Indeed. There's a lot to be said for spending the money on infrastructure and socialised services rather than just giving it to people.

It's not clear and some balance is required but lol at calling it poor shaming.

Also alturistic investment into science/technology focused on the problems the poorest face such as disease, clean water etc has a lot to be said for it.

Following Bernie's "plan" is a recipe for turning the U.S. into Greece. No thanks

It's nice to see you consistently stand up for pieces of **** who make blanket statements disparaging groups of people. No one can call you mercurial!

wat?

If you think money is better off being in the hands of smart , hard working people (generally rich) rather than stupid, lazy people (generally poor) you are obviously a horrible person who hates poor people.

and that's a par for the course attack.

However believing the money should be spent on infrastructure/services etc rather than just handing it to the poor isn't usually associated with hating the poor.

Where did I state that the economy would collapse? All I stated was that the USA has actually had 90% marginal tax brackets post WWII and what happened as a result. I think as late as 1960 the USA had IIRC a 90% marginal tax bracket and as late as 1970 a 70% marginal tax bracket. Too lazy to look that up. There is a reason that changed. So if I am opposed to a 90% tax bracket I'm homering for rich people? That is completely ridiculous. Here's the thing you need to consider and there really is no way around this, higher real economic growth leads to higher federal tax revenue in real dollars. The historical record speaks for itself. If you want to convince people that a 90% tax bracket will bring in more federal revenue than you need to make a case that those tax brackets will spur economic growth.

To tie in economists to this discussion lets just say that Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz (both Nobel prize winning economists) almost certainly have different views on the impact of a 90% tax bracket than Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke. I'm sure Milton Frieman would have/did have to. They all use economic models to justify their views.

So difficult to read through the first post.

1. Increase corporate taxes & stop them from shifting jobs & profits overseas. Welp that didn't take long to find a contradiction.

lol yeah it is wall street fault Americans lost jobs, homes, etc.

2. Increasing MW? bold strategy if you are pairing this with trying to keep corporations from moving jobs overseas.

3. AH, YES! Let us take more money away from the most productive people and corporations so we can let daddy government figure out how to spend it.

4. Yeah, why not try to increase the price of goods and services - it's not like that hurts the poor and middle class more than the wealthy that we all love to hate.

5. Why are we trying to help young Americans get jobs while raising MW?

6. haha... Yeah, I am sure that will help w/ the income gap.

7. College got expensive so the governemnt decided to hand out money for people to go. Because of that college got more expensive (why wouldn't colleges increase tuition if nobody cared what it cost since they were so many getting money to go- hint: this is the same thing that will happen w/ free health care).

I have to stop there. I'll come back later for some more laugh when I read 8-13.

We laugh everytime you try to opine on anything economics. Figure out how marginal tax rates work yet?

I mean yeah, not sure if you remembered, but we had this thing called a financial crisis that Wall Street definitely played a role in.

We should have a national IQ test and give all the nation's money to the smartest man or woman. None of this namby pamby "generally smart" people. Min max all the way to the greatest prosperity the world has even known by giving all the money to one man or woman.

I do like this IQ points means you get to buy hookers and blow for the good of America method of central planning though.

Time for personal attacks directed towards someone who's political views you generally don't agree with with when you can't refute the points bahbah's making. I mean the points he makes are clear enough. If they are so stupid let's read the real reasons companies move jobs off shore for instance. Standard, not the least bit amusing either which is also standard. I get that you guys are posting for personal entertainment so knock yourselves out.

Bahbah is a barely functioning idiot, he's not giving thoughtful responses he's reflexively spewing against the left. Wall Street obviously had a hand in the financial crisis. We obviously need to fix our infrastructure what the **** does that have to do with herrrrr take money out of the hands of the most productive people. Bernies trade policy is silly.

But it's unchained. When that mouthbreather that thinks black people have small brains, and who can't understand marginal tax rates opines on economics, I will remind people he's a moron.

I'm not sure why you included me as my posts weren't personal attacks but merely pointing out that that rich people should have money is actually just defending the status quo by imagining that people who have money are smart by virtue of them having money and not actually interested in trying to be productive by giving actually smart people money but rather just interesting in keeping the poor poor and the rich rich.

