This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Charles Ferguson: "Standing Behind Every Great Con Artist Is Someone Like Glenn Hubbard "

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Submitted by Charles Ferguson, Oscar-winning creator of Inside Job

Standing Behind Every Great Con Artist is Someone Like Glenn Hubbard

Mitt Romney has a credibility problem. He changes his beliefs like laundry (abortion, medical insurance, whether Bin Laden was worth killing, attacking Iran), refuses to disclose his tax returns, and won't explain how he could possibly pay for the tax cuts he proposes. But there is another scandal in Romney's campaign -- namely Glenn Hubbard, Romney's chief economic advisor, who was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under George W. Bush, and is now Dean of Columbia Business School.

I interviewed Hubbard for my documentary film Inside Job, and analyzed his record again for my book Predator Nation. The film interview became famous because Hubbard blew his cool after I interrogated him about his conflicts of interest: "This isn't a deposition, sir. I was polite enough to give you time, foolishly I now see, but you have three more minutes. Give it your best shot." But the really important thing about Hubbard isn't his personality; it's that as an economist and an advisor, he is a total, unmitigated disaster.

First, Hubbard has an abysmal track record in economic policy, including the very issues that Romney has made the pillar of his presidential campaign. Second, like Romney, Hubbard refuses to disclose critical information about his income, conflicts of interest, and paid advocacy activities. Third, both in public statements and in my personal experience, Hubbard has been evasive, misleading, and even dishonest when discussing both policy issues and his own conflicts of interest. And last but not least, those conflicts of interest are huge: Hubbard has long advocated policies that Wall Street loves, often without disclosing that he is, in fact, highly paid by Wall Street.

Let's start with tax cuts, since Romney claims that he can cut tax rates sharply without increasing the deficit, and without benefiting the rich. Mr. Romney claims that tax cuts will be fully paid for by closing loopholes and deductions, and will not add to the deficit; Hubbard has publicly supported Romney's claims. Interestingly, Mr. Hubbard has quite a record on this very issue. Shortly after becoming chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors in 2001, he spearheaded the Bush administration's tax cuts, and he said lots about them.

How did that work out? First, we now know that over half of the benefits of the Bush-Hubbard tax cuts went to the top 1 percent of the population. In part to benefit the wealthy, the tax cuts were also structured to reward investment in financial assets, rather than either consumer spending or real capital investment. As a result, the tax cuts caused huge budget deficits, yet did little to stimulate growth or job creation: there were basically no new jobs created during the Bush administration, despite adding trillions to the national debt.

That is not, however, what Hubbard said would happen. On August 22, 2001, he published anarticle in the Wall Street Journal entitled "Tax Cuts Won't Hurt the Surplus." Oops. In the article, also, Hubbard predicts that his tax cuts would preserve the Clinton budget surpluses by causing GNP to grow 0.3 percent per year faster.

Hubbard also co-authored an article with William Dudley, then the chief economist of Goldman Sachs, entitled "How Capital Markets Enhance Economic Performance and Job Creation." It was published by the Goldman Sachs Global Markets Institute in 2004, just as the housing bubble was getting seriously crazy. In my filmed interview, here's how Hubbard described the article:

INTERVIEWER: In 2004 you co-wrote a paper with William Dudley, who was then the chief economist of Goldman Sachs. What do you think about the arguments you made in that paper?

GLENN HUBBARD: As I recall that paper, the arguments were basically to the effect that healthy capital markets are important for the economy, views that I held before and certainly hold after.

Well, here's what that paper really said. Hubbard wrote that "The ascendancy of the U.S. capital markets" had yielded "enhanced stability of the U.S. banking system... more jobs and higher wages... less frequent and milder [recessions}... a revolution in housing finance." Later in the article: "The capital markets have helped make the housing market less volatile... " Next, "Credit crunches... are a thing of the past... " and my personal favorite, "The revolution in housing finance has also... been important in making the economy less cyclical." In other parts of the article, Hubbard and Dudley specifically praise credit default swaps for their role in reducing and spreading risk. Like wow, man.

Hubbard refused to tell me whether he was paid to write that article; no payment is disclosed in the document itself, nor on Hubbard's CV. Which brings us to Mr. Hubbard's many, many disclosure problems and conflicts of interest. After the release of my film Inside Job, Columbia University was forced to establish disclosure requirements for the first time for its professors. At the time, Hubbard stated that he welcomed them. Well, it wasn't quite that way in our interview. Here are some selections, verbatim and unedited:

INTERVIEWER: Let me go back to your own personal business involvements. I'm looking at your résumé now, and I guess it looks to me as if the majority of your outside activities are consulting and directorship arrangements with the financial services industry. Would you not agree with that characterization?

GLENN HUBBARD: Not to my knowledge. I don't think my consulting clients are even on my C.V.

INTERVIEWER: Who are your consulting clients?

GLENN HUBBARD: I don't believe I have to discuss that with you. You have a few more minutes and the interview's over.

Slightly later:

INTERVIEWER: Okay. Who are you a director of?

GLENN HUBBARD: I don't believe I have to answer that question.

Well, actually, now that Columbia had adopted disclosure regulations, we now know at least something about Hubbard's income sources, and the overwhelming majority of them are in the financial sector. The HTML version his CV (which you can read here) does not fully disclose his activities, but if you click on the PDF version, you see more. And what you see is that at least two thirds of his literally dozens of consulting, advisory, and directorship arrangements over the last decade are with the financial sector -- MetLife, KKR, Goldman Sachs, Freddie Mac, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, the list goes on and on.

Even Columbia's new policy does not require Hubbard to disclose how much they pay him; all we know currently comes from required SEC disclosures of his director's fees from the boards of three financial sector companies, which pay him over $700,000 per year. His total financial sector income, including consulting and speaking, is undoubtedly much higher. Yet here's how he described his income in our interview, once again verbatim and unedited:

INTERVIEWER: Forgive me, but I'm going to be direct: How does your personal income compare, your private income as opposed to your university salary?

GLENN HUBBARD: Vastly times more, because I write textbooks, so that's much more remunerative than being a professor.

INTERVIEWER: How about your consulting income from the financial services industry, and your directorships?

GLENN HUBBARD: I don't do much consulting in the financial services industry. I do have some directorships, but the income from those would be modest compared to my other income.

Textbooks. You read that correctly. As for not doing "much" consulting for the financial sector, I counted consulting or directorships with 29 financial sector firms on your CV. And your $700K per year directorship income is "modest" compared to the other stuff? Really, now, Glenn.

But we're not done yet. There is a more that Hubbard still hasn't disclosed, and refused to disclose to us when we were making Inside Job. On his CV, Hubbard lists The Analysis Group as a consulting client. That is misleading at best. The Analysis Group is one of a half dozen major firms that specializes in matching private companies and lobbying groups, who are the real clients, with professors who they pay to support their positions in regulatory, policy, Congressional, and legal disputes. It was The Analysis Group, for example, that arranged for Hubbard to testify on behalf of two Bear Stearns hedge fund managers who were prosecuted for securities fraud in 2009. Hubbard was paid $100,000 for his testimony.

Hubbard has been affiliated with the Analysis Group for many years, but when we asked him, he refused to disclose who he had worked for or what he had done. He also refused to provide us with a copy of the Federal financial disclosure form he was required to submit in 2001; we couldn't obtain it from the White House, because they had already destroyed (yes, that is interesting, isn't it?). Nor has Hubbard provided his total consulting income, his tax returns, or a comprehensive list of his income sources and clients for the period since he left the White House in 2003.

So the next time you hear Mitt Romney refuse to release his tax returns, and then tell you that he can cut taxes and balance the budget while creating lots of jobs, well... I would ask you to remember that standing behind every great con artist is someone like... Glenn Hubbard.

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:26 | 2944019 williambanzai7
williambanzai7's picture

So this douche bag, whom I remember very well from the film, is Romney's, I mean Wall Street's, secret economic weapon....

BOHICA everyone!

