FlintTalk.com Forum Index > Political Talk Topic: Were we better off under King George? Goto page 1, 2  Next

Author    Post   Adam F L I N T O I D This is somewhat shocking. According to Mark Perry we had a lower tax burden under King George. http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/07/citizens-more-taxed-now-than-under-king.html http://www.atr.org/content/pdf/2008/july/071508ot-cogdreport.pdf Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:55 am  Flinn's Journal F L I N T O I D If you remember your civics and U.S. history lessons, the colonists were complaining about "taxation without representation." The colonists had no means to contact their M.P. because there was no M.P. representing them. _________________ I HAVE SEVERED MY TIES WITH FLINTTALK.COM BECAUSE TROLLS CANNOT BE CONTROLLED ON THIS BOARD. Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:09 pm  MikeInGB F L I N T O I D I find the graph on page two (from the ATR link) very interesting. In 1992 when Clinton came into office through 2000 when he left there was a sharp decline in the COG day. Since Bush came into office in 2000, it has consistently increased. Obviously, it is the fault of those damn tax and spend liberals. Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:19 pm  Public D F L I N T O I D According to Mark Perry, there is no glass ceiling, Obama is to blame for the stock market's decline, climate change is a religion, high gas prices are good, and on and on. Read the stuff if you can stand it. Then tell me he doesn't get off on being outlandish for the sake of it – more like The Joker (with tenure) than a serious economist. The more you site him, the less credibility you have – and the more his thirst for offensive, contrarian, fuzzy correlating, ego-stroking nonsense grows. _________________ http://www.toomuchonline.org/index.html http://www.hr676.org http://www.pnhp.org/publications/the_national_health_insurance_bill_hr_676.php Tue Jul 22, 2008 2:11 pm  Ted Jankowski F L I N T O I D It is silly to say Oboma is to blame for the stock market decline. Global Warming is a religon! High gas prices are never good! Tue Jul 22, 2008 2:45 pm  Adam F L I N T O I D quote: Public D schreef: According to Mark Perry, there is no glass ceiling, Obama is to blame for the stock market's decline, climate change is a religion, high gas prices are good, and on and on. Read the stuff if you can stand it. Then tell me he doesn't get off on being outlandish for the sake of it – more like The Joker (with tenure) than a serious economist. The more you site him, the less credibility you have – and the more his thirst for offensive, contrarian, fuzzy correlating, ego-stroking nonsense grows. Any examples? Mark Perry is a heavy believer in free market economics. Most of his stuffs seems on target to me. He's also an excellent professor. Tue Jul 22, 2008 2:52 pm  Adam F L I N T O I D quote: Ted Jankowski schreef: It is silly to say Oboma is to blame for the stock market decline. Global Warming is a religon! High gas prices are never good! Some people may believe he is going to win and tank the economy. Then it would make sense to sell now. Whether it is true or not I support conservation High gas prices do encourage conservation and more fuel efficient vehicles. Tue Jul 22, 2008 3:26 pm  Public D F L I N T O I D I could do this all day, Adam, but I don't want to spoil my appetite. Perry buffoonery evidence. Here goes: Gas will drop to $1.50: http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/12/coming-oil-glut-and-30-oil-150-gas.html Borrowing Billions From China is No Big Deal: http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/05/greg-mankiws-excellent-explanation.html The Poor are Totally Getting Richer: http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/05/bad-news-for-two-america-theme-poor-got.html Wal-mart Has No Impact on Small Businesses: http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/07/wal-mart-no-effect-on-small-businesses.html There is No Earnings Gap Between Men and Women: http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/04/what-pay-gap.html OK. That's enough. I just thew-up in my mouth a little. You get the idea. See a trend? See somebody going out of his way to be bombastic, shocking, and misogynistic? You almost get the sense that he must be silently mocking those who buy into this garbage. Perhaps. But it's more likely that his quest for economic celebrity gets its cues from Paris Hilton. That is, if you aren't good enough, be fantastically, obnoxiously, obscenely bad. In this millennium, tis better to be notorious than merely famous anyway. Good-bye, Tom Hanks. Hello, Amy Winehouse. Personally, I don't trust anybody who thinks justifying economic robbery makes good fodder for fame-seeking. Or for the most blog hits. Or the most appearances on CNBC. Or worse, for no reason at all. I'm curious. What makes him good professor again? He makes you think? I guess I could see that . . . if you're taught the other side of the story too. _________________ http://www.toomuchonline.org/index.html http://www.hr676.org http://www.pnhp.org/publications/the_national_health_insurance_bill_hr_676.php Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:19 pm  Mellow D F L I N T O I D He is a good professor because he is sooo easy to understand. How do I solve x? The Free Market. How do you explain the universe? Supply and Demand. One nursery rhyme fits all. La la la la. And national debt jumped over the moon. Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:25 pm  Adam F L I N T O I D The guy predicting $30 oil does seem like an idiot but long term oild could go back to the $2 area. Our currency is becoming worthless anyways so the case could be made to get what we can for it now. http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/81xx/doc8113/05-16-Low-Income.pdf I think our poor also live better than the majority of the world if my memory is correct. http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv31n1/v31n1-1.pdf Guys are getting laid off more than women. Sex discrimination??? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24524554/ I still think Mark Perry is a very good economist. Economics is not as simple as suplly and demand especially with things like elasticity etc. It can also be hard to predict markets. Economists generally do a pretty good job but their are bound to be mistakes. When you add things like the federal reserve, market manipulations, taxes, regulations into the mix it gets extremely complicated. To top it off there are people like you that think we are in a free market economy, when the majority is government controled. Tue Jul 22, 2008 7:20 pm  Mellow D F L I N T O I D quote: Economics is not as simple as suplly and demand especially with things like elasticity etc... When you add things like the federal reserve, market manipulations, taxes, regulations into the mix it gets extremely complicated. Yes, of course. Sometimes, economists fall so in love with those rules that they imagine that the science of economics is a natural science, like the law of gravity, and that any regulation is like messing with physics. They get so tied up in trying to maintain the "free market' that they forget that the reason that man created those rules in the first place was to get to the greater good for man. Experiments in laissez faire have not seen the success Milton had hoped for. I agree with you that "free markets" are a great way to sell iPods, Egyptian cotton sheets, Mr. Coffee machines. But I question whether the "free market" is the best way to hawk cancer meds (don't know about you, but I'd pay pretty near anything to get rid of cancer if I had it), to clean up the environment , or to determine the value of work . I'd prefer that we put our thought more directly in the good of man, instead of continuing our knee-jerk reaction of trying to maneuver our way to the greater good indirectly through the market. And I prefer to have my philosophical arguments of positive liberty and negative liberty at the Torch over a burger and beer. Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:42 am  Mellow D F L I N T O I D Adam, have you seen the "Story of Stuff"? It is 20 minutes long, but it is pretty interesting, especially when you get to that third arrow, and the story of designers. Watch it here: http://www.storyofstuff.org/ whole or here http://youtube.com/watch?v=OqZMTY4V7Ts in segments or cut to the chase here (but you'll miss a lot of the action) Link Wed Jul 23, 2008 11:36 am  Public D F L I N T O I D Great 'stuff,' MD! Wonder if Dr. Perry would show that in class? Maybe you could bring it in for show-and-tell, Adam? _________________ http://www.toomuchonline.org/index.html http://www.hr676.org http://www.pnhp.org/publications/the_national_health_insurance_bill_hr_676.php Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:55 pm  Mellow D F L I N T O I D quote: Great 'stuff,' MD! Please. Call me, "Doctor." Wed Jul 23, 2008 1:09 pm  Adam F L I N T O I D quote: Mellow D schreef: Yes, of course. Sometimes, economists fall so in love with those rules that they imagine that the science of economics is a natural science, like the law of gravity, and that any regulation is like messing with physics. They get so tied up in trying to maintain the "free market' that they forget that the reason that man created those rules in the first place was to get to the greater good for man. Experiments in laissez faire have not seen the success Milton had hoped for. I agree with you that "free markets" are a great way to sell iPods, Egyptian cotton sheets, Mr. Coffee machines. But I question whether the "free market" is the best way to hawk cancer meds (don't know about you, but I'd pay pretty near anything to get rid of cancer if I had it), to clean up the environment , or to determine the value of work . I'd prefer that we put our thought more directly in the good of man, instead of continuing our knee-jerk reaction of trying to maneuver our way to the greater good indirectly through the market. And I prefer to have my philosophical arguments of positive liberty and negative liberty at the Torch over a burger and beer. Economics is pretty pure but it's extremely complicated because totally free unadulterated markets don't really exist in America. I'm not a master economist but with massive U.S. anti free market initiatives a Chilean free market could be overpowered. http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0506-09.htm You don't think cancer patients should have access to cheaper drugs? Or alternative drugs they want. The AMA & FDA and drug industry, and trial lawyers help keep affordable drugs off the market. With the high cost of taxation factored in the ipods etc might be able to be discounted 50% is we had a smaller government. I'd also prefer that we put our thought more directly in the good of the common man and greatly reduce government interference. I think we need more liberties. It's simply a questions of which ones. Wed Jul 23, 2008 1:47 pm    Display posts from previous:   All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First

Jump to: Select a forum Local News and Politics----------------Open chatFeed BackReal Estate For SalePolitical TalkTigersVehiclesPistonsVehicles for partsThe Flint JournalRed WingsGarage SaleMichigan Professional Soccer TeamsPolitical JokesWantedFlint Sirens Women's Rugby ClubThe Bob Leonard ShowMiscellaneousGenesee County PatriotsFlint City Derby Girls / Flint River Floaters Roller Derby TeamThe Flint Generals Flint Facts----------------Did you know?

Goto page 1, 2  Next <  Last Topic | Next Topic  >

Forum Rules: You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum