Elizabeth Warren is running to unseat Scott Brown from his US Senate seat from the state of Massachusetts. The clip below is a teaser of the type of populist rhetoric the citizens of Massachusetts are sure to hear from her.
Although, she is correct about the trillions in waste caused by fighting wars and the crony medicare deals, she still seems to think the "rich" need to be taxed more.
Of course, she has to be joking about the job done by government in educating LBJ's great grandkids, who are running around in major cities terrorizing innocent people. She thinks the "rich" should be taxed for this lunacy? As for the roads, she needs to read Walter Block's book, Privatization of Roads and Highways.
Although, she appears to be anti-war, don't mistake Warren as a small government type. Her oversight of TARP and her looking into the nationalisation of banks should be clue enough as to where her thinking is.
When Elizabeth Warren wants to "tax the rich," she really means tax the middle class, either by raising taxes on families who make $2-300,000 and have several children and college tuition to deal with, who are just trying to make ends meet.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure she will find ways to escape the taxes she wants to impose on everyone else. But isn't she herself rich? I would think she is, with a $1.7 million home in Cambridge:
http://www2.cambridgema.gov/fiscalaffairs/PropertyDetail.cfm?PropertyId=14044
The idiot Obama was allegedly "anti-war". She's a typical statist moron.
ReplyDeleteAbout 100 years from now, if we make it, college kids will see these old video's of our elites of the day and the stuff they professed to be true, and they'll have a good laugh over how ignorant our society was to follow these hacks down the road to destruction. It would be like us being able to witness a meeting in the 1500s between the crown's top alchemists and the king's court. We would hear all sorts of smart sounding conversation about how close they were to being able to enrich the kingdom by turning anything into gold and silver, but that they just need more time.
ReplyDeleteLike the alchemist, the modern day economist's legitimacy does not come from what they have achieved but from what they say they can achieve.
"We need taxes! How would roads ever be built?!" It's pretty funny how statists always use roads as the perfect example of necessary federal spending, when they make up some infinitesimal percentage of the total budget.
ReplyDeleteRoads are used to convince the gullible that gummint is not a racket but is actually of use to those it tax-rapes. Ditto cops and firemen.
ReplyDeleteShe makes a perfectly good argument as to why no one builds or should build a factory in the US.
ReplyDeleteHow about halting the three no-win wars, shutting down 750+ military bases and adding 2 cents transaction fee on every single trade on Wall Street first, Betty...?!
ReplyDeleteHasn't Dilorenzo done research into how many roads were in fact made and created in the early history of the US without taxpayer money?
ReplyDeleteRegardless, the taxes and all the other nonsense government programs would not be possible without the evil "rich" people. Let's see some roads built if everyone making 50k or above left the country!
You can complain all you want about the things she's saying, but the real problem is all the stupid milkshakes listening and applauding. Every one of those idiots are going to vote for her.
ReplyDeleteSo people who make 200k to 300k a year think they are middle class. hmmmm. Insane. You worry about college tuition, others worry about feeding and housing their children. Who do I worry about more...hmmmmm. Easy, the ones who are REALLY STRUGGLING. And 300k a year isn't middle class. And not only that, even if you make 300k a year, after deductions I am sure it brings you under 250k, the drop off point for the SMALL repeal of the TEMPORARY Bush Tax Cuts. Lets get real, the real middle class makes under 100K a year, even as low as 50K a year and are struggling. So if you are having trouble at 300K a year, you have a spending problem.
ReplyDeleteWhat Warren is saying is very mainstream and traditional (see for example Adam Smith, Book V of *Wealth of Nations*). We're really in trouble as a nation when so much excitement is generated about a common-sense statement like this.
ReplyDelete