May 11, 2013
— Open Blogger The brilliance that is the Washington Post has seen fit to publish a blog post that completes the circle of profound ignorance of all economic thought that has been validated by...you know...reality.
Posted by: Open Blogger at
11:30 AM
| Comments (398)
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: rickl at May 11, 2013 11:32 AM (sdi6R)
Posted by: eleven at May 11, 2013 11:33 AM (fsLdt)
Posted by: eleven at May 11, 2013 11:34 AM (fsLdt)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 11:35 AM (GEICT)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet Palin/Bolton 2016 at May 11, 2013 11:35 AM (XIxXP)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at May 11, 2013 11:36 AM (pxDth)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet Palin/Bolton 2016 at May 11, 2013 11:36 AM (XIxXP)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 11:39 AM (GEICT)
Posted by: AmishDude at May 11, 2013 11:39 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at May 11, 2013 11:39 AM (pxDth)
My Saturdays are SO uneventful!
Posted by: Miss Marple at May 11, 2013 11:40 AM (GoIUi)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 11:40 AM (GEICT)
Flat income? Holy schnikes. That's full retard.
Even the Chinese wouldn't do some silly shit like that. Communists who are communist know better than that.
You have to go to college to believe something that fucking stupid.
Posted by: eleven at May 11, 2013 11:41 AM (fsLdt)
----------------
Why? Why is that helpful?
Posted by: mama winger at May 11, 2013 11:42 AM (P6QsQ)
Why? Because it's transparent and also because it maximizes personal choice (within the confines of the welfare state.)
Can't afford health insurance because you spent your stipend on booze and cigarettes? Lump it. Everyone got the same thing. You wasted yours.
Of course, this is all hypothetical. In the real world, the government would "give" (steal from others) everyone a basic income and when the layabouts and slackers wasted what they had been given, they'd steal more from the productive citizens to buy off the poor. Just like they do now.
Posted by: Warden at May 11, 2013 11:43 AM (0DlnM)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 11:43 AM (GEICT)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at May 11, 2013 11:44 AM (pxDth)
Posted by: Chandler's Ghost at May 11, 2013 11:44 AM (9JS/n)
Posted by: Bill Ayers at May 11, 2013 11:45 AM (ipoBj)
Posted by: Dave S. at May 11, 2013 11:45 AM (UvR6d)
-------------
oh for the love of pete
Posted by: mama winger at May 11, 2013 11:46 AM (P6QsQ)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 11:47 AM (GEICT)
Posted by: Ook? at May 11, 2013 11:47 AM (OQpzc)
Meh, it's an idea that's been tossed around in various forms by the right and left.
A negative income tax has some arguments in its favor but reasonable people will admit that it has its drawbacks as well, just like every other solution out there. Unfortunately the jackass author of this article is in no way "reasonable".
Posted by: Colorado Alex at May 11, 2013 11:47 AM (lr3d7)
Have these idiots determined what the prices on the menu would change to to achieve this demand? And what this would do to the likelihood anyone would choose to buy their food there?
Posted by: epobirs at May 11, 2013 11:47 AM (kcfmt)
P.J. O'Rourke proved in Parliament of Whores that we have no poverty in America. Total poverty spending divided by number of people below the poverty line equals...well, you know.
How about instead of this bullshit, we get the private sector moving so that people can work? I know, I know...I'm just being crazy or racist or greedy or something.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 11, 2013 11:47 AM (kNqmp)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at May 11, 2013 11:48 AM (jucos)
Posted by: zsasz at May 11, 2013 11:48 AM (MMC8r)
When they start paying 15, the people that are making 7.50 now will be out of work. $30,000 a year to make sammiches? I'm on it.
Posted by: Bruce at May 11, 2013 11:49 AM (lWMBo)
Posted by: Tobacco Road at May 11, 2013 11:49 AM (4Mv1T)
..... a UBI would create greater equality by ending poverty and providing a minimum living standard. It would also increase bargaining power for workers, who could demand better working conditions with a safety cushion. .... such bargaining power “will generate an incentive structure for employers to seek technical and organizational innovations that eliminate unpleasant work,” which would “have not just a labor-saving bias, but a labor-humanizing bias.”
Um, OK. Whatev..... Going for a beer and back to Card's game.
Posted by: olddog in mo at May 11, 2013 11:50 AM (A9na/)
Posted by: Ook? at May 11, 2013 11:50 AM (OQpzc)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at May 11, 2013 11:50 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: mama winger at May 11, 2013 11:50 AM (P6QsQ)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 11:50 AM (GEICT)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 11:51 AM (wsGWu)
Posted by: Islamic Rage Boy at May 11, 2013 11:51 AM (e8kgV)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at May 11, 2013 11:51 AM (pxDth)
We are told we owe it to our fellow citizens. Complete and utter bullshit. The first and foremost duty any citizen has to another is to not be a parasite. When that is the commanding ethos of a free culture it turns out the number genuinely in need of charity is remarkably low and readily covered by private parties acting of their own volition.
Posted by: epobirs at May 11, 2013 11:51 AM (kcfmt)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 11:52 AM (GEICT)
Posted by: Dave S. at May 11, 2013 11:52 AM (UvR6d)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 11:52 AM (qyfb5)
employers to seek technical and organizational innovations that
eliminate unpleasant work”
So who the heck is going the clean out the grease traps at Burger King now?
Ever smelled that? I cleaned 'em in high school and poured it into a tin trash can out back. A can of vomit.
Posted by: Tobacco Road at May 11, 2013 11:52 AM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: RWC at May 11, 2013 11:52 AM (Wl/Ht)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at May 11, 2013 11:52 AM (jucos)
How about you go back and read this before you start calling people ignorant. M'kay?