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:31 | 2944030 economics9698
economics9698's picture

Hubbard, UCF grad, is a fucking Keynesian.  His textbook is 50% propaganda bull shit.  Political programming for the masses. 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:42 | 2944056 ThirdWorldDude
ThirdWorldDude's picture

Is Glenn related to L. Ron Hubbard? That would explain a lot!

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:56 | 2944075 economics9698
economics9698's picture

The Bush tax cuts, 2003, resulted in a revenue increase of 40.1%. If I told you that the increase in revenue was because of the Bush tax cuts I would be lying. Alan Greenspan’s 1% federal funds rate and the housing boom created most of the tax revenue increase but the Bush tax cuts were instrumental in giving the green light to consumers to spend, spend spend.

It’s a lie that tax cuts hurt tax collections. Unless they are below 25%, and we have not seen that rate since Calvin Coolidge, they collect MORE taxes because of increased economic activity.

Reagan collected 69% more revenue over his 8 years.

Kennedy posthumous cuts in 1964 greatly expanded tax collections.

Romney should eliminate corporate taxes and cut the top rate down to 30%.

The author does not understand why there is such wealth inequality and blames it on tax cuts. He is clueless. The reason for the wealth inequality, which began in 1971, is because of inflation.

The rich and government own the means of production and can raise prices whenever they want and have the ability to do so. The working class cannot and their wages are subject to supply and demand. With unlimited immigration, higher payroll taxes for social programs like Medicare and social security, and constant inflation of course they are going to lose out.

It has nothing to do with the top rate going from 39.6% to 35%. This is absurd.

These economic “experts” should do a little fucking research before they open their fucking mouth making a fool of themselves before a national audience.

Hubbard is clueless as well.

If you want to stop wealth inequality return to a gold or silver standard.  Until then these assholes are talking bull shit.

 

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/FGRECPT?cid=107

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:00 | 2944083 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

Er...maybe not.

 

''The Congressional Research Service (CRS) isn’t explaining why it recently decided to pull a study that examined Republican theories about tax cuts for the rich and found them wanting.

''The study looked at 65 years of tax policies and compared them with resulting effects on America’s gross domestic product, finding that cutting taxes for the very wealthy has never led to job creation and mostly just tends to encourage greater income disparity between the rich and the poor.

“The results of the analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 years in the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate do not appear correlated with economic growth,” the study concludes. “The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution.” 

Raw Story (http://s.tt/1rJOR)

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/11/02/congressional-research-service-pul...

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:28 | 2944124 economics9698
economics9698's picture

I have researched this pig nine ways to midnight.  When the US went off the gold standard and the money creation locomotive went into high gear the bottom 90% lost out. 

Main causes,

1.  Inflation. 

2.  Taxes.

3.  Immigration.

Think about it a second, 10 million illegal immigrant blue collar workers flooding the labor market during the housing boom.  What do you think will happen?

Social Security taxes going from 2% of GDP to 6%.  Who does that hit?  It’s not the rich.

Inflation.  How often do workers get a raise?  How often can a merchant raise prices?  Do the math.

So tired of all these lazy greedy corrupt “economist” covering up for the elites theft.

Get a silver or gold standard and living standards will increase for all if, for no other reason, than capital will be efficiently allocated and not wasted on housing bubbles.  The gold standard also put a cost on money so assholes on Wall Street who get $20 million dollar bonuses would have to be paid in real gold money, not some paper Ben prints out of his ass whenever he wants.

It’s all right there on the White House Historical Tables.

Fucking look once in awhile, you might learn something.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

Lazy MF economists covering for the elites.

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:01 | 2944244 aint no fortuna...
aint no fortunate son's picture

All good reasons but I believe there's an additional key one. Reagan brought in Donald Regan, CEO of Merrill Lynch, who ended up holding positions as his CoS and SecTreas. As the latter, he pushed to deregulate commercial banks and S&L's - we know how that worked out in the late '80's/early 90's. I doubt it was a coincidence that under Reagan/Regan the entire country went on a spending spree,, buy now, pay later - CONgress with the joys of deficit spending, civilians with a massive proliferation of credit cards. Wall St revved up its "asset" securitization engines and the rest was history. Under Reagan US debt surged over the $1 TRILLION level and it obviously hasn't looked back ever since, and no matter who wins this farce of an"election" we'll be over $20 Trillion in 4 more years.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 15:02 | 2944583 economics9698
economics9698's picture

I agree Reagan/Regan lit the fuse.  Raising taxes on the middle class and cutting taxes for the rich.  Spending increased 76% under Reagan.  Still the main cause of the wealth inequality is no gold standard.

Would the credit expansion be possible with sound money?

I think not.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 16:57 | 2944853 narapoiddyslexia
narapoiddyslexia's picture

Reagan was not relevant. GDP grew exponentially from 1910 to 2007 or so. The causes were outside Reagan's influence. His claim to have affected growth by cutting taxes is the same as the crowing rooster claiming he's the cause of the sunrise. Its a good way to fool the inattentive, but still a false claim.

See the chart

Reagan didn't affect anything that I can see. The growth curve did not change its inflection during his term.

Where am I wrong? [I'm no expert, just a guy with question.]

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 17:06 | 2944874 economics9698
economics9698's picture

Here is the inflation chart.

 http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?s[1][id]=CPIAUCSL

They look the same.

ZH has some good blogs on productivity growth and wages, the seperate in 1971.

Inflation.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 17:12 | 2944889 I am more equal...
I am more equal than others's picture

The author of this article is a fucking idiot.  A victim of group think for popularity. 

With statements like this "won't explain how he could possibly pay for the tax cuts he proposes" shows a mindset that is totally corrupt.  First, taxes are a confiscation process that pays for ever expanding government.  The origin of the money comes from my hard work (and people like me) - I do not work hard for the government - I work hard for my family.  My obligation to government - taxes - should decrease the more I make not increase.  Government should be limited to what it can do - fucking idiots like this author want ever expanding services.  FUCK YOU! Fuck the bitch the birthed you and the winch that birthed her - she was probably an FDR whore and you the product of an enormous progressive idiot.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 19:41 | 2945219 tooktheredpill
tooktheredpill's picture

Nice troll looking avatar too.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 22:53 | 2945557 jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

you really have a way with words.  i'm convinced.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:14 | 2944279 11b40
11b40's picture

While you do make some valid points, you still need to do some more work.  No where in your research do you mention jobs....or the lack thereof.  Gutting our manufacturing base and the financialization of every thing that moves, or can be found to have any value, is one of the root causes of all this, but there are many reasons that contribute to our dire situation.

Regarding the Kennedy tax cuts, do you recall what the top rates were back then?  As a reminder, they were 92% - more than 2 times as high as today.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:24 | 2944421 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

 

It's an EXCESS OF LABOUR. When the labour pool tipped in the 70s everything fell apart which lead to a huge expansion of credit and financialization of the economy. 

Exceess of labour means people get paid less (less tax revenue), which means they can buy less (GDP drops) and people need to borrow more to keep up (causing inflation). This turns into a vicious cycle. 

And it doesn't matter what you do as far as changing the tax code or implementing a gold standard. As technological innovation continues (replacing jobs) and cheaper manufacturing bases continue to pop up globally there is no way the amount of jobs necessary to keep up with the workforce will be created. 

Specialized highly educated workers will always be in demand, but the whole thing with "specialized" is those jobs are rare. The rest of the workforce is in serious trouble. 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 15:00 | 2944597 economics9698
economics9698's picture

"No where in your research do you mention jobs....or the lack thereof.  Gutting our manufacturing base and the financialization of every thing that moves, or can be found to have any value, is one of the root causes of all this, but there are many reasons that contribute to our dire situation."

Trade deficit?

Take a look here.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/NETFI?cid=108

 

What do you see before 1971 and after?

When you can print the medium of exchange and the medium of exchange is not backed by gold and other countries are lined up to buy the worthless paper then why not take advantage of it?  After all its not your ass losing a job.

Simply put it is cheaper fro the elites to printing money and import cheap shit to sell than pay real American workers in real plants to make real shit.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 15:13 | 2944607 economics9698
economics9698's picture

"It's an EXCESS OF LABOUR. When the labour pool tipped in the 70s everything fell apart which lead to a huge expansion of credit and financialization of the economy."

 

Foreign born Americans was at a all time 20th century low of 4.7% in 1970 and has increased steadily to 12.3% today.  The elites want cheap labor and democrat votes.

For those interested here is a link to the income tax top rates from the Brookings Institute.

Kennedy 91 to 77.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?DocID=543&Topic2id=30&Topic3id=38

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 17:27 | 2944923 11b40
11b40's picture

There are plenty of contributing factors, but you are correct.  Without U.S. Dollar hegemony, this would not have happened.

It was around 1974 that the lobbyists for the mass merchants & catalog showrooms finally got their way and had fair trade laws abolished in America.  Congress signed on to the idea that the maker could not control how his product was sold once title passed to the seller.  No longer was the smaller merchant protected.  No longer was a carefully developed brand from a smaller manufacturer protected. 

At the same time, these mass merchants were also working hard to reduce and/or eiminate tariffs. 

These 2 factors went hand-in-hand in allowing our manufacturing base for consumer goods to be siphoned off and re-deployed wherever the lowest cost labor could be found.

I have been involved with the retail industry for 40 years in various capacities, and traveled the trails of production from the U.S. to Japan, then Korea, then Tiawan, then mainland China.  We are now watching China lose market share in certain categories to India, Viet Nam, Maylasia, and other third world countries.

All the while, even though my income increasingly came from imported goods, I kept saying this was wrong.  I knew immediately that Ross Perot was 100% correct in 1992 when he railed against NAFTA with his "giant sucking sound" commentary.  We should NEVER have allowed this flood of cheap merchandise to pour into this country, force our domestic factories to compete against subsidized foreign industry, eliminate our manufaturing jobs, destroy the tax base, and dramatically drive up the costs of social programs.

We should never have allowed the multi-nationals to buy Congress, either, or finacial institutions to grow from 15% of the economy to almost 45%.  We should not have bought the supply-side, trickle down economics fairy tale.  It was a bad joke, and the joke was on us.

Now, we are well and truly screwed as a country.  Things are, in my opinion, much worse than most realize, and I do not know if there are any viable solutions that preserves the America we once had.  It's kind of like a beautiful tropical fish aquarium.  By turning up the heat, we can make fish stew from it.  Once it becomes fish stew, it can never be made back into an aquarium.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:11 | 2944125 nope-1004
nope-1004's picture

I will be contacting Columbia University and advising that they have a corrupt, inbred douche on staff.  Universities and colleges need to gain respect, as that is what higher learning is about.  Universities and colleges do not need to be aligning themselves with white collar, insider trading, faggots.

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:06 | 2944253 Diogenes
Diogenes's picture

"I will be contacting Columbia University and advising that they have a corrupt, inbred douche on staff."

Geez that will narrow it down. What university staff is not 99% corrupt inbred douches?

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:58 | 2944381 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

Columbia is very well aware. I've posted this clip many times, but it never gets old - Hubbard in inside job, enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlIoeTObmEk

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:13 | 2944132 redpill
redpill's picture

People are missing the forest for the trees.  None of Romney's flip-flopping promises are relevant, because even if he wins the White House, the Republicans won't have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and the Democrats will oppose every one of his policies in retaliation for kicking their golden boy out of office.  But the red teamers eat up the propaganda like the shit is already passed and that it all works out in the end.

And while I despise Mitt Romney, the faux outcry to see his old tax returns as if that is going to have a bearing on his qualifications is disingenuous.  The only reason people want to get their hands on them is to comb through them and try to find some dirt to use against him politically.  In that context I'm surprised he released the two years of returns that he did.  If a potential employer asked me to provide them multiple years of tax returns I'd tell them to go fuck themselves.  Plus I don't think one need to point out the irony of blue teamers complaining about a candidate not releasing personal documents.

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:18 | 2944144 vast-dom
vast-dom's picture

and Obummer paid what, 20% income taxes in 2011? It's F R A U D on both sides on the ugly gov divide.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:24 | 2944156 redpill
redpill's picture

If anyone were honestly concerned about ensuring the tax system was fair we would replace the income tax and corporate tax system with a consumption tax on new retail goods and services that would act much more like a wealth tax than the income tax does.  It would also encourage saving, which we desperately need, give people more choices in when and how to pay tax, and would result in a rush of capital back into the country since there would no longer be a reason to hide it offshore.

 

But people aren't serious about it.  They are consumed by the red team / blue team horse race and will view every and any issue through their partisan perspective.

 

Disclosure:  Don't blame me, I voted for Ron Paul

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:40 | 2944341 Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture

"we would replace the income tax and corporate tax system with a consumption tax on new retail goods and services"

My income got taxed on the way in.  Now you want to tax my savings when I spend them?  Fuck that.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:11 | 2944409 redpill
redpill's picture

You're already paying indirect taxes on your savings anyway. Corporate and payroll taxes get passed on to you every day. Besides it would also be offset by lack of income tax going forward. Ideally older folks wouldn't spend the principal of their savings anyway, but rather use the interest or dividends as income for expenses. Of course that's hard with ZIRP, but assuming we wrestled our monetary policy away from Keynesian madmen (which is about as likely as politicians giving up their ability to trade tax giveaways for votes through the income tax system) it would be a massive net benefit.

But even if all that were not the case, I'd rather take a hit on my savings today but ensure a future for me and future generations where the IRS and politicians no longer get to stick their fingers into every detail of every person's financial life each year. I don't think people realize the destruction our tax code inflicts on the economy.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 15:10 | 2944618 economics9698
economics9698's picture

I second whatever red pill said.  Some good insights.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 16:27 | 2944788 t0mmyBerg
t0mmyBerg's picture

If you believe those sons of bitches will allow the income tax to decline as an offset to the VAT if they can get it through, you are smoking some seriously powerful hashish.  It will merely result in a new higher level of tax for all.  They must not be allowed under any circumstances whatsoever to assess a VAT in America.

Sun, 11/04/2012 - 08:15 | 2945116 Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture

"You're already paying indirect taxes on your savings anyway."

That's no reason to pile direct taxes onto my savings.

" Ideally older folks wouldn't spend the principal of their savings anyway, but rather use the interest or dividends as income for expenses. Of course that's hard with ZIRP,"

Old folks spend their principal.  This isn't your "ideal" world.  Hard with ZIRP?  LOL.  You should have stopped right there.

"but assuming we wrestled our monetary policy away from Keynesian madmen"

LOL.  Come back with your proposal when that happens.  The answer is still 'No'.

"But even if all that were not the case, I'd rather take a hit on my savings today but ensure a future for me and future generations where the IRS and politicians no longer get to stick their fingers into every detail of every person's financial life each year."

Dude, they tap your phone, they read your email and they inspect your butthole every time you fly.  Hang on to your checkbook.  You might need it.

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 20:14 | 2945284 Acet
Acet's picture

Consumption taxes are regressive in that they affect the most those people that spend the biggest percentage of their income, i.e. the poorest.

Poor people don't save: they earn very little money and have to spend all of it in essentials.

Middle class people save little if any since they have little or no money left after essentials and some consumption.

Rich people spend a small percentage of their income in consumption and even after spending in luxuries, they still have most of their income left which is often used in things like property. Certainly, it's not going to be spent in one country only.

So your consumption tax is designed to fuck the poor, hard, and fuck the middle class while the rich keep most of their income. Well done! Great idea! Where did you got it from, the Cato Institute?

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:16 | 2944415 Totentänzerlied
Totentänzerlied's picture

"replace"

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 19:02 | 2945120 Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture

"Got it".

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:52 | 2944363 Nehweh Gahnin
Nehweh Gahnin's picture

"If a potential employer asked me to provide them multiple years of tax returns I'd tell them to go fuck themselves."

 

But then, you're not running for PUBLIC office, are you?  If I am going to trust you with my public policy, I expect you to own up to what you do and who you are.  If, otoh, I am merely hiring you to do a job, I expect you to do that job according to the criteria and goals I set for you, perform well, and make it more profitable for me to pay you than to not.  And if I am hiring you to do my finances, I damn sure WILL be looking at your financial record, and if you tell me to fuck myself, well, I guess you're not the one for the job, are you?

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:40 | 2944452 redpill
redpill's picture

Really?  Do you demand to see your accountant's personal tax returns?  You'd have a hard time finding a CPA that would agree to that.

This is why we wind up with douchebags in public office, because they are only ones willing to go through the unreasonable process.  Instead of getting the best person for the job, we get some asshole that doesn't mind having every detail of their life torn apart and spread across every media outlet known to man. 

Divorce papers, tax returns, college transcripts, it's all bullshit.  It gets demanded for mudslinging purposes, not because it's actually a way to appraise a candidates qualifications. 

As long as we make it clear that political candidates are going to have every aspect of their entire lives disgorged, we'll only get the scum to run that are so power-hungry that they are willing to put up with it.

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 14:05 | 2944495 OneTinSoldier66
OneTinSoldier66's picture

The other end of the spectrum is we know nothing about candidates and vote for them just based upon whether or not we like the sound of their name.

 

Who determines where the line is drawn?

 

I have come to believe that Representative Democracy through electoral politics is a myth. I could vote for someone to represent me, but they're not ever going to be me no matter how hard I pull the lever.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 14:16 | 2944516 redpill
redpill's picture

How about instead of demanding tax returns and divorce papers we demand actual policies and legislation. Proof of action, not just words. Make these assholes actually write up some legislation and say "this is what I will do" instead of the horseshit we put up with in 2008 where all we heard is hope and change only to find out the prick just hands over the legislative agenda to Nancy "you have to pass it to see what's in it" Pelosi. Or Mitt's magical tax world where he promises it will all work out fiscally on the back end. Really? How about you fucking write that one out Willard? And like back in math class, SHOW YOUR WORK.

We hear so much verbal masturbation from these assholes, I'm tired of it. I don't give a shit what they say, show me the laws you'll sign, period.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 14:36 | 2944539 OneTinSoldier66
OneTinSoldier66's picture

I hear ya, loud and clear. +1

 

However, it won't work. The only thing that is a vote is when you trade... spend money, or labor, or barter. That's the only method in which the market receives a signal these days. Now that we have state issued monopoly money, we have the best Government that monopoly money can buy, for those that have state issued monopoly money.

 

Btw, I just want to let you know that I gave you a green arrow on all your posts about a consumption tax. Cheers

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 15:33 | 2944676 Gutterballs
Gutterballs's picture

Studies of time series data are worthless. The past century of data is not a nice gaussian distribution of data points, it is a slow and relentless march towards more debt, more leverage, more financialization, more inflation, etc. Any correlations massaged from the data are suspect, before you even get to the whole "correlation is not cuasation" elephant.

You need to learn to differentiate the signal from the noise. Economic data points are noise. Drawing conclusions based on correlations of noise is not just a waste of time, it also crowds out the pursuit of real knowledge and insight. Do us all a favor and refrain from posting this crap.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 16:52 | 2944840 TheProphet
TheProphet's picture

GDP is a monetary measurement and thus highly susceptible to inflation.

To be sure, Stephanie Pomboy was written up in Barron's a few months back and has attributed 83% of the GDP "growth over the last four years to dollar inflation.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 16:52 | 2944841 TheProphet
TheProphet's picture

GDP is a monetary measurement and thus highly susceptible to inflation.

To be sure, Stephanie Pomboy was written up in Barron's a few months back and has attributed 83% of the GDP "growth over the last four years to dollar inflation.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:00 | 2944091 hawk nation
hawk nation's picture

Nice response I'm going to keep my eye on you [supposed to be from the scene in back to school with dangerfield]

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:05 | 2944106 CaptainObvious
CaptainObvious's picture

Heh heh, crazy Sam Kinnison.  How I'd like to see him in Nanny Bloomberg's face right now. 

"...putting headbands on, running in the goddamn New York Marathon!  AHHHHHHH!  AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!"

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:15 | 2944139 true brain
true brain's picture

Isn't this a round-about way of attacking Romney on the final weekend before the vote? They're all crooks. What about Obama's con-artist, Corzine, Rubin, Summers, Levit, etc .etc.

That's why I ain't voting no more.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 15:04 | 2944604 Whiner
Whiner's picture

You Sir are not bright. Vote for the candidate who will hurt you LESS! It's like having to choose a bride out of the whore house. Don't pick the one w herpes, but the one with a head cold

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 22:53 | 2945559 true brain
true brain's picture

Whiner, you're such a typical idiotic sheeple. Don't you even think? So Romney take 49% from me and Obama takes 50%, big freaking difference. Both supports NDAA, drones, wars upon wars. If you have a little brain and critical thinking skill,  you will realize that there is essentially no difference between the two. By voting, you legitimize and allow the corrupt government to persist. If 50.01% of voters don't vote, the government does not have legitimate claim to govern and everything must be redone until there is majority vote. Do you understand now? Idiot.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 22:53 | 2945560 true brain
true brain's picture

Whiner, you're such a typical idiotic sheeple. Don't you even think? So Romney take 49% from me and Obama takes 50%, big freaking difference. Both supports NDAA, drones, wars upon wars. If you have a little brain and critical thinking skill,  you will realize that there is essentially no difference between the two. By voting, you legitimize and allow the corrupt government to persist. If 50.01% of voters don't vote, the government does not have legitimate claim to govern and everything must be redone until there is majority vote. Do you understand now? Idiot.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:11 | 2944123 i_call_you_my_base
i_call_you_my_base's picture

"Bush tax cuts were instrumental in giving the green light to consumers to spend, spend spend."

Really? I thought it was primarily people levering up their homes.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:14 | 2944137 Too Big 2
Too Big 2's picture

You make some good points but let's cut through the b.s.  If the citizens of the USA want to create jobs we only have to establish a flat tax. 

If Romney were smart he would make Forbes his economic advisor and get a flat tax established for both personal and corporate taxes.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 14:37 | 2944560 Kobe Beef
Kobe Beef's picture

If Romney were smart: Ron Paul, Treasury Secretary.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:25 | 2944305 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

the reason for so much inequality is the perpetual bailouts of the real estate "lobby." i think Sandy might have popped the last three bubbles: Manhattan, Switzerland and California. We shall see. Once real estate values nationally start resetting then i think a great "leveling effect" will begin. Obviously your argument is totally false empirically: taxes were astronomical after World War II...and there wasn't a lot of inequality. The current variant only happened after Nixon and the closing of the so called "gold window." Simply put "the rich have gotten bailouts and we've gotten the shaft" ever since.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:25 | 2944424 Totentänzerlied
Totentänzerlied's picture

Post-war America had more advantages than any other nation ever, period. Cheap gas and rapid adoption of car ownership, all economic rivals totally decimated, an entire continent plus many other regions needing to be rebuilt, the whole red scare bullshit provoking the biggest military spending binge in history, Bretton Woods, biggest population explosion in national history and one of the largest of all time, etc. etc. etc.

No, it was just the tax rate. Do you take everyone to be as much of a fool as you are?

"taxes were astronomical after World War II...and there wasn't a lot of inequality." Blue therefore seven, up therefore black. Seriously?

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 17:44 | 2944883 earleflorida
earleflorida's picture

@9698

Lawrence Lindsey 2001-02 was the 'Dir. Nat'l Econ Council'! Lindsey was responsible for authoring 'The bush #43 Tax Cuts', as a financial advisor extraordinaire, period! Subsequently, shortly after Bush #43 took the U?S into war- as all good republicans do- Larry Lindsey was fired from his dual post'd job[s]! Why? He had the audacity... 'too-stand-up-on-his-own-two-feet' stating publicly that the 'True Cost' was well over the administration figure [and, he himself, was well short also... surprise, surprise?] and with the siding of Paul O'Neill the 'Secretary of Treasury' [2001-02] they both were given the terrorist/ traitors stigmatization via Georgie `Boy! "Off with Their Heads!!!"

Glenn Hubbard had help from brother 'JEB' of Florida? Why you ask? Bush won because of ?! The job was his on a high status recon-list. It's that simple!

