I'll blame a President for taking a sh*t situation, and SOMEHOW finding a way to make it worse.
He's increased our deficit three fold, spending what Bush spent in 8 years, in just two.
He tried to get GOVERNMENT APPROVAL for priests, which thankfully the Supreme Court struck down, and then if that weren't enough, tried to force Religious institutions to provide Abortions.
And now he wants to cut Military spending, the fund programs we can't afford regardless... fail.
The amount of wealth a tiny part of the population has is insane, and they STILL buy off politicians to keep every fucking penny of it while forcing everyone else to make up the difference.
@dlind70 Its called stealing, which I also hope you learned in first grade. The massive exploitation of the system must, and will, come to an end sooner or later.
@dlind70 Funny how they teach sharing in first grade but they don't seem to emphasize the whole "not taking other people's stuff" thing quite as much.
It's as if the moral lesson is the only legitimate way to avoid having your stuff taken from you is to just give it to the people who want to take it from you.
We take worse care of our poor than any industrialized nation. Say what you want about what we do about that. But, do you think that poverty has anything to do with crime rates and a populations intelligence? We have the largest prison population of any industrialized nation, the most violent crime, and we have a substantial part of our voting population that thinks the earth is 6 thousand years old. It's not all about giving to the poor, part of it is, who do you want to share a country with?
@jahi120 True but who's decision is it? Do you force your kids to share their pie or do you teach them to do it out of their own compassionate free will?
This may be the dumbest fucking explanation I have ever seen. Where did the pie come from. How did you acquire the goods to make that pie. Where did you acquire the knowledge to make the pie. And the government will never take a 100% of anything. I enjoy Penn and Teller but this is sincerely dumb. How much of the pie should the government take to protect someone else from stealing over overthrowing your pie making business. See how NOT SIMPLE this explanation is. God people are thick.
I don't think he really wants to change it at all. The problem isn't our tax system since we have a progressive tax system where the rich pay the most (or they're supposed to.) The problem is that Wall Street and big corporations like GM and GE will always back him because they know as long as they support him he will give them the corporate welfare.
This analogy only works if it becomes significantly more easy to get pie the more pie you have, and when pie is taken from someone you never take all the pie they have at the time, you only take a percentage of the pie they currently have and also if you use some of the pie to finance projects which will help everyone to get pie faster and to prevent people from illegally taking your pie and pay regulators to make sure your pie isn't poisoned and other things which benefit everyone including you
People who make more money should pay more taxes. It's a rather simple concept. Bigger pool of money, the slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') higher rate is barely felt. The general push is to move the tax rates from around 35% back up to 39% roughly, like they were under Clinton. THAT is what everyone has a massive issue over. 4% when you're making over 250k a year. I won't even go into millionaires and billionaires.
Actually, most people get the robin hood thing wrong. If you read story, you see that he actually takes from the Government, (tax collectors and nobles), and gives to the poor.
take from the rich to give to the poor,hmmm, robin hood? Sounds like breaking the law to me; although it might be bammyboys new leagle type law,er, no law at all!!!!
@danning1 who are you to tell people how much money they want or need? Stalin? Maybe Bill Gates wants to create a future for his kids grandkids etc. Maybe he wants alot of mansions. Maybe he wants to buy Millions of rats and launch them out of a cannon. He earned his money he can do what he wants.
@danning1 It is their "pie". What gives the government the "right" to determine what are enough pies. You have the liberty to make your own pies and hoard if you so desire...or you can sell them and make more pies....however if the government keeps intervening they will take their pies overseas and hoard them there, there is money to be made world wide...even offshore pies taste good to those that have them..lol
The thing is these people have an endless desire for more wealth. No man gets rich unless he uses the back breaking labor of thousands of people. The key to being rich is to skim just enough off the working class to keep them working without complaining. Bottom line the rich are getting rich because they sold this country out. They enjoy our freedoms that are provided by our soldiers, but they don't want to sacrifice anything especially not their millions/billions.
I like how he implies that record low taxes are breaking the higher ups. Last I checked the rich were getting nothing but richer while the gap got larger with every new tax break.
@rentatrip1 Hop off of Faux News's dick for 5 minutes and you would realize he is an average president thrown into a shit storm. I don't really like him but saying the things you did just shows your ignorance.
Ron Paul is the only man who can restore our beloved nation to the White Christian Capitalist country it was and was always meant to be. We are going to restore the glory of the 1800's. We are going to our nation back from the AshkeNAZIs and their hordes of mud people.
Really complex, fair, and nuanced view on how our system works. I can't believe I actually thought Penn was a respectful guy when he claimed he didn't like going with pragmatic arguments. He's like every other asshole in this country, make one point and think it perfectly dissolves any entire system you disagree with. Also, if this is how pragmatic he can get with critiquing economic systems.... well... do I need to say more?
Everyone he's right, we should all pay for our own roads/infrastructure. I don't have enough money to build one so i'll just set up a pay toll. Are you poor? Oh well...
from what i heard obama was saying that you are getting taxed higher now because you were getting taxed less before to make it fair and spread the wealth, if he got richer and got taxed the same then his just going to increase the gap between him and the poor even further, so obamas raising the tax and redistributing it so it can reach people with less, thats sounds fair to me.. can anyone correct me?
@FubarLikeYou I believe the use of violence or the threat of violence to take the honest and lawfully acquired property of my innocent neighbors is the fair thing to do. I understand there is no moral or ethical justification for theft, but I have been conditioned to believe that what the central planners deem as "fair" is an acceptable replacement for morals and ethics. They have deemed that coveting my neighbors property is now a virtue called "fairness". Can anyone correct me?
@tmoallen i think you missed my point, this guy in the vid is earning 250k a year now so his getting taxed more so some of it can be put back into the economy allowing people like your neighbour to earn it and make their house payment instead of just letting this guy get richer and sit on his money or spend it on personal assets instead of redistributing it back into the econemy where people like your neighbout can earn it.
@FubarLikeYou No I understood you point quite well. Spending money on personal assets is the very act of putting money into an economy. Government taxation is not. The government is a non-productive, non-wealth producing entity, spending other peoples money on government departments is not "redistributing it back into the economy". People don't "sit" on wealth, they invest it. Which is again the very act of putting money back into the economy. Are you really that clueless about economics?
@tmoallen a personal asset is a personal asset, that money he spent on it is still his money because he can sell the asset back for the money, making it a liability to the economy. the government is a non productive non wealth producing entity? are you kidding? what money do u think payed for the roads you drive to work on? the school you learnt at? the laws that stopped your neighbour robbing you every time you came home? if your neighbours house was his wealth, he would have owned it
@FubarLikeYou Money =/= production. The gov steals money from others and spends it. A mugger(laws didn't stop him) who steals $100 and spends it has not produced anything. Buying a house, car, or blender does not benefit an economy? So builders, loggers, brick-makers, banks, workers etc aren't part of an economy? Roads, schools etc. can be funded more efficiently and morally(without theft) without the gov. Laws aren't products. You still haven't addressed the immorality of your positions?
@FubarLikeYou Let's translate that: I believe the government should rob my neighbor of his wealth to "redistribute in back into the economy" i.e, other peoples bank accounts. I am so ignorant of economics, wealth creation, and money supply that I think that one person making a dollar means another person loses a dollar.
@FubarLikeYou Income disparity being a problem is such Bullshit, it's something politicians say is a problem so they can tell people they can fix it and hopefully win votes. There is nothing wrong with wealthy people getting richer, so long as everyone else is getting richer as well. Also people who are poor today can be wealthy tomorrow. And young people and new immigrants entering the work force tend to replace the people who WERE poor( Once young, or once new immigrants.)
