Free Markets and Small Government Produce Prosperity

[luftwaffle]

@zombiefitnezz That's rather absurd and arbitrary, haha. You're joking I assume.

[Mortonc3]

I question not the data but the bias of the data. If the motive of the publication is to sell copies and inform capitalists where the markets have the best returns, then an "economic freedom score" should not be used to measure overall prosperity and the standard of living for a nation. Its a false correlation between returns for investors and the economic security of the citizens of that nation.

[iluvpoliticzz]

----7 communists ahhahaa

[boing3887]

you don't seem to see that your statement made no sense - the reason is that there was no context.

if you're talking about how americans hold contradictory or false views, that's fine and probably true. but show some context. taken by itself, the statement "americans don't want cuts to their medicare/aid bc they see the wasted money on useless trash..." makes no sense.

and even with context, it doesn't make sense. so bc americans see waste and inefficiency in govt., they don't want cuts?

[bwood21390]

/watch?v=ebn7DPdXh6g

[justaquicklook]

boing3887 the libtard writes:

"notice that no other rich country really has tax revolts"

-This Obots displays, and proudly I might add, their ignorance. It's almost like it hasn't watched any news since 2008. It's almost like it forgot all the recent riots in Europe. You don't see American's rioting..just left wing race baiting liberals..reminants of 1992.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

the riots in Europe aren't about taxes, they're about joblessness and austerity measures. i'm sorry that your ideology blinds you to the facts. since europe is wedded to the euro, most european countries can't undertake monetary policy freely like we can. basically monetary policy is appropriate for germany only.

please enroll in the nearest community college and take an economics course. your ignorance of history and economics would cause milton friedman to roll in his grave

[justaquicklook]

@boing3887 Moron...your TWIST of history is interesting to say the least. So...now think hard on this one....who do you think pays for all those handouts and government entitlement programs? DO you think they just pick Euro's or Dollars from a money tree somewhere in Russia? No they get them from taxes...sheesh...some people love their ignorance waaaaaay too much.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

i don't see what your talk about entitlements has to do with what we were talkikng about before, but if you want to talk about money and taxes i'll oblige. milton friedman observed that all money comes from the federal reserve. the supply of money is provided by the Fed, and the demand for money is created through taxes. thats straight up milton friedman. the government doesnt really "need" tax money as long as it keeps the money supply within reasonable bounds.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

i'm sorry that you're ignorant of monetary economics since you seem to get your eocnomics from peter schiff and the blogs of cranks who believe that gold is the path to utopia. also, the american welfare state is extremely stingy and small by international comparison. also, taxes in america are also much lower than in other comparable rich countries.

there is no empirical relationship between the level of taxes, the size of welfare states, and economic prosperity.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

in fact, france and scandinavian countries like norway, sweden, denmark and finland - all with larger welfare states and higher taxes than traditional conservative scapegoats like spain and greece - have weathered the recession pretty well. also, if you want to look at how economics should be conducted, look at china. china knows what friedman says on fighting recesssions and basically dumped money out of a helicopter and is chugging along.

data, not ideology.

[HoGraz]

LABOR LAW?!?! Noooooo.

[FRSFreeState]

Thats right a "Small Government" thats out of our wallets and bedrooms and off of our backs. No Socialist Democratic form of "Big Government" or Far Right form of "Big Government" with limited Social Freedom. 

[boing3887]

all this talk of free markets is bunk. all rich economies have strong markets, but strong markets are built up through strong institutions, laws and regulations and relatively free markets must also be supported by strong infrastructure and also a skilled workforce - which you get through compulsory education. there also needs to be a social support system for hard times, or else you get things like the tea party. notice that no other rich country really has tax revolts, except america

[boing3887]

@boing3887

america with its low tax rates in comparison to other rich countries has tax revolts all the time bc americans think they're taxed too much! talk about the triumph of delusion over substance

[justaquicklook]

@boing3887 Your blind hatred for the free market shows America just how ignorant you sheeple can be. You free-loading liberals have brought upon the collapse of Greece, Ireland, soon to be Portugal, Spain..then the rest of the Union. All of these places did not have a Tea Party..but the do know thanks to their realization that a liberal movement is violently destructive and should be treated just like any other enemy, shot in the street, left for dead.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

i'm sorry that you're so ignorant of history and of economics. letsee...i extensively quote milton friedman and that makes me a hater of the free market? ireland, portugal and spain were all running budget surpluses before the financial crisis. they basically all got screwed by a massive housing bubble - and they didn't have any freddie's or fannie's to facilitate a housing bubble. the trouble with tea partiers is that they think through slogans, the facts be damned.

