Reasoners on the Tube: Nick Gillespie Discusses Obama's Tax Cut Deals on CNN's Parker Spitzer

Editor in chief of Reason.tv and Reason.com Nick Gillespie debates Mother Jones' David Corn about Obama's recent tax cut deal how the adminstration's role in the economy has made recovery all the more difficult on CNN's Parker Spitzer. Air date: December 9, 2010.

Approximately 6.08 minutes. 

Go to Reason.tv for HD, iPod and audio versions of this video and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic notification when new material goes live.

Comments

[Episiarch]

I find it ironic that of the shows that reason editors get invited to, one of the primary ones is hosted by the king of scumbags, Eliott Spitzer. Nick, I know that you want to be invited back, but can't you make a bareback joke or something? Make that shitheel squirm.

[J sub S]

Alas, Veronique de Rugy ignored my plea to kick Spitzer in the family jewels and stalk off.

My mom always said, if at first you don't succeed, try, try again.

Nick, could you do me a favor during your appearance on CNN's Parker Spitzer?

[ClubMedSux]

This morning on the train I was watching the podcast of Kurt Loder on the show and while discussing the Charlie Rangel censure the panel was asked who else should be censured for hypocrisy. The sight of Spitzer leading a roundtable discussion calling out political hypocrites made me want to laugh and cry at the same time.

[Pro Libertate]

I'd work in references to the number 9 each visit. Nothing overt, just odd and not-entirely-relevant mentions of the square of three.

[Warty]

What's surprising is that Spitzer is relatively courteous as a host. I expected him to go all FUCKING STEAMROLLER on his guests.

[Pro Libertate]

It's because he has no power. Not even as a pundit.

[ola]

How about when one of the guests mentions Nick's libertarian philosophy, he can bring up personal liberty and the legalization of prostitution.

[joshua corning]

I like how Corn acknowledged that Nick was a libertarian then used a bunch of arguments that he uses against conservatives.

As a descendant of the Cornish poeple I disown that prick.

On a side note did everyone else notice that the video stops right in the middle of Nick talking?

[Milton Quaffalot]

Nick, I wish you had talked more about the middle-class tax cuts.

I have yet a good explanation on why it's OK to borrow $3.2 Trillion to cover tax cuts for the middle-class but borrow $700 Billion for tax cuts to the wealthy is beyond the pale.

[Almanian]

The government wouldn't have to "borrow $3.2 Trillion" or "borrow $700 Billion" more if the government spent less, regardless of the tax rates.

"It's" not OK, but has nothing to do with "cuts" for the "middle-class" or "the wealthy". SPEND LESS, CONGRESSTARDS.

[joshua corning]

I have yet a good explanation on why it's OK to borrow $3.2 Trillion to cover tax cuts for the middle-class but borrow $700 Billion for tax cuts to the wealthy is beyond the pale.

Actually if you go back and read Nick's many posts on the subject he has pointed out numerous times that over the past 60 years the top tax rate has jumped all over the place yet tax revenues has stayed nearly flat at 18 to 19% of GDP.

The take away lesson being that raising tax rates on the very rich does nothing for raising revenues and the only way to raise revenues is by raising GDP....

Of course it has also been demonstrated numerous times that lower tax rates increase GDP.

The simple fact is that there is no 700 billion you will get from the rich...because if you raise taxes on them they will simply not earn the income that you want to tax....and only the economy will suffer because of it.

[Tman]

Nothing makes me want to puke BILE any harder than hearing that phrase "JOBS CREATED AND/OR SAVED".

It's the single DUMBEST phrase that has been added to the political/economic lexicon over the last two years.

[Brandybuck]

I think this is the issue that finally drives a wedge between Obama and those turds that voted for him. For the first time I cam seeing signs of outrage from the left directed at Obama for having the temerity to consider a reduction in the skyrocketing rate of spending.

[Flex Nasty B.I.G.]

I think the show would be a lot better if the hosts spoke with one guest at a time. e.g., Parker, Spitzer, and Gillespie for 20 minutes, then Parker, Spitzer, and the douchebag guy for the next 20 minutes.

As it is now, there's too much crosstalk, nobody gets a chance to fully explain their thoughts, and the discussion goes all over the place.

[Almanian]

there's too much crosstalk, nobody gets a chance to fully explain their thoughts, and the discussion goes all over the place.

CNN Cable news stations consider that a feature, not a bug, based upon what I've seen.

[Spiny Norman]

"I don't think this tax battle is..."

What? I don't think this tax battle is what? Don't leave us hanging!

[Almanian]

Also, I've decided that, under the right conditions, re: Parker - I'd hit it.

That is all

[ChrisO]

All you'd have to do is say "I hate Sarah Palin", and you'd probably be good to go.

[Xenocles]

I'd hit Spitzer, too.

[R C Dean]

Why do people keep referring to tax cuts, when the deal currently under discussion is nothing more than the extension of the current rates?

Why do people keep saying that keeping the current rates will cost the government hundreds of billions of dollars?

Why are people so fucking stupid?

[joshua corning]

Why are people so fucking stupid?

The poeple using the term "Tax Cut" want taxes to go up. Essentially the left.

It is smart of them cuz it gets their side all riled up and on message. It is idiotic because the rest of the country wants tax cuts.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do people keep saying that keeping the current rates will cost the government hundreds of billions of dollars?

Because a lie doesn't work unless you commit to it, even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

Why are people so fucking stupid?

I blame the New Math.

[Anonymous]

Looks like you have link conflict; the post of Nick on Red Eye is linking here. (Ever think of implementing a proper URL scheme? Didn't think so...)

[sage]

What the hell.

I was just going to say that The Jacket was dominating the table, but I appear to have arrived at the wrong thread. I'm going to bed.

[Michael Duff]

Gillespie makes some great points here. Namely that tax rate stability is more important than the idea of a temporary cut.

But what really struck me is how the guy from Mother Jones seems determined to argue with a Republican who is not in the room.

His response to every argument is, "But the Republicans did..." but that doesn't get us anywhere. That's just partisan sniping that sidesteps the real issue.

The constant burden of libertarians, trying to live down what "our Republicans" did.

[hmm]

Why does the article Reasoners on the Tube: Nick Gillespie on Red Eye with Greg Gutfeld, Talking Wikileaks, NASA, Olbermann, & More lead here for comments?

Anyway I loved the bloop bloop tivo at 23 minutes in the Reasoners on the Tube: Nick Gillespie on Red Eye with Greg Gutfeld, Talking Wikileaks, NASA, Olbermann, & More video.

The Jacket was awesome.