@ShamanMcLamie yes but arn't they able to get rich aswell because these wealthy people are getting taxed, making money available for the poor to earn? if the rich keep getting richer and dont put the money back into the economy then the money runs dry you cant have 1m in the economy give it to 1 person without taking any back and expect other people to get rich aswell
@FubarLikeYou First of all that's assuming the money makes it's way to the poor. Many government programs actually hurt the poor, but that's a different argument. First of all rich people don't always just put their money under their bed. One they put it in a bank that gives people loans. Second they invest it in stocks that provides capital for businesses. Also supply and demand applies to money. If less dollars are out on the market than then those that are are worth more.
@FubarLikeYou Keep in mind what makes a dollar is mostly in the mind. As a physical object it's pretty worthless. Dollars are just a tool for more efficiently trading goods and services. If rich people put all their money under their bed and don't spend it that reduces the supply of dollars increases those that aren't under someones bed more valuable and increases that individuals buying power. Now that's deflation and that comes with a host of other problems as well though.
@ShamanMcLamie Income disparity is a very real threat and is one of the major causes of the great depression. When wealth becomes concentrated at the top there is lower demand, so less reason to produce, less reason to higher, which creates less money at the bottom and less demand etc. etc. Income disparity IS NOT a made up political problem, it is a very real concern. Also a growing % gap is the issue, not a flat one like you seem to think.
@ShamanMcLamie We currently have a growing disparity. The top have doubled their wealth over the past 30 years while the middle class have gotten poorer. If they were both doubling nobody would complain, but so long as the top get richer and the bottom get poorer there IS an issue.
Much as I love Penn and Teller, this is a gross exaggeration (not that much of their stuff isn't). Look at Sweden -- Much higher taxes than the US, many more universal welfare programs than the US, and yet they have half the income disparity, less unemployment, and a better economy overall. So spreading wealth around doesn't work?
@EmeraldFerret Let's consider the differences, Sweden is a much smaller country with a more homogenous population where there is more consensus. Let's also remember Sweden's economy lagged big time during the 90's and since then have been precipitously rolling back the welfare state. America is an enormous diverse country with little consensus on many issues and a multitude of states with varying laws affecting the economy. So don't go comparing the two they are not the same.
If you think about it, each of the fifty United States gets to practice very much how Sweden does when they are allowed proper (aka constitutional) control over their OWN affairs, their OWN roughly Sweden-sized populations. So why do so many people want so much extra power for the federal government? It makes no sense.
@EmeraldFerret Income disparity isn't a problem. Say I were a billionaire, and I volunteered to have half my assets taken from me, and all i asked was that you would have 40% of your assets taken away from you, would you be happy with that? A wealth gap increasing is a symptom of something else, and that something else is the problem not the gap itself. Less unemployment and "a better economy overall" do not necessarily mean a better standard of living, this is hard to measure
@theredscourge FYI - In the 1980s, shortly before the collapse of the soviet union, it had about a 1% unemployment rate, but yet nobody would argue it was a country of abundance. Many argue that it only failed because greedy people ran the government, but that's been true here since at least 1900, and we aren't dying of starvation yet. If we know greedy people gravitate toward positions of power, it only makes sense that if you want to stop greed, you've got to cut down the power.
The fact that Teller was able to cut a 2nd and 3rd piece of pie is proof that the rich elite members of government haven't taxed us to the grave. There's still a little left in the coffers. No new taxes!
Bill Gates and all the billionaires eat cake. So they're not keeping pie from us they're just giving it to each other,you know, in addition to the cake.
@Waywardpaladin How about lowering the higher taxes instead of raising the lowest ones? Shouldn't the goal be less government waste?
How about we get rid of income tax entirely for ALL people, put a simple flat income tax on ALL corporate profits, institute the "negative income tax" (google it) in place of welfare checks (EVERYONE gets $X and keeps ANYTHING they make on top of that), fire most of the rich IRS+welfare admins who can easily get another job, and use the savings to help the poor?
@theredscourge This would lower American wages without lowering standard of living, meaning American companies can afford to hire Americans again, bringing many jobs back from overseas. Some savings from the reduced expenses will be passed onto the consumer, increasing the value of any existing savings people have, thus increasing the quality of life for people without having to give them any more money. All that personal income tax crap ADDS NOTHING to the economy, and will be gone.
@theredscourge The additional savings by the people will be used mostly to invest in home improvements, things they need, better food, and making investments, all of which help stimulate the economy further. Many of the now obsolete private accountants could move into corporate tax auditing roles, which would mean more eyes watching out for corporate fraud.
@theredscourge Except we have been lowering the higher taxes? The top marginal tax rate used to be 95% and has been dropping every since. As for a negative income tax, sounds like Basic Income, which even Hayek and Friedman signed off on. We do need to start unraveling what we're spending on, like corn subsidies. With the drive for ethanol production, corn has become a commodity worth enough to maintain the production without subsidies, but, they still exist.
Since 1968, the Fed managed to destroy all but 1/6th of the value of every US dollar (if you deposited every spare penny entirely into a bank account for 44 straight years, you'd have 1/6th left), and the US federal budget increased by 21 times.
The cost to manufacture a transistor on a CPU fell to 1/38,500 of its previous cost (99.999974% decrease), while Intel made a solid ~25% profit margin.
@theredscourge Assuming your bank account doesn't give you interest of course *lol* Also, citing the example of Moore's Law and the unparalled productivity gains we've seen in that is certainly misleading. Either way, I still don't see how that conflicts with the value of transfer payments?
@MrLunitunz They'd never allow someone like myself to work for them. They're in the business of creating jobs for their buddies so their buddies can support their advancement through the ranks, whereas I'm for the opposite.
@iinventedthequestion The negative income tax replaces welfare+foodstamps. Essentially, every citizen, _employed or not_, gets $X dollars per year (likely issued monthly) to spend as they see fit. With no personal income tax, everyone keeps any additional money they make after that, so there is no possible incentive to stay on welfare. You'd cut EVERYONE with citizenship a check, and fire the welfare administrators. Government jobs are the only jobs which when cut actually improves the economy.
@iinventedthequestion@theredscourge rather, there'd be no possible incentive to stay unemployed (welfare is gone in my scenario). Many people will no longer qualify for welfare if they accept a low paying job, and without both they cannot afford to move out of home, so they stay living with their parents for ages, which hurts everyone, including the housing market. There are many other side benefits to the economy and to the budget via the specific combination of policies I had mentioned above.
@theredscourge True but there are some people who simply cant get a job i doubt most people on welfare are on it because they are slackers who dont try too get a job, also if the employees are guarenteed a livable wage wont the employers pay them as little as they can because the employees will be supported by our tax dollars its a noble i dea i just have criticisms of it
@iinventedthequestion I'm guessing you aren't suggesting that the welfare system ought to provide a particularly unlivable wage, but even if you did, the fact that doing it this way would result in savings, if needed, the exact same amount of money as now could still be paid out, and the savings merely pocketed and applied to other government programs. What I can say for sure is all possible incentives to abuse a safety net ought to be removed, but the safety net itself...someday, but not today.
The problem is that people assume that there are infinite amounts of ingerdients to make pies. If one person has lots of pies, the others can't make a pie for themselves, no matter how hard they try.
@Capitanvolume That may seem reasonable at first glance, but the problem with your thinking here is that this is not even a problem in Hong Kong, a far more libertarian run country, with a population density WAY higher than that of the USA. Consider also the situation of the invention of petroleum. That oil was always under the ground before, but we just had not known how to utilize it. Technology improved, and the same amount of land suddenly provided us orders of magnitude more goods.