[justaquicklook]

@boing3887 No they did NOT get screwed because of the housing bubble. They got screwed because of interest rates when the Euro was introduced by your BIG GOVERNMENT ideology.

Oppression wasn't cool when Hitler did it and it's surely not cool when the "progressives" do it.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

well, i'm sorry that you've been watching fox news instead of reading the london financial times or the economist, where the real economic news is. spain and ireland were running surpluses before the crisis hit. greece is the only country where deficits were a big problem. perhaps i should turn off my brain like you and decide that spain and ireland prove that budget surpluses are bad for the economy.

[justaquicklook]

@boing3887 FoxNews? ha ha...so you've resorted to the old "FoxNews" insult eh? It's safe to say I reached your intellectual capacity many comments ago. Anything else you post is just the same mindless dribble that can be read at FecalMatter or DailyKos where the rest of Obots discuss what you refer to as "facts". I'll bow out now since it's painfully obvious you have nothing intellectual to add.

Enjoy that warm cup of Kool-Aid turd...you deserve the ignorance you are so proud of.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

i'm sorry that you are unable to answer any of the facts i have presented. it's sad that you hear about riots in europe and believe that BY DEFINITION the riots must be because of high taxes and government spending. however, a quick look at the newspapers show that the rioters are motivated by anger at austerity measures and policies which bail out banks while pushing the costs onto taxpayers.

[boing3887]

@boing3887

i mean, if you were serious about debate, you could give information which showed my evidence to be wrong. like, perhaps show evidence that hong kong and singapore don't have huge state sectors, even though they're regularly held up by free marketers as evidence of the success of free market policy.

you could somehow show that finland, norway, denmark and sweden aren't rich at all. but you can't. so you hurl insults. you need to learn more about the world, buddy

[justaquicklook]

Ya know @boing3887 you lefties are dumb as a rock.

You joined the rest of the sheeple in bashing Fox News on baseless claims yet you, for some reason, expect me to supply you with facts for debate. How about you present a fact why you think they are fake? We all know Bammy is a two faced liar but his followers too? Say it aint so.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

fine, call me names and don't provide evidence or arguments. "we know bammy is a two faced liar." "you lefties are dumb as rocks." great argument.

i never said fox news is fake, i said their reporting on the world is misleading and ill-informed. why not interview experts on europe who speak the language to ask them why there are protests? are the protesters protesting govt. debt? no, they're protesting the cutting of benefits and harsh austerity measures.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

you still haven't provided any data or arguments, just name-calling and assumptions like "we all know..." or "say it aint so" or "you lefties are dumb."

sure, if i'm so dumb and my evidence is so bad, then do the proper thing and provide facts, statistics and figures of your own which invalidate mine, or show how i'm misquoting some source, or show how i'm overlooking some information on the issues in question.

i suggest you go read some books, rather than watching tv

[justaquicklook]

@boing3887 Wait let me get this straight, all of a sudden you care about evidence? Why in the hell should I provide someone with evidence when it's evidently clear they have no intentions of debating but instead discrediting the 'evidence'. I could easily post a fact minutes before an Obot jumps in and starts off on a Palin or Bachman rant, nope ain't playing the libtard game anymore and neither are the majority of the Americans.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

it's my fault that the "evidence" you provide, what little there is, is wrong and contradicts the consensus of people who've spent their lives puzzling over the questions and studying the problems?

and if your evidence is good, then i won't be able to discredit it. but your evidence is usually from sources that are just wrong or from sources that only give half-truths.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

"majority of americans." well, thats a funny thing, public opinion. poll after poll after poll shows that americans LOVE to talk a big game about hating taxes and big govt. and welfare, but they don't want to cut social security or medicare, and would prefer raising their taxes to increase or keep those benefits constant rather than cut the benefits to prevent more taxes.

and you keep on talking about how i'm so unreasonable and won't accept your evidence. but you dont give any

[justaquicklook]

@boing3887 Wrong again. The majority of America don’t want cuts to their Medicaid/Medicare because they see the wasted money on useless trash like ethanol subsidies and billion dollar investments in more agencies that will apply more rules & regulation to their lifestyles. I will gladly pay more taxes if it is put to good use, but it won’t be. Medicine is not waste, the agencies like EPA are. You comment like you’ve never had to work a day in your life, probably a liberal.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

again, ad hominem attacks. i "comment like i've never had to work a day in my life." well, actually, i've worked in a lot of hard jobs from janitorial work to fast food to office desk jobs - is that work to you?

the statement you gave above makes no sense "americans don't want cuts to medicaid/medicare bc they see wasted money on useless trash..."

so they don't want cuts bc they see waste in govt? the sentences that follow are contradictory. you need to organize your thoughts

[justaquicklook]

@boing3887 Guess you need a color chart or something. Here I'll just create a statement that was told to me during a meeting in December.

