Hillary Clinton

These 2 Olympics Commercials Show Everything That's Wrong With Democratic Economics

While Hillary Clinton tries to tax Wall Street and punish companies that move, Andrew Cuomo uses scores of millions of taxpayer dollars to advertise a failed government program that waives taxes and rewards companies that move

|

A couple of nights back, while watching the Olympics, I saw these two expensive-to-air commercials in rapid succession. The first is the brainchild of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, the second is a campaign ad for presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. This is your Democratic Party on economics:

Making our economy work for everyone starts by making sure those at the top pay their fair share in taxes.https://t.co/uDdkrzKL9O

I can think of no better snapshot of major-party economics as practiced in 2016. We need incentives to reward companies for moving in, and penalties to punish them for moving away! Let's waive taxes for a decade on one politically acceptable category of businesses, while raising taxes permanently on a disfavored class right next door! And no matter what, it is government that will help your business grow, and create millions of new jobs.

At least Clinton's intelligence-insulting ad was paid for by her own campaign. Cuomo, on the other hand, has poured more than $200 million of taxpayer money into promoting New York like this since 2012, including north of $50 million for Start-Up NY, a program that the governor promised would "supercharge" the Empire State economy.

So how many jobs has Start-Up NY produced, in exchange for all this advertising, and an estimated $100 million in waived taxes? Uh, 408. Cuomo, meanwhile, insists that the many critics of the ad campaign's desultory return on investment are "wrong," because

the advertising is generic. "Come to New York," and "We will help your business grow if you come to New York," and "New York is not the frightful place that you thought it was," "We're not a high-tax state — we'll eliminate taxes." So that's what the advertising did. We had a very anti-business reputation, and if you asked any company, we actually did — you ask companies around the country, "Would you ever move to New York?" They'd say, "Oh no no no — New York is anti-business. It's very high tax, it's very high regulations." So we had a bad reputation that we had to correct to even be considered.

And the quote-unquote Start-Up ads are really generic. Start-Up means, "Come to New York and we will help you start up your business—no taxes, but usually we'll also give you a loan, we'll give you an incentive, we'll invest in your business and take an equity participation." But if a state wants to be competitive now, it's going to take more than just no taxes. That's sort of the opening bid. But most often you're going to have to put an additional investment package on the table to be competitive with what the other states are offering.

What a godawful mess.

And as for why New York has a bad enough business/regulatory reputation that it needs to spend eight figures counteracting that impression, look no further than Cuomo's own speech at the recent Democratic National Convention:

[O]ur progressive government is working in New York. We raised the minimum wage to $15, the highest in the nation because we insist on economic justice! We enacted paid family leave because all workers deserve dignity! We are rebuilding our middle class and we're working hand in hand with organized labor because the middle class is the backbone of this society! We are protecting the environment by banning fracking because this is the only planet we have.

There is a better way, one that both 19th-century political parties have long since abandoned. And that is this: Make the rules—including tax levels—few, simple, and fair, and then please get the hell out of the way. That's how "we make the economy work for everyone," or to translate out of the Hillaryspeak, that's how an economy can produce far more opportunity than would-be central planners could ever fathom, let alone conjure up with their incessant interventionism.

Advertisement

NEXT: Which Presidential Candidate Is Pumped about Driverless Cars, 3D Printing, and Gene Editing?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. This article is written in the first person but has no byline.

    1. Reason has finally ended the charade and now speaks for itself.

      1. On Aug. 17, 2016 12:21 pm, Reason became fully self aware. Judgement Day.

        1. I think I’ll stay away from woodchippers for the next while.

          1. Has the overdrive reached the maximum state yet?

    2. My last pay check was 9700 dollar working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
      This is what I do,…. http://bit.do/FOX92

    3. Which article? The one that has Matt Welch’s name at the top, or was that added later?

  2. Let’s play “guess the author.”

    1. Going off just the headline… Nicky.

      1. Yeah, I’d agree. Robby would have thrown in a obligatory dig against Trump.

        1. Robby and ENB came to mind, but would they write about economics?

          It could also be Fisher, since it’s very heavy on New York politics. The suspense is killing me.

