Why doesn’t Krugman just change his name to Keynes and be done with it? Oh! Right. Both Krugman & Keynes are/were closet-capitalists, investing their money carefully and using every legal means possible to shelter it, but shhhh… forget about that… don’t look at the man behind the curtain, again, and again, and again… Just do what he says you, the little person, should do, the hypocritical bastards.
Damn, I’m grumpy this morning.
The point is, Krugs is at it again. Mark my words, in about 10 years, if this madness stands, we will have a full-fledged two-tier medical system. The rich will pay for premium access to skilled physicians and the poor will have government sh*t.
We’re already seeing it start with the… oh, damn. I forget what they call them, but you can pay $1500 per year or so and get 24/7 access to your physician.
Medical Speakeasies. ObAmerica.
WRONG, my little commie friend.
Business exists to make a PROFIT. Without PROFIT, they don’t SURVIVE. NOBODY will INVEST in an enterprise whose stated aim is to tuck its employees in at night. That’s an ENTIRELY different PARADIGM. If you want a social service, then get/make/endorse a social service through LOCAL, STATE, CIVIC, or FAITH-BASED institutions, but NOT through some big-ass federal government program or on the backs of the nation’s PRODUCERS.
Liberals have this relentless and annoying impulse towards assigning church-type goals to capitalist enterprises. Grow up dammit.
Sigh… Krugs is at it again. Chuggin’ that Bush-Evil Train around and around… It’s yet more proof of why they call economics the miserable science, or something to that effect. In liberal-land Bush is responsible for all evils in the world, from recession to warm salad forks.
I submitted the comment below to his column’s (The Unwisdom of Elites) assertion that $2T of the $14T on America’s balance sheet is due to the Bush tax cuts. Kryst… Does he not realize people have Google ferkryssakes!
I’d LOVE to know where you got your $2T Bush tax cut number, big guy, because TWO of your favorite sources for data say YOU ARE WRONG, The Tax Policy Foundation an the CBO:
TPF QUOTE -> MYTH 4. The Bush tax cuts are the main cause of the budget deficit. — …They are NOT the main cause of the sizable deficit that exists today. In 2007, well after the tax cuts took effect, the budget deficit stood at 1.2 percent of GDP. By 2009, it had increased to 9.9 percent of the economy. The Bush tax cuts DIDN’T CHANGE between 2007 and 2009, (‘the last three years’) SO CLEARLY SOMETHING ELSE IS TO BLAME.
TPF SOURCE -> August 3, 2010 50 The Tax Policy Center Five Myths about the Bush Tax Cut ~ http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=1001423
CBO QUOTE -> There is NO WAY to precisely identify the actual effects of those tax changes from budget data. Measuring the actual impact of the legislation would require gauging what revenues an economic performance WOULD HAVE BEEN in the absence of the legislation then comparing those outcomes to those that occurred with the legislation. SUCH COMPARISONS ARE IMPOSSIBLE to do with any precision
CBO SOURCE -> The above excerpt was taken from a May 11, 2010 letter from Douglas W. Elmendorf, Director of the C.B.O. to Representative Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) and you can find it here -> http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/114xx/doc11492/HincheyLtr.pdf
Below is a comment I just submitted to another stain on Krugman’s insufferable blog… er… I mean, a comment I just submitted to a post on The Conscience of a Liberal (as if there were such a thing). If it’s not published there, I wanted to be sure it was published here:
Having it both ways? You know what OTHER VSP’s (very special people) had it both ways? John Maynard Keynes, your hero. Me not thee economics was his m.o. in private. He invested. Carefully & well. Know who else was a me not thee? MARX ferkrissakes. He was sustained by wealth accrued through capitalism, which was available to be FREELY given to him (as opposed to FORCIBLY by taxation) to sit on his a** and screw up the world. The BIGGEST me not thee of today? THE OBAMA FAMILY. If it weren’t for a couple of rich white women who lunch, Obama’s father would never have met Obama’s mother. Because of their rich capitalist husbands’ money, available to them to be FREELY GIVEN, they bankrolled much of Obama Senior’s Excellent Adventure in America. Funny, I don’t recall Obama ever making an example of their philanthropy or THANKING THEM for their generosity in a speech. You’d think he’d have their children to the White House for a photo-op, you know? But why would he? Since he started making BIG money on his book, he’s not given a single friggin’ DIME to his welfare aunt here in Boston who lives 100% off our tax money. Brother’s Keeper? THEE NOT ME!
It takes only 5 or 6 swings of the ax to knock down this morning’s New York Times OpEd by Jill Lepore, a Harvard historian whose scholarship I have more regard for than her politics. I actually watched her give a lecture on CSPAN over the winter; learned from it, and enjoyed her manner very much. Then she lost me with the slobbering mess below. The liberal drivel in “Poor Jane’s Alamanc” is so easily wiped up, I debated whether or not to spend a minute with it never mind an hour, but here it is. In short, Mizzzz Lepore laments Ben Franklin’s cherished sister’s life as a pitious example of what will happen to you if those evil-doers, the Republicans, get their way with the Ryan budget.
April 23, 2011 • Poor Jane’s Almanac • By JILL LEPORE • Cambridge, Mass.
THE House Budget Committee chairman, Paul D. Ryan, a Republican from Wisconsin, announced his party’s new economic plan this month. It’s called “The Path to Prosperity,” a nod to an essay Benjamin Franklin once wrote, called “The Way to Wealth.” Franklin, who’s on the $100 bill, was the youngest of 10 sons. Nowhere on any legal tender is his sister Jane, the youngest of seven daughters; she never traveled the way to wealth. He was born in 1706, she in 1712. Their father was a Boston candle-maker, scraping by. Massachusetts’ Poor Law required teaching boys to write; the mandate for girls ended at reading. Benny went to school for just two years; Jenny never went at all.
AF: Mizz Lepore, ‘Tis true. Women were not burning bras in the 18th, or even 19th century. Colonial America was inhospitable to women’s freedom, yes, but if applying contemporary standards to society in centuries past is the underlying structure of your thesis to follow, what’s next? A blistering essay on how evil Lincoln was for not inviting openly gay soldiers to fight in the Civil War? C’mon.
Their lives tell an 18th-century tale of two Americas. Against poverty and ignorance, Franklin prevailed; his sister did not. At 17, he ran away from home. At 15, she married: she was probably pregnant, as were, at the time, a third of all brides.
Continue Reading »