"They don't need to cut Medicare when there is so much to cut elsewhere"

See if you can digest that for a bit. Don't put to much thought into it if you don't understand it right away. I can post another example if you need.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

color chart. that's a good one. i think you're confused about where deficits and waste come from.

how do we know which spending causes deficits? by looking at PAYGO. if a bill that spends money also proposes raising taxes or cutting spending elsewhere by an equal amount to the additional spending, then it's budget neutral. if not, then it's deficit-raising.

the bills that fit that profile were: iraq/afghanistan wars, bush tax cuts, medicare advantage (also bush).

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

as for wasteful spending. medicare is the largest govt. health program, and it has administrative costs a fraction of the private health sector. its costs increase every year at a rate of about 5% a year, while the private health insurance sector has costs increasing about 8% a year, if my memory is correct. but medicare is more efficient than the private sector, and its high costs come from working through private sector health companies.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

according to the CBO, which was run by doug elmendorf, who was a protege of Martin Feldstein - Reagan's former chief economic advisor, the inclusion of social security in the US budget makes the budget outlook better. if social security, both its spending and its assets, were taken out, then the budget picture would get slightly worse bc social security has $1 trillion worth of treasury security assets.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

some people will argue that treasury securities are now "worthless," or that the U.S. may need to default on social security's treasury bills bc the govt. "can't afford to pay them back." well, if that's the case, default on the treasury bills held by wall street bankers as well. that never comes up, which strongly suggests that proponents of privatizing social security are dishonest or ignorant or both.

the bulk of discretionary federal spending is on the military.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

but i never see conservatives talk about cutting military spending - very rarely.

ethanol subsidies and farm subsidies are indeed wasteful, and they are used to help american agri-business undercut foreign competitors' prices. thats one of the reasons why so many mexicans flee here - they were farm workers who couldn't compete with american agriculture's subsidized prices. it's hard to compete against subsidized competitors, after all.

welfare is negligible and shrinking

[iluvpoliticzz]

@boing3887 well duh....conservatives believe in a large national defence....so theyre not gunna choke off the money to rour military

[boing3887]

@iluvpoliticzz

true. because aid to hungry children and single mothers is wasteful spending, but billions to Boeing, Lockheed and Raytheon isn't!

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

also, i see that you've been reading jonah goldberg - thus your progressives and hitler comparison. well, letsee, jonah goldberg in his work points to beliefs that the fascists and various leftists had in common. fair enough. however, professional historians note that what united fascists was a societal social darwinism, ultra-nationalism, hatred of internationalism, and hatred of outsiders. well, thats the tea party right there - hate immigrants, hate internationalism, etc.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

do i think the tea party is fascist? no. i'm just making a point. you should be a bit more careful before throwing comparisons to hitler around. and why is it that people like you always claim that leftists or liberals are fascist while ignoring the skinheads, neo-nazis, and pat buchanans who're pretty openly fascist?

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

umm...actually the euro has largely served to erode welfare states. the european central bank consistently has much tighter monetary policies and much higher interest rates than the US federal reserve. the euro is a way of imposing fiscal and monetary discipline on european populations since it wouldnt work through the political arena.

[boing3887]

@justaquicklook

in fact, before the financial crisis ireland and iceland were held up by heritage foundation, cato and american enterprise institute as free market success stories. they both were always in the top 3 or 5 in "economic freedom" indexes by those think tanks. does that mean that free markets have failed and that budget surpluses are bad?

you need to read some more milton friedman.

[boing3887]

free markets and small government. which countries have followed this lead and are prospering - now or in the past? specific examples please?

[mezhar]

@boing3887 For example Switzerland, and Hong Kong. And USA in the past, and still in some extent. And an example of a huge and rapid positive change that these policies can make, is Ireland in the 1980's to 1990's. Ireland used to be the poorest nation in Europe, but decided to take small government policies into use in the 1980's, and has been climbing the ladder ever since, and is now one of the most prosperous nations in Europe.

[boing3887]

@mezhar

yes, hong kong - where the govt owns all the land and is the only and ultimate landlord and they have a significant welfare state to support the working population - subsidized housing that about 50 pct of people live in, public hospitals where the govt subsidizes 90+ pct of the cost, and ditto with the education. they also have a comprehensive social security system

[boing3887]

@mezhar

hong kong, like other successful asian economies, is marked by very close ties between the govt and banks and large firms - in other words, corporatism. the govt and private sector cooperate to guide the economy.

hong kong also undertook massive interventions into its currency during the asian currency crises - screwing over currency speculators in the process and angering wall street and "the city" in london

[boing3887]

@mezhar

switzerland has a great economy, but it is also very small. they provide solid social services, healthcare is heavily regulated by the govt: so there are private insurance providers, but the profit has been taken out of the system - thereby making their healthcare system solid.

they are also very protective of their agricultural sector, so they have high food prices. on top of that they provide all kinds of subsidies for families.