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 11, 2013 11:52 AM (ltdV/)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 11, 2013 11:53 AM (MBqvE)
Protip: A Guaranteed Basic Income was considered by Nixon and the Republicans back in the 60s/early 70s. "We're all Keynesians now" and so on.
Good times, good times....
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 11, 2013 11:53 AM (kdS6q)
You have a promising future in DC politics.
Posted by: Attila at May 11, 2013 11:53 AM (Cs2tJ)
Posted by: Thrawn at May 11, 2013 11:53 AM (JqnAE)
Posted by: infovore
Okay, I'm all for it, as long as there are now crying shitwits on TV saying their starving and can't afford a decent flat screen. They fail on $10,000, they fall behind and get eaten by the hyenas...no boo hooing. No bail outs, no more taxes to help them. You feel sorry for them, YOU help them.
Posted by: Bruce at May 11, 2013 11:54 AM (lWMBo)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at May 11, 2013 11:54 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 11:55 AM (wsGWu)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 11:56 AM (GEICT)
...sorry. I need a nap.
I'll dream of a Utopia where I can get shot in the suburbs for some shoddily-produced UBI shoes.
Posted by: Slapweasel at May 11, 2013 11:56 AM (7gwGw)
We're not asking for the moon. Just give us the moon.
Reverend Dr. Rafana (Church of Latter Day Stealing Shit)
Posted by: eleven at May 11, 2013 11:56 AM (fsLdt)
Oh hi, fascism.
Or Damien Thorn. Take your pick.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 11, 2013 11:56 AM (LYIrp)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at May 11, 2013 11:57 AM (vHxiM)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 11:57 AM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at May 11, 2013 11:57 AM (pxDth)
Fortune favors the bold.
Posted by: d_fitz at May 11, 2013 11:57 AM (sYzMZ)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at May 11, 2013 11:57 AM (piMMO)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at May 11, 2013 11:57 AM (jucos)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 03:39 PM (GEICT)
Unless the commenter is a perpetually drunken potato eater who paints himself blue and worships the moon, on the 17 days each year it can be seen through the overcast.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at May 11, 2013 11:57 AM (O6Tmi)
At this point it looks like the free stuff army is 53% and growing so I don't know why they just don't call this idea of "universal basic income" by a name that actually says what it is: How about "universally steal from some people and give the thievings to other people".
The thieves will still get at least 53% of the vote.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 11, 2013 11:57 AM (jKWYf)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 11:57 AM (WAgIq)
Posted by: JonathanEllis at May 11, 2013 11:58 AM (5i0ik)
Posted by: Trelawney Hope at May 11, 2013 11:58 AM (ylG8S)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 11:58 AM (wsGWu)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 11:59 AM (GEICT)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 12:01 PM (WAgIq)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 11, 2013 12:01 PM (MBqvE)
$1trillion is $20K for 50million persons. All I have to say with that is they have done it wrong for a while. The Stimulus could have made full employment. Just imagine the annual deficits we've had for 5 years and the redirection of that directly to the population, no laundering...well LESS laundering.
The article is typical leftist and utopian because there are no consequences mentioned.
Posted by: jk76 at May 11, 2013 12:01 PM (VKkox)
Posted by: mama winger at May 11, 2013 12:03 PM (P6QsQ)
Posted by: zsasz at May 11, 2013 12:03 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 12:03 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 03:47 PM (GEICT)
We had a union here who sued over a wage dispute. The court ruled in their favor. The company offered a settlement and warned that they would be forced to shut down because they couldn't afford to pay the judgment. The union rejected it and demanded the judgment. The company shut down and the union was somehow surprised and upset. They were under the impression that the company was obligated to stay in business and provide them jobs.
Posted by: Zombie John Gotti at May 11, 2013 12:04 PM (1hekh)
Posted by: Zombie John Gotti at May 11, 2013 12:06 PM (1hekh)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 12:06 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: The Prince of Darkness at May 11, 2013 12:06 PM (jucos)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:07 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at May 11, 2013 12:07 PM (OXYW6)
Posted by: Zombie Oswald Mosley at May 11, 2013 12:08 PM (MBqvE)
Posted by: Conservative Crank at May 11, 2013 12:08 PM (FqcJu)
Posted by: zsasz at May 11, 2013 12:09 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: RWC at May 11, 2013 12:10 PM (Wl/Ht)
Posted by: M. McCain at May 11, 2013 12:10 PM (Lqb+9)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at May 11, 2013 12:10 PM (pxDth)
I would light the candle, but Barry in W-Sector was found to be unreliable and eliminated.
...it is also my last government match.
Posted by: Slapweasel at May 11, 2013 12:11 PM (7gwGw)
Here's my proposal:
-Universal income of $30,000.
-End all spending on welfare, social programs, and business subsidies.
-The right to vote each calendar year requires paying a voter registration fee of... $30,000.
If someone wants to take that $30k and live off it, then fine for them. However, they won't be able to afford to vote. The productive class will gain a greater influence over the electoral process.
Posted by: Colorado Alex at May 11, 2013 12:11 PM (lr3d7)
112 I'm still really bugged by Nakoula thing.
Some say well 'don't feel bad because He was a bad guy.'
ok but still isn't it the intent of Hillary and Obama to jail a private citizen for making a video they didn't like, an in doing that would have been breaking the Deal to uphold the Constitution when voted into office?
I mean when Hillary says, "We will make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted" to Wood's father Isn't the INTENT what matters here?
Did They Know He was already lapsed on the Probation deal?