The better skit would have been the PieMan gives a congressman a B-Job and gets a law passed that allows him to run his factory without any safety protocols which only slow down production, & with substandard ingredients, and unequal pay for women employees, etc....and now the unrestricted PieMan is making money hand over fist - & so he continues the B-Jobs since the Supreme Court says it's OK....but hey don't complain about it, for if you do, you're a spread the wealth liberal muslim socialist.
this explanation does not work, nobody is going to take all of tellers pie and give all of it to someone less fortunate, no no no just a small piece. unlike the current system where they take a large piece of tellers pie and give it to someone, more fortunate. like bankers and israel and terrorists, yep they give tellers pie to terrorists as well, but it's ok as long as those terrorists are working for america. because they all like pie, it's when america stops giving them pie that's the problem
@plwpahi Fact: The #1 contributors to the federal budget by far are the personal income taxes from the top 20%. The people who advocate for lower taxes wish to achieve this via smaller government, and with smaller government and lower taxes, big foreign wars of aggression are simply not feasible. Sorry.
@cowdust51 no i'm not, but i'm not a conservative either. i'm a realist and think those guys would be the same or worse than obama if they could beat him, just under a conservative banner, because that would be the only thing that would change, from a dem banner to a rep banner. if people want someone who will beat obama and want to change more than a banner at the same time, vote Ron Paul.
otherwise just like in vegas, you can choose, but the house ALWAYS wins.
@plwpahi I like Ron Paul, I really do, but support for him isn't big enough. He's definetly a better alternative to the other "conservative" candidates, but the numbers don't stack up. No matter who a person votes for regardless of party it's still THEM against us.
@cowdust51 that's right, but as far as politicians go Ron Paul is unique and has a lot more common sense and practicality than the others who seem to be made with the same programming, plus i like it when Ron Paul says he will keep fighting till August, because a lot can happen between then and now.
@theredscourge Big wars of aggression simply are not feasible? George Bush didn't pay for the Afghan/Iraq war with tax money, he payed for it with borrowed money. And this was a guy who pushed for a smaller government and tax cuts.
@azbed129 "with smaller government and lower taxes, big foreign wars of aggression are simply not feasible" Yes, I meant it when I said it. How did they get those loans? Offering collateral that can prove they can pay it off. If tax income is drastically lower, they'd not have that collateral, or they'd have to drastically cut other services, which most would protest. Only a defensive oriented force could be maintained. Just nukes and the National Guard would be cheap!
So using the pie example Penn and Teller gave, to me it seems like Teller would have a lot of pie while Penn has less. But instead of Penn getting more pie from Teller, he would give a portion of his pie to the government while Teller does the same. Under the Obama tax plan, Penn will have to give a smaller percentage of his pie to the government while Teller have to give a bigger percentage.
This is not an argument for or against the Obama tax break but more of a critique of the argument itself. I personally don't see it as "spreading" the wealth, but rather an adjustment of how much a person pays in taxes depending on income bracket. Both the 95% and 5% will still be paying taxes, and it is not like the tax money from the 5% will go directly into the 95% bank accounts. And AGAIN, I'm not arguing in favor or opposition of the tax break.
@swanmix10 what your talking about is the trickle down system, which shows the problem right in the name, no poor person is getting rich off of this, the money is well, TRICKLING down. The reason is that the large corporation owners have massive amounts of money, but only pay the employees the bare minimum, their money isn't flowing down, it's barely trickling.
That's not a fair representation at all, it's bullshit. If we do what you want us to do, it would be like if Teller was given buttloads of pie, and you worked your ass off trying to get some pie, but because of bad circumstances, you only get a little bit of pie for your hard work. Then when the government goes around to collect pie tax, they take 1 piece from him, and ten from you despite the fact that you have practically no pie to begin with. Your example is shit, get a better analogy.
I hope I was getting the wrong impression from this, because it seemed as if Penn was implying that a man who could buy something that makes $250,000 a year needed his $250,000 a year more than someone who makes $50,000 a year. Or was it two separate clips thrown together?
a more accurate portrayal would have been something like this: “I helped you make 30 pies. Can I have one??? …but I did all the work, your pie business would be nowhere without me….fine I’m spitting in the next batch.”
Sorry progressives! I never got a job from a poor person. Nor did I ever eat a meal from a poor person, nor was I ever clothed by a poor person. My point is that trade and free markets make us all rich, and demonizing business men and woman for working 60 hours a week is plain fucking stupid because their wealth gave us everything we have now.
But they weren't talking about Obama's statement at all. In fact, if you listened to what he said (instead of only three words from it) it's explained pretty clearly.
@flintston3r I won't disagree with you there. But I think it's worse to have the federal reserve print it and charge us interest (that we pay in taxes) than it is to let the government print it directly.
Of course this is a problem of having an army-enforced monopoly (government). I think several competing currencies with no government would serve us better.
@PeopleR2sensitive Saying go to Somalia to see how it works is like saying go to Nazi Germany to see how democracy works. Just like saying go to Rome to see how a republic works. Funny that YOU mock abstract analogies and then use them.
BTW if taxes aren't powerful, why use them? Doesn't the government have to power to print money from nothing anyway?
The goverment get our money by employing guns. The criminals within it get our money first. Unlike a business, you can't decide to not work for them and you can decide to compete against them (unless you believe you have a chance to join their gang.)
Businesses rely on their employees and consumers. It is in the self-interest of a business to support positive relations with Es+Cs.
Govs get more power when they suck. Schools suck, need more money. Defense sucks, need more money.. and so on...
...they inherited it... especially in this day and age... its called "old money" and now most the rich people today were born into wealthy family where there great great great grandfather made the money. So basically yeah if you are born into a family that's rich and you get to start life out with hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in a trust fund then it will be much easier for you to make more money then someone that starts life out with no money (lower & middle class)..
Why do people have to make it out like people are just stealing money from other people that have it... The only thing they are debating is charity, which is giving to poor families that don't have the means to make ends meet, that doesn't make them a bad person, if you can help then why not? Has humanity lost our 'humanity' for compassion towards one another? They always make it out like certain people just want to steal money from "rich people." Well, about 90% of "rich people" didn't earn it.
@TheEllampalli This might take a 2 part response. First let me say I worked for the federal gov. and I have a close friend that is a cororate auditor, Penn (the dark haired one is the playing the part of the gov/general public. I'll call them "P"). Teller is playing the part of corporate CEOs and chairs, I'll call them "C." So in reality it works like this;
C pays no taxes,recieves tones of fed funding and acts as company figure heads. They get pretty much limitless pie. In turn they give a...
[part2] ... miniscule piece of pie to the workers who make them more pie. C with their limitless pie can act as careless as they want with their pie and if they want more,they ask for more from P. Now "P" (you and I) pay taxes,C does not and actual TAKES money from P. So,no. Not only is Penn and Teller COMPLETELY ass-backwards on how this works, they've simplified their "synario" to appeal to those who don't understand the system. And since most don't understand the system,will accept this tripe
@TruthinessDotCom I was actually going to go in-depth responding to your positions. Then I realized that you "worked for the federal gov." You seem to think that gives you extra credit for explaining your position. Here's my view:
You don't seem to have a problem with taking money acquired by counterfeiting or robbed from people under threat of force. You have a problem with competition. If your skills and knowledge were of value, people would actually be WILLING to pay for your services.
OH YEAH, DEFINITELY! Because people who WORKED HARD to get a lot of money are automatically EVIL!!! Since we don't have as much money we're the good guys and we should protest against those who have potentially helped us by making jobs so that we can SPREAD THE WEALTH AROUND so that we can ALL BE EQUAL and crash the society because ALL THE JOBS WIILL BE GONE NOW THAT NO ONE CAN AFFORD TO PRODUCE THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!! Retards...
Rich people don't always work hard for their money. In a free market, competition is easier to spring up and underbid the lazy/stupid, putting them out of business. In a free market, people vote whenever a form of currency leaves their hands or when they choose to work. They are deciding who benefits from their actions. A free market would remove power from the lobbyists and return it to individuals.
