceasing debate about whether programmatic government is good or bad, but the idea that the individual owes his pocketbook to the rest of society and that his freedom is unimportant in the grander scheme of things.

The thing about bac is he's not for the people at all. He believes in the "drive or be driven" ideology of slave owners and other power obsessed a-holes.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

This country was also founded on a hell of a lot of other dysfunctional and outdated beliefs. Fast forward several hundred years and the role of society takes a much more important role .. as expected as the country became more cohesive and universal to all Americans .. instead of white men only.

BAC, this country was founded to break away from those beliefs that you hold so dear. The belief that the individual freedom and liberties were not important as compared to the overall benefits of society resulted in years of british oppression. If individual freedoms are antiquated, your socialist beliefs are even more so, being much older than individual rights beliefs.

And we shall continue to dance on this issue.

Imagine your grandmother without social security. Would she be one of those people not smart enough to save for her retirement? I mean no disrespect to your grandmother, but that's the mantra of the privatization crowd .. AND, Social Security is the BEDROCK of SURVIVAL for a great many seniors.

Imagine if we had been dumb enough to invest the lives of seniors in the stock market?

If my grandparents had not been led to believe that social security would provide for their economic security in retirement, then their private choices very well could have set them up with a comfortable life. What we have instead is a program that promised one thing, but delivers something else completely.

Interesting choice of examples .. given that France is number 1 on the most recent Quality of Life Index, they all have lower costs of living, and all rate higher on health.

Neither one of them being a place that i'd want to live simply because of the limits in choices i'd be given to determine my life. Is security really a better trade off for your freedom? I think not.

You're talking to the wrong person about the fear of taxes. I have no such fear. I do not put the interests of ME above the interests of the American people.

I call that shit "patriotism"

I'll take that to mean that you'll deal with 60 to 90 percent tax rates as long as society overall benefits. Tell me then, what about the minority of that society that suffers?

This ain't about me or any individual. This is about America.

Anything less is selfish and petty in my opinion.

But America was born to protect the individual and individual rights. So what do you do? Rebel? Revolution? Your 'responsibility' as an american is to continue to support and protect the rights of individuals. Anything less is un-american.

 

[ib1yysguy]

Your grandparents sound like fucking dumbasses. Who the fuck is stupid enough to believe social security is going to be enough to live on? I'd bet you 100 bucks that your grandmother didn't think $300 was enough to live on every month and she wound up not being able to save or not willing to save for retirement for no reasons at all having to do with the existence of social security. The dishonesty is glaring here.

 

[Topspin]

Ib1 your a gerber baby
1. your still in school
2. your moronic post
3. do you have a clue as to the percentage that live on SS alone?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Your grandparents sound like fucking dumbasses. Who the fuck is stupid enough to believe social security is going to be enough to live on? I'd bet you 100 bucks that your grandmother didn't think $300 was enough to live on every month and she wound up not being able to save or not willing to save for retirement for no reasons at all having to do with the existence of social security. The dishonesty is glaring here.

your ignorance and stupidity outshines it all. Were you alive when social security started? If so, how old were you?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Ib1 your a gerber baby
1. your still in school

that dumbfuck retard is still a school kid?

 

[Topspin]

he's a gerber baby still in school

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Ib1, you're a total fucking ignoramus apparently stupid enough to think you're a hell of alot smarter than those of us who've been alive twice as long as you.

take your fucking binky and your blanket and crawl back under your mommas tit.