Judge Napolitano: Obama Administration Doesn't Understand Economics 101

Judge Napolitano argues that the government makes an economic mistake when it raises taxes too high "because people that are able to control their income will defer it or receive the income in other ways, end up earning less and paying the government less."

He continued, "So, not only are the government's tax revenues down, but the economic activity generated by that wealth is down."

"They just don't understand the sort of basic Economics 101," he concluded.

My Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/Eduardo89rp

Fair Use Disclaimer:

This video may contain copyrighted material. This material is made available for educational, research, and news reporting purposes only. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law which allows citizens to reproduce, distribute or exhibit portions of copyright motion pictures, video tapes, or video disks under certain circumstances without authorization of the copyright holder.

• Category

  News & Politics

[LOLThatSucksOMG]

"We expect more from the federal government than the founders dreamed, far more from the federal government than the government can afford, infinitely more from the federal government than the constitution authorizes."

This is truth. Thanks, Judge Napolitano.

[JeffSalmeri]

Covert Liberty-Loving Economics Teacher (in New Jersey no less) Right Here Judge

[kessass83]

As some famous name said: The original American constitution is only good for white man. Other raises for long enslavement and generational poverty can't comprehend what free man means.

[John Mc Keon]

Creative destruction only creates destruction.

[VoteRonPaul12]

I'm not even going to reply to such ignorance.

[achillesmlf]

Exactly.

[achillesmlf]

Ron Paul is an Ayn Rand disciple. He would have been worse than Obama or Romney. He agreed with Atlas Shrugged, which is bullshit. If the 1% didn't hoard all the cash it would be out in circulation, if there was a need for so much wealth. The human race got along just fine without them for tens of thousands of years

[achillesmlf]

Maybe if they stopped debasing the currency and kept the pie at an affordable level, so many people wouldn't need government assistance. Not everybody is a high paid judge or media puppet newscaster. If for example, my boss pays me $200 per week and it cost's me $250 to live, that's my fault? The 1% could pay 75% tax and still live like kings. The reason the tax revenue is down, even though ppl are crying their tax is up, is because there are less ppl working to pay tax, so they have to raise it

[VoteRonPaul12]

What a great attorney general he would have made in the Ron Paul administration.

[Curt Welch]

Yes, I agree that's exactly what he meant. The problem however is that the government's only interest should be social. The only reason for the government to exist is to protect the social interests of the people. His argument was that the government was "failing economics 101" by putting the people's interest before the economy. Any government that puts the economy ahead of the people, has failed more then economics 101, it's failed to keep itself from being corrupted by the rich.

[evanr00]

What he means by social interest, is the the govt redistributing wealth so they can make things, what they deem as, fair.  Economic interests means improving conditions so that more economic activity will bring in more tax revenue than would happen under a redistribution plan.

[Curt Welch]

From the video: "The government sometimes acts as if it's motivated by social interests instead of economic interests".

Oh my god, did he really just say that? We can see who's money is paying for this mouth. Governments must 100% of the time act in the SOCIAL interest of the people. If at any time a government starts to protect the money of the rich, instead of protecting the people, it's time for people to take their guns out, remove the government, and start over. Same for "news".