Comments on: Pity the Downtrodden Billionaires

By: Timon

Timon — Sun, 19 Dec 2010 05:44:57 +0000

Judy, that wasn’t my experience in New York. In my experience, landlords were corporate entities that double charged for building repairs that weren’t done and hired foreign-born superintendents to work part-time while contractually obligated to hire full-time supers.

By: Judy K. Warner

Judy K. Warner — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 13:48:31 +0000

That folk song illustrates the idiocy of class warfare. The story of actual landlords rather than folk-song ones is very sad, at least for some landlords. Many immigrants and other people with little education in New York City bought rental properties as a way to move up in the world. They didn’t reckon with New York’s rent control laws and other laws heavily weighted against the evil landlords. They could not do required maintenance and upgrades without raising rents, and they could not raise rents. Many lost all they had as their buildings went into foreclosure. It is so easy to demonize people when you picture them as little monopoly men in top hats. It seems “fair” to take away from those guys.

By: Todd

Todd — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 05:42:29 +0000

“Our fiscal practices and our sexual practices have this in common: they both seek the pleasure without taking adult responsibility for its natural consequences.”

Republican borrow-and-spend economics as adolescent immorality. Gotta love it.

By: Gregory K. Laughlin

Gregory K. Laughlin — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 20:33:20 +0000

What’s unfair is for one generation to tax itself insufficiently to pay for what it spends, thus passing on a large portion of the cost (plus interest) for their spending to later generations. Spend less or tax more — or a combination of the two. That is the only moral course for this generation. Our fiscal practices and our sexual practices have this in common: they both seek the pleasure without taking adult responsibility for its natural consequences.

By: Anne B.

Anne B. — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 17:32:02 +0000

I want to see Bernie Sanders’ most recent 1040.

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:51:42 +0000

I don’t see the argument here. Government demand for revenue is “insatiable” precisely because American voters have decided they want government to do things like fight wars in other countries and care for the elderly and indigent through SS, Medicare and Medicaid. That’s the majority of federal spending right there and it’s also where most of the future growth in spending will come from.

You don’t like higher taxes? Then what do you propose to cut to balance the budget?

Moreover, the above post is built on a false premise as Clinton did indeed raise taxes in 1993 and tax revenue as a percentage of GDP grew throughout the 1990s. Not all of that was due to tax rates of course — the growth of silicon valley was a big factor as well. It still refutes the notion that higher taxes will not lead to higher revenue.