The "PTB" could care less...

Check these links:  Alan Blinder [POS] & Lawrence Lindsey ie., "once loved, twice burned" [fat-POS]---     http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2012/03/27/2-Prominent-Economist-S...    here if problem:

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Authors/M/suzanne%20McGee.aspx    ref: 3/27/12 Pg3 directory-- "2 Prominent Economists Say the Bush Tax cuts Must go" [oh, the hypocracy of it all ... it's ok to laugh- or cry?!] 

and here from bizzar'r`oh-land`ahoy... `Who Really Owns NYC's Financial District?'-- Jekyll-Island Incarnate  

http://www.lovkap.blogspot.com/2011/11/1-of-america-control-99-of-americ...    

In conclusion... I find the author to be part of the Hollywood Crowd gathering up kindle for his next 'Tempest In A TeaPot'... Shitless FireStorm! 

Ps. Just so there's no confusion;  Columbia, Princeton, Wharton, Chicago BSoE, Stanford GSoB, Yale or Harvard, et.el. mean shit when their curriculum's fundamental is pigeon-holed in a 'Keynesian BirdCage'!

Ps2.     Go Romney!!!

 

 

 

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:42 | 2944460 malikai
malikai's picture

L. Ron Hubbard was a "nuclear scientist" turned scifi writer turned cult leader. In one of his books (History of Radiation I think it was called), he wrote that radiation does not effect the brain at all.

I'd say Glenn is probably L. Ron's zombified corpse.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:31 | 2944031 no taste
no taste's picture

Dear Mr. Eastwood,

Mr. Eastwood, I am a Republican.  I am an angry Republican.  I will NOT vote for Mr. Romney.

http://dearmreastwood.weebly.com/

 

Not that the other asshole is any better.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:55 | 2944230 Bananamerican
Bananamerican's picture

so far 12 assholes disagree with you, NT

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:31 | 2944320 no taste
no taste's picture

I am sure that there are many more than 12 assholes who disagree with me.  Blankfein alone is so important that he counts as something like quadzillion assholes.

As a simple matter though, why don't people just vote for a third party?  It almost doesn't matter which third party.

I know too many hard-working, taxpaying middle Americans who think somehow something will be some tiny bit better for them with Romney.  It ain't going to happen.  Americans are going to be screwed by Robnomba.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:59 | 2944088 icanhasbailout
icanhasbailout's picture

Well, Obama could win perhaps, and Larry Summers and Tim Geithner will ride to the rescue...

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 14:22 | 2944231 socalbeach
socalbeach's picture

Regardless of what one thinks of the candidates, Obama is probably going to win. Nate Silver is the most rigorous of the pollsters I've come across and he has an impressive track record.  He correctly called the winner in 49/50 states in the 2008 pres election, and all of the 35 Senate races. Romney's main hope now is that the state polls are "biased" in Obama's favor.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-...

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:20 | 2944296 williambanzai7
williambanzai7's picture

Summers and this guy are the same kind of fucking maggots which is just more evidence of the illusion of choice,

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:28 | 2944313 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

I have no idea what this guy is going to do. I would say he will be taking orders "from the boss" should that boss be hired so you might as well put Mitt Romney up there. Anywho "the bailout regime is fully entrenched." I don't see anyone changing that anytime soon...

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:09 | 2944116 Fredo Corleone
Fredo Corleone's picture

This very same article regarding Mr. Hubbard was posted on Cafe Americain on 27 October; it runs still.

How serendipidous for the Incumbent, that such stale news finds itself as top weekend billing -- a mere three days before the Election.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:22 | 2944298 11b40
11b40's picture

Any comments on the facts presented?  I had not seen this previously, so what's your point? You prefer we all learn these details after the fact?

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:30 | 2944171 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture

So many anti-Romney posts lately.

It's almost as if Obama were the default ZH candidate.

Even Thirty Rock was much darker regarding Obama than ZH has been.

Then again there are the rumors this is just a trap site established by BIGOV to track the "radicals".

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:57 | 2944234 Bananamerican
Bananamerican's picture

Gully, you are one sick puppy

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:18 | 2944288 Oldwood
Oldwood's picture

Most were just happy to make fun of Romney when he was perceived as behind. Now that there is talk of him possibly winning, the sharp knives are coming out! There are a lot of folks here who openly attack the idea of socialism but secretly are hoping for a good paying position once the plan is fully in place. Humans always seem to find a way to make lemonaid from lemons and I think reality tells us regardless of this race, we will be seeing lots of lemons in our futures. I can hear the lemonaid stands (as permitted by Obama) being built right now!

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:27 | 2944428 prains
prains's picture

what does that make you then Gully??????

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 22:45 | 2945546 Almost Solvent
Almost Solvent's picture

Exactly.

Because the government needs to set up a "fake" website to spread the truth about how rotten to the core our economic/political system is?

It's not like they already run all US internet traffic through Langley computers. 

Oh yes, the TinFoil crowd always flips out when sites like ZH start going mainstream. 

 

ZH has started to go mainstream - and all that goes along with it, including increased traffic through Langley computers. 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:28 | 2944432 glenlloyd
glenlloyd's picture

Like I've been saying all along, it's either the devil you know or the devil you don't know.

Pick one or the other, not going to make a difference at all, there's nothing remarkably different between the two.

As RP said before when asked about whether we need a third party, I would agree, we need a true second party.

Same old same old

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 19:44 | 2945225 tooktheredpill
tooktheredpill's picture

I wouldn't stress too much, if its not Hubbard, it would be someone just as bad until Wall St stops pulling the strings. I wonder what happened to Larry Summers.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:28 | 2944024 max2205
max2205's picture

And so who is behind The bernake

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:35 | 2944040 john39
john39's picture

The rothschilds and a few other crime cabal families... estimated to own at least half of the entire world's wealth.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:41 | 2944054 samsara
samsara's picture

Dup (damn touch screens)

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:41 | 2944055 samsara
samsara's picture

Easy, who owns controlling shares in the private company he works for?

I would expect to see names like Warburg,Rothchilds, Rockefeller, et al

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:20 | 2944150 john39
john39's picture

strange that people down arrow this type of factual comment.  look it up idiots, do you think these parasites run the FED as some sort charity for the cattle?

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:02 | 2944098 vast-dom
vast-dom's picture

Thank you Charles for your public service and excellent doc. 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:55 | 2944229 LMAOLORI
LMAOLORI's picture

 

 

Actually the correct answer is the politicians since they could end the fed tomorrow. Dem Chuck Schummer get to work Bernanke and a week or so later he did.

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:31 | 2944033 Crimedog
Crimedog's picture

ZH - dare I say it - fair and balanced

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:32 | 2944034 Element
Element's picture

He'll fit right in.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:33 | 2944036 Wakanda
Wakanda's picture

Pointy heads like Glenn Hubbard piss me off way more than the politicians that use them for cover.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:27 | 2944427 Melin
Melin's picture

The pointy headed Glenn Hubbards are using the dimwitted politicians for cover.

Hence, the permanence of it all.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:34 | 2944037 centerline
centerline's picture

When finance shifts from being a service to mankind into the controlling mechanism... this is what you get.  Period.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:36 | 2944044 john39
john39's picture

actually, it has probably always bee this way...  just a lot easier to see now.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:44 | 2944058 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

It is partly a problem of scale.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:45 | 2944061 centerline
centerline's picture

I would agree but expand upon it that it has been the design and supply of "currency" that has been king since common mediums of exchange were put to widespread use.  When that expands to fuel an entire "financial" sector that has such power over virtually everything else, the outcome is widespread fraud.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:17 | 2944143 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

I don't think anything is ever going to "serve mankind" in an all inclusive, global sense; that's what I meant about scale. Corruption is harder to inhibit as scale increases. Complexity and the number of failure points increase as scale increases. The consequences of failure due to corruption or complexity increase with scale.

I think our national socio/economic systems are too large to function properly - if by "properly" one means to serve the interests of those governed as a whole. Supranational systems are even worse. The idea of a global system is terrifying.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:34 | 2944323 11b40
11b40's picture

Thank you, Rex, and plus 100!