[boing3887]

@mezhar

switzerland also used anti-cyclical deficit spending to get out of the early 2000's recession and freely undertook monetary interventions as well through its central bank.

also notice that switzerland's workforce is very highly educated. how did they get that way? exactly the same way as most other countries, they undertook massive govt. education programs. sure the private sector has a role, but saying that govt has none or hurts prosperity is nonsense

[boing3887]

@mezhar

using the example of ireland is just a joke - they are a worse credit risk than spain right now, even though ireland has undertaken much harsher austerity measures. ireland's recent troubles were caused by weak regulation on capital flows - they had a classic housing bubble in which money inflows from the eurozone led to an irrational exuberance, and now ireland's taxpayers are having to take responsibility for the gross errors of the banking sector - unregulated, remember?

[boing3887]

@mezhar

what about ireland's cutting of their deficit/debt/govt. spending? well, where did their growth come from? did cutting govt. spending just stimulate the economy in itself bc the private sector was happy? no, they had a currency devaluation and then a subsequent export boom. so all countries have to do is have an export boom? well, can EVERY country run a trade surplus?

[boing3887]

@mezhar

so ireland's past (PAST) boom had everything to do with currency manipulation - or monetary stimulus. they also deregulated like crazy - which then led them to their current economic crisis. sure, we'd all love to be ireland right now, wouldn't we - with their projected 12% unemployment rate. notice also that ireland had no community reinvestment act, no freddie or fannie. their economy was rated 3rd in economic freedom by heritage in 2008.

[boing3887]

@mezhar

and finally, the US. yes, the US, with their infamous agricultural subsidies which allow US agriculture to sell their food for super-cheap, thus driving third-world farmers out of business. the US, in which newt gingrich and trent lott's districts led the country in federal subsidies during the 90's. the US, in which the govt. portion of medical spending keeps on getting bigger bc the private medical insurance sector is so inefficient.

[boing3887]

@mezhar

the US, which pioneered compulsory and free public education in the early 20th century - leading to a workforce whose level of education and skill was unheard of all over the world. the US, which invested heavily in a humongous highway system which allowed the growth of the suburbs and commuting to work.

[boing3887]

@mezhar

the US has lead the world in public higher education for the past 50-60 years: the State of NY public universities during the 40's to 60's, and then the University of California system from then until now. the US, where the vast bulk of federal discretionary spending goes to "defense" - which usualy means science research or buying weapons and equipment from defense contractors who would go bankrupt without govt. support - both official and unofficial.

[boing3887]

@mezhar

this type of thinking is typical of american conservatives and libertarians, most exemplified by alan greenspan, who believes that america is great because of its great innovation machine which has created things like computers, lasers, space satellites and the internt - forgetting to mention, or perhaps not knowing, that these were all funded through massive taxpayer expense before being handed over free of charge to the boeings and northrops.

[itachi705]

@boing3887 You are an idiot.

[boing3887]

@itachi705

no arguments or data, just name-calling? please make your case, whatever it might be. you remind me of those people who respond to arguments they don't like or cannot dispute with "holocaust denier!" or "fascist!"

[itachi705]

@boing3887 I'm just calling a spade a spade.

[boing3887]

@itachi705

fascist!

[therealist1057]

People should really watch and listen to the video before they respond with invalid or  pre-disproved arguments.

[97pattan]

provided the private sector starts investing. if the government is too small, they are at the mercy of the private sector...the bigger player will become more powerful than the government. hence the people are at the mercy of the private investor or likely to be one big private person whom you could not vote out of his money power. dangerous also.

[miller4america]

I agree somewhat. But I am economics major and I can say Economist don't know what anyone means by big government or small government. Almost all economist say we had to spend then and keep spending now. The stimulus was needed especially considering that firms aren't likely to invest in infrastructure. I say this having studied under very free market oriented tenured professors.

[mhirtes12]

I wonder what sort of smaller government these folks have in mind? Tribes maybe? They could ask the Taliban to give them pointers.

[wibblegorm]

How exactly did Bush detour? He was in office when the banks were deregulated and the divide between rich and poor in the US increased MASSIVELY.

The focus should not be on economic growth. America already has a hige economy, and continuous growth in a finite world is unsustainable. The focus SHOULD be on wealth redistribution. Untold billions of dollars sat in fatcats bank accoutns gathering dust are NOT being used. So much could be done with the money you already have, so use it.

