"Tax The Rich (More)?": Paul Krugman And Newt Gingrich Square Off - Live Webcast

Tyler Durden's picture

The periodic Munk debate spectacle out of Canada is memorable for bringing together very flamboyant personalities, discussing very germane topics. The one that has just started has a topic of whether the rich should be taxed. More. Surely an issue that has seen its share of discussion in the US in the past year, so we hardly expect to learn anything new. What is most amusing, however, is that the debate tonight pits none other than Paul Krugman (and former Greek socialist leader and economic destructor extraordinaire George Papandreou, whose family incidentally was found with tax-evading Swiss accounts so brownie points for extra hypocricy) defending more tax hikes, and pitting Newt Gingrich and Arthur Laffer on the "don't tax me bro" side. The result should be quite a memorable catfight.

From the Munk Debates:

Arguing for the resolution, be it resolved tax the rich (more), is Paul Krugman, New York Times columnist, Nobel Prize winner, and global authority on economic inequality. He will be joined by George Papandreou, President of the Socialist International and former prime minister of Greece.


Speaking against the resolution will be Newt Gingrich, recent candidate for the U.S. Republican nomination for President and former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. Gingrich will be joined by Arthur Laffer, a "founding father" of supply-side economics, and key economic adviser to President Ronald Reagan.

So, without further ado, here is millionaire Krugman vs millionaire Newt, debating whether it is "fair" for the rich to give "moar".

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
HelluvaEngineer's picture

I'll just assume the down-arrowers are drug dealers or illegal immigrants. Or possibly the 1%.

If everyone pays, more people will understand the cost of the Leviathan.

surf0766's picture

Don't you know. It will hurt the poor. Those making under 50,000 and on food stamps.

Baby boomer have agreed to fair a 20% wealth tax all for the greater good.

Manthong's picture

Krugman, Papandreou V Laffer and Gingrich?

For some reason I get images of Homer and Mr. Burns V Ned Flanders and Sideshow Bob.

Meat Hammer's picture

It has always been my contention that the debate over which economic class should pay what amount of taxes is flawed in its very nature by the belief that the government having more money is a good thing.  

AmCockerSpaniel's picture

I agree with with the not giving too much money to the government, but the government is the one who decides how much they will take.

But on percentage bases; The tax rate should be such that the more one nets, the higher the rate. This is to enlarge the middle class. All

this trickle down stuff is a lie. If we want jobs here, then we need to dump "free trade". The only thing free trade did was to make it free to

move jobs out of here.

Big Slick's picture

That was like watching paint dry.

Half of me thinks that if we still need to be making this argument, we've lost the war

The other half thinks that the true conversion will only be realized in the coming crisis/war.  

In either case, listening to Paul Krugman debate Newt Gingrich on whether to tax the rich is a monumental waste of time.  

They trynna catch me ridin dirty's picture

'Everybody who makes more than I do should pay more taxes, so that I can get more free stuff.'

Like a wise man once said, democracies only last until they bankrupt themselves.

Harbanger's picture

You sure it wasnt "Socialism only works until you run out of other peoples money?  Which always leads to bankruptsy.

Freddie's picture

What are three CFR stooges and a sort of economist - Alec?

Gingrich is a CFR and so is Krugman assuming they would have him.   Laffler has a little credibility but the other 3 deserve a rope and a lamppost.    Gingrich pretends to be a conservative but he is a CFR Rockefeller C-lister.

Roandavid's picture

Skins a little thin there, eh bucko?

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

@HelluvaEngineer: "I'll just assume the down-arrowers are drug dealers or illegal immigrants"

Don't forget the sheep who don't want to see their shepherds go without a nice wooly coat this winter-of-our-discontent.  Or they hope to morph into a shepherd one day.  Can you say "Stockholm Syndrome!" ?  /s

Seriously, though, why should I give a damn about how much more the 'rich' will pay?  What (!), because the rich will take their post-bailout or post-layoff fiat elsewhere?  LMAO.  People should worry more about their own tax bracket -- assuming they actually pay into the system.


sitenine's picture


No, just an ordinary guy here. I down arrowed you because "FAIR" and "TAX" are mutually exclusive concepts.

FoeHammer's picture

BARF. These guys make me sick.

JPM Hater001's picture

Did Laffer every pay Schiff off???