Did Obama and Hillary know that Nikoula had a history that could be prosecutable?
Posted by: willow at May 11, 2013 04:07 PM (nqBYe)
Posted by: willow at May 11, 2013 12:11 PM (nqBYe)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:12 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: zsasz at May 11, 2013 12:12 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: I lurk, therefore I am at May 11, 2013 12:13 PM (QR2k5)
That link has to be the stupidest thing I've read today, possibly for this entire week.
And I've read a lot of stuff.
I've also forgotten more about economics than the author of that article has ever known.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit at May 11, 2013 12:14 PM (+z4pE)
Everything on the interweb is...'splodey.
Posted by: Lamontyoubigdummy at May 11, 2013 12:14 PM (Yv66T)
Posted by: Red China at May 11, 2013 12:15 PM (Zv1QB)
Posted by: Future Politician, probably in a polyester pantsuit at May 11, 2013 12:15 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: SFGoth at May 11, 2013 12:16 PM (g9SL/)
Arguments, yes. Intelligent arguments, no.
Everyone gets it. Meaning it soon becomes worthless and the cycle of whining and demands for handouts begins all over again.
You would get the same effect without any of the negatives if upon Jan. 1 of every year you gifted each and every citizen with a lump sum of ZERO.
Think about it. No new government bureaucracy is needed. The sum is completely immune to inflation and other forms of currency valuation changes. It would be perfect and meaningless as every other utopian plan, yet entirely realizable. The President need only mention it in the State of the Union address and that would be the sole basis for its existence.
Posted by: epobirs at May 11, 2013 12:16 PM (kcfmt)
Yes, your logic is perfectly clear to me.
Please explain again how sheep bladders can be used to prevent earthquakes.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 11, 2013 12:18 PM (kNqmp)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 11, 2013 12:19 PM (MBqvE)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:20 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 12:20 PM (wsGWu)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 12:20 PM (7vimm)
Posted by: Peaches at May 11, 2013 12:20 PM (8lmkt)
Posted by: Conservative Crank at May 11, 2013 12:21 PM (FqcJu)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:21 PM (GEICT)
Hey, Peaches! I'm just resting in between Honey-Do jobs. Waiting for the NASCAR race, pondering whether to go get some more Guinness.
How's tricks?
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit at May 11, 2013 12:21 PM (+z4pE)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 04:21 PM (GEICT)
THAT'S MY FAVORITE!!!
Posted by: Peaches at May 11, 2013 12:22 PM (8lmkt)
Posted by: Staff at May 11, 2013 12:22 PM (G9qZk)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at May 11, 2013 12:23 PM (pxDth)
The one and only reason for vouchers is to escape a govt run system. So being for them as an escape is not the same as not wanting the govt involved whatsoever. The ultimate, at least from a conservative or libertarian is to get the govt out of education entirely. The same goal for entitlements. End them in their entirety.
ps - the proposers can never answer the inflation argument which is why they avoid it.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 11, 2013 12:23 PM (jKWYf)
Posted by: zsasz at May 11, 2013 12:24 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:24 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: Staff at May 11, 2013 12:24 PM (G9qZk)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 12:25 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 11, 2013 12:25 PM (MBqvE)
Posted by: Dems at May 11, 2013 12:26 PM (wsGWu)
And I think that's a beautiful system.
Posted by: Tobacco Road at May 11, 2013 12:26 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: Hanoverfist at May 11, 2013 12:26 PM (F6NgH)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 12:26 PM (qyfb5)
18 Actually, this knee-jerk reaction is what's foolish. People who are economically savvy, or even moderately economically literate, enough to be familiar with the term "lump-sum grant" are well aware that there is a lot of economic logic to a guaranteed basic income or "citizen's dividend" as I prefer to call it, if we're going to have any kind of government redistribution at all.
Posted by: infovore at May 11, 2013 03:42 PM (0llFJ)
----------
So your entire outlook is based on the belief that "government redistribution" is...an imperative.
This has been tried before. It's called Communism.
Please cite an example where this has ever worked well.
Perhaps it has escaped your attention, that the biggest Communist Countries in the world have been moving towards Capitalism...and see it as a superior way to do things.
Posted by: wheatie at May 11, 2013 12:27 PM (LxEHG)
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, who did not vote for this shit at May 11, 2013 12:27 PM (+z4pE)
Get on it, lefties. I haven't got all damned day here.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 11, 2013 12:27 PM (kNqmp)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 12:27 PM (7vimm)
They also had technology that was essentially magic. The transporter/replicator screws up everything. With that in place scarcely any story in the series makes sense.
Take an uninhabited star system and use a massive replicator to convert the whole mass and energy into a billion Defiants with a few billion copies of Data to serve as crew. (Which means you can do away with that pesky life support stuff in favor of more weapons and engines.) Instant unstoppable fleet. Dominion War lasts one episode.
You don't even need to do that. Build a big transporter and aim it at anything you don't like. It's reduced to an information stream that can simply be erased from existence by wiping the memory where it is stored.
Star Trek, especially by the TNG era and everything that followed, is not a good point of reference for anything like a possible future.
Posted by: epobirs at May 11, 2013 12:28 PM (kcfmt)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 12:28 PM (7vimm)
Posted by: Mexico at May 11, 2013 12:29 PM (sYTYw)
Posted by: CarolT at May 11, 2013 12:29 PM (z4WKX)
Which is why I'm sitting inside, unshaven and pantsless, playing video games and talking to you retards.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 11, 2013 04:25 PM (MBqvE)
It is an absolutely divine day here in Southern Clownifornia, ITC! I hit Nordstom early and was home just after noon. Now, instead of doing Useful Things, I am also sitting here like a fungus and conviviating with my fellow morons.
Posted by: Peaches at May 11, 2013 12:30 PM (8lmkt)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 12:30 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Dems at May 11, 2013 12:30 PM (wsGWu)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 12:30 PM (7vimm)
Posted by: CarolT at May 11, 2013 12:31 PM (z4WKX)
"The fact that it is universal is crucial. This eliminates income traps that can cause severe work disincentives. A UBI answers the Foucauldian critique about the welfare state being a way for the state to stigmatize and control marginalized populations. There are no state officials determining whether or not a single mom “deserves” help or drug tests and other invasive, humiliating requirements. Others see UBI as a way of recognizing the value of decommodified caregiving and other cooperative, non-labor activities, by making sure there is space in the economy to both reward and carry them out."
This is gibberish. Does anyone with more than half a brain (that excludes you, Dr Lefty Liberal, PhD) think that such a program would let the ogvernment end Medicare, food stamps, etc. At best, we go back to the USSR, where everyone has a constitutional right to a bed in a corner, enough food to be able to function, a visit to the doctor who will use the same catheter and hypodermic needle he used on the previous 20 or 30 patients, and the right to be a "productive citizen" (or get put in a labor camp for being a parasite.)
off topic -- thunder..!
Posted by: mallfly at May 11, 2013 12:31 PM (bJm7W)
Posted by: Dave S. at May 11, 2013 12:31 PM (UvR6d)
Posted by: Captain Ned at May 11, 2013 12:31 PM (i+Fm3)
Posted by: Fritz at May 11, 2013 12:31 PM (G9Mmf)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:31 PM (m9EP3)
I'm pretty sure the government would get abolished before we got to a full-retard "redistributional aspect."
IYKWIMAITYD
Posted by: Tobacco Road at May 11, 2013 12:31 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: Corky Thatcher at May 11, 2013 12:32 PM (jucos)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 12:32 PM (7vimm)
Come on people, this is only going to cost 3,000,000,000,000 per year.
And then people will like it so much they'll start voting for anyone who will give them free raises. It'll be 40K/person in no time.
Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at May 11, 2013 12:32 PM (sYTYw)
123 I'm sorry, I did not mean to kill the thread with my joie de vivre. It probably won't happen again anytime soon.
Posted by: Peaches at May 11, 2013 04:20 PM (8lmkt)
--------
Oh, I hope not, Peaches. I love your joie de vivre.
We would be fortunate to experience regular outbreaks of it!
Posted by: wheatie at May 11, 2013 12:32 PM (LxEHG)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 11, 2013 12:33 PM (jE38p)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:33 PM (GEICT)
It virtually bastes itself!
No Muss. No Fuss.
(How do we keep White, hetero-males from pilfering it? They are ALWAYS pilfer-y.)
Posted by: Slapweasel at May 11, 2013 12:33 PM (7gwGw)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 12:34 PM (WAgIq)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 11, 2013 12:34 PM (jE38p)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 12:35 PM (WAgIq)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 12:35 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet Palin/Bolton 2016 at May 11, 2013 12:36 PM (XIxXP)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 12:36 PM (wsGWu)
Posted by: Wonkish Rogue at May 11, 2013 12:36 PM (+UrNT)
Posted by: zsasz at May 11, 2013 12:36 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:36 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:36 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at May 11, 2013 12:37 PM (jucos)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:37 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: Baldy at May 11, 2013 12:37 PM (tyDFN)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 12:37 PM (7vimm)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at May 11, 2013 12:38 PM (pxDth)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:38 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 12:38 PM (WAgIq)
Posted by: Truck Monkey is Sorry at May 11, 2013 12:39 PM (jucos)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:39 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 12:39 PM (wsGWu)
Because there will be no concentrated areas of spending that will differ significantly from what the government spends money on so supply and demand will not be affected.
Does everyone have that?
Good.
Let's move on to physics...who needs it?
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 11, 2013 12:39 PM (LYIrp)
Ready for CACs offering waiting in the bullpen.
Posted by: Tobacco Road at May 11, 2013 12:39 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: zsasz at May 11, 2013 12:39 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: eleven at May 11, 2013 12:39 PM (fsLdt)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:39 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: SamIam at May 11, 2013 12:39 PM (S09w5)
Posted by: I lurk, therefore I am at May 11, 2013 12:39 PM (QR2k5)
Of course it changes the level of govt spending, it says it right there, everybody gets it. Are you really that stupid or just play one on TV?
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 11, 2013 12:39 PM (jKWYf)
As I've always said, if you like your money, I'll keep your money.
For you.
Here's a voucher and a bag of Fritos.
Posted by: Bart Hussein Obama at May 11, 2013 12:40 PM (I2uSp)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:41 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: Dave S. at May 11, 2013 12:42 PM (UvR6d)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 12:42 PM (7vimm)
187...How scary is it that the IRS targeting political orgs IS the distraction?
Yeah, BC...they're admitting to Political Persecution and Abuse of Power.
And doing it, to distract from their willing sacrifice of American lives to win an election.
Posted by: wheatie at May 11, 2013 12:42 PM (LxEHG)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 12:42 PM (WAgIq)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 12:42 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 12:42 PM (wsGWu)
Fixed it. It's what we do best.
Posted by: Tobacco Road at May 11, 2013 12:43 PM (4Mv1T)
Posted by: CarolT at May 11, 2013 12:43 PM (z4WKX)
Posted by: waldo at May 11, 2013 12:43 PM (sXWmd)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:43 PM (m9EP3)
I'm not even in favor of this proposal, as I said in my first post. I just thought it was embarrassing to see such stupid objections, as if this was some new insane communist idea rather than something that has been floating around for a long time and debated by serious thinkers such as Charles Murray and Milton Friedman. But if you'd rather ignorantly hoot and holler, hey, whatever floats your boat.