[hoodoo961]

Sound money...is a prerequisite for economic growth? Under that logic, the global economy should not have grown since WWII. Foolish.

[obmax1212]

The government doesn't generate revenue, so how could it pay taxes? More importantly, why would it pay taxes to itself? What purpose does that serve? It sounds like you want to say "why can't the government produce it's own income outside of taxation". Simple answer: it doesn't produce anything.

[zonto22]

@obmax1212 Correct. They provide a service though and we pay them for it. The services they render need to be redefined.

[12FlyMe]

Faith -- Fairtax knows its crazy -- that's why they hid that in the fine print.

No nation on earth pretends to pay itself a sales tax. Your city and state does not pay sales taxes. This would be massive tax, far far higher than any sales tax on earth.

The fed gov paying it to itself is just silly. Medicare and the military paying hundreds of billions in sales taxes?

Cities and states COULD theoretically pay it -- but do you think California HAS 100 billion to pay?

[12FlyMe]

The key to Fairtax is bullshit. Fairtax is based in fine print on a massive surcharge that cities and states would have to pay.

Why the fuck does Fairtax hide this shit in the fine print? It woudl be a massive fucking surcharge on all city and state spending.

For example, if a state built a highway for 4 billion -- they would have to give federal government 1.5 billion in sales taxes.

Its fucking NUTS. And they hide this shit.

Google Fairtax absurdity -- learn what shit it is.

[Rhal95]

I don't trust the Fraser institute. They push the Friedman model of free enterprise. Good for corporations, bad for the people. That is not capitalism.

Than is corporate piracy.

The only way to balance the money with the debt is to erase the dept. Let the gambling banks fail!

[FrickinLaserBeam]

Friedman was all about letting gambling banks fail. Friedman was all for free entry into and out of markets for people, companies, capital, etc. without any coercion. Nothing I've learned about Friedman's phillosophy had anything to do with promoting corperate piracy - that is by definition coercion, that which Friedman opposed vehemently.

[lalubella111]

We shouldn't have to pay an income tax at all. Its BS and not legal. There is NO LAW. And if you want to be a smart head about it and insist there is one... SHOW IT TO ME. Can't help it that peeps got tricked back in 1913 and now everyone just assumes we gotta do it. But if you don't pay, then your savior gov. sicks the IRS bullies on you. Never legal, but hey... who are you to argue? Now pay or we destroy.

No company should be bailed out ever. If they mess up and fail, thats too freakin bad.

[LifeinaRaindrop]

Are you saying we shouldn't have bailed out AIG or Citigroup? Do you understand the financial disaster that would result in these two companies failing?

[chaozflame126]

They failed, let natural selection take its course and remove them. I don't want my money to support a failing company that will fail again

[LifeinaRaindrop]

I can understand your sentiment, however, AIG or Citigroup isn't like GM or Circuit City failing... or any other business for that matter. Imagine every person who "owns" a house, who is still paying mortgages to Citigroup. Imagine all the overseas investments failing, and the stock market collapsing since AIG overseas about 30% of all US domestic currency in their transactions. Its unfortunate, yes, but because of the free market, we allow corporations to grow THIS large.

[kev3d]

That is not true at all and there is no company that is "Too big to fail". It was interference in the free market which screwed everything in the first place. If there is a market for the business that AIS or Chase or whomever is conducting, then the pieces will be picked up. Because a company sells off it's assets or is broken up does not mean a collapse. It is government protection, not the free market that allows companies to grow this irresponsible. The antithesis of a free market.

[slickbtk]

the problems with these big corporations and banks is not the free market it is the governments intervention in the free market. the fdic is the single biggest contributor to our banking problem, and that is a federal agency that destroys free market banking. Its so ignorant to blame free markets for our problems, if you make it so people cant lose if they recklessly flip coins than dont blame the coin flippers

[zonto22]

@chaozflame126 Part of the failure was them investing in risky subprime mortgages and trying to support ridiculous levels of leveraging. However, that isn't technically the reason they failed. They were manipulated by puts and corrupt individuals practicing illegal short selling.

[chaozflame126]

@zonto22 Haha, I never realized a year old comment would be here in highest rated ^_^

If the CEOs, executives, company presidents, or whatever names I've left out wouldn't waste the money from the help, I'd have less of an issue with them. But firing a group of people that saved them money and going off on a beach trip is a slap to the face to everyone. The CEOs just want money, and don't care who they fire or have to step on to get it. Sounds very much like politics also IMO

[kev3d]

Hey, Karl Marx, you want to stop trolling around with a bunch of different Youtube Monikers and stick to one. Your dishonesty is almost as egregious as your understanding of economics.