Why bother explaining anything ? He knows exactly who he's preaching to with his oversimplifications. Every single person who doesn't understand that in his model, he falsely divides the pie between Himself " the .. what ... poor or entitlement class ? and Teller , representing the wealthy. Yet he completely skips the part where a third of the pie MUST be taken by " the government" in order to insure the existence of future pie. Billionaires don't create wealth out of thin air, dummies.
The national debt is about 15 trillion dollars. How are taxes gonna reconcile this? You could take everything from everyone in the US and still not pay it off. Then you'd be left with a nation full of poor people.
It isn't a sin to be rich. Isn't that why people work hard? Isn't that how the economy is supposed to work?
@aquinasjsa Nobody ever said it was a sin to be rich (other than God in the bible). And the current tax model is NOT making Rich People poorer. In fact Rich people are getting RICHER and poor people are getting poorer and the middle class is being wiped out as rich people refuse to create jobs (even though they are making money hand over fist and getting RICHER each day, they refuse to invest in our country because they do not want to - that is NOT how the model should work. Think about it.
@rjpcambridge "they refuse to invest in our country because they do not want to" Why don't they want to? Do you think they just want us to suffer? Do you think they want us to not be able to afford their products/services? Perhaps they don't want to invest in our country because of the taxes they would have to pay. Those taxes increase the price of what they are selling and that reduces their sales. Therefore, the jobs go overseas.
@aquinasjsa I can't explain it properly in 500 characters but a rich person can very easily go with earning 3million $ a month down from 4 million. However a poor person cannot go to 750$ a month down from 1000$.
Once you earn anything past say 2k/3k $ a month, you can live a very comfortable life. Rich people who earn 20k $ or more a month can still enjoy being rich, but have to sacrifice just a BIT of the wealth to increase the quality of life for MANY people.
@1MadVirus1 Why? You are acting like there is only so much money to go around. There is always room for someone to earn more income without taking from the "Rich" and giving to the "Poor". It's should be called taking from the industrious and giving to the stupid and lazy.
@1MadVirus1 the point is taking to much of their pie makes reduces their ability to invest that pie so that pie can run through the banks and and into the hands of bakers and oven making companies, therefore when you invest your pie you are essentially distributing your pie anyway, i mean money, pieconomics doesnt work that way.
Looks like 696 people are going to give me some pie.
furydeath 1 day ago in playlist Liked videos
Isn't this what earned income credit on your tax return is all about?
thom19671 1 day ago
@LOL4Polio
I'll blame a President for taking a sh*t situation, and SOMEHOW finding a way to make it worse.
He's increased our deficit three fold, spending what Bush spent in 8 years, in just two.
He tried to get GOVERNMENT APPROVAL for priests, which thankfully the Supreme Court struck down, and then if that weren't enough, tried to force Religious institutions to provide Abortions.
And now he wants to cut Military spending, the fund programs we can't afford regardless... fail.
Alaskaslim 2 days ago
Prime example of CATO being completely obvious.
The amount of wealth a tiny part of the population has is insane, and they STILL buy off politicians to keep every fucking penny of it while forcing everyone else to make up the difference.
mecher3k 2 days ago
Its called sharing; You may have learned this concept in first grade.
dlind70 3 days ago
@dlind70 Its called stealing, which I also hope you learned in first grade. The massive exploitation of the system must, and will, come to an end sooner or later.
rwoz 2 days ago
@dlind70 Funny how they teach sharing in first grade but they don't seem to emphasize the whole "not taking other people's stuff" thing quite as much.
It's as if the moral lesson is the only legitimate way to avoid having your stuff taken from you is to just give it to the people who want to take it from you.
HaroldRehling 1 day ago
Proof that poor people eat more pie than rich people.
kaneda26 3 days ago
@kaneda26
Except you're a CATO drone.
mecher3k 2 days ago
Lol. That's awesome and so true. Stupid Obama
dalton1583 3 days ago
We take worse care of our poor than any industrialized nation. Say what you want about what we do about that. But, do you think that poverty has anything to do with crime rates and a populations intelligence? We have the largest prison population of any industrialized nation, the most violent crime, and we have a substantial part of our voting population that thinks the earth is 6 thousand years old. It's not all about giving to the poor, part of it is, who do you want to share a country with?
LOL4Polio 4 days ago
@LOL4Polio 0bama has CREATED more poor people than any other president in history.
friskynibbles 4 days ago
@friskynibbles Only if you refuse to look at actual statistics or history. But according to a statistic you just made up, yes he has...
LOL4Polio 3 days ago
@friskynibbles But hey, lets continue to blame a president for trying to take a shit sandwich he was given into a panini.
LOL4Polio 3 days ago
@LOL4Polio dude it's been 3 years. let it go and move on
TheOffenda 2 days ago
@LOL4Polio not people who are willing to steal money,and give it to others.
Cogitatio023 3 days ago
@LOL4Polio
"We take worse care of our poor than any industrialized nation."
Our "poor", people who earn about $22,000 or less, are very close to the European average, which is $24,000.
Goods are cheaper here, and our taxes are lower.
And are ABSOLUTE poor, people whoa re so poor that they can't afford basic necessities like food, our rate of them, is lower than in Europe.
Our poor, by en large, live like the Middle class of developing nations.
Alaskaslim 2 days ago
@Alaskaslim Oh, and so that's why our child poverty rate is the second worst of developed countries, with only Mexico worse than us?
LOL4Polio 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LOL4Polio
"Oh, and so that's why our child poverty rate"
Statistical artifact.
The poverty line is different for each Country, for us, it's as I said, $22,000.
Since the AVERAGE INCOME in Europe is only $24,000, that would make THEIR poverty line, somewhere around $12,000.
Thus, over 1/3 of our "poor", live just as well as the lower end of European AVERAGE.
Throw in, once again, cheaper goods and lower taxes, and that means they actually live with more.
Alaskaslim 2 days ago
that has to 300 grams of sugar right there
ConorJNixon 5 days ago
Comment removed
soulessENERGY 5 days ago
Comment removed
soulessENERGY 5 days ago
imagine 1% of the pie eaters had 60% of the pie. They would have plenty to share
jahi120 5 days ago
@jahi120 True but who's decision is it? Do you force your kids to share their pie or do you teach them to do it out of their own compassionate free will?
soulessENERGY 5 days ago 2
Comment removed
Dsgooden 4 days ago
welfares a bitch aint it?
Beanmachine91 5 days ago
This may be the dumbest fucking explanation I have ever seen. Where did the pie come from. How did you acquire the goods to make that pie. Where did you acquire the knowledge to make the pie. And the government will never take a 100% of anything. I enjoy Penn and Teller but this is sincerely dumb. How much of the pie should the government take to protect someone else from stealing over overthrowing your pie making business. See how NOT SIMPLE this explanation is. God people are thick.
Jasterisk 6 days ago
Oh, come on, no special intro music for penn and teller??
ghrabi33 6 days ago
Obama hasn't changed the tax structure at all. He said he would, but it hasn't happened. His Wall Street pals would never allow it.
fatouche99 6 days ago 5
@fatouche99
I don't think he really wants to change it at all. The problem isn't our tax system since we have a progressive tax system where the rich pay the most (or they're supposed to.) The problem is that Wall Street and big corporations like GM and GE will always back him because they know as long as they support him he will give them the corporate welfare.
JoshBoschke 4 days ago
obama sucks!
Jamespot24 1 week ago
Are these guys anarchists? Otherwise they're still for ''pie spreading'' to military, police and courts.
SwedxSimon02 1 week ago
This analogy only works if it becomes significantly more easy to get pie the more pie you have, and when pie is taken from someone you never take all the pie they have at the time, you only take a percentage of the pie they currently have and also if you use some of the pie to finance projects which will help everyone to get pie faster and to prevent people from illegally taking your pie and pay regulators to make sure your pie isn't poisoned and other things which benefit everyone including you
oddmegan 1 week ago
People who make more money should pay more taxes. It's a rather simple concept. Bigger pool of money, the slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') higher rate is barely felt. The general push is to move the tax rates from around 35% back up to 39% roughly, like they were under Clinton. THAT is what everyone has a massive issue over. 4% when you're making over 250k a year. I won't even go into millionaires and billionaires.