    2. Well, whoever it is watches the Olympics, so probably some lameass like Nick.

    3. Ha! Welch wrote it, probably while wearing an unusual tie.

      1. And a friggin’ backpack.

        1. Why ya gotta be dissing my backpack?

          1. “it’s cool bro. Lots of people have silly nick names.”

          2. Because it says swiper no swiping on it?

          3. Jealousy, probably. [cinches straps tighter on own backpack]

            1. Oh, I have a sweet ass backpack from my firm, too. It’s just one of those things: walking around midtown and seeing all the suits with the backpack. Call me old school, but backpacks are not part of the business look.

              I think it’s time for the ’80s aluminum-coke-transaction briefcase to make a comeback. It makes a bolder statement.

              1. the ’80s aluminum-coke-transaction briefcase to make a comeback

                meh. I had a friend with one. there was a comeback during the dot-com boom which was the “Super-slim aluminum briefcase”. Frankly they’re unwieldy, and date very quickly. they look like you’re trying too hard. Its like the japanese kids and their pencil cases.

                more du-jour have been either classic leather portfolio-cases (w/ Ipad), or more rough-tumble Filson-style outdoor ‘go bags’/computer cases.

                1. M-51 Engineer Bag. OD of course.

              2. haha, ass-backpack

          4. I’m pretty sure the “Cross-Slung Messenger Bag” replaced the “Now Do You Have Your Juice Box, Honey?”-book-bag sometime around the turn of the millennium.

      2. More like on his sofa in his underwear.

    4. It’s sensible and well written. Must be Welch.

      (yeah, I cheated)

  3. Make the rules?including tax levels?few, simple, and fair, and then please get the hell out of the way.

    But, how then can I use the levers of power to enrich myself? /Polderp

  4. Hmmm…. article by anonymous? This is new.

  5. Speaking of Hillary, did anyone hear that NPR interview with Julian Assange this morning, and if so, did you get the impression that NPR is hopping-fucking mad that Assange made Hillary look bad? Ari Shapiro would just not let go of tack that the leak came from the Russians. Who cares what the emails showed… the lead came from the Russians, AND SHOULD YOU FEELZ BAD ABOUTZ THATZ JULIAN!!1!!?!!!?!??

    1. No but I’d love a link. I’m far too lazy to do any searching.

      1. Oh, and it was with David Greene, not Ari Shapiro.

        http://www.npr.org/2016/08/17/…..email-case

        You kind of need to listen to the interview audio to get the continuous pressing from Greene about the Russians.

        1. But was it the Russians?
          Well, the emails are pretty bad.
          Yeah, but who gave them to you?
          They implicate some serious things.
          So the Russian hackers got into the DNC?
          Do you have trump emails?

          1. they’re all debating single-payer healthcare, and how Hillary will bring it closer, and why FDR was the greatest thing ever.

            the word “Russia” doesn’t even appear in the comments. Its clear that the whole frothing-fascination with the “Russia done hacked us!”-angle is entirely a media-creation to avoid ever actually talking about the contents of the DNC leak.

            1. Who are these people?

              I don’t know anyone, nor can I relate, to being obsessed with single payer health care. Its as if life just isn’t worth living until your taxes are paying for your medicine.

              Practically no topic related to health can be discussed in media without “Well, if we already had single payer healthcare, we wouldn’t have any problems related to health care!” becoming the primary topic.

              It’s worse than Hitler.

              1. life just isn’t worth living until your taxes are paying for your medicine

                They think this is equivalent to “someone else (maybe the superrich!) is going to pay for my healthcare.”

                They really are that stupid.