[ann4now]

Too bad the idiots in Washington didn't pay attention to the Cato. This AIG stupidity should be the prime example of what a government should not do. The fiasco of these politicians has me disgusted today. I am being sold to the Liberatarian party by the day.

[ok1jwc]

CATO makes so much sense because they are NOT for Democrats OR Republicans.

The CATO institute knows that there is no real meanigful difference between them.

I despise the fact that 95% of voters are one of these two immoral statist Socialist parties.

They have hurt our nation from every possible angle.

The Reps drag us into insane trillion dollar wars abroad, and destroy personal freedom at home, while the Dems steal every penny they can from some Americans to pay off others.

Blah!

[OlivierdeAthos]

"CATO makes so much sense because they are NOT for Democrats OR Republicans."

Is that why they've got Dan Mitchell, a former Republican Congressional Staffer, and aid to Senator Bob Packwood (R-Oregon) producing their videos?

[blakeart]

Haven't read many of the comments about this video...

And in the video, you make some interesting points.

However, Where was all this "policy" when W was president? I feel that you fall into the category of "We're out of power, now we're going to belittle whatever the other head of the 2 headed eagle/monster is doing" classic Divide and conquer.

I am not buying it. I am no fan of Obama per se, but how can you blow this smoke now? Acknowledging Bush screwed up, but you did nothing until now.

[aeuiono]

W not only said that TARP violated his principles, sort of implying regret, but he himself and his team was rather Keynesian to New Keynesian. The original TARP plan reflected this mindset, but that plan was scraped by Paulson for direct bailing out of banks.

It should be noted that the Right is far more factional than the very united Left. There are many different types of Right-wingers who have wildly different ideas. Most Republicans lately have come from a very left-version of the Right.

[TakeBackVermont]

CATO has been making these video's forever. They pointed out many of Bush's mistakes. So if you get what I mean, they are right wing because most of the rights views are what they support, except they are a right wing sucker standing behind Bush in all of his mistakes.

[whoo689]

Cato is actually a LIBERTARIAN think tank. They're just as left-wing on issues as right-wing overall. They disagree with Bush on a lot of things, like his foreign policy.

[worldofdraculas]

@whoo689 They aren't Left-Wing on anything. That's not how political ideologies work. The Left-Wing and Libertarians have completely different reasons for reaching those conclusions, and how tackle the issues.

For example, you might say Liberals and Libertarians are both pro-gay marriage. In reality, Liberals believe in protected classes of people and making laws to bring equality, while Libertarians simply do not think the government should have laws regulating marriage.

[Kumosabe]

What are you talking about? They criticize bush's spending habits and his foreign policy >.>

[TakeBackVermont]

You are right. I meant to say that they are *not* a right wing sucker.

[TheCondor24]

FUCK REPUBLICANS

[mcgloinm]

I see that the Conservatives are bringing out all the guns. Oh well, here we go again, with the "Psychological Whiners".

[RonPaulGeorgeRingo]

If anybody who voted for McCain believes that the (Bush BLANK CHECK) Republicans would have suddenly CARED about deficits had MCCAIN won, they are living a LIE.

We ALL know that whoever "won" was screwed, at least in the short term - given the nightmare Bush left.

A "failed" McCain presidency = Hillary Clinton 2012. The Obama presidency forces "conservatives" (in denial) to FINALLY (!) look beyond Reagan's "CREDIT CARD conservatism" & THINK outside the box which = Ron Paul / libertarian.

[DillonX]

I supported LIbertarian candidates Harry Browne in 2002 & Ron Paul in 2008, so I have agreed w/ the CATO institute on some issues in the past.

But now they've been taken over by the NWO.

Robert Murdoch (FOX) is now on their Board of Directors, & the big corporations (Exxon,CItibank,etc) started taking them over w/ contributions from the companies & their execs.

I no longer trust them & won't unless they kick out these big corporate influences.

[JanColdwater]

Flat tax? On what? Income? IT IS ILLEGAL! NO INCOME TAX - PERIOD!

[putittogether]

Thank you. More people need to take the time to understand fundamental economics.

[closedanger]

The truth remains what it is. This video is corret. You cannot have it both ways.

[tjefferson10]

This is idiotic--20 + years of supply-side/tax cut philosophy has done nothing but hollow out and ruin our nation--and all the while corporate fat cats wallow in their obscene riches. Cato Institute--your philosophies are bankrupt.

[guyclark5525]

Did you even watch the video?!

What he's arguing is the complete opposite of supply side, it's monetarism.

Supply side economists believe in incentives and tax cuts for stimulating growth. He even said tax cuts alone are not effective and criticized the Bush Administration's poor fiscal responsibility.