Btw give me 40 million dollars, a blind, and a dart board of the big money managers and watch my imaginary IQ soar.

I do remember it. I just remember the actual story and not the governments version of the story.

The govt created this bubble with laws that forced banks to give loans out to those who they normal wouldn't give loans to. Then when that backfires the govt is heard yelling at banks for giving loans to people they shouldn't have and reminds us every day how the only reason we had this bubble was because the banks were greedy. The free market doesn't have a PR team to let everyone know that banks weren't being greedy, they were just following the law.

Btw, the same thing is happening again, albeit a smaller stage, in nyc right now. The govt played a huge roll in a bubble for taxi medallions by fixing the number of official cabs that can be in the city. Then when the entrepreneurs came up with things called uber and lyft the price of these cab medallions plummeted leaving the cabbies in big trouble since they had huge loans out to buy the medallions. Now all the cabbies are defaulting on their loans and banks that tried to help these cabbies out are in big trouble.

Ummm... I wasn't saying every single smart person is rich. However, there is a very strong correlation between wealth and intelligence. Didn't think I was saying anything controversial.

So your contention is Wall Street is blameless for the financial crisis and that banks not being able to make free money off of a monopoly asset is, somehow, a violation of the free market?

I don't remember the government passing laws mandating CDO squareds and massively leveraged mortgage securitizations, can you point those out for me?

lollolol bahbah. This is why everyone points, mocks, and laughs at you even when you aren't spewing racism. lololololololol

This is a guy who claims to be a financial advisor and an expert on economics too. hahahahahahahaahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahah

You must have dined on so much lead paint when you were younger.

Except it is refuting the point that smart are rich people are therefore more productive and the money that they wisely spend on a yacht and blow, after hours of computation of multiple variant analysis I'm sure, is somehow spend in the most advantageous way possible that will increase the overall good. That IQ trends with wealth says nothing about the issue of how wealth should be distributed to maximize the good.

LOL no. There is no such correlation... or if there is, it is negative.

Six inherited Waltons combined have more $$$$ than 30% of USAians, roughly 100,000,000 people, combined. Those lazy Waltons must be pretty damn smart, if their six brains combined are able to establish a 'smartness' correlation over those 100,000,000 brains combined.

Or another way of looking at it: If you gave an IQ test to the millions of actual real Walmart workers worldwide, what's the odds of these six peeps, who have never had to work a day in their lives, end up in places #1-6 ??

Many of the biggest tax havens are part of the european union or run by the UK. Very good argument to not tax fairly though.

Best argument to make people work under worse conditions for less money. Making the fear of beeing jobless huge, because offering no social safety.

A lot of research that companies profit of are made on public university. So yeh, it might be fair if they give some money to daddy governemt.

I dont see how gambling on the wallstreet is productive either. Making 16h a day tshirts, thats fckn productive.


I still don't understand how someone who is not rich believes in this neoliberalism.

I'm about to hop on a plane and I'll have limited time to keep answering you. Under Clinton a law was passed that twisted the arm of banks into making them to give mortgages to people who couldn't afford them.

Wall Street isn't totally faultless but they catch way too much blame. They were playing by the ****ty rules that were set up for them.

Of course (most) rich people are more productive. Businesses (especially small business) are the major cog of economic growth - not the poor or middle class - the government is a drag on economic growth.

They deserve a lot of blame. Managing risk is their business and they were ****ing terrible at it.

I know you hate the law you are talking about. It helped poor people and minorities.

.

Nope (big business contributes more than small business to growth) annnnnd nope thats not close to universally true and certainly not by GDP definiton

lol bahbah

I agree. That's why I propose dissolving all government. No cops, no courts. If There shouldn't be the government there to subsidize some, like property owners, against others through making everyone pay for cops and courts. This should lead to unprecedented growth for everyone by getting the government out of the way and you should agree. That is unless you're a government lover who thinks we should be forced to undergo socialist programs like forcing everyone to pay for police and courts and laws in order to protect property

I'd love to see how productive that factory owner would be if all the factory workers went on strike for a day. then we can compare it to a day when the workers come in and the owner takes a day off and see who the major cog of economic growth really is.