This whole "bigness" dynamic has been encroaching on humanity for over 50 years, but the computer revolution allowed it to move into hyper drive.  Humans are not machines, but we are being treated like them, and they are quickly becoming our masters, creating the situation you well describe.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:36 | 2944045 AL_SWEARENGEN
AL_SWEARENGEN's picture

Like every other bought out bureaucratic elitist cocksucker, he wiggled and squirmed when his deeds were brought into the light of public scrutiny.  Unfortunately for honest people, researchers like Charles Ferguson who actually have the balls to ask real questions are few and far between compared to vast majority of those other bought out cocksuckers in the mainstream media.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:10 | 2944120 aint no fortuna...
aint no fortunate son's picture

totally agree, except I might suggest he's a bureaucratic elitist cockaroach

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:14 | 2944126 Bob
Bob's picture

The reformation of "journalism" under monopolistic free market practices since Clinton's Telecommunications Act of 1996 has bastardized a previously respectable profession beyond recognition and reduced "investigation" to presenting an extremely limited set of perspectives as nothing more inherently meaningful or anchored in objective reality than a taste test between Product A and Product B:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996

As if "objectivity" necessarily means neutrality:

https://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/10/25-3

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:38 | 2944048 JamesBond
JamesBond's picture

......how he could possibly pay for the tax cuts he proposes.......

====

charles ferguson hasn't the IQ points necessary to see the absurdity of this statement

 

jb

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:40 | 2944051 tony bonn
tony bonn's picture

"...refuses to disclose his tax returns..."

you call that an issue when an indonesian citizen is sitting in the white house who absolutely refuses to release any of his past records such as college transcripts, passport applications, birth records, draft registrations, and other documents which past presidential candidates were to subject to release? and on top of that releases a photoshopped birth certificate??

i hope that the implication of your exposure of hubbard isn't that soetoro is an improvement, because if it is, go fuck yourself.

a vote for obamney is a vote for nazism, terrorism, war, death, and murder.....

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 14:44 | 2944568 Kobe Beef
Kobe Beef's picture

Don't forget the forged Connecticut SSN. Disgusting. Of course the Roman Imperials had such upstanding, principled Emperors such as Nero, Caligula et al. We all know where this train is going.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:40 | 2944052 lizzy36
lizzy36's picture

I loathe this man.

I refuse to engage in a conversation that includes but what about "insert current favorite kleptocrat - for example: Geithner".

This isn't about GOP or DEMS, because lets face it a man like Glenn Hubbard don't give a fuck about ideology. He is an entitled, pedigreed, white dude, who believes it is his RIGHT to lie, cheat, commit fraud and get PAID for it.

Glenn Hubbard is actually BAD at what he does. He is a failure as an economist and yet somehow has risen to the top. Somehow despite a legacy of being wrong, and corrupt he is a player. Perhaps that is what it takes to be a player:get a corrupt economist with a decent pedigree to endorse bad policy. He is like a bad doctor who consistently misdisagnosis cancer for the common cold, and yet somehow becomes Dean of Harvard Med.

The fact that a MAN like Glenn Hubbard could become Treasury Secretary, which he believes is his birthright, is exactly what is wrong with America.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:51 | 2944079 Manthong
Manthong's picture

"He is an entitled, pedigreed, white dude, who believes it is his RIGHT to lie, cheat, commit fraud and get PAID for it"

Unlike Eric Holder.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:01 | 2944096 lizzy36
lizzy36's picture

As i said in my comment this is not about the COMPS. It is about holding each  responsible in a vacuum, NOT based on the bell curve of corrupt politcial persons.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:05 | 2944249 Manthong
Manthong's picture

Oh, I agree with you.. I was just sayin'..

http://i.imgur.com/RNun6.jpg

 

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:53 | 2944081 Element
Element's picture

He's the right guy for the position ... if one wanted to engineer another inside job ... nah!

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:18 | 2944146 SMG
SMG's picture

That's a really good point.  You know we sit here and lament how someone so destructive, could ever be put in a position of power.  It's because those who are running everything WANT him there.   Until we as a people, turn off American Idol, put down our smartphones, pay attention and actually do something about it,  the Oligarchs are going to keep screwing us till all of us are completely enslaved or dead.  Black vs White, Old vs Young, Repub vs Democrat.  They are all false divisions to distract us from the real lines in the war.   The Luciferian Elite vs everyone else.  Spread the word, get organized, and let's do something about it.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:13 | 2944129 LetThemEatRand
LetThemEatRand's picture

"He is a failure as an economist and yet somehow has risen to the top."

I agree with everything you said except for that.  I believe these guys are wrong deliberately.  They profit from it.  They need to convince the public that giving more to the oligarchs is the best economic policy despite that common sense would dictate to the contrary, and guys like Hubbard are on the front lines selling that very bullshit.   Even many seemingly intelligent posters here still have a semi-worship of Reagan, the modera-era father of debt bubbles and redistributor of wealth to the top under the guise of trickle down economics.  Guys like Hubbard perpetuate that myth, and they are generally well paid for the effort.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:04 | 2944393 myshadow
myshadow's picture

scum on top of a stagnant pond.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:00 | 2944243 LMAOLORI
LMAOLORI's picture

 

 

obama got the peace prize and paul krugman also how backwards is that given obama's record on killing and krugman's stupidity on economics and look who is the current treasury secretary the worse of the worse tax cheat blow the bankers geithner even hubbard who is merely this author's speculative theory couldn't hold a candle to his incompetence and fraud

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:40 | 2944053 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

The premise that tax cuts must be "paid for" is moronic and only argued by idiots.

It isn't the State's money you tard!

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:20 | 2944151 Unprepared
Unprepared's picture

OK. Maybe he used the wrong language but you know what he means and he is correct: reduce taxes implies reducing spending if one wants to be budget-neutral, all things equal. Hence the "paid for", specifically because it's not the "State's money".

 

Please quit superficial attacks just because someone used the wrong language or because you know you will get greenarrowed.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:39 | 2944193 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

Imade the statement because it is an idiotic premise, period. Furthermore, if someone can't use the right language they should shut up and not express the opinion until they can say whatever they are trying to convey.

The problem isn't that Leviathan doesn't get enough, its that it spends what it doesnt have and never will have on programs that dont have enough support among people that actually pay taxes to pay enough to cover its costs.

Sun, 11/04/2012 - 08:00 | 2945860 xiao miao
xiao miao's picture

"if someone can't use the right language they should shut up and not express the opinion until they can say whatever they are trying to convey."

Zerohedge "Lednbrass"

alias Silverseek's "valerb"

alias Kitco's "about ag" before getting banned

Now you come here to unload your frustration and trying to make internet friends

Why don't you take a walk with your dogs instead of spending your life before a screen? As you describe it Alpharetta should be a nice place anyway

Still lighting up your house "like a christmas tree" to keep nightly visitors away, smartass?

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:43 | 2944057 Long-John-Silver
Long-John-Silver's picture

He's a Keynesian just like the Keynesian serving under Obama. At least with Romney some level of control can be maintained with a coming re-election campaign. Obama will have no limits if he is re-elected. Every President should be voted out of office every 4 years.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:46 | 2944064 onebir
onebir's picture

Mr Ferguson: thank you for giving it your best shot. It's slowly making its way to the target.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:02 | 2944246 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

Anyone who exposes people like Hubbard and the bigger fucking maggot, the William Dudley (who is the Man pulling the strings) is okay with me. 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:49 | 2944066 EhKnowKneeMass
EhKnowKneeMass's picture

The article is spot on. However, it's rating had "plummeted" from 5 to 3.8 in a couple of minutes. All ZH closet republicans were out in full swing.

Deep down, most of us, if not all, are partisans or party apparatchiks. As somebody else says "fucking sheeples".

 

Please note that I can't vote, so please don't categorize me as a Democrap.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:17 | 2944142 EhKnowKneeMass
EhKnowKneeMass's picture

<cliche>LOL</cliche>

Now, whom did I offend, the republishits or democraps? C'mon, now, you can do better. MOAR down-votes please. Pretty please?

