Root: Krugman Wrong on Capital Gains

Paul Krugman Is Wrong About Capital Gains Taxes
by Wayne Allyn Root – Capitalist Evangelist

Paul Krugman

Paul Krugman

http://blogs.forbes.com/wayneroot/

Paul Krugman is a liberal. He’s also untruthful on the topic of capital gain taxes. Like President Barack Obama and most liberal Democratic politicians, Krugman’s contortions about capital gains taxes are so pathetic you’d think he owned stock in Pinnochio Inc.

The question is why do Obama and his lackeys like Krugman so enthusiastically spread such misinformation about capital gains taxes? Alas, the answer is simple. With a totally failed presidential record the Democrat game plan for re-election is to incite envy, jealousy, and class warfare.

Take Krugman’s most recent work of fiction: his column from Sunday’s New York Times. He attacks capital gains tax rates as just for the “very rich” – “unwise, unjust and expensive favors showered on the upper class.”

The rest of the article: http://blogs.forbes.com/wayneroot/

45 thoughts on “Root: Krugman Wrong on Capital Gains

  1. Dale Sheldon-Hess

    Root: “[L]ast I checked those low capital gains rates are being showered on _everyone_.”

    Krugman: “[T]hree-quarters of which go to the top 1 percent of the income distribution.”

    Anatole France: “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.”

  2. Dan Ciammaichella

    Why do people care what a nut like Root thinks about anything again? Maybe you can quote some Alex Jones and Billy Cunningham too…everybody loves their stooges in threes!

  3. Wayne Root

    @3 Hi Dan.

    Love when jealous people choose to denigrate and get vicious and nasty.

    Keep it up. It motivates me!

    I love this site.

    The more leftists and radicals bitch and moan…

    The more I achieve.

    Over 20 million people a week now read my commentaries.

    I added my own weekly column at Forbes.com 2 weeks ago.

    I just became regular columnist for FoxNews.com. My first column comes out tomorrow called “Homeschool to Harvard.”
    They picked me and my daughter Dakota to celebrate “National School Choice Week.”

    On same day my columns will be up at Forbes, Newsmax, and FoxNews…

    Plus my weekly video commentary will reach 825,000 readers of PersonalLiberty.com.

    And I’ll be announcing my own radio show within 2 weeks…to be nationally syndicated.

    You just don’t get it.

    The haters go nowhere…

    You waste your hot air with your envy…

    But you inspire me.

    I get up at 5 AM in your honor.

    I write commentaries at Midnight when I think of your envy.

    It’s beautiful…keep it up.

    I’m your very own Tim Tebow of the Libertarian Party.

    Just like Tebow, I prove that I will out-work, out-fight, out-smart, out-hustle my critics…

    And use my passion, enthusiasm and faith to leave my critics in the dust gasping for air.

    So keep the bitter and jealous comments coming!

    You inspire me.

    My mantra is…”Wake up and attack each day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind.”

    Keep kidding yourselves…while my opinions reach 20 million people a week…before my radio show starts!

    This is how you change your life…and that’s how you change a political party that has reached very few voters and elected no one important in 40 years…

    Not through talk.

    Never through jealousy or complaining.

    Through action and enthusiasm…

    And Faith.

    God Bless,

    Wayne

  4. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    @5, I disagree.

    I doubt that Root believes he has have 20 million readers. He’s too smart to believe such nonsense.

    More likely, Root thinks he can fool others into believing that he has 20 million readers.

    That’s how it is with hucksters.

    Hucksters know what the rubes want to hear. And the LP is full of rubes who want to believe that the latest snake oil is their ticket to major party status.

    By the time they wake up and see that it was snake oil, Root will be long gone, counting his money from whatever radio or cable TV gig he got from leveraging his LP titles and creds.

  5. Tom Blanton

    Because last I checked those low capital gains rates are being showered on everyone. Last I checked, they apply to every home sold in America. So they benefit every homeowner.

    Go check again, nimrod.

    You might start here:

    http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/industries/article/0,,id=98921,00.html

    It is the exclusion of gains under $250,000 ($500,000 for couples) that benefits the vast majority of home sellers – not capital gains rates.

    The real problem is that there is no equitable basis for taxing income derived from investments at a different rate from income that is derived from labor.

    If the Root tribe made out so well under the capital gains system, just think how well things would have gone with a 10% flat tax, or a 1% flat tax, or even better, no income tax at all.

    Alas, most Americans, especially the upper middle class and wealth, feel entitled to externalize the costs of the amenities and infrastructure they desire for their lifestyles and businesses. Fancy airports, grand wars, special subsidies, and keeping the riff raff away from the gates ain’t cheap.