He's making the same arguments that Milton Friedman made: small government, sound money, etc. which has proven to be successful in other nations.

[CarryANation]

Monetarism has been completely discredited and they stopped trying to make it work 25 year ago.

Also, monetarism does NOT suggest "sound money" monetarism promotes fractional reserve fiat currency.

How could monetarism work anyway? Tell me the volume of money in the global economy, M3 plus effective money like derivatives?

CATO lol

[broncfan23]

yeah and look where the last 25 years has led us.

CarryANation LOL

[CarryANation]

broncfan23 you must not remember the 70s/early 80s.

[guyclark5525]

Sound money doesn't necessarily have to be commodity backed, monetarism enforces the idea that a currency should be managed responsibly, encouraging economic and political policies (small government, free market) to prevent inflation/deflation.

And actually you are wrong, monetarism can work through discipline. Google "Miracle of Chile". Chile underwent economic reform under the guidance of monetarist ideals in the 1970s, and they remain to this day the most prosperous nation in South America.

[CarryANation]

guyclark5525 - ah yes, "managed responsibly" which means the exact same thing as the Democrat's stimulus, you give the money to your favorite political cronies, in the case of monetarism, finance and defense.

Chile was a dictatorship in the 1970s, how you can get "free markets" out of a dictatorship is quite hilarious.

[guyclark5525]

To add to that; You are correct that monetarism wouldn't realistically work in America. The US holds the mantle of hegemony right now; we import more than we export, we spend more than we can print and borrow, and we have the largest military budget in the world.

It has it's advantages in smaller countries that have a favorable trade surplus, small government, free market etc. but you are right, it is unrealistic as an option in the US.

[unabashedproxy]

tjefferson- Isn't 'wealth envy' great? You public school slugs should have been taught how to work! Who do you think creates the jobs?

[tjefferson10]

public school slugs? that's a good one. apparently only those who were born with silver spoons in their mouths know how to work--or perhaps not judging by the actions of our brilliant bankers. As for wealth envy--I rail not against wealth but against greed--amazingly enough, it appears the wealthy are the greediest. (see bonuses handed out by Merrill Lynch given after taking public funds)

[medlock01]

During FDR's administration he spent in excess to build the economy "bottom up". The result is that poverty level did not change, and the unemployment never dropped below 10%.

Actually unemployment was above 20% for 21 consecutive months - even with all that spending.

How about we realize that our corporate tax rate is too high and cut that? 80% of the US owns stock, so this would benefit most people and would encourage investment here.

[eurogoldexchange]

Bottom up is the only way, not this top down mindnumbibg drivel. Start EDUCATING your fellow citizen, so they understand what they can, must or need to do by themselves.

[aires12345678]

obama is already a puppet.. he only follow giving orders.

[Elasaltaculos]

It is easy to follow orders when one agrees with them.

[aires12345678]

yep, i think as they say money talk!

[t4705mb6]

The only problem I have with this video is the use of the terminology "Free Market".

There has not been a free market since the stone age.

Business does NOT approve of "free market". It is a businesses agenda to crush free markets because it produces competition. Competition must be destroyed under any companys business plan. Competition puts unwanted pressure on business and is seen as lowering profit.

The best scenario for business is selling junk in volume at high prices & slave wages.

[RogerOnTheRight]

"free market" explains the fundamental market behaviour. To the extent markets are not free, government has intervened. Even still, the resulting distortions themselves follow those same basic patterns.

For example, when prices are "fixed", shortages occur. Or when a product is banned, black markets appear with high prices.

Human behaviour is what drives market behaviour. And human nature is immutable.

"Free market" economic systems conform to human nature.

[t4705mb6]

So? Thats not what the public is being spoon fed.

[RogerOnTheRight]

Yet, it is true.

Your notion of business having the agenda of producing profits from slave wages is absurd. Most companies easily recognize their dependence on productive labour, and tend to take reasonable care not to alienate that labour source.

Which is why union membership peaked at the end of WW2.

[t4705mb6]

Baloney. You have swallowed the bait. I attended the board meetings at my "fortune 250" corporation for 16 years and have met leaders in dozens of major industies. Industry leaders have NO qualms at all about cheating the public, their customers or labor as long as the perception is the opposite. They work hard at not getting caught and often government helps them achieve that.

Not ALL buisineees take this attitude but, MOST large ones do.

[RogerOnTheRight]

Sounds like you are confessing. Shame on you.

Still, in my decades of experience, most business people obey the law. Perhaps only out of necessity, but they do obey.

Certainly, when it is easy to cheat, cheating happens. But, for the most part, that is the government's doing, since absolute power does tend to corrupt absolutely.