          2. I saw those.
            Pitiful.

          3. notthatjoe Guest ? 5 hours ago
            I’m tired of all of this. I’m tired of these stories. I’m tired of explaining that there was retroactive classification. I’m tired of reminding people Colin Powell did the same thing. I’m tired of defending her and just want her to get to work because she will do a good job.

            1. I’m tired of reminding people Colin Powell did the same thing.

              Why do people think that this is an argument? If the other guys did it, that makes it OK?

              1. “I’m tired of reminding people Colin Powell did the same thing.” (NPR commentator, I presume)

                Except…. he didn’t.

                http://www.politifact.com/trut…..same-thin/

                The fact that Jill Stein and Gary Johnson isn’t neck and neck in the polls is an indication of just how BADLY (or unintentionally) the dem’s base is misinformed and blinded by ideology. Sellouts shouldn’t pretend to be enemies of the establishment.

            2. Whoa, Idle. I think that actually IS that joe. You know, the short one from lowell.

            3. I’m tired of explaining that there was retroactive classification.

              There is, practically speaking, no such thing. What these shitheels are trying to say is that some of the emails Clinton had on her private server were not properly evaluated by an OCA for classification before being transferred in an insecure manner. That takes it from one crime to two. Apparently, if you rape somebody and then kill them, you’ve committed no crime because they just cancel out.

              I’m tired of reminding people Colin Powell did the same thing.

              No, he did not. He had two email accounts. One for official State Department business, hosted by the State Department, and one for unofficial business, hosted elsewhere. Not to mention that the rules changed between when Powell was Secretary and when Clinton was. Even if Powell did exactly what Clinton did–and he didn’t–she was under a different set of rules. And that rule change had nothing to do with Clinton but rather reflects the changes in how IT is perceived and used as technology marches forward.

            4. As I understand it the SOS is responsible for designating classification. The whole ‘they weren’t classified at the time’ canard is pure idiocy. notthatjoe should go play in the freeway.

              Cankles is a pathological liar and about as sophisticated liar as a 12 year old.

              1. As I understand it the SOS is responsible for designating classification

                Only for classified information that relates to the business of the State Department (roughly). Not for classified military or national intelligence information.

                It is definitely a canard, though. You don’t handle information that is classified but not yet evaluated by an OCA as though it were unclassified.

                1. Moreover, there are classification guides which remove most of the ambiguity. It’s not like people sit around all day waiting for OCAs to review every piece of information. For the most part, the classification is easily determined from the information itself and is “applicable” from the moment the information is originated, not the moment somebody bothers to slap a classification header on it.

    2. Look, the Russians are trying to influence American elections by showing how the Democrats steal American elections.

      1. I mean, if it prompted reforms that led to more honest primaries and general elections, well, technically that would still be influencing elections. So.

      2. That seems like bulletproof logic.

        1. That was more of a fight against the communist insurgents who sought to enslave the entire population, not so much a fight against an elected party.

    3. I caught that. It was exactly what I’ve come to expect from NPR. They are all-in for Hillary.

    4. Yes. It was sad.

      Almost as sad as the Joseph Stiglitz interview at lunchtime where he droned on and on about how bad free markets are.

      1. Stiglitz is one of those professional assholes who thinks Top. Men should run everything solely because he is sure he will be one of those Top. Men.

        1. See also: Krug-Man.

        2. Stiglitz scored an econ Nobel for ‘proving’ that govts. can make everyone better off by taxing and subsidizing.

    5. Establishment “journalists” like NPR are going to be against people like Assange by default. They’re nostalgic for an older time when they would get to be the middle-man between people like Assange and the general public. Instead, he just uses technology to bypass them, which cuts them out of framing the story, etc.

      1. They love the framing. They need it

      2. They’re nostalgic for an older time when they would get to be the middle-man between people like Assange and the general public.

        I frequently get the impression that an (now) old white guy like Assange at least partially stepping into the shoes of old white guys like Woodward and Bernstein to overturn Obama and/or HRC is an issue too. Clever white people breaking news to ‘convict’ minority right-thinkers is insufficiently revolutionary and too anti-narrative. If Assange had sexually assaulted two men the case would’ve been dropped in any court in the world. Had Snowden been dark-skinned, gay, transgender or any permutation thereof forced exile to Russia would be a war crime against humanity.

      3. “They’re nostalgic for an older time when they would get to be the middle-man between people like Assange and the general public.”

        In that respect they are analogous to the Roman Catholic Church during the Protestant Reformation. You the peasant cannot have a personal relationship with God. No, you must go through us, the priesthood – we will tell you how to interpret and think about all things religious.

    6. That was a little weird. Didn’t they also ask him if he’d publish leaked emails from the RNC if he had the opportunity?
      Is Assange supposed to be some kind of right winger now, or something? Seemed like it would be pretty obvious that it would.

  6. Taxing business may be THE most self defeating thing government has ever done. And that’s quite a list.

    1. Corporations aren’t peeeeoopllee maa….

      Oh wait.

      1. No taxation without representation!

        1. Pay to play is the new black.

          *Repeats “I’m a racist” 3 times*

        2. Every time I read or hear “no taxation without representation”, I think of the scene in The Great Escape where the Americans make the potato vodka and everybody is getting lit. McQueen and Garner are pouring out the booze and the third American in the camp, whose name I can’t remember, blurts it out and McQueen stops mid-word and double-takes him. I always laugh at that scene…until poor little Archie Ives dies a few minutes later.

          Sorry I was off topic. It’s about the best I can do lately.

          1. Start at about 5:15 of this clip.

            https://youtu.be/MZsEl3QIs38

      2. They’re people! Corporations are made of people!

        1. Like Soilent Green?

        2. Here’s what I find really bizarre: “progressives” will vehemently insist that since “corporations aren’t people”, they can impose infinite burdens and limitations on the activity of corporations without infringing on the freedom of any individual human anywhere. Yet, governments are held to be not only people, but The People – all of them, including those who voted against the representatives of said government.

    2. Luckily businesses don’t create jobs. Hillary will create all the jobs we will ever need.

  7. When I was growing up in Maryland, Democratic politicians on opposite sides of the state said exactly the opposite things about government’s proper role in job creation. When I pointed that out to a Team-Blue-bot, he not only didn’t dispute it, but even said that it was a good thing.

  8. Anyone with half a brain would find the Hillary ad laughable.

    1. Do you have to watch the olympics to catch it?

  9. “we’ll invest in your business and take an equity participation.”

    Government ownership of private businesses always and everywhere works out well.

    1. I think that has been tried before…what is the word for it…it’s right on the tip of my tounge…?

  10. When someone dies, I vote we take half his shit and give half to those who voted for me and I hold the other half in trust. Deal?

  11. The Clinton commercials during the Olympics seem to be trying to convince me to switch from Johnson to Trump.

    Not successfully, but she is spending a lot of money on it.

    1. The Clinton commercial that features Trump on Letterman, where I think the punchline is supposed to be that his Trump dress shirts are made in China, is so amateurish that I have to wonder where all that money is going.

      1. I’m not entirely unconvinced by the theory that Hillary is actually a Trump plant to make the Democrats look bad.

        1. Both of them as plants seems pretty plausible and The Manchurian Candidate meets Dave, where the Russians end up running a smear campaign against the legends of some deep cover agent, seems like pretty believable political fiction.

    2. There was an article, at Slate I think, that said Clinton has spent $64M on advertising this summer and Trump has spent $0.

      I’m thinking this shows some brains on Trump’s part. Nothing matters before September.

  12. Election 2016:

    Build a wall to keep Mexicans out vs. Build a wall to keep jobs in.

    1. “But every now and then, I wonder if the gate was put up to keep crime out or keep our ass in”

  13. I was subjected to a clip of a Hillary campaign speech in which she said, in her signature gorgon command voice, “We’re going after the rich! We’re going after businesses! We’re going after those who don’t pay their fair share!”

    And the crowd cheered delightedly.

    We’re fucked.

    How can people be duped by wealth envy hucksterism spouted by a blatant moneygrubber like Hillary Clinton?

    1. They don’t care if the leader is also rich. Envy outweighs all.

      1. In a bizarre way, her being rich gives her more credibility. Like those preachers who accumulate, and flaunt, their wealth. I don’t understand it, but a lot of people just can’t seem to resist the urge to sycophant someone with money, I guess.

    2. Clinton’s going to make herself pay her fair share?

    3. We’re going after those who don’t pay their fair share!

      Lie of omission. She didn’t add “to the Clinton Foundation”.

    4. Never underestimate the power of the promise of free shit paid for on someone else’s dime.

    5. That ad is exactly what Democrats used to be accused of in 80’s – Tax and Spend is their only setting – back then they used to deny it. Now they brag about it.

    6. Brooks, go back and read the article on the panic at JFK airport. All will become clear.

    7. I still want to hear how she defines “fair share”.

      1. “What’s mine is mine, and what’s yours is mine.”

  14. Making our economy work for everyone starts by making sure those at the top pay their fair share in taxes

    So we’re going to lower the tax rates for the upper brackets? I mean, you could also make sure people pay their “fair share” by raising the tax rates for the lower brackets and eliminating the EITC, but she did say “those at the top”.

  15. I live in NY media market. Whenever I see those Cumo tax-break ads I wonder who would be sucker enough to take the deal. So many states where you could get the same tax-break forever. All I came up with is an entrepreneur who plans to cash out inside 10 years and needs to be located in the area.

    1. Start up.
      Sell at year 8 or 9
      Profit.

      1. Sure, buyers are certain to miss that fact in their due diligence. More likely, you can’t find a buyer at anything like you think the fmv should be.

        1. Oh, sure, Poke holes in my great plan!

      2. Cankles is proposing an exit tax for companies leaving the country. How long before they start prosecuting businesses for going out of business or selling, a la Venezuela?

        1. Directive 10-289 FTW!

  16. Promising an exit tax is funny.

    It implies that Hillary Clinton believes incorporating in America carries a permanent tax obligation and leaving for any reason should require reparations, but that that obligation disappears if the company just straight up fails.

    Which implies that Hillary Clinton prefers no jobs to jobs that don’t pay corporate tax.

    1. One of the signs that the political classes have greedily increased their parasitism beyond the ability of their host society to support is the institution of controls to prevent the flight of capital and savings.

      It’s amazing how many signs there are of impending economic doom that should be scaring the shit out of anyone who follows history that go almost completely unremarked upon.

      1. Meh. The stock market seems to be fixed until the election. Oil prices are propped up. etc…

        At this point, I have complete confidence in the government and Fed to extend the irrational markets far longer than I would have previously thought possible.

        Unfortunately, the corollary is that when the shit comes, it’s going to come down hard.

        1. Pretty much this.
          It won’t be pretty.

    2. Which implies that Hillary Clinton prefers no jobs to jobs that don’t pay corporate tax.

      This has been — openly or otherwise — the goal of many Democrats for some time. They’d rather you sat at home, collected a welfare check, and either a) showed up to vote for them or b) stayed home and let someone else vote in your place, than that you involved yourself in the messy business of earning a living. Because that would result in a diffusion of power, away from them.

    3. She wants to do to corporations what the IRS already does to individuals revoking their citizenship.

    4. “Which implies that Hillary Clinton prefers no jobs to jobs that don’t pay corporate tax.”

      I have been told by proggies that if you can’t run a company well enough to pay wages in some magic number they pulled out of their ass, why, you SHOULD go out of business.
      Thereby implying that no wages are better than some wage less than that MNTJPooTA.

      1. I love that line.

        It’s like if I walked up to a bystander on the street, stabbed him in the stomach, and said, “well if you can’t handle some massive blood loss and peritonitis, you’re too weak to live anyway!”

  17. Something I have been thinking about, lately.

    It has become quite popular to operate from the presumption that an employer should never be allowed to fire anybody. If you worked there for a day, you are owed a job forever.

    What would happen if an employer tried to turn the tables? “You can’t quit. You owe me your loyalty and labor forever.”

    How would our progressive keepers respond to that, do you suppose?

    1. With shrieks of horror… unless it was the government talking to the serfs.

    2. I always like to ask that. Customers and employees are offered a lot more liberty than sellers and employers. No one’s saying a baker can force engaged couples to buy their cakes, or employees can be forced to continue working until it’s convenient for the employer.

    3. You realize that is a subplot in Atlas Shrugged?

    4. What would happen if an employer tried to turn the tables? “You can’t quit. You owe me your loyalty and labor forever.”

      Sounds like the employer wants to put an exit tax on their employee.

    5. You can also flip it this way: When you buy a product from someone, you are providing them with work; in a way, you are their employer. You and millions of other customers are the employer of every company that sells products or services.

      So if the “progressives” insist that employers cannot deprive employees of the arrangement that they previously had, shouldn’t people be prohibited from changing brands of soda or toilet paper without getting government approval to ensure that it’s fair? Can these corporations sue you for “wrongful” termination of your arrangement?

  18. At this point, I have complete confidence in the government and Fed to extend the irrational markets far longer than I would have previously thought possible.

    Unfortunately, the corollary is that when the shit comes, it’s going to come down hard.

    The current obsession of the “business news” providers with the Fed is frightening. You’d think Janet Yellin is the Oracle of Fucking Delphi or something.

  19. Just watched GJ on fox. He’s saying that in order to balance the budget it will be necessary to address entitlements like social security. That means a “fair” means testing. How would that be fair?

    1. Should he, or any other Libertarian candidate, say “I will seek to end Social Security tomorrow.” Good luck with that; we aren’t living in Galts Gulch. Maybe a revolution would end S.S. but the only practical way to end an entitlement through political means is going to be some sort of gradual, hurt everyone a little bit, reform.

      1. So go be a moderate Republican. Because gradual reform has worked soooo many times in the past.

        1. I don’t really have any attachment to the LP, so if they want to run a moderate republican-type who is sort of libertarian, I wish them all the best.

          Gradual reform hasn’t worked well. But sudden and radical reform looks like a political impossibility. So what do you do? Wish really hard for a libertarian government, wait until everything falls apart so you can rebuild, or support gradual reforms?

          1. Gradualism only works for leftists. Because like entropy, there are more possible configurations of laws and tax schemes that would be bad for human well being than there are possible configurations that are decidedly good for human well being. There’s almost no chance that government will get gradually more libertarian like there’s almost no chance that a pile of cotton will gradually degrade into a t-shirt.

            To get a more libertarian society, you need to be able to convince higher numbers of people that, for example, social security is morally reprehensible as well as economically irredeemable. You won’t do that by conceding valuable territory. Though maybe it’s true, maybe it’s impossible that people will be able to look past the immediate gratification of their own short-term insular interests in order to ever vote SS out of existence. In which case, what is left to vanquish the beast other than relatively sudden economic calamity? It’s possible that only immovable and unforgiving reality can stop the march of socialism, but it’s important as libertarians that we not rhetorically subsidize endless stop gap measures to prolong the life of socialist policies nor lessen the impact of facts of and reason to admonish the policy in the first place.

            We must teach. We must be the rightest motherfuckers in the room, consistently. That means not over indulging in rhetorical fruit sushi to shore up your poll numbers.

            1. I enjoy your rhetorical comments. In this case, however, I question your association of government with a pile of cotton as opposed to an odorous mountain of excrement, with the expectant positive or negative benefits of degradation in each case being inversely related.