Henry Chinaski's picture

It could be worse.  John McCain could debate Syria with John Kerry.


Meanwhile, the farce hits a new low...


pigs-n-space's picture

Talk about two useless fucks......

steelhead23's picture

yes, Laffer has been wrong so often he's a counterindicator - and Newt is a history professor whose understanding of history ended with Aristotle.

1000924014093's picture

"The butcher’s business has been replaced by a picture of a butcher’s business".


Who would have guessed that it would have been the "capitalist" countries that were busy creating Potemkin villages for their masters 80 years later?

smacker's picture


Papandreou quoting the Marxist loon "Gordon Brown" will not get me on side.

ParkAveFlasher's picture

More MSM false dichotomy diversionary octopus ink splatter now in the form of a pseudo-intellectual pro wrestling cage match.   My money is on Gingrich.  I hope lightening strikes them both though, two crispy skeletons propped up against podium seems like it would entertain me much more.  EDIT Oh they are in chairs, not podiums.  That would be even more satisfying.  Take hairy greek man with you too.

DaveyJones's picture

i've never seen anything more pseudo

KickIce's picture

How about we hang both their asses and put them out of my misery.

JPM Hater001's picture

Papandreou moderating is just precious...

Loved the monalogue on just societies...

Common_Cents22's picture

Having anyone associated w/ Greece on the panel is like having Corzine on a Corporate Governance and Ethics panel.

centerline's picture

More kabuki theater.  Reality = rich will get taxed into oblivion.  If you aint in the club, here it comes.

Chief_Illiniwek's picture

Ordinarily I would watch.  But the Simpsons are about to come on...

Goldilocks's picture

The Simpsons - Duff Beer Presidential Debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FlIpLkwzYU (0:32)

The Simpsons - Krustyburger vs. McDonalds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Pb70dHWVHo (0:46)

The Simpsons - Radiation Dude vs. Radioactive Man
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0AUY7sU66M (0:41)

HelluvaEngineer's picture

What about Kang and Kodos - "go ahead and throw your vote away"

Common_Cents22's picture

Gingrich could've beat obama but was thrown under the bus by his own party to run Mr. nice guy Romney who wouldn't confront anyone.

NotApplicable's picture


ParkAveFlasher's picture

I'd like to see Monica Lewinsky debate Bill Clinton on whether or not cigar insertion is a turn on.  Moderating would of course be Hillary.

HelluvaEngineer's picture


Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Don't you love the SNR at this point? /s

I vote for more signal, less noise. Please.

noless's picture

Goldilocks, you, like i; enjoy linking to moderately relevant YouTube videos which draw pop cultural references which jibe with the tone.

Thereby, let it be known that in this instance i upvoted your contribution, even though it was In fact, numetal.

Let it be known to all, the truth uncovered for all to see.

Freddie's picture

Anyone remember when Clinton and Gingrich met in NH and conservtaives thought Newt would kick Bill's ass.  Newt was gushing over Clinton.  The reality is they are both CFR stooges (Rockefeller boys) and we know Bill is NWO.   Newt is a fake conservative RINO CFR member.

HelluvaEngineer's picture

Gingrish is a POS who unfortunately hails from my neck of the woods.  He is a purely political creature, with no useful skills.

Common_Cents22's picture

and obama has some skillz?    

caimen garou's picture

that gang together does'nt make one good man, what a waste

Common_Cents22's picture

Flat tax would eliminate 90% of IRS and tremendous power,  would bring the rich in the game by eliminating legal tax avoidance that is not affordable for lower or middle class.

notquantumdum's picture

And, the Fair Tax would do even better.  We almost had the flat tax back in '86 in the US when there were only 3 tax brackets, as I recall . . . 22,000 revisions and 72,000 pages to the tax regulations later . . . here we are.

Shizzmoney's picture

No, Tyler......BOTH of these guys want to tax the poor more.......and the rich less.

It's just where they spend the poor's money (they call it "Revenue"), is where the debate is.

Common_Cents22's picture

Krugman wants to divide up a smaller and smaller pizza.    The answer is growing the economy.

Harbanger's picture

You want continual growth on a finite planet?  That'll destroy us!  That's how they scare simpletons into accepting a progressively smaller pizza until they finally kill each other over the last few pieces..

nbsharma's picture

Papandreou? Krugman? Gingrich? Jeez.