http://nymag.com/news/politics/conse...-frum-2011-11/

opcorn: I expect your dramatic and amazing response to this, Brainy.

 

Hey, look, another article buy a guy who calls himself a conservative and wants a tax increase on "$250k billionaire households" to get a <$1t revenue increase as an answer to a $14t deficit. He also makes it clear that he's a conservative which has no like any conservative president in the last 30-years. So, basically, this article is either a forgery or this dude is not really a conservative. Don't worry, you'll get your leftist GOP candidate, go ahead and hide your booze and caffeine.

 

I'm sorry, this guys seems to be confused as to what it means to be conservative.

:ignore:

 

Konservative Karl is not "conservative", nor does he love America. He is punch-drunk on regulation and telling people how much they don't know about respirating oxygen and how it affects the kommune.

Mr. Blaen99,
When your party comes to terms with its spending, I may come back. Until then your leaders can go back to "Ricking" OWS and concepts of income inequality and the pedal spacing in my cars.

 

From the article:

lul what?

Conservative voters are in favor of farm subsidies and tax loopholes?

 

It all has to do with how you define "conservative voters" and "tax loopholes." Plenty of Republicans support things like mortgage interest deductions. I would think most "conservatives" would favor eliminating that deduction in exchange for a lower marginal income tax rate.

A voter can be Republican and conservative but they are not synonymous.

I have not read this author's other works so I am responding only to the linked article. It goes back to how you define "conservative." I see he worked for GW Bush and voted for McCain in '08. You can argue neither were conservatives, I guess.

I don't see where he says he wants to increase taxes on "$250k billionaire households." What are your objections to his specific points?

 

Because it's pointless, where this is not:

 

I see your chart and raise you.

In addition to the differences in the balance of trade between the US and Canada, the recessions of the early '90s and the most recent one have significant differences.

 

He suggests that Bush was an icon of conservatism and berates the party for supporting him. The guy who expanded medicare, government, and bankrolling his buddies' corporations in 2009 is not my definition of a prime example of what I believe in.

He suggests the Tea Party is a "movement of radicalism" on page 2.

On page 5 he chastizes Capitol Hill for filibustering, a tool in place for a reason. Believe it or not, the President is responsible for nominating appointees who are centrists, someone so reasonable that both sides will consider.

Then, he telsl us, "Rather than workable solutions, my party is offering low taxes for the currently rich and high spending for the currently old, to be followed by who-knows-what and who-the-hell-cares. This isn’t conservatism; it’s a going-out-of-business sale for the baby-boom generation." The reasonable "conservative" will differentiate between the dual income $125k household and Obama-friendly GE CEO Immelt who's corporation paid how much in taxes over the last decade? Does he hold the same contempt for a PhD household as a the real millionaires, specifically the ones with millions of Dollars? Does he believe the earnings of a family should be confiscated when the patriarch expires? This is why I call him a Marxist, and why I'm right. His "...it's a going-out-of-business-sale for the baby-boom generation" statement is accurate, yet he believes that irresponsible spending can/should be rationalized by increasing taxes on a mis-named tax bracket.

 

GDP is positive for both nations, we are not in a recession.

 

Ask your girl about Richard Koo and his work at Nomura. If she doesn't know who he is, buy her his book for Santa Day and be a hero.

 

I like Richard Koo, not sure about the GF but we've talked about it. I don't get into the weeds about it and "balance sheet recession", I stick to the political side because I'm not educated in economics and a bit infantile on the subject...I do my best to refrain from preaching her teachings.

 

One could argue he is still a little too focused on "neo-classical" paradigms but I think his perception of the balance sheet recession (and the failures of monetary policy) are pretty helpful.


I am supposed to be avoiding political advocacy and focusing on political forecasting because I find the former to be largely useless and the latter potentially beneficial.


So... there's that.

 

Came for the hustler, died laughing of being accused of a leftist. Thanks for the lulz Hustler!

 

Social leftiest, extreme fiscal conservative. Atheism, prochoice, pro gun, flat tax, foreigner hating satanist.

 

you forgot miata driving homo.

 

Aww Brainy, aren't we all? <3

 

yep.