Wow! You must have been reading my mind, sir. Both Bill O'Reilly and Paul Krugman are scumbag book peddling phonies that deserve no attention from me, whether they claim to be "conservative" or "liberal." I don't know why anyone still takes either seriously, but they have definitely found a niche in telling their audiences what they want to hear and making millions from doing so, and I'm happy for both in that respect.
I wonder how much Professor Krugman pays in taxes and whether he really believes anything he actually says if that's the case. The Celebrity Net Worth site says he's worth about $2.5 million. Let's levy a 91% income tax on him, since he supposedly makes over $250,000 a year and see how he likes it.
I also suspect that Ann Coulter and Cenk Uygur are also the biggest fakers ever in my opinion. Just look at Uygur's Wikipedia page and his past and you'll see how much of a phony he is too and how Comcast has a 10% stake in Current TV.
By the way, those two clowns Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have been contemplating running for president in 2016. Some Republicans have even considered Jeb Bush. I'm really hoping the moderates, centre-right Republicans, and many others abandon ship and start their own party, similar to that of the Conservative Party in Canada. That will spell the end for the modern Republican Party as we know it and forever condemn them into irrelevancy. What are your thoughts on this as well as what I said about O'Reilly and Krugman?
You are a very wise young man, Roberto. You question the dogma on both sides and it will serve you well in the future. I'm actually glad to hear from you again in that I also wanted to add Joseph Schumpeter and Frederic Bastiat as conservative economists from the past that I heartily recommend (I especially recommend Bastiat's "The Petition of the Candlemakers").
Roberto, I thoroughly agree and it's partially why I voted for Gary Johnson (fiscally conservative and socially tolerant).......P.S. You might want to check out my colleague, rational nation at blogspot. He is also of this type of conservatism.
Roberto: Krugman makes millions in the private sector. Which is his right: his employers see that sort of value in his work.
But it shows what a hypocrite he is if he piteously whines about people with valuable skills making millions through the worth of their merit in the private sector.
And guess what? Krugman has argued against other high wage earners being paid for the real worth of their work. Everyone except him, of course.
What I want to know, dmarks, is Krugman dumb or dishonest? John Nanace Garner in 1932 accused Mr. Hoover (clearly a progressive Republican who was far closer to Teddy Roosevelt than he was to Harding and Coolidge) of "leading the country down the road to socialism." This, and Mr. Krugman continues to call the dude a laissez faire capitalist.
9 comments:
Wow! You must have been reading my mind, sir. Both Bill O'Reilly and Paul Krugman are scumbag book peddling phonies that deserve no attention from me, whether they claim to be "conservative" or "liberal." I don't know why anyone still takes either seriously, but they have definitely found a niche in telling their audiences what they want to hear and making millions from doing so, and I'm happy for both in that respect.
I wonder how much Professor Krugman pays in taxes and whether he really believes anything he actually says if that's the case. The Celebrity Net Worth site says he's worth about $2.5 million. Let's levy a 91% income tax on him, since he supposedly makes over $250,000 a year and see how he likes it.
I also suspect that Ann Coulter and Cenk Uygur are also the biggest fakers ever in my opinion. Just look at Uygur's Wikipedia page and his past and you'll see how much of a phony he is too and how Comcast has a 10% stake in Current TV.
By the way, those two clowns Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have been contemplating running for president in 2016. Some Republicans have even considered Jeb Bush. I'm really hoping the moderates, centre-right Republicans, and many others abandon ship and start their own party, similar to that of the Conservative Party in Canada. That will spell the end for the modern Republican Party as we know it and forever condemn them into irrelevancy. What are your thoughts on this as well as what I said about O'Reilly and Krugman?
You are a very wise young man, Roberto. You question the dogma on both sides and it will serve you well in the future. I'm actually glad to hear from you again in that I also wanted to add Joseph Schumpeter and Frederic Bastiat as conservative economists from the past that I heartily recommend (I especially recommend Bastiat's "The Petition of the Candlemakers").
Roberto, I thoroughly agree and it's partially why I voted for Gary Johnson (fiscally conservative and socially tolerant).......P.S. You might want to check out my colleague, rational nation at blogspot. He is also of this type of conservatism.
Krugman is what Krugman does.
Roberto: Krugman makes millions in the private sector. Which is his right: his employers see that sort of value in his work.
But it shows what a hypocrite he is if he piteously whines about people with valuable skills making millions through the worth of their merit in the private sector.
And guess what? Krugman has argued against other high wage earners being paid for the real worth of their work. Everyone except him, of course.
What I want to know, dmarks, is Krugman dumb or dishonest? John Nanace Garner in 1932 accused Mr. Hoover (clearly a progressive Republican who was far closer to Teddy Roosevelt than he was to Harding and Coolidge) of "leading the country down the road to socialism." This, and Mr. Krugman continues to call the dude a laissez faire capitalist.
Few and far between are individuals tarred as "laissez faire capitalist" by leftist idealogues who actualy are such.
The label tends to be used to attack anyone with economic ideology to the right of Stalin.
Well, on this one he was WAY OFF.
Post a Comment