Your opposition was pretty tepid, on the order of "One could make an argument against it, and you are a new poster calling everyone stupid. That makes you look an awful lot like a troll, you understand.
Posted by: Grey Fox at May 11, 2013 12:43 PM (XQsSC)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:44 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: Preznit Urkel X at May 11, 2013 12:44 PM (jucos)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:45 PM (GEICT)
The best way to combat poverty is via a thriving private economy with minimal taxes and regulation. Yes, a minimum social safety net is fine...that is not what this is and I do not equate this with a negative income tax (note use of the word "universal").
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 11, 2013 12:45 PM (LYIrp)
I'll take your word for it. Liberals are teh stoopid when it comes to economics.
Film at 11, as they say.
Posted by: BurtTC at May 11, 2013 12:45 PM (BeSEI)
Posted by: Staff at May 11, 2013 12:46 PM (G9qZk)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at May 11, 2013 12:46 PM (jucos)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 12:47 PM (wsGWu)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:47 PM (m9EP3)
If someone wants to go all utopian, how about just no taxes at all. All debt, just print. That way no need to cut checks at all. No entitlements, eat what you kill.
I vote that utopia.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at May 11, 2013 12:47 PM (jKWYf)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet Palin/Bolton 2016 at May 11, 2013 12:48 PM (XIxXP)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:48 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:48 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at May 11, 2013 12:48 PM (pxDth)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 12:49 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet Palin/Bolton 2016 at May 11, 2013 12:49 PM (XIxXP)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:49 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: infovore
There are no new communist ideas. They've existed for a long time and they always fail. The writers even admit this is straight out of the fantasy playbook - "Utopian"
Anyone seeking to institute a utopia is an enemy of mankind.
It is inflationary because there is not a chance in hell it would replace any entitlement currently in place. Insisting that it would is sheer, unmitigated bullshit and you know it.
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at May 11, 2013 12:50 PM (YTstp)
Friedman was a smart guy. That does not mean that "wouldn't it be nice" ideas should be characterized as workable or reasonable. Hell, I'd like to not experience pain when I stub my toe--but that is not how the world works.
This proposal removes the incentive to work, is inflationary, and because of the hard lessons of history is as slippery a slope as I can imagine.
And next time you get personal with me, go shit in your hat.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 11, 2013 12:51 PM (LYIrp)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 12:51 PM (WAgIq)
Posted by: waldo at May 11, 2013 12:51 PM (sXWmd)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 12:52 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet Palin/Bolton 2016 at May 11, 2013 12:52 PM (XIxXP)
Posted by: olddog in mo at May 11, 2013 12:52 PM (A9na/)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 12:52 PM (wsGWu)
Translation: "This enormous anthill has been outside my door for years. Just because I poured honey on myself and rolled in it?
-I most certainly did not expect this."
Posted by: Slapweasel at May 11, 2013 12:52 PM (7gwGw)
Another big advantage of both systems is that you don't need the hordes of welfare workers, tax accountants, and IRS agents.
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker
Which is one of those technocratic "efficiency" solutions that tend to be infinitively more complex and expensive in practice. TFX much?
More importantly, much of the impetus for a GBI in the US occurred during the postwar years when The Big Problem to solve was how to absorb the vast amount of wealth the US was creating and importing thru it's economic dominance. Hence a consumption driven approach.
Lost its appeal after the economy went tits up with Vietnam and the '73 Oil Embargo. And makes no sense in the current Flat Busted Era.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 11, 2013 12:53 PM (kdS6q)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:53 PM (m9EP3)
Who's with me?
Posted by: Fritz, hootin' and hollerin' at May 11, 2013 12:53 PM (G9Mmf)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:54 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at May 11, 2013 12:54 PM (jucos)
224 I am not a new commenter. I have been reading and commenting here for at least 5 years. I just don't usually comment a thousand times a day. I now see that today was a bad day to make an exception.
Posted by: infovore at May 11, 2013 04:47 PM (0llFJ)
---------
So now, you're making a whine that you are learning impaired.
Because...if you've been reading here for 5 years, and haven't picked up on the fact that Government Redistribution of Wealth leads to nothing but decay and despair...then your reading comprehension is at an extremely low level.
Next, you're going to declare that we are meanies for challenging your assertion that we are stupid.
Posted by: wheatie at May 11, 2013 12:54 PM (LxEHG)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet Palin/Bolton 2016 at May 11, 2013 12:55 PM (XIxXP)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:56 PM (GEICT)
I actually read a whole paragraph, realized the knucklehead was just getting warmed up, as they say, scrolled down to see how long, and said 'no thanks.'
I can honestly say I've never yet regretted deciding not to waste my time reading something. As much as I HAVE read so far in this lifetime, I've learned to trust my own instincts on this.
Posted by: BurtTC at May 11, 2013 12:56 PM (BeSEI)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 12:56 PM (WAgIq)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at May 11, 2013 12:56 PM (jE38p)
Posted by: Wonkish Rogue at May 11, 2013 12:56 PM (JRU+g)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:56 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: waldo at May 11, 2013 12:56 PM (sXWmd)
Posted by: Red China at May 11, 2013 12:57 PM (Zv1QB)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 12:57 PM (WAgIq)
I'm done with this because it is one of those issues, like the Paulbots on gold, that is so much navel gazing.