Government denies a level playing field and favours one group over another. Real corruption in this world happens primarily as a result of bad government.

[t4705mb6]

Thanks for judging me without any information. You assume a lot which is dangerous.

FYI, I was the voice of descent when it came to the unethical or imoral. In charge of Environmental services, I was looked upon as a "necassary evil" since they did not want to deal with the expense of keeping the environment clean. I was told to my face that my department was a "liability".

When Bush raised pollution limits in 2003 I walked out. Would YOU have done the same? Odd, I don't FEEL ashamed.

[RogerOnTheRight]

No, I am sure you do not feel ashamed. But, I bet you feel pretty stupid. No, I take that back. You don't see it yet.

You admit to being the "voice of descent". I don't disagree.

Perhaps you might phrase it, "voice leading to descent".

What pollution limits did Bush raise in 2003?

Were you the pedantic voice screaming about "Global warming!!"?

Of course you don't feel ashamed. But, I get the feeling you didn't quit.

[t4705mb6]

You are looking for a fight.

Why are you pretending to know who I am and what I have done without the information?

You seem to be having more fun attacking me than anything.

Do you continue because I simply respond? This is going nowhere.

[RogerOnTheRight]

Well, you are the "voice of descent", so down you go...

I am merely responding to outrageous comments you make. You seem to imagine business people are particularly evil.

Yet, while no more pure than any other humans, they certainly do better by us than does government.

You imagined you laid a trap for me, and posture as some hero of the non-polluting class.

Yet, you come across as an ignorant fool who condescends arrogantly and poorly.

Now, tell us what Bush did to increase pollution.

[wdcsucks1]

hey afq2007, do you know what that spike behind you stands for? its 666 feet long! 666 the number of the beast!

[zappos49]

555 feet........6,660 inches

[mrcool011]

Amazing video.

[bamagirl369]

Awesome video! Need it on the video google homepage!!!

[WulfBand]

Please watch Aron Rusos: Freedon to Fascism

This research video is Concrete PROOF that taxes are Voluntary and NOT legal. They were never ratified. Plus the 16th Amendment states that taxes are Illegal. The only legal taxes are against Corporations. PEOPLE WAKE UP !!!

[IndianXC]

Look at Freedom to Fascism's WIkipedia page. It's honestly a terrible investigative report

[brooksde]

We need to come together to save this country.

This is a step in the right direction.

[2012Ronpaul2012]

great work.

[sayanythingkicksass]

great job unfortunatly although our money is becoming incredibly unsound

money supply up 70% in the past year

[unmarshal]

Excellent job Dan. I look forward to all of your videos.

[seestuff09]

well tax cuts are only effective if you also cut spending, which is our real problem. because if the govt. doesn't cut spending it'll either take your money through taxes or inflation. the bad thing is most people don't notice inflation as easily as taxes.

[dconjar]

You left out option #3: Defaulting on the bad debt.

M0 has doubled since the beginning of 2008, but I'm not convinced that we'll see inflation simply because the world is getting pounded much worse than we are and we're witnessing debt destruction on a massive scale.

There was an FX dislocation last night that could have potentially precipitated into major collapses throughout Asia and Europe, along with a deflationary collapse in the US because of Bernanke's swap lines. We got lucky.

[davidmesaaz]

Many reduce a Presidents economic recovery to whether or not he raised taxes.. Clinton raised taxes and the economy was good (even though he cut taxes in 1997. Bush had tax cuts and the economy tanked.

Taxes are not a pancea... but they are like this video says a part of the greater economic picture.

[youthgrunt]

Of course, between 2002 and 2007 the economy did quite well after the Bush tax cuts. It was when spending (in the form of the strength of the dollar) and stupid regulation (in the form of banking requirements) that the current economy went south.

[CrowdPleeza]

Clinton didn't have any wars to fund and America had a tech boom that improved productivity which brought in a lot of tax revenue. So you have to take these things into account when analyzing the 90's economy.

[davidmesaaz]

But he cut the capital gains tax in 1997 by one third. Which really helped the tech industry and was one of the causes of the boom... Lower tax rates bring in higher tax revenues... It was true during the 1990's and true today...

[CrowdPleeza]

I thought you were supporting Clinton's tax increase as helping the economy. I kinda misread.

[youthgrunt]

I would have preferred to see you argue that those 5 items ARE the metrics that should be measured for economic growth.

Still, good job as usual.

[alncohen]

That's it

[QIQrrr]

Mr. Mitchell: you are so right! Great videos.

[jobrien2001]

Excellent job educating the mob

[LookBetter4Ever]

We need to contunue the Revolution!