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:49 | 2944072 Opinionated Ass
Opinionated Ass's picture

how he could possibly pay for the tax cuts

 

How do you pay for tax cuts? Good point. How does a marauding drug addict pay for robbing people less? Wait, I think you don't have to pay anything to stop hitting people on the head with a baseball bat! Eureka!!

 

"Silly Ass. What the writer means is how will the drug addict pay for his drugs if he cuts down on his robbing!" Oh. Well why didn't he say that then?

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:50 | 2944073 illyia
illyia's picture

Loved the movie. Great article, too.

Thanks, CF and ZH.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:50 | 2944074 cranky-old-geezer
cranky-old-geezer's picture

 

 

Get a PhD then sell your soul to Wall Street.  The new formula for success in America.

Constitution says legislative, executive, judicial. 

Now it's government, Wall Street, academia.  

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:09 | 2944118 CaptainObvious
CaptainObvious's picture

What about the fourth estate, the MSM?  Oh, wait, I forgot that's a subsidiary of the government now...

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:51 | 2944076 hawk nation
hawk nation's picture

Does no one in politics have a moral baraometer to guide them?

I had hopes and maybe i am nyeve that based on romneys life and church involvement that he would do the right thing for the vast majority of american citizens but now my faith in good over evil is fading

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:10 | 2944122 CaptainObvious
CaptainObvious's picture

Damn boy, you are naive.  When did church attendance ever dictate morality?  Most of the biggest cheats I know attend church on a regular basis.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:14 | 2944278 Diogenes
Diogenes's picture

My grandmother used to say, if you want a dirty deal get in with a church man. She was right.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:58 | 2944380 JR
JR's picture

Addressing the congressional Hispanic caucus in september 20, 2012, obama, reciting part of the Declaration of Independence conspicuously leaves out “by their Creator.” And in his 2011 thanksgiving address, God was not mentioned in his entire address. What’s more, in his 9/11 proclamation, he chose to omit the words “God” and “prayer.”

In your grandma’s estimation, then, does this make Obama a safe bet to seal the deal?  He not a church man!

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:22 | 2944299 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

Here's 20 mintues of Mitt Romney flip flopping. And yes, you should already know this by now. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wTjBSpf8tM

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:52 | 2944080 JR
JR's picture

Glenn Hubbard is not running for president; Charles Ferguson is not running for president; and Tyler Durden is not running for president.

But Barack Obama is - perhaps the president with the most devastating economic policies, not to mention the landslide into socialism, of any president in America’s history.

Just why, on the weekend before the election, is Zero Hedge coming out full bore for the reelection of Barack Obama?

This has been the dirtiest political campaign in recent years, but who would have believed that Zero Hedge would climb down into the mud to participate.

And, then, there is the case with a Don’t Vote appeal from a UK contributor seeking to encourage libertarians not to vote Republican and to invite hosts of Obama bloggers to come to the site  -  a disreputable column purposely kept on the ZH front page into the weekend.

This blog will prove my case as the paid campaign supporters for Obama on this site use the red junk button in their desperate attempt to reelect Barack Obama.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:56 | 2944084 Element
Element's picture

Let me guess, you still play that old political favorite-party game?

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:03 | 2944103 JR
JR's picture

What do you think is happening here on Zero Hedge? I worked extremely hard and was a contributor for Ron Paul. I say that in the face of this campaign, not against Romeny, but a campaign for Obama. They are both flawed candidates but these comments result in votes to reelect the president.

And that’s disgraceful. I had expected better from Zero Hedge.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:24 | 2944158 Bob
Bob's picture

So was Ron Paul just a means to keep votes the R's think of as belonging to them from running out of the party altogether?

And it's ZH's obligation to not address any of the issues in a way that might negatively impact the mission to herd Ron Paul supporters back to their rightful owners?

I'm voting for neither face of Obamney, btw.  Just curious. 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:44 | 2944205 JR
JR's picture

Thanks for your comment, Bob.

No, I supported Ron Paul because this nation needs a complete wash-out of its economic system, including an end to fiat money and the reign of a private banking cartel. That movement is still continuing and will grow stronger.

But I do not see how four more years of Obama continually strengthening the power of the international bankers, reducing the influence of the American middle class, and establishing a permanent Third World culture and economy with the help of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Ben Bernanke, et al., needs to be supported and you and I both know that to stop voting at this moment and to foster blockbusting attacks on Mitt Romney are votes to reelect the president.

There is absolutely no evidence that Romney is other than a moral man. And there is no evidence that he will support the strengthening of the international bankers in their quest to establish world government. Those claims cannot be made for the president.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:25 | 2944297 Element
Element's picture

However, there is plenty of evidence that he's a complete loon who solemnly believes the New Jerusalem will be in Kansas, and holds hardline fundamentalist as well as ultra-zionist views, right?  Just the sort of loony needed to kick-off a global war, proper.  You just may get some new problems that makes your present menial political concerns look quite fucking idiotic and beside the point, in retrospect.

just sayin

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:38 | 2944336 JR
JR's picture

And your implication is that Obama and Biden (“I am a Zionist”) do not toe the line on Israel?

just askin'

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:01 | 2944390 Bob
Bob's picture

Hey, if you could get Mitt to stop using that pouty "its not fair" voice and to instead express himself in a properly "big boy voice" I'd appreciate it.  Likewise for that twisted look of being caught with his hand in the cookie jar that he wears most of the time along with the pouting. 

It's just a personal pet peeve I have with him.  Naturally, I don't expect the lying itself to change. 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:13 | 2944413 JR
JR's picture

Bob, it was in all the papers, the president is Obama, not Romney. And so this election is about Obama, as well as Romney. Regardless of how you are voting, you’ve given Romney a shot. Do you have something for Obama, plus or minus? Then let’s have it.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 14:14 | 2944521 Bob
Bob's picture

C'mon, shills for BarryO can expect to be taken with the same degree of seriousness. 

Why should anybody drink either koolaid is what I think. 

When you're so damn sensitive about Zomney you kinda join company with the Obots, whether you appreciate it yourself or not.   

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 22:53 | 2945561 Almost Solvent
Almost Solvent's picture

Hell yes! I was at a party last weekend with some friends and friends of friends. A couple Obots and Rbots got into it back and forth. 

(1) The points they argued were so fucking idiotic (he's not an American, he's in a cult, etc. etc.)

(2) Several of us "with a clue" started interjecting how BOTH parties were fucked up and we got turned on by both Obots & Rbots as some common enemy

(3) This country is fucked no matter who wins this election

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 14:25 | 2944536 Matt
Matt's picture

Some see re-electing Barack Obama the fastest path towards a reboot.

EDIT: and Romney as the quickest path to WW3.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:24 | 2944159 aint no fortuna...
aint no fortunate son's picture

"They are both flawed candidates but these comments result in votes to reelect the president."

That's total bullshit. Every person here has no doubt made a decision, hopefully thoughtfully and well informed, a long time ago. I personally decided I will NOT vote for either of these pathetic excuses for human beings as a statement in itself. As I said before in another article, the lesser of two evils is still evil. We have no choice when it comes down to picking one of these cretins. They're both nothing but bought and paid for whores for political crime families - the dims and the repugs - that themselves are merely increasingly transparent fronts for corporate america, lobbyists, K street. Big insolvent criminal banks, Big oil, Big arms merchants, Big pharma, Big puppet media run this country and its political whores lock stock and barrel. So I say fuck 'em all, I don't participate in a fucking lie known as "democracy." Democracy's dead, zed. R.I.P.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:39 | 2944175 LMAOLORI
LMAOLORI's picture

 

 

+1 on both your posts JR it's not Hubbard running and it's only speculation as to what role he would play in a Romney administration.  I also worked for Ron Paul in fact I followed him before he ran for President and the reason was his views on limited government. I will remind people that Ron Paul did NOT endorse Lying Spender Gary Johnson and he ran as a Republican. ZH has been filled up in recent months by people from the Daily KOS (the daily Commie) one wonders if they are paid posters.  A write in is a wasted vote but go ahead do what you will and then remember if you vote for or write in a vote that doesn't count YOU are responsible for the government we get.  YOU are responsible for the rise in food stamp use. YOU are responsible for the lack of criminal prosecution of the bankers by obama. A lot of you claim boomer's should be held responsible for past governments well keep that in mind when you waste your vote or vote for obama. Junk away I wear the the junks as a badge of honor against stupidity.