Get the economy moving. Magically, poverty will decline.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 11, 2013 12:57 PM (LYIrp)
Isn't there some distinct difference between being given something versus earning it ?
Don't you tend to value the earned over the given , or is that quaint old notion not part of the nu-amerika ?
Posted by: seamrog at May 11, 2013 12:58 PM (a8hHx)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 12:58 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: Red China at May 11, 2013 12:58 PM (Zv1QB)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet Palin/Bolton 2016 at May 11, 2013 12:58 PM (XIxXP)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 12:59 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Velvet Ambition at May 11, 2013 12:59 PM (R8hU8)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 12:59 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: zsasz at May 11, 2013 12:59 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at May 11, 2013 01:00 PM (pxDth)
Someone from the NRSC called me to ask for $100 donation because Harry Reid is stalling everything in the senate. I said no. The man wouldn't stop and told me that we have to get republicans in and hope that they are conservatives! I had already said no and I wanted only true conservatives not RINO's elected.
I would love for another man like Ted Cruz to come out of nowhere and be as honest and truthful as he was during his campaign. He's one of the few that have stayed true to their campaign promises.
Rubio had such promise but then he got himself involved in Gang of Eight. Mark Levin said that McConnell pushed Rubio to get involved in that bill.
I'll go to Levin's new website and try to remember when he said that.
Posted by: CarolT at May 11, 2013 01:00 PM (z4WKX)
Posted by: PaleRider at May 11, 2013 01:00 PM (5CusZ)
Just in case /s!
Posted by: Hrothgar at May 11, 2013 01:00 PM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Slapweasel at May 11, 2013 01:00 PM (7gwGw)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet Palin/Bolton 2016 at May 11, 2013 01:00 PM (XIxXP)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 01:01 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: Wonkish Rogue at May 11, 2013 01:01 PM (JRU+g)
Posted by: RWC at May 11, 2013 01:01 PM (Wl/Ht)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet Palin/Bolton 2016 at May 11, 2013 01:02 PM (XIxXP)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 01:03 PM (wsGWu)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 01:03 PM (7vimm)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at May 11, 2013 01:03 PM (jucos)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 01:03 PM (WAgIq)
262...Get the economy moving. Magically, poverty will decline.
Well yeah, Circa, I agree.
But our government is paying people to be poor.
So until we stop that shit, poverty will continue to proliferate.
Speaking of New York...
Has anyone else noticed New York's new ad campaign?
They're saying that they are now a Haven of Low Taxes for Businesses...and "Ya'll Come!"
Posted by: wheatie at May 11, 2013 01:04 PM (LxEHG)
Posted by: Peaches at May 11, 2013 01:04 PM (8lmkt)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet Palin/Bolton 2016 at May 11, 2013 01:04 PM (XIxXP)
Really? Cutting everyone an automatic check is "infinitely more expensive" than paying a horde of welfare caseworkers?
Do tell us how that could be.
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker
Look at any Government guaranteed outcome solution: farm supports, guarnteed heathcare, social security and so on.
You end up with a larger bureaucracy to administer the program and even more expense than you started with.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 11, 2013 01:05 PM (kdS6q)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 01:06 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 01:06 PM (wsGWu)
Yes, and I will be the next Pope even though married and Protestant.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 11, 2013 01:06 PM (kNqmp)
Posted by: Rob Parker at May 11, 2013 01:06 PM (JRU+g)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 01:06 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: Proud Welfare Millionaire at May 11, 2013 01:07 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 01:07 PM (qyfb5)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 01:07 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 01:08 PM (WAgIq)
I have a MENSA level IQ and I scored a perfect 36 out of 36 on the ACT.
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk
Sure sure, but how did you do on the all important Nitrogen Test?
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 11, 2013 01:08 PM (kdS6q)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 01:08 PM (GEICT)
my hands are sore and I need to hold a cold, nearly frozen metal can for a few hours. As a dentist ( Hi Nevergiveup!) I need to recover for Monday and I have to play golf again tomorrow :-(
Posted by: free tibet at May 11, 2013 01:09 PM (quLHy)
Posted by: zsasz at May 11, 2013 01:10 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 01:10 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 01:11 PM (WAgIq)
" It would require an amendment to the American Constitution that I am not competent to frame in legal language, but its sense is easy to express: Â’Henceforth, federal, state, and local governments shall make no law nor establish any program that provides benefits to some citizens but not to others. All programs currently providing such benefits are to be terminated. The funds formerly allocated to them are to be used instead to provide every citizen with a cash grant beginning at age twenty-one and continuing until death. The annual value of the cash grant at the programÂ’s outset is to be US$10,000.Â’ "
The left in this country will no more agree to that than they'd agree to an amendment to bad the fed'l income tax in return for a VAT or national sales tax.
Posted by: mallfly at May 11, 2013 01:11 PM (bJm7W)
Posted by: infovore at May 11, 2013 01:11 PM (0llFJ)
Posted by: Hanoverfist at May 11, 2013 01:12 PM (5S02w)
308 People usually overlook my high IQ when they find out about my 15" penis.
Do you have to use a thigh holster for that?
Posted by: wheatie at May 11, 2013 01:13 PM (LxEHG)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 01:13 PM (GEICT)
Posted by: Staff at May 11, 2013 01:13 PM (G9qZk)
Posted by: Jack at May 11, 2013 01:14 PM (Zv1QB)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 01:14 PM (GEICT)
only under very unlikely conditions, Olaf. I seriously doubt that the left from Pelosi and Reid on down, would agree to eliminating any other welfare programs until the GI had been around for some number of years, just to be sure... you know, because we wouldn't want any children to go to sleep hungry or anything like that...