        2. I guess Ron Paul is a moderate Republican now.

          1. Ron Paul was early and often in saying that departments X, Y and Z should be abolished, that taxes should be slashed and entitlements curtailed and under the right circumstances, abolished altogether. Gary Johnson would rather praise Hilary’s impeccable record of public service. But yeah, great analogy though.

    2. It’s not fair now.

    3. “Sorry people who actually saved/earned – I am cutting you off to keep the checks flowing to thems that did not.”

  20. The fact that they know what’s wrong and how to solve it – but won’t – is proof they are evil, not stupid. Always go with evil before stupid.

  21. [O]ur progressive government is working in New York. We raised the minimum wage to $15, the highest in the nation because we insist on economic justice! We enacted paid family leave because all workers deserve dignity! We are rebuilding our middle class and we’re working hand in hand with organized labor because the middle class is the backbone of this society! We are protecting the environment by banning fracking because this is the only planet we have.

    I count at least 4 sentences where I am absolutely certain he is lying through his teeth.

    1. So what happens when the financial sector in NYC starts dying? I’m pretty sure that is what is paying for all this glorious “progressive government [that] is working in New York”. It’s like a petrostate except at least petroleum is a tangible commodity.

      1. Not that my home state of Maryland is one to talk. At least NY can point to the financial sector being a useful (if overleveraged and overinflated) and private (if heavily manipulated and regulated) sector of the economy. What has led the great People’s Republic of MD to such soaring heights of prosperity (apparently, we are now the “richest” state)? Federal government contracting and employment.

      2. So what happens when the financial sector in NYC starts dying?

        We turn into Venezuala Norte.

        1. Venezuela, even

          1. Play The Division for a sneak peak

  22. We enacted paid family leave because all workers deserve dignity!

    “Dignity” is not bought with the wealth of others, stolen at gunpoint.

    1. I guess having a baby is no longer a voluntary decision?

      I want paid leave for taking a job with a new company.

    2. “Dignity” is the hours of work not being done by parents that us singles cover together.

      1. “Economic justice” is the money we take from less-favored unskilled people and give to more-favored unskilled people together.

        This is fun.

      2. Hey, at least being mandated by the government to work more for the same pay puts upward pressure on our desirability as employees! (Until they start mandating quotas on married and single folks of course.)

        Gotta take pleasure in the small things.

  23. Thank you Welch. I will say again, you are on the good list. It’s a short list.

    Cankles was just on the teevee with her horrible, raspy, squawk ranting about tax fairness, i.e. raising taxes on people who already pay the highest corporate taxes in the civilized world. Her trained seals and paid astroturf clapped. Those dumbasses are going to be trampled by the companies that haven’t already left the country as they run for the border.

    1. I can’t wait until robots displace the entire blue collar workforce.

      Sure there will be some unrest for a while.

      I have faith that the production value if a robot will be so far superior to the best union worker ever, that we can then produce enough wealth to pay them to stay home and get high.

      1. I have a dog that spends 3/4 of her life sleeping and the other 25% eating, shitting, and nagging me to pet her. Her production value is superior to the best union worker ever. At least she fertilizes the back yard.

    2. Is it your inability to not be a vile sexist that renders you incapable of telling the difference between statutory and effective tax rates?

      1. Is it your inability to not be a mouthbreathing retard that renders you incapable of telling the difference between tax rates, nominal or effective, and the distribution of tax burden by income quantile?

        1. Nope. Is it your pathetic sycophancy that makes you believe that the ultrarich are somehow burdened by taxes in this country relative to the middle class?

          1. I think Trump is the one with the tax plan that will cut the taxes for everyone across the board, including and especially the middle class.

            Then there is this:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-U_dakE9rk

            What is amazing about that are the trained seals applauding. If she were to point at the audience and squawk “You are a bunch of fucking idiots!” they would give her a standing ovation.