EDITORIAL: Third-party votes are wasted Alternative candidates can’t solve America’s ills

snip

It feels good to take a stand on principle. Knowing you’ve done the right thing for the right reason brings a feeling of satisfaction; third-party advocates thrive on this emotional response. The problem is, voting for an alternative candidate is rarely the right thing to do.

Supporters believe the Libertarian Party’s Gary Johnson would, if elected, be better equipped to restrain Washington spending. The front page of Mr. Johnson’s own website acknowledges that’s not something that will happen. He only seeks enough votes to make a protest statement. “Five percent of the vote ends the two-party abuse and allows Libertarian candidates equal ballot access and federal funding,” wroteMr. Johnson.

That’s right, the Libertarian candidate wants your vote so he can get a handout from Uncle Sam: matching funds that neither Mitt Romney norBarack Obama have sought this year.

Texas Rep. Ron Paul showed there’s another way. Though he was theLibertarian Party’s presidential candidate in 1988, he learned he could be far more effective within the two-party system. As a GOP contender in the past two cycles, Dr. Paul developed a devoted following among small-government Republicans that he used to form the Campaign for Liberty, which fights for change from within. 

Food Stamp Growth 75X Greater than Job Creation

Here's the short list of Gary Johnson lies, and it's not exhaustive.

  • Nobody committed any crimes.  You remember that, right?  From here and, originally, from here back in 2010
  • I will submit a balanced budget.  Oh really?  Well, history says he didn't in New Mexico.  Oh, I know, he claims he balanced the budget, but he did it like Clinton with new debt, which means he played "cook the books."  Legal, but a lie nonetheless.  Worse, his campaign has chronically been in debtso he can't even balance his own campaign's budget!  How many bites at the apple do you get on a claim when you have proof via someone's actions that they will do exactly the opposite?

 

 

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:15 | 2944275 Element
Element's picture

I don't have a dog in that fight as I'm not a yank, but I think you'll find most people reading zh aren't going to vote for either of these snakes in the grass, and any one who does, well, they can't really be helped, or convinced by mere blog posts and comments. 

But ranting at zh's TPTB, and posters in general, about the political content or the alleged bias in them a bit dubious a position and activity.  Are you seriously going to have some sort of intense emotional experience/reaction, if one or the other is elected in a few days?  Really??

If so, I hope you work out why that is, so it never happens to you again.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:59 | 2944086 lizzy36
lizzy36's picture

So, you are having your stroke in installments (not a question but a statement).

ps - as a CANADIAN (so NOT a paid obama campaign worker) i junked your comment because it is ignorant.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 10:59 | 2944089 centerline
centerline's picture

Doesn't matter.  It is just the illusion of choice.  This is all just part of the circus.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:03 | 2944102 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

I agree with your right to be an imbecile but quit abusing the privelege.

ZH runs articles from a wide range of poltiical viewpoints, its part of what makes this place worthwhile. Echo chambers are for the stupid which is no doubt why you seem to be yearning for one.

I junked you because you are a dumb person with an infantile grasp of the situation, not because I like Obama.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:12 | 2944130 JR
JR's picture

Finally, the mysterious Obama supporters who use the junker button have come out of the closet. Perhaps you’ve noticed that this is the weekend before a contested presidential election.

To come out savaging one candidate over the other is to spectacularly take part in the election; hardly creating an echo chamber for ideas.

Romney is a candidate who has flip-flopped on his issues, yes, but he is running against a known regime allied with the bankers and the socialists that is bringing America’s to its knees.

In you echo chamber of ideas, where is this weekend’s critical attack, then, on the Obama Administration?

You may not be a vote for Obama but you have helped generate them for Obama.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:47 | 2944214 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

If you think another effete Ivy League metrosexual who dislikes a broad interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, thinks the Boy Scouts are big meanines for not supporting gay scoutmasters, ran his entire term as executive on borrowed money that rocketed state debt, advocates state controlled health care, is owned entirely by a thoroughly corrupt financial system, and has indicated that he will continue foreign adventurism that we cannot afford is any different whatsoever than the other guy who point for point follows the same policies you are off your rocker.

It doesn't make a damn bit of difference which of those useless swine wins the Presidential Auction.

Just turn on your TV and go back to sleep.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:57 | 2944233 JR
JR's picture

I don’t have a television, do you?

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:07 | 2944114 EhKnowKneeMass
EhKnowKneeMass's picture

You have been here 3 years 10 weeks and still believe in this right/left false dichotomy. Holy stinky poopshoot, the country is fucked.

By the way, a few days ago somebody accused ZH of being anti Oblimey and was helping Rombie get elected.

 

Deep down, most of us, if not all, are fakes and full of shit.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:12 | 2944127 centerline
centerline's picture

still laughing.  thanks!  we are so fucked.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:19 | 2944148 JR
JR's picture

My country’s collapse and the brilliant responses I’m hearing here are beneath what I had come to expect in my 3 years and 10 weeks on Zero Hedge.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:38 | 2944186 EhKnowKneeMass
EhKnowKneeMass's picture

What did you expect, JR, that an article on ZH will change the results of the election. If so, I have got news for you, the results of the election have already been decided; what you are witnessing is just a puppet-show. And you are blaming ZH for helping Oblimey? In all my years at ZH, I have heard the following

ZH is misogynist

ZH is misandrist

ZH is anit-LGBT

ZH is racist

ZH is pro-republican

ZH is pro-democrat

ZH is pro-life

ZH is pro-death

ZH is pro-alien

ZH is anti-immigrant

ZH has a few biases, but they aren't any of the above, IMHO.

Deep down, most of us, if not all, still believe elections are free and fair, and vote based on our baises.

!!!FUCK!!!

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 11:11 | 2944117 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

Dude, I had that kneejerk thought myself, then remembered ZH hammers everyone but Ron Paul. Obama is getting plenty of bad press from ZH on this hurricane stuff. ZH is an equal opportunity bullshit exposer.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:52 | 2944364 JR
JR's picture

Just look at the first line of this piece, ma cheri amour: Mitt Romney has a credibility problem.

That’s all you need to know that this is a hit piece. Zero Hedge enlisted this column knowing Ferguson’s past positions on Romney to use on the weekend before election. IMO

;-) as always

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 12:25 | 2944307 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

Hey retard, none of us want either of these worthless cocksuckers for President. Take your useless partisan bullshit and shove it up yer ass.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wTjBSpf8tM

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 14:11 | 2944513 JR
JR's picture

It’s hard to discuss issues with someone who has such an extensive vocabulary. I just can’t seem to come up with the right words that would impress you.

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 14:35 | 2944556 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

How can anyone discuss anything with you? It's like talking to a rock.

Issues? You dodge and junk all my comments that address them. I presented Mitt in his own words and you ignored it.

Stop trolling and maybe someone will take you seriously.

 

Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:07 | 2944397 JR
JR's picture

After the election will Zero Hedge be able to repair its image after opening the door to Cass Sunstein’s megaphone and the Obama Campaign? ...

...The Megaphone desktop tool is a Windows "action alert" tool developed by Give Israel Your United Support (GIYUS) and distributed by World Union of Jewish Students, World Jewish Congress, The Jewish Agency for Israel, World Zionist Organization, StandWithUs, Hasbara fellowships, HonestReporting, and other pro-Israel public relations organizations. The tool was released in July during the 2006 Lebanon War. An RSS newsfeed is available so that non-Windows users may also receive the Megaphone "action alerts."[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

...The Megaphone Desktop Tool gives the user the option of going to a particular site with a poll, and if the user chooses to go to the site, the software then casts a vote automatically, when this is technically feasible. The vote is chosen by the distributors of Megaphone. ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaphone_desktop_tool

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!