OCPios62 1 week ago
@OCPios62 why doesnt the government just spend less & lower everyone's taxes? really it isnt rocket science
rocknrojoe 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@OCPios62 why doesn't the government just spend less & lower everyone's taxes? really it isn't rocket science
rocknrojoe 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Actually, most people get the robin hood thing wrong. If you read story, you see that he actually takes from the Government, (tax collectors and nobles), and gives to the poor.
MrSperbermichael 1 week ago
take from the rich to give to the poor,hmmm, robin hood? Sounds like breaking the law to me; although it might be bammyboys new leagle type law,er, no law at all!!!!
ricglos 1 week ago
Great....now i want some pie...
Icemanrussian 1 week ago
@danning1 who are you to tell people how much money they want or need? Stalin? Maybe Bill Gates wants to create a future for his kids grandkids etc. Maybe he wants alot of mansions. Maybe he wants to buy Millions of rats and launch them out of a cannon. He earned his money he can do what he wants.
zachman9990 1 week ago
Im hungry...
KitchenK9 1 week ago
XD
Solvandus 1 week ago
eating pie works "until you run out of other peoples (pie)."
clericbop 1 week ago
@clericbop LOL :)
Kaltwasser45 1 week ago
And what about people who (using Penn and Teller's flawed metaphor) hoard more pies than they could ever possibly eat or need?
danning1 2 weeks ago
@danning1 Its their pie and you have no right to it. Make your own pie.
suntzuaow1977 2 weeks ago
@danning1 It is their "pie". What gives the government the "right" to determine what are enough pies. You have the liberty to make your own pies and hoard if you so desire...or you can sell them and make more pies....however if the government keeps intervening they will take their pies overseas and hoard them there, there is money to be made world wide...even offshore pies taste good to those that have them..lol
bigpondcruiser 1 week ago
This must have been fun to film.
nixthenamed 2 weeks ago
Well, to quote Penn and Teller. Thats BULLSHIT
Bendro 2 weeks ago
P & T oversimplifying at it's best/worst... Depending on how you see it.
Muscari 2 weeks ago
I love Penn and Teller. This is explained kinda well but a little overboard. The rich don't become poor, they just become a little less rich.
soadpwnsyou 2 weeks ago
@soadpwnsyou
And the poor just become a little more poor...
WVMADMAN1 2 weeks ago
Love it!
cutdeamon 2 weeks ago
How funny, two libertarians that don't understand economics
Cioppa182 2 weeks ago
The thing is these people have an endless desire for more wealth. No man gets rich unless he uses the back breaking labor of thousands of people. The key to being rich is to skim just enough off the working class to keep them working without complaining. Bottom line the rich are getting rich because they sold this country out. They enjoy our freedoms that are provided by our soldiers, but they don't want to sacrifice anything especially not their millions/billions.
toowaker37 2 weeks ago
I like how he implies that record low taxes are breaking the higher ups. Last I checked the rich were getting nothing but richer while the gap got larger with every new tax break.
thor123422 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
rentatrip1 3 weeks ago
@rentatrip1 Hop off of Faux News's dick for 5 minutes and you would realize he is an average president thrown into a shit storm. I don't really like him but saying the things you did just shows your ignorance.
thor123422 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul is the only man who can restore our beloved nation to the White Christian Capitalist country it was and was always meant to be. We are going to restore the glory of the 1800's. We are going to our nation back from the AshkeNAZIs and their hordes of mud people.
RON PAUL 2012!!!
RealRonPaul 3 weeks ago
Really complex, fair, and nuanced view on how our system works. I can't believe I actually thought Penn was a respectful guy when he claimed he didn't like going with pragmatic arguments. He's like every other asshole in this country, make one point and think it perfectly dissolves any entire system you disagree with. Also, if this is how pragmatic he can get with critiquing economic systems.... well... do I need to say more?
MotherNikita 3 weeks ago
Penn comes off it this video as just another libertarian pig. Clueless.
TheThordir 3 weeks ago
Everyone he's right, we should all pay for our own roads/infrastructure. I don't have enough money to build one so i'll just set up a pay toll. Are you poor? Oh well...
Kanoki989 3 weeks ago
from what i heard obama was saying that you are getting taxed higher now because you were getting taxed less before to make it fair and spread the wealth, if he got richer and got taxed the same then his just going to increase the gap between him and the poor even further, so obamas raising the tax and redistributing it so it can reach people with less, thats sounds fair to me.. can anyone correct me?
FubarLikeYou 3 weeks ago
@FubarLikeYou I believe the use of violence or the threat of violence to take the honest and lawfully acquired property of my innocent neighbors is the fair thing to do. I understand there is no moral or ethical justification for theft, but I have been conditioned to believe that what the central planners deem as "fair" is an acceptable replacement for morals and ethics. They have deemed that coveting my neighbors property is now a virtue called "fairness". Can anyone correct me?
tmoallen 3 weeks ago
@tmoallen i think you missed my point, this guy in the vid is earning 250k a year now so his getting taxed more so some of it can be put back into the economy allowing people like your neighbour to earn it and make their house payment instead of just letting this guy get richer and sit on his money or spend it on personal assets instead of redistributing it back into the econemy where people like your neighbout can earn it.
FubarLikeYou 3 weeks ago
@FubarLikeYou No I understood you point quite well. Spending money on personal assets is the very act of putting money into an economy. Government taxation is not. The government is a non-productive, non-wealth producing entity, spending other peoples money on government departments is not "redistributing it back into the economy". People don't "sit" on wealth, they invest it. Which is again the very act of putting money back into the economy. Are you really that clueless about economics?
tmoallen 3 weeks ago
@tmoallen a personal asset is a personal asset, that money he spent on it is still his money because he can sell the asset back for the money, making it a liability to the economy. the government is a non productive non wealth producing entity? are you kidding? what money do u think payed for the roads you drive to work on? the school you learnt at? the laws that stopped your neighbour robbing you every time you came home? if your neighbours house was his wealth, he would have owned it
FubarLikeYou 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
tmoallen 3 weeks ago
@FubarLikeYou Money =/= production. The gov steals money from others and spends it. A mugger(laws didn't stop him) who steals $100 and spends it has not produced anything. Buying a house, car, or blender does not benefit an economy? So builders, loggers, brick-makers, banks, workers etc aren't part of an economy? Roads, schools etc. can be funded more efficiently and morally(without theft) without the gov. Laws aren't products. You still haven't addressed the immorality of your positions?
tmoallen 3 weeks ago
@FubarLikeYou Let's translate that: I believe the government should rob my neighbor of his wealth to "redistribute in back into the economy" i.e, other peoples bank accounts. I am so ignorant of economics, wealth creation, and money supply that I think that one person making a dollar means another person loses a dollar.
tmoallen 3 weeks ago
@FubarLikeYou Income disparity being a problem is such Bullshit, it's something politicians say is a problem so they can tell people they can fix it and hopefully win votes. There is nothing wrong with wealthy people getting richer, so long as everyone else is getting richer as well. Also people who are poor today can be wealthy tomorrow. And young people and new immigrants entering the work force tend to replace the people who WERE poor( Once young, or once new immigrants.)
ShamanMcLamie 3 weeks ago
@ShamanMcLamie yes but arn't they able to get rich aswell because these wealthy people are getting taxed, making money available for the poor to earn? if the rich keep getting richer and dont put the money back into the economy then the money runs dry you cant have 1m in the economy give it to 1 person without taking any back and expect other people to get rich aswell
FubarLikeYou 3 weeks ago
@FubarLikeYou First of all that's assuming the money makes it's way to the poor. Many government programs actually hurt the poor, but that's a different argument. First of all rich people don't always just put their money under their bed. One they put it in a bank that gives people loans. Second they invest it in stocks that provides capital for businesses. Also supply and demand applies to money. If less dollars are out on the market than then those that are are worth more.