            1. But there will still be ultrarich swimming in their pools of gold coins and not creating jobs! Not fair!!

          2. You’re saying you want rich people to have an income cap?

          3. I’m not the one crowing about “fair shares”.

        2. The talking points on the morning news were all about “Trump Got Tax Break for Casinos!!1!” so it’s not surprising he’s got taxes on the brain.

      2. Oh stop it, sock puppet.

        1. I for one am happy that Hillary is the Dem nominee. It means we get a few months of Tony retardation (which, lets be honest, is basically a reflection of the stupidity that is your average dem voter).

          1. I don’t know who is running that sock puppet but you are correct. They do a good job.

  24. I was not aware that New York had any reputation over the last couple decades that wasn’t “I’m not rich enough to live or work there.”

    1. … Yogi Berra, is that you?

    2. Tony|8.17.16 @ 2:18PM|#
      “I was not aware that New York had any reputation over the last couple decades that wasn’t “I’m not rich enough to live or work there.”

      Tony, I wish I had a nickel for very subject in which you are ‘unaware’; I’d be farting through silk.

      1. “I’d be farting through silk.”

        haha, love that one.

    3. You should get out more, then.

      1. Upstate NY has some of the lowest costs of living in the country. Too bad there are no jobs left.

        1. I love how the enlightened Tony thinks NY=NYC. I spent lots of time in the finger lakes region and its either mildly expensive lake houses or absolute desolation.

  25. “Make the rules?including tax levels?few, simple, and fair, and then please get the hell out of the way. That’s how “we make the economy work for everyone,””

    Everyone? Reeeeeeally? What about the cronies? Won’t someone think of the cronies?

  26. Fucking idiots. Are they so stupid to actually believe it, or are they just saying things they know their low-intelligence voters will gobble up.

    1. Yes. Absolutely.

  27. Making our economy work for everyone starts by making sure those at the top pay their fair share in taxes.

    People who say this always neglect the mention how much that subset of the population pays as a proportion of the taxes. Last I checked the top 1% of income earners were paying 35% of all income tax and 24% of federal taxes more generally.

    So what is their fair share, exactly? 50%? 90%? 120%?

      1. Compromise we can all agree on.

  28. I still want to hear how she defines “fair share”.

    She’ll know it when she sees it. That much is certain.

    1. “More from you, less from me.”

  29. You realize that is a subplot in Atlas Shrugged?

    Huh. Never read it.

  30. Cognitive disconnect. It’s like the people who run New York have discovered that their high taxes and overregulation are chasing away business, and they think they can lure more businesses if they temporarily forgive taxes, but there’s no comprehension that high taxes and overregulation are actually bad for business.

    1. Remember that bully from grade school that extorted lunch money from weak kids? As soon as their feral senses tell them that the weak kids aren’t going to take that shit anymore they make fake apologies and false promises of friendship. As soon as the weak kids let their guard down they are back at it.

      That is the democ…socialist party.

  31. It’s rather absurdly and depressingly comical the arrogance of government telling us what we already effen know and unwittingly admitting the way to growth is to cut taxes and get the hell out of the way. The whole reason why business grind to a halt is by regulations imposed by the state.

    Why raise them in the first place if it’s the way to create jobs?

    This is how they *claim* to *create* jobs.

    They literally insult people to their faces.

  32. I am making $89/hour working from home. I never thought that it was legitimate but my best friend is earning $10 thousand a month by working online, that was really surprising for me, she recommended me to try it. just try it out on the following website.

    ??? http://www.NetNote70.com

  33. China and Russia have been hacking us for a while. JUST a few weeks ago, a Chinese FBI personnel was revealed to be a Chinese agent. He was sent to the hangman, who forced him to American style cream cheese Dim Sum.

    But when Russia targets Clinton – “OMG we’re being hacked by Russia”

  34. The democratic party particularly the democratic party of NYS has never been about reason, rationality or results. It’s been about Tammany Hall

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.