tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10214951.post8107606791271060639..comments2024-03-17T08:07:12.695-05:00Comments on Between The Lines: Bad theory, selective outrage mark anti-tax cut screedJeff Sadowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03972004592729833310noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10214951.post-41380954968341372592010-08-06T10:27:39.637-05:002010-08-06T10:27:39.637-05:00It all boils down to this:
Plutocrat is a vile &q...It all boils down to this:<br /><br />Plutocrat is a vile "human" being.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10214951.post-69111136138965689252010-08-04T16:13:44.252-05:002010-08-04T16:13:44.252-05:00"All you conservatives (including your CREW-a..."All you conservatives (including your CREW-award winning Landrieu) prefer that there are zero incentives for safety, every incentive for recklessness, and to top it off, a cap on liability so that even in the event of gross recklessness they are off the hook."<br /><br />Let's see there's a straw man, black and white extremist thinking, and a demon. Quite the resume for someone who criticizes "vitriolic lash-outs"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10214951.post-31425957686984037512010-08-02T21:10:51.138-05:002010-08-02T21:10:51.138-05:00Nice to see that I'm not the only one holding ...Nice to see that I'm not the only one holding Jeffrey to task for his vitriolic lash-outs. <br /><br />A few points worth mentioning: <br /><br />First, the problem with BP is that it learned that if it became good at lobbying, it wouldn't have to be good at safety. What we really want is an industry that is good at safely drilling oil but terrible at lobbying. All you conservatives (including your CREW-award winning Landrieu) prefer that there are zero incentives for safety, every incentive for recklessness, and to top it off, a cap on liability so that even in the event of gross recklessness they are off the hook.<br /><br />As for the auto industry, I was completely against that bailout. But you know what, the government sure as hell did a better job of running it than the private-sector executives. If you conservatives weren't in self-imposed exile in Fox-"news" land, you would be coming to grips with that. [Not that the govt should have any hand in it, they should sell that stock ASAP and never get back in the business again, I'm just saying they are at least turning a profit.]<br /><br />And unlike you cheesy, neocons, I will freely admit the corruption of people like Rangel, Landrieu, and the thankfully-dead Murtha. I'd love to see them in jail. There isn't a single conservative on the planet who is as honest with Ted Stevens, Randy Cunningham, Bob Ney, John Boehner, etc. The reason is that you are hypocrites.Mr. Harris Plutocrathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14272042050207617611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10214951.post-56324407377649127342010-07-29T15:41:41.394-05:002010-07-29T15:41:41.394-05:00Plutocrat is a vile human being.Plutocrat is a vile human being.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10214951.post-69049956215854148862010-07-29T12:06:38.954-05:002010-07-29T12:06:38.954-05:00You're avoiding the point and distracting whic...You're avoiding the point and distracting which is exactly what someone doesn't when they don't have the facts but don't want to lose the argument. From where does the government get the power to run private sector companies? I'll help you out since you want to play hostile witness; it's not in the Constitution, it's a way for politicians to fill their coffers and earn favors by appointing friends to jobs. <br /><br />If you want to tell me the government didn't take over GM, you should really learn something before you presume to teach something. <br /><br />"The U.S. Treasury, which already has loaned GM $19.4 billion, would get 72.5 percent of the new company’s stock and provide $30 billion in additional financing to keep the new GM operating under bankruptcy protection."<br />http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30981121/<br /><br />"The government still has $2.1 billion invested in preferred shares that pay dividends, plus a 61% share of common equity valued at about $45 billion to the U.S. and another $8.1 billion to Canada."<br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_Chapter_11_reorganizationAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10214951.post-79219755587904793882010-07-29T10:47:06.974-05:002010-07-29T10:47:06.974-05:00Income tax was created in the 16th Amendment, that...Income tax was created in the 16th Amendment, that's where the Constitution gives the right for government to tax.<br /><br />As to your other comments, your implication was that the government forcibly took over these companies and turned them from success to failure. The reality is the "brilliant" private sector ran these industries into the ground and they came to government for help.<br /><br />I have a feeling you are one of the hypocrites that cry about government control and then whine and moan when government doesn't take action "quickly enough" as in the oil spill.<br /><br />In a similar fashion, if the government had given these bailouts and had NOT put some restrictions on the money, you would be crying about that. The bottom line is the government did not take over these companies, it bailed them out and simply put some strings on how that money would be used.<br /><br />Now run along and go play with your tea bags.