A world in economic crisis

Showing up the MoveOn.Org as out of touch economic idiots

Posted in Uncategorized by Aussie on December 12, 2010


There are some millionaires who have signed on to a “petition” stating that they do not need “tax cuts” and that they “do not need the money”. This video illustrates the stupidity of their position.

As it is rightly stated by the male in the video, the person who is earning the higher income has several options to consider, and all of them would help people who are out of work.

I love the ending of this particular video.


5 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. […] The matter is that if you are a private individual and have a right to issue dollar, which is supported with the world economy, so you are tempted to start overproduction (if only you are no saint like Maria Theresa, but bankers of Fed are certainly not), as it gives you fantastic opportunities and privileges. That was the real purpose the Fed was established for, that was the real aim of affords to make dollar to become the A great related post about this: https://australianstagflation.wordpress.com/2010/12/12/showing-up-the-moveon-org-as-out-of-touch-econ… […]

  2. Tyrone said, on December 14, 2010 at 10:02 am

    Exactly – if you feel that strongly about it, Mr./Ms. Rich Blowhard, by all means, write the government of your respective country a check! And let the rest of us keep our money to do with as we wish.

    I am reminded of a song from the English 60s rock group Ten Years After (who played at Woodstock, 1969). The lyrics are very telling, and are exactly what this class warfare fight is all about right now:

    “Tax the rich;
    feed the poor –
    till there are
    no rich no more.”

    • Aussie said, on December 14, 2010 at 2:26 pm

      The best example of why this attitude of taxing the rich “until the rich are no more” is wrong is in the Gospel accounts and refers to the attitude of Judas Iscariot who takes umbrage when the woman anoints Jesus with nard. It was Jesus who chastised Judas Iscariot and stated “the poor will always be among us”.

      What that scene tells me is that there is a place for the wealthy in the world, because it is the rich who use their money to provide jobs for those poor people. There are rich people who abuse their powers attained through wealth. A good example of such an abusive person in our era has to be George Soros. He does not use his own money to help those who are disadvantaged, rather he uses his money to bring down governments and the like. On the other hand, you have someone like Bill and Melinda Gates (not everyone’s favourite people for a variety of reasons) who use their money through the Gates Foundation to assist third world individuals. We might not agree in totality with the projects that the Gates support but they are not using their wealth for the sole purpose of bringing down governments or breaking the Bank of England.

      The issue should be about justice, perhaps even social justice (which is not well defined) in the Biblical sense. This form of social justice would be looking after the widows, the orphans, the mentally and physically disabled. This is not meant to be on the government scale which is what we see in the 21st century but on the individual scale – where family members look after each other.

  3. Carlyle said, on December 16, 2010 at 6:01 am

    Excellent article – piles on the truth!


    • Aussie said, on December 18, 2010 at 2:30 pm

      I looked at the American Thinker Post. Thanks. I am not sure if it was downloaded into my reader when I returned from my overseas holiday in New Zealand via a cruise ship (sea sick anyone?).

      I note the economic ignorance of both Nancy Pelosi and Øbama, as well as Keith Olberman who has also been making the same kind of uniformed comments regarding unemployment benefits and the economy.

      I will continue to maintain however, that that kind of comment and ignorance has nothing to do with Keynesian economics. I know it is a long time since I read Keynes, yet I do not remember him ever making such ludicrous claims regarding the impact of unemployment benefits upon the economy.

      The reason is that unemployment benefits are paid out of taxes collected from those who are employed. If people are unemployed then they are not contributing to the economy. The contributors are those who are in employment and who are paying taxes!!!!! It is not the other way around.

      Since I come from a country where we have had unemployment benefits for a very long time, I am well aware of the arguments for and against using those benefits. The most obvious point is that they are welfare payments. The next is that they should be short term, to tide people over when they are unable to find work over a long period of time. Also, giving out these benefits without the requirement of some kind of work i.e. work for the dole leads to a portion of the “workforce” being unproductive. This is also true when workers in say NSW State rail come to work each day, sign on and then do nothing all day because they cannot be sacked. They have not produced any goods or services but they are being paid by the State to do nothing.

      I will attempt a longer article on the subject because unemployment benefits are used in a number of countries and it is a controversial subject for a variety of reasons. Anyway, I doubt that Keynes would have agreed with Pelosi and Øbama on the subject. It is simply not a Keynesian explanation!!!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: