How much? America would be best off if the super-rich were taxed at 90 PER CENT, say economists. We have a better idea. How about we quit giving billions to countries that hate us? Think about what could be done with all that money if it stayed in the US?
This post was last modified on November 24, 2014
View Comments (15)
One day ama be rich so HELL NO!!!
:)
And even if they did tax them at 90%, these clowns would have it spent within a month.
Seems that the 1% finances more of the government than the bottom 90%. Still not enough for the Keynesians.
Hmmmmm France tried this and it led to an exodus of the rich. And since most of the rich are liberals that would be cutting off those pricks that keep funding demotards since they would be in another country? Economists....People who can't get a real job so they tell everyone else how it should be done. They are gonna Gruber up the economy even more than it already is.
I really like the fact that Gruber has become a verb, and it's not exactly an endearing one.
The remark should have been qualified with the word "Marxian".
Forget the super rich; economists ought to be taxed at 95% of their entire incomes.
Thomas Sowell said that the best education expenditure we can make is to pay all the professors of education in universities a million dollars (this was a few decades ago), to stop teaching and stop writing.
I would do that with economists, too.
Seeing as how they didn't earn even one percent.
That's just it.
Economists? You mean those guys with the expensive college educations who brought us 18 trillion in debt? Those guys?
Economists know nothing of creating a system of commerce and currency that will exist in perpetuity. All they know how to do is move debt around from place to place to make one situation LOOK like it's working while they tell you to temporarily ignore the other situations. All they know is how to play games with fake money projected through interest and buying and selling debt so they can make themselves rich while the ship of state sinks.
They are all villains.
"All they know is how to play games with fake money projected through interest and buying and selling debt ..."
It's not just economists. In NJ, we had a governor whose field of expertise was exactly that.
Problem is that the vast majority of people don't know the first thing about Intro to Econ 101, never mind actual Econ 101. So all they look at are the degrees and the status and listen to the erudite rhetoric.
That is why I see moronic posts on facebook comparing the largest employer of some decades ago (GM) with the largest employer of today (Wal-Mart), and implying that Wal-Mart is evil because they pay $8-10/hr while GM paid the equivalent of $50/hr in today's dollars. This from supposedly intelligent, educated people.
Never mind that GM has financially tanked at least in part because of that rate of pay and bennies, and never mind that even working an assembly line requires a level of skill, manual dexterity, and strength that not everyone possesses, and basically anyone more intelligent than a chimp can be a Wal-Mart cashier or shelf-stocker. Is this rocket science? Are supply/demand and the creation of wealth that hard to understand?
And meanwhile, the "educated" ruling class all but worships the broken-window theory of economics.
Maybe a basic problem of theirs is that they just can not see that "the masses" are actually sentient, self-determined individuals who will react to changes in the playing field in their best interests, and not a bunch of furniture that they can rearrange at will
Well said and exactly right.
You mean Economists, none of whom have ever had a real job in their life's nor could run a pay toilet. Being an "economist' is not a real job neither is being a professional bullshit artist. (Same difference except that bullshit artists are occasionally right)