ShamanMcLamie 3 weeks ago
@FubarLikeYou Keep in mind what makes a dollar is mostly in the mind. As a physical object it's pretty worthless. Dollars are just a tool for more efficiently trading goods and services. If rich people put all their money under their bed and don't spend it that reduces the supply of dollars increases those that aren't under someones bed more valuable and increases that individuals buying power. Now that's deflation and that comes with a host of other problems as well though.
ShamanMcLamie 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
FubarLikeYou 3 weeks ago
@ShamanMcLamie Income disparity is a very real threat and is one of the major causes of the great depression. When wealth becomes concentrated at the top there is lower demand, so less reason to produce, less reason to higher, which creates less money at the bottom and less demand etc. etc. Income disparity IS NOT a made up political problem, it is a very real concern. Also a growing % gap is the issue, not a flat one like you seem to think.
thor123422 3 weeks ago
@ShamanMcLamie We currently have a growing disparity. The top have doubled their wealth over the past 30 years while the middle class have gotten poorer. If they were both doubling nobody would complain, but so long as the top get richer and the bottom get poorer there IS an issue.
thor123422 3 weeks ago
Much as I love Penn and Teller, this is a gross exaggeration (not that much of their stuff isn't). Look at Sweden -- Much higher taxes than the US, many more universal welfare programs than the US, and yet they have half the income disparity, less unemployment, and a better economy overall. So spreading wealth around doesn't work?
EmeraldFerret 3 weeks ago
@EmeraldFerret Let's consider the differences, Sweden is a much smaller country with a more homogenous population where there is more consensus. Let's also remember Sweden's economy lagged big time during the 90's and since then have been precipitously rolling back the welfare state. America is an enormous diverse country with little consensus on many issues and a multitude of states with varying laws affecting the economy. So don't go comparing the two they are not the same.
ShamanMcLamie 3 weeks ago
@EmeraldFerret Short answer: Population matters. A lot.
If you think about it, each of the fifty United States gets to practice very much how Sweden does when they are allowed proper (aka constitutional) control over their OWN affairs, their OWN roughly Sweden-sized populations. So why do so many people want so much extra power for the federal government? It makes no sense.
BrotherAtticus 3 weeks ago
@EmeraldFerret Income disparity isn't a problem. Say I were a billionaire, and I volunteered to have half my assets taken from me, and all i asked was that you would have 40% of your assets taken away from you, would you be happy with that? A wealth gap increasing is a symptom of something else, and that something else is the problem not the gap itself. Less unemployment and "a better economy overall" do not necessarily mean a better standard of living, this is hard to measure
theredscourge 3 weeks ago
@theredscourge FYI - In the 1980s, shortly before the collapse of the soviet union, it had about a 1% unemployment rate, but yet nobody would argue it was a country of abundance. Many argue that it only failed because greedy people ran the government, but that's been true here since at least 1900, and we aren't dying of starvation yet. If we know greedy people gravitate toward positions of power, it only makes sense that if you want to stop greed, you've got to cut down the power.
theredscourge 3 weeks ago
The fact that Teller was able to cut a 2nd and 3rd piece of pie is proof that the rich elite members of government haven't taxed us to the grave. There's still a little left in the coffers. No new taxes!
cowdust51 3 weeks ago
Bill Gates and all the billionaires eat cake. So they're not keeping pie from us they're just giving it to each other,you know, in addition to the cake.
cowdust51 3 weeks ago
Who let the commie into ur country!
whatnamescan 4 weeks ago
very clever, i shall look to these two next time i want economics explained to me.
mxmtzgr 4 weeks ago
So, by their logic, the marginal tax rate should be 100%? Capital gains should be far more than 15%.
Waywardpaladin 4 weeks ago
@Waywardpaladin How about lowering the higher taxes instead of raising the lowest ones? Shouldn't the goal be less government waste?
How about we get rid of income tax entirely for ALL people, put a simple flat income tax on ALL corporate profits, institute the "negative income tax" (google it) in place of welfare checks (EVERYONE gets $X and keeps ANYTHING they make on top of that), fire most of the rich IRS+welfare admins who can easily get another job, and use the savings to help the poor?
theredscourge 4 weeks ago 24
@theredscourge This would lower American wages without lowering standard of living, meaning American companies can afford to hire Americans again, bringing many jobs back from overseas. Some savings from the reduced expenses will be passed onto the consumer, increasing the value of any existing savings people have, thus increasing the quality of life for people without having to give them any more money. All that personal income tax crap ADDS NOTHING to the economy, and will be gone.
theredscourge 4 weeks ago
@theredscourge The additional savings by the people will be used mostly to invest in home improvements, things they need, better food, and making investments, all of which help stimulate the economy further. Many of the now obsolete private accountants could move into corporate tax auditing roles, which would mean more eyes watching out for corporate fraud.
theredscourge 4 weeks ago
@theredscourge Except we have been lowering the higher taxes? The top marginal tax rate used to be 95% and has been dropping every since. As for a negative income tax, sounds like Basic Income, which even Hayek and Friedman signed off on. We do need to start unraveling what we're spending on, like corn subsidies. With the drive for ethanol production, corn has become a commodity worth enough to maintain the production without subsidies, but, they still exist.
Waywardpaladin 4 weeks ago
@Waywardpaladin Income tax rate used to be 0% as well.
Since 1968, the Fed managed to destroy all but 1/6th of the value of every US dollar (if you deposited every spare penny entirely into a bank account for 44 straight years, you'd have 1/6th left), and the US federal budget increased by 21 times.
The cost to manufacture a transistor on a CPU fell to 1/38,500 of its previous cost (99.999974% decrease), while Intel made a solid ~25% profit margin.
Voters are not getting their money's worth!
theredscourge 4 weeks ago
@theredscourge Assuming your bank account doesn't give you interest of course *lol* Also, citing the example of Moore's Law and the unparalled productivity gains we've seen in that is certainly misleading. Either way, I still don't see how that conflicts with the value of transfer payments?
Waywardpaladin 4 weeks ago
@theredscourge stop making sense.
jr55ful 3 weeks ago 13
@theredscourge Do you work for the Government? You should.
MrLunitunz 2 weeks ago
@MrLunitunz They'd never allow someone like myself to work for them. They're in the business of creating jobs for their buddies so their buddies can support their advancement through the ranks, whereas I'm for the opposite.
theredscourge 2 weeks ago
@theredscourge The Government'll take anybody. You know why? It's soul-crushing work for low pay.
MrLunitunz 2 weeks ago
@MrLunitunz I think there is clear evidence that they'll take anybody, so good point lol.
theredscourge 2 weeks ago
@theredscourge I really love how you mentioned negative income tax. So many libertarians forget about that aspect of Friedman's economics.
mikejpete 2 weeks ago
@theredscourge i totally agree with you but what about people with no job and their family is starving
iinventedthequestion 2 weeks ago
@iinventedthequestion The negative income tax replaces welfare+foodstamps. Essentially, every citizen, _employed or not_, gets $X dollars per year (likely issued monthly) to spend as they see fit. With no personal income tax, everyone keeps any additional money they make after that, so there is no possible incentive to stay on welfare. You'd cut EVERYONE with citizenship a check, and fire the welfare administrators. Government jobs are the only jobs which when cut actually improves the economy.
theredscourge 2 weeks ago
@iinventedthequestion @theredscourge rather, there'd be no possible incentive to stay unemployed (welfare is gone in my scenario). Many people will no longer qualify for welfare if they accept a low paying job, and without both they cannot afford to move out of home, so they stay living with their parents for ages, which hurts everyone, including the housing market. There are many other side benefits to the economy and to the budget via the specific combination of policies I had mentioned above.
theredscourge 2 weeks ago
@theredscourge True but there are some people who simply cant get a job i doubt most people on welfare are on it because they are slackers who dont try too get a job, also if the employees are guarenteed a livable wage wont the employers pay them as little as they can because the employees will be supported by our tax dollars its a noble i dea i just have criticisms of it
iinventedthequestion 2 weeks ago
@iinventedthequestion I'm guessing you aren't suggesting that the welfare system ought to provide a particularly unlivable wage, but even if you did, the fact that doing it this way would result in savings, if needed, the exact same amount of money as now could still be paid out, and the savings merely pocketed and applied to other government programs. What I can say for sure is all possible incentives to abuse a safety net ought to be removed, but the safety net itself...someday, but not today.
theredscourge 2 weeks ago
The problem is that people assume that there are infinite amounts of ingerdients to make pies. If one person has lots of pies, the others can't make a pie for themselves, no matter how hard they try.