Posted by: mallfly at May 11, 2013 01:14 PM (bJm7W)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 01:14 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 01:14 PM (WAgIq)
this 50-year-old idea
Posted by: infovore
A 50 year old solution to a 50 year old problem - an American with too much money.
Does not apply now.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 11, 2013 01:14 PM (kdS6q)
Posted by: Olaf the Norwegian Berserker at May 11, 2013 01:15 PM (m9EP3)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 01:16 PM (WAgIq)
Posted by: BCochran1981 - Credible Hulk at May 11, 2013 01:16 PM (GEICT)
312 I guess me, Olaf, and Milton Friedman and Charles Murray are just insane retarded Communists and you folks who just heard about this 50-year-old idea for the first time two hours ago have it all figured out.
Posted by: infovore at May 11, 2013 05:11 PM (0llFJ)
---------
Again with the passive-aggressive insults. ...Are you damaged?
Posted by: wheatie at May 11, 2013 01:17 PM (LxEHG)
Sounds like Opposite World's Joe Biden.
Posted by: mallfly at May 11, 2013 01:17 PM (bJm7W)
Posted by: olddog in mo at May 11, 2013 01:17 PM (A9na/)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at May 11, 2013 01:18 PM (WAgIq)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 01:18 PM (7vimm)
Posted by: Thrawn at May 11, 2013 01:18 PM (JqnAE)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 01:18 PM (wsGWu)
Posted by: Lauren at May 11, 2013 01:21 PM (wsGWu)
Posted by: RWC at May 11, 2013 01:23 PM (Wl/Ht)
In addition to the income tax itself, Friedman’s egalitarianism is revealed in the Friedman-Stigler pamphlet attacking rent controls. "For those, like us, who would like even more equality than there is at present . . . it is surely better to attack directly the existing inequalities in income and wealth at their source" than to restrict the purchases of particular commodities, like housing.6 The single most disastrous influence of Milton Friedman has been a legacy from his old Chicagoite egalitarianism: the proposal for a guaranteed annual income to everyone through the income tax system – an idea picked up and intensified by such leftists as Robert Theobald, and one which President Nixon will undoubtedly be able to ram through the new Congress.7* In this catastrophic scheme, Milton Friedman has once again been guided by his overwhelming desire not to remove the State from our lives, but to make the State more efficient. He looks around at the patchwork mess of local and state welfare systems, and concludes that all would be more efficient if the whole plan were placed under the federal income tax rubric and everyone were guaranteed a certain income floor. More efficient, perhaps, but also far more disastrous, for the only thing that makes our present welfare system even tolerable is precisely its inefficiency, precisely the fact that in order to get on the dole one has to push one’s way through an unpleasant and chaotic tangle of welfare bureaucracy. The Friedman scheme would make the dole automatic, and thereby give everyone an automatic claim upon production.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard43.html
Posted by: mallfly at May 11, 2013 01:24 PM (bJm7W)
Posted by: zombie sir thomas more at May 11, 2013 01:28 PM (mGBy8)
So, how's the "universal basic income" concept working out in practice? Behold, the folly of Utopia.
A commenter at the linked piece said it best - it takes a special breed of stupid to believe in this sort of "genius", much less say it out-loud, in what is, essentially, a national newspaper.
Posted by: DocJ at May 11, 2013 01:30 PM (V20sy)
Posted by: infovore at May 11, 2013 01:31 PM (0llFJ)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at May 11, 2013 01:32 PM (LYIrp)
Posted by: olddog in mo at May 11, 2013 01:33 PM (A9na/)
Posted by: Gem at May 11, 2013 01:34 PM (0k9Bw)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 01:36 PM (7vimm)
Yeah, you trot out the part where Milton Friedman advocates this kind of transfer payment and maybe I'll take you seriously.
But until then, I'm just going to leave, because you have outlived your usefulness as a chew toy.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at May 11, 2013 01:39 PM (O6Tmi)
Only two possible conclusions-
1. Milton Friedman is an insane retarded Communist.
2. AOSHQ's initial reaction was wrong.
Anyway, nothing productive about discussing the actual substance of the idea with a bunch of people who only heard about it two hours ago
Posted by: infovore
1. As has been pointed out, many of us were quite familiar concept before two hours ago and have already evaluated the idea. As for the others, being able to read new information and analyze it is a skill they possess.
2. Milton Friedman need be need neither Angel or Demon. He is just not infallible.
3.Only intellectual cowards and trolls do the whole "That was my last post because I won HA HA!" internet silliness.
4. U suck.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at May 11, 2013 01:40 PM (kdS6q)
Posted by: SurferDoc at May 11, 2013 01:53 PM (6H6FZ)
Posted by: Herbert Hymenhopper at May 11, 2013 01:55 PM (p8RjH)
Posted by: occam at May 11, 2013 01:56 PM (DAHhf)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 01:56 PM (qyfb5)
Infovore,
The old, old economy was fine.
If you wanted to work, there was work for you.
If you didn't want to work, you'd lose weight quickly.
Sometimes there ISN'T a better mousetrap.
Posted by: seamrog at May 11, 2013 01:58 PM (a8hHx)
Posted by: Clownf*cker at May 11, 2013 02:01 PM (fdBil)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s] at May 11, 2013 02:02 PM (qyfb5)
All you need to do is adjust the population levels down a bit to limit payouts, and ensure the economy remains static to eliminate the risk of inflation.
See? Easy!
Posted by: Blanco Basura at May 11, 2013 02:03 PM (jGsIV)
Posted by: toby928© at May 11, 2013 02:04 PM (QupBk)
Posted by: toby928© at May 11, 2013 02:07 PM (QupBk)
Certainly an idea this bad would not discriminate against children, I take it?