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10214951.post-18245209094626560432010-07-28T18:35:23.904-05:002010-07-28T18:35:23.904-05:00From where does government get the money to buy an...From where does government get the money to buy an auto company? I guess if you live in Zimbabwe you can take it just from rich white people, but in the United States, the government takes money from working people, earners. Where in the Constitution does it say the government can confiscate by force workers' money, where does it say the interest of a company being too big to fail is greater than the right of an individual to keep what he works for? <br /><br />Your ignorance in believing that when government takes over companies it runs them "for the people" astounds me. Government regulators and industry executives are revolving doors. The woman in charge of health care regulation is a former insurance executive. Look at how many people from Goldman Sachs work in the government. <br /><br />Why do you think the "financial reform" bill wrote in exceptions for big banks? They know if they go soft on some banks instead of guaranteeing equal protection under law, those banks will make it worth their while.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10214951.post-63700390517239842052010-07-28T14:18:02.721-05:002010-07-28T14:18:02.721-05:00"But this is the venom we get from Democrats ..."But this is the venom we get from Democrats who despite putting huge segments of banking, auto, and health industries under "brilliant" federal regulation, still want more, more, more."<br /><br />Wow, I'm sorry that happened in your country. What country do you live in, anonymous at 9:27? In the United States what happened is the banking, auto and insurance industries ran themselves into the ground and had to beg government to bail them out of the mess they had made. Nothing like what happened in your country.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10214951.post-66102419155191593422010-07-28T09:27:50.511-05:002010-07-28T09:27:50.511-05:00H-Airy writes:
"It's all about pushing mo...H-Airy writes:<br />"It's all about pushing more tax burden on the poor people you look down on for not being 'productive.'"<br /><br />As opposed to, say, Obama's HHS Secretary and Obama's Treasury Secretary and Democrat Charlie Rangel who all "forgot" to pay their taxes? You'd prefer the tax policies of a Democrat like John Edwards who laments two Americas at the same time his lawyers and accountants make sure he doesn't pay more than 5%? Or you'd prefer the tax policies of a John Kerry who moves his yacht out of his home state so that he can save on taxes? <br /><br />If you think because of some lack of education or inbreeding that businesses don't care about higher taxes, look at the Obama administration...they cared enough to avoid them. If you think that somehow rich political elites will pay their fair share under the current system, look at the Obama administration. It's rich political elites who want to push the burden onto small business owners, whom I like to call "employers".<br /><br />But this is the venom we get from Democrats who despite putting huge segments of banking, auto, and health industries under "brilliant" federal regulation, still want more, more, more.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10214951.post-75238118996527404082010-07-28T09:09:47.598-05:002010-07-28T09:09:47.598-05:00The nutty professor - Jeff Sadow - has spoken. Je...The nutty professor - Jeff Sadow - has spoken. Jeff, you seem to want everything for free - seems to me you have the same characteristics as the poor, non-productive segment of society that you loathe.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10214951.post-19437644275119068932010-07-27T22:10:26.971-05:002010-07-27T22:10:26.971-05:00The chutzpah for jeff to preach about "select...The chutzpah for jeff to preach about "selective outrage". Right after the politicians he worships run up the largest debt burden in the history of the entire planet, he folds his arms, pouts his lips, digs in his highheels and absolutely refuses to have any part in paying back the huge pile of debt he helped run up. <br /><br />Naturally, Jeff is drinking on the most impressionable of kool-aid. If we merely stop paying taxes collectively, according to jeff, we will all be rich and the debt will magically be paid back somehow. To suggest otherwise is "vast ignorance about economics". [By the way, Jeff, The Economist magazine used to be well respected by conservatives until it failed to sprint in the direction of your discredited economic policies. When you drove the country's economy into the ground, they didn't even gloat. And when they took a poll worldwide of the most respected and successful economists, you know what they said, Jeff? They said - en masse - that Obama and his economic policies were superior to the plans of your beauty-pageant queen and tv sportscaster airhead.] <br /><br />You're right, Jeff, people who don't take economic lessons from Professor Palin are simply ignoramus simpletons. <br /><br />I love your fourth paragraph. Filled with economic-y sounding stuff that appears to have been written by Palin herself, rather than your former hero, Greenspan, who, unlike you dedicated neocon ideologues, is slowly coming to grips with the consequences of reckless fiscal policy.<br /><br />But you aren't here to make an economic argument. It's all about pushing more tax burden on the poor people you look down on for not being "productive." Maybe if we're lucky, jeff, with your lead the whole country will someday be as rich and shiney and Shreveport.Mr. Harris Plutocrathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14272042050207617611noreply@blogger.com