Capitanvolume 1 month ago
@Capitanvolume That may seem reasonable at first glance, but the problem with your thinking here is that this is not even a problem in Hong Kong, a far more libertarian run country, with a population density WAY higher than that of the USA. Consider also the situation of the invention of petroleum. That oil was always under the ground before, but we just had not known how to utilize it. Technology improved, and the same amount of land suddenly provided us orders of magnitude more goods.
theredscourge 4 weeks ago
Keep you liberal hands off my pie. MAKE YOUR OWN!
Jblod240 1 month ago
The better skit would have been the PieMan gives a congressman a B-Job and gets a law passed that allows him to run his factory without any safety protocols which only slow down production, & with substandard ingredients, and unequal pay for women employees, etc....and now the unrestricted PieMan is making money hand over fist - & so he continues the B-Jobs since the Supreme Court says it's OK....but hey don't complain about it, for if you do, you're a spread the wealth liberal muslim socialist.
slmeucalesa1 1 month ago
this explanation does not work, nobody is going to take all of tellers pie and give all of it to someone less fortunate, no no no just a small piece. unlike the current system where they take a large piece of tellers pie and give it to someone, more fortunate. like bankers and israel and terrorists, yep they give tellers pie to terrorists as well, but it's ok as long as those terrorists are working for america. because they all like pie, it's when america stops giving them pie that's the problem
plwpahi 1 month ago
@plwpahi Fact: The #1 contributors to the federal budget by far are the personal income taxes from the top 20%. The people who advocate for lower taxes wish to achieve this via smaller government, and with smaller government and lower taxes, big foreign wars of aggression are simply not feasible. Sorry.
theredscourge 4 weeks ago
@theredscourge there's no need to be sorry..unless your a supporter of mitt, gingrich or santorum. then yes be sorry lol
plwpahi 3 weeks ago
@plwpahi If you're a liberal democrat then you should be sorry
cowdust51 3 weeks ago
@cowdust51 no i'm not, but i'm not a conservative either. i'm a realist and think those guys would be the same or worse than obama if they could beat him, just under a conservative banner, because that would be the only thing that would change, from a dem banner to a rep banner. if people want someone who will beat obama and want to change more than a banner at the same time, vote Ron Paul.
otherwise just like in vegas, you can choose, but the house ALWAYS wins.
plwpahi 3 weeks ago
@plwpahi I like Ron Paul, I really do, but support for him isn't big enough. He's definetly a better alternative to the other "conservative" candidates, but the numbers don't stack up. No matter who a person votes for regardless of party it's still THEM against us.
cowdust51 3 weeks ago
@cowdust51 that's right, but as far as politicians go Ron Paul is unique and has a lot more common sense and practicality than the others who seem to be made with the same programming, plus i like it when Ron Paul says he will keep fighting till August, because a lot can happen between then and now.
plwpahi 3 weeks ago
@theredscourge Big wars of aggression simply are not feasible? George Bush didn't pay for the Afghan/Iraq war with tax money, he payed for it with borrowed money. And this was a guy who pushed for a smaller government and tax cuts.
azbed129 3 weeks ago
@azbed129 "with smaller government and lower taxes, big foreign wars of aggression are simply not feasible" Yes, I meant it when I said it. How did they get those loans? Offering collateral that can prove they can pay it off. If tax income is drastically lower, they'd not have that collateral, or they'd have to drastically cut other services, which most would protest. Only a defensive oriented force could be maintained. Just nukes and the National Guard would be cheap!
theredscourge 3 weeks ago
This is a great explanation, once again by Penn! But let's not forget that "Joe The Plumber" turned out to be fake.
politicalmyincorrect 1 month ago
So using the pie example Penn and Teller gave, to me it seems like Teller would have a lot of pie while Penn has less. But instead of Penn getting more pie from Teller, he would give a portion of his pie to the government while Teller does the same. Under the Obama tax plan, Penn will have to give a smaller percentage of his pie to the government while Teller have to give a bigger percentage.
Balstar5283 1 month ago
This is not an argument for or against the Obama tax break but more of a critique of the argument itself. I personally don't see it as "spreading" the wealth, but rather an adjustment of how much a person pays in taxes depending on income bracket. Both the 95% and 5% will still be paying taxes, and it is not like the tax money from the 5% will go directly into the 95% bank accounts. And AGAIN, I'm not arguing in favor or opposition of the tax break.
Balstar5283 1 month ago
Brilliant! Spread the wealth you fucking dumb asses!
Vindigary 1 month ago
Im gona try this next time anyone has pie.
PitbeastA 1 month ago
@swanmix10 what your talking about is the trickle down system, which shows the problem right in the name, no poor person is getting rich off of this, the money is well, TRICKLING down. The reason is that the large corporation owners have massive amounts of money, but only pay the employees the bare minimum, their money isn't flowing down, it's barely trickling.
gweiss1858 1 month ago
That's not a fair representation at all, it's bullshit. If we do what you want us to do, it would be like if Teller was given buttloads of pie, and you worked your ass off trying to get some pie, but because of bad circumstances, you only get a little bit of pie for your hard work. Then when the government goes around to collect pie tax, they take 1 piece from him, and ten from you despite the fact that you have practically no pie to begin with. Your example is shit, get a better analogy.
gweiss1858 1 month ago
I hope I was getting the wrong impression from this, because it seemed as if Penn was implying that a man who could buy something that makes $250,000 a year needed his $250,000 a year more than someone who makes $50,000 a year. Or was it two separate clips thrown together?
ODaemienE 1 month ago
Penn really likes pie
Ikarr0s 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
a more accurate portrayal would have been something like this: “I helped you make 30 pies. Can I have one??? …but I did all the work, your pie business would be nowhere without me….fine I’m spitting in the next batch.”
joyful 1 month ago
Comment removed
joyful 1 month ago
Sorry progressives! I never got a job from a poor person. Nor did I ever eat a meal from a poor person, nor was I ever clothed by a poor person. My point is that trade and free markets make us all rich, and demonizing business men and woman for working 60 hours a week is plain fucking stupid because their wealth gave us everything we have now.
swanmix10 1 month ago
Thank u so much 4 sharing I agree -3
PalmTreeCloud 1 month ago
But they weren't talking about Obama's statement at all. In fact, if you listened to what he said (instead of only three words from it) it's explained pretty clearly.
elbruces 1 month ago
@aquinasjsa printing money is the reason we're in this mess.
flintston3r 1 month ago
@flintston3r I won't disagree with you there. But I think it's worse to have the federal reserve print it and charge us interest (that we pay in taxes) than it is to let the government print it directly.
Of course this is a problem of having an army-enforced monopoly (government). I think several competing currencies with no government would serve us better.
aquinasjsa 1 month ago
HURR YES LETS USE AN ABSTRACT ANALOGY THAT VASTLY OVERSTATES THE POWER OF TAXES.