Posted by: Herbert Hymenhopper at May 11, 2013 02:09 PM (p8RjH)
Posted by: Clownf*cker at May 11, 2013 02:10 PM (fdBil)
Posted by: toby928© at May 11, 2013 02:15 PM (QupBk)
Posted by: rightlysouther(aim low boys theys ridin ponies) at May 11, 2013 02:20 PM (uOxBm)
Posted by: toby928© at May 11, 2013 02:21 PM (QupBk)
Posted by: rightlysouther(aim low boys theys ridin ponies) at May 11, 2013 02:33 PM (uOxBm)
Posted by: JamesT at May 11, 2013 02:35 PM (blYjC)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 02:38 PM (7vimm)
Posted by: coprovore at May 11, 2013 02:40 PM (WMsq+)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 02:45 PM (7vimm)
Some idiots don't seem to get the idea of discussing a bad idea in a serious way so as to make people understand for themselves why it is a bad idea.
Jonathan Swift wasn't actually advocating for the consumption of Irish babies. He was trying to make people think.
Doesn't work with some people.
Posted by: epobirs at May 11, 2013 02:52 PM (kcfmt)
Posted by: coprovore at May 11, 2013 02:54 PM (WMsq+)
Posted by: epobirs at May 11, 2013 02:57 PM (kcfmt)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 03:01 PM (7vimm)
Posted by: DrDrill at May 11, 2013 03:01 PM (L3nHO)
Posted by: cool arrow at May 11, 2013 03:03 PM (WMsq+)
False set of choices.
As pointed out by the Rothbard passage, Friedman was not an infallible oracle of all economic wisdom. He was human like anyone else and like any human was subject to embracing defective ideas that held appeal on a deep level to solve problems that remain insoluble. This is akin to the scientist who would rather defend a badly flawed flawed hypothesis to the bitter end than settle for allowing a portion of his field to be labeled 'we don't know and may never know.'
The correct choice is #3) Friedman was subject to an emotionalism that flawed his thinking on this subject and invited much criticism from his colleagues who held other of his ideas in high respect.
Posted by: epobirs at May 11, 2013 03:06 PM (kcfmt)
Posted by: Clownf*cker at May 11, 2013 03:09 PM (fdBil)
Posted by: Clownf*cker at May 11, 2013 03:12 PM (fdBil)
Ah, there's the rub. Leftists are totally in favor of confiscatory levels of taxation. On anyone who has a dollar more than they do, that is.
Posted by: cool arrow at May 11, 2013 03:12 PM (WMsq+)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 03:12 PM (7vimm)
Posted by: SurferDoc at May 11, 2013 03:14 PM (6H6FZ)
Which the Democrats can then blame on Republicans in perpetuity. Standard operating procedure.
Posted by: cool arrow at May 11, 2013 03:14 PM (WMsq+)
Posted by: DrDrill at May 11, 2013 03:21 PM (L3nHO)
Posted by: Baconfat at May 11, 2013 03:24 PM (V9ENJ)
Posted by: DrDrill at May 11, 2013 03:29 PM (L3nHO)
Posted by: cool arrow at May 11, 2013 03:33 PM (WMsq+)
Posted by: Waterhouse at May 11, 2013 03:39 PM (J0TC5)
Posted by: Waterhouse at May 11, 2013 03:41 PM (J0TC5)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 03:43 PM (7vimm)
Posted by: Waterhouse at May 11, 2013 03:43 PM (J0TC5)
Posted by: Waterhouse at May 11, 2013 03:44 PM (J0TC5)
Posted by: filbert the Whig at May 11, 2013 03:45 PM (7vimm)
So if they dont abolish the income tax, then all you morons get taxed on your addl 30,k. Of course you dont benefit from it because inflation adjusts prices upward, and the dimotard base, who is not paying fed income tax anyway, gets the most benefit, but mostly only short run and makes them further dependent and wanting of increases UBI payments to offset for inflation.
A perfect microcosm of the liberal politics of wishfulment leading to economic desolation and character ruination. So hopelessly delusional they should be institutionalized.
Posted by: simpleton at May 11, 2013 03:55 PM (NGsLN)
In regards to Friedman's negative tax proposal, don't we have that now with the Earned Income Credit? So far that hasn't done jack shit to help the welfare situation.
Posted by: NotAMoose at May 11, 2013 04:09 PM (ZZg4j)
Posted by: HoboJerky at May 11, 2013 04:21 PM (52n2x)
Posted by: toby928© at May 11, 2013 04:51 PM (QupBk)
Posted by: GeneTheFirst at May 11, 2013 05:15 PM (QSHbO)
Posted by: Rob in Katy at May 11, 2013 07:46 PM (PiTBB)
OK, I'm new here and don't understand the in-house dialog, but just to take note of the original post . . . hafta think it would be obvious to mock the Wonkblog (!?!) for his bereft knowledge of basic economics.
. . . i.e. inject wage income w/ no increase in productivity (raise price, don't increase supply), and inevitably a decrease in demand . . . (for wage labor) . . . and employment goes down.
The lefties can waive their hands at min wage or min income for the rest of time, but they cannot legislate away the 'invisible hand.'
> and every attempt to do so will resuly in 'unintended' (read 'unexpected') consequences that reduce economic growth.
Best Regards,
Posted by: CAPT Mike at May 11, 2013 10:03 PM (DiQnH)
Posted by: GeneTheFirst at May 13, 2013 11:47 AM (MDY9p)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3289 seconds, 526 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: rickl at May 11, 2013 11:31 AM (sdi6R)