I agree with some Libertarian views but the other half are fucking stupid. Go to Somalia if you want to see your idealism at work.
PeopleR2sensitive 1 month ago
@PeopleR2sensitive Saying go to Somalia to see how it works is like saying go to Nazi Germany to see how democracy works. Just like saying go to Rome to see how a republic works. Funny that YOU mock abstract analogies and then use them.
BTW if taxes aren't powerful, why use them? Doesn't the government have to power to print money from nothing anyway?
aquinasjsa 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How about they give Teller 4000 pies? ONLY THEN this video would be accurate
94Cioppa 1 month ago
The goverment get our money by employing guns. The criminals within it get our money first. Unlike a business, you can't decide to not work for them and you can decide to compete against them (unless you believe you have a chance to join their gang.)
Businesses rely on their employees and consumers. It is in the self-interest of a business to support positive relations with Es+Cs.
Govs get more power when they suck. Schools suck, need more money. Defense sucks, need more money.. and so on...
aquinasjsa 1 month ago
I meant to say "you can't decide to compete against them."
aquinasjsa 1 month ago
Hmm... what Obama's doing with our nations money makes a little more sense now. Thanks Penn and Teller for elaborating!
UniversalLizard 1 month ago
...they inherited it... especially in this day and age... its called "old money" and now most the rich people today were born into wealthy family where there great great great grandfather made the money. So basically yeah if you are born into a family that's rich and you get to start life out with hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in a trust fund then it will be much easier for you to make more money then someone that starts life out with no money (lower & middle class)..
HerbalJah 1 month ago
Why do people have to make it out like people are just stealing money from other people that have it... The only thing they are debating is charity, which is giving to poor families that don't have the means to make ends meet, that doesn't make them a bad person, if you can help then why not? Has humanity lost our 'humanity' for compassion towards one another? They always make it out like certain people just want to steal money from "rich people." Well, about 90% of "rich people" didn't earn it.
HerbalJah 1 month ago
I usually find Penn & Teller to be... insightful (?), but this video is just plain ignorant.
TruthinessDotCom 1 month ago
@TruthinessDotCom Why do you say that? And can someone tell me which episode this is.
TheEllampalli 1 month ago
@TheEllampalli This might take a 2 part response. First let me say I worked for the federal gov. and I have a close friend that is a cororate auditor, Penn (the dark haired one is the playing the part of the gov/general public. I'll call them "P"). Teller is playing the part of corporate CEOs and chairs, I'll call them "C." So in reality it works like this;
C pays no taxes,recieves tones of fed funding and acts as company figure heads. They get pretty much limitless pie. In turn they give a...
TruthinessDotCom 1 month ago
[part2] ... miniscule piece of pie to the workers who make them more pie. C with their limitless pie can act as careless as they want with their pie and if they want more,they ask for more from P. Now "P" (you and I) pay taxes,C does not and actual TAKES money from P. So,no. Not only is Penn and Teller COMPLETELY ass-backwards on how this works, they've simplified their "synario" to appeal to those who don't understand the system. And since most don't understand the system,will accept this tripe
TruthinessDotCom 1 month ago
@TruthinessDotCom I was actually going to go in-depth responding to your positions. Then I realized that you "worked for the federal gov." You seem to think that gives you extra credit for explaining your position. Here's my view:
You don't seem to have a problem with taking money acquired by counterfeiting or robbed from people under threat of force. You have a problem with competition. If your skills and knowledge were of value, people would actually be WILLING to pay for your services.
aquinasjsa 1 month ago
They the ones who ate da blueburry pieeeeee
nevabindun 1 month ago
Poor Teller :(
wasteofspace1234 1 month ago 12
This has been flagged as spam show
OH YEAH, DEFINITELY! Because people who WORKED HARD to get a lot of money are automatically EVIL!!! Since we don't have as much money we're the good guys and we should protest against those who have potentially helped us by making jobs so that we can SPREAD THE WEALTH AROUND so that we can ALL BE EQUAL and crash the society because ALL THE JOBS WIILL BE GONE NOW THAT NO ONE CAN AFFORD TO PRODUCE THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!! Retards...
RandomLoser21 1 month ago
What episode is this one from
ThorFan4Life 1 month ago
Rich people don't always work hard for their money. In a free market, competition is easier to spring up and underbid the lazy/stupid, putting them out of business. In a free market, people vote whenever a form of currency leaves their hands or when they choose to work. They are deciding who benefits from their actions. A free market would remove power from the lobbyists and return it to individuals.
aquinasjsa 1 month ago
you guys are letting youre weak emotions get to you chill out on caps
Lmiller63 1 month ago
IN NEBRASKA OUR ELECTED JUST DECIDED TO TRIPPLE THEIR WAGES
WHEN the common folk were told we get a cut in income because taxes are going up and our wages stayed the same. and yep food prices jumped about 20%.
welcome to Nebraska.
donze52 1 month ago
This video is a very simplified explanation of a very complex problem.
liamstarwatcher 1 month ago
The point is that neither should starve and opulence cannot be justified as long as there's scarcity. And there's always scarcity.
ReX342 1 month ago
Why bother explaining anything ? He knows exactly who he's preaching to with his oversimplifications. Every single person who doesn't understand that in his model, he falsely divides the pie between Himself " the .. what ... poor or entitlement class ? and Teller , representing the wealthy. Yet he completely skips the part where a third of the pie MUST be taken by " the government" in order to insure the existence of future pie. Billionaires don't create wealth out of thin air, dummies.
torgo4ever 1 month ago
i perfer being trickled on
gdogvibes1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How about they give Teller 4000 pies? ONLY THEN this video would be accurate
Cioppa182 1 month ago
This is a great example of what the rich have been doing to the middle class for years.
HENRYPATRICK1736 1 month ago
The national debt is about 15 trillion dollars. How are taxes gonna reconcile this? You could take everything from everyone in the US and still not pay it off. Then you'd be left with a nation full of poor people.
It isn't a sin to be rich. Isn't that why people work hard? Isn't that how the economy is supposed to work?
aquinasjsa 1 month ago 34
@aquinasjsa Nobody ever said it was a sin to be rich (other than God in the bible). And the current tax model is NOT making Rich People poorer. In fact Rich people are getting RICHER and poor people are getting poorer and the middle class is being wiped out as rich people refuse to create jobs (even though they are making money hand over fist and getting RICHER each day, they refuse to invest in our country because they do not want to - that is NOT how the model should work. Think about it.
rjpcambridge 1 month ago
@rjpcambridge "they refuse to invest in our country because they do not want to" Why don't they want to? Do you think they just want us to suffer? Do you think they want us to not be able to afford their products/services? Perhaps they don't want to invest in our country because of the taxes they would have to pay. Those taxes increase the price of what they are selling and that reduces their sales. Therefore, the jobs go overseas.
aquinasjsa 1 month ago
@aquinasjsa I can't explain it properly in 500 characters but a rich person can very easily go with earning 3million $ a month down from 4 million. However a poor person cannot go to 750$ a month down from 1000$.
Once you earn anything past say 2k/3k $ a month, you can live a very comfortable life. Rich people who earn 20k $ or more a month can still enjoy being rich, but have to sacrifice just a BIT of the wealth to increase the quality of life for MANY people.
Would explain more but am capped
1MadVirus1 1 month ago
@1MadVirus1 Why? You are acting like there is only so much money to go around. There is always room for someone to earn more income without taking from the "Rich" and giving to the "Poor". It's should be called taking from the industrious and giving to the stupid and lazy.
politicalsheepdog 1 month ago
@1MadVirus1 the point is taking to much of their pie makes reduces their ability to invest that pie so that pie can run through the banks and and into the hands of bakers and oven making companies, therefore when you invest your pie you are essentially distributing your pie anyway, i mean money, pieconomics doesnt work that way.
34lbs 1 month ago