    Guess what, it ain’t folks whose incomes are taxed at capital gains rates that are donating $2,500 to candidates or $5 million to super pacs. So, I guess when the well-heeled decide they are going to quit supporting big spenders, we’ll all be better off. Too bad it’s the fat cats that benefit the most from fat bloated corporatized government.

  6. Tom Blanton

    uh oh, that should be:

    Guess what, it ain’t folks whose incomes AREN’T taxed at capital gains rates that are donating $2,500 to candidates or $5 million to super pacs.

  7. Tom Blanton

    “Over 20 million people a week now read my commentaries, in my imagination.”

    I think I would enjoy Root’s rants a lot more if he got Knapp to edit his stuff before putting it out.

    To me, Root is to political writing what drag show performers that lip-sync to their favorite songs are to music.

  8. Brian

    This guy is delusional. We waste hot air with our envy? Most of the negative comments in here took like 10 seconds to post. Root, an author with a readership of 20 million, responds with rambling sermons about personal success.

    I love this site, but there is a reason that we don’t see “real” pundits/politicians posting comments on here. It’s because they’re busy doing shit!

    If anyone here is truly envious of Root’s success and wants to emulate him I know of at least ten or so pyramid schemes that you can get involved with! Feel free to ask.

  9. Ayn R. Key

    “As a common sense, Tea Party fiscal conservative, I want to keep more of my own money.”

    So you are no longer even claiming to be a “Reagan libertarian”, whatever that means? You are no saying you are a conservative?

  10. Wayne Root

    @13

    In case you didn’t know the LP has always described itself as “fiscally conservative and socially tolerant.”

    Which has always exactly described my political views.

    I have always been and will forever be a fiscal conservative.

    Also…in case you didn’t know…polling is released each year that determines on a scale of 1 to 100 what the Libertarian ratings are of each member of Congress.

    The top 50 or so rated highest as Libertarian are 100% Republicans.

    100%.

    All 50 of the top rated.

    Ron Paul used to be the only one who was rated 100- a perfect Libertarian.

    In recent polls, there are now 4 or 5 rated as 100- all are Republicans.

    There are about 15 or 20 Congressmen rated 90 or above- all are Republicans.

    Maybe you are the one who doesn’t understand the meaning of “Libertarian.”

    Those polls are not run by me…nor do I determine winners. But since Ron and Rand Paul both get 100’s, I think you could argue they are pretty darn accurate.

    Funny how not one Democrat in America is even remotely close to being a Libertarian, or even agreeing with us 50% of the time.

    Most of the Democrats are at the rock bottom with ratings of 20% or less.

    The Democrats who call themselves “liberal” are in the 10% to 0 range.

    Interesting.

    But I know…

    Facts scare leftists.

    Wayne

  11. paulie

    Wayne,

    Also…in case you didn’t know…polling is released each year that determines on a scale of 1 to 100 what the Libertarian ratings are of each member of Congress.

    The top 50 or so rated highest as Libertarian are 100% Republicans.

    100%.

    All 50 of the top rated.

    Which rating system are you using?

    Ron Paul used to be the only one who was rated 100- a perfect Libertarian.

    In recent polls, there are now 4 or 5 rated as 100- all are Republicans.

    Who are they? I’d like to examine their record in more detail.

  12. Thomas L. Knapp

    @14,

    “polling is released each year that determines on a scale of 1 to 100 what the Libertarian ratings are of each member of Congress.”

    It’s not polling, it’s indexing (the “Liberty Index”) of votes against a laundry list.

    That laundry list is created by a Republican organization (the Republican Liberty Caucus) for the express purpose of making Republicans look more libertarian.

    That is, the votes that are indexed are only the votes on which the GOP line is putatively more libertarian than the Democratic line.

    The index is fine-tuned each year with the goal of magically making more and more Republicans into “libertarians” without them having to you know, change their views or actions or anything like that.

  13. Dan Ciammaichella

    @Root

    and I would be jealous of a Beck Limbaugh wannabe who, like them, is out only for himself and his wallet…why? Thanks for the laugh…tis a shame you don’t realize that your clown shoes are a major reason why the LP isn’t taken seriously by those of us who would like to take them seriously.

  14. Darryl W. Perry

    @14
    LP has always described itself as “fiscally conservative and socially tolerant.”

    I believe until recently the LP was described as “fiscally conservative/socially liberal”

    As far as the “ratings” you reference; I saw a Nolan Chart from 2006 showing the Democratic Party Congressmen were more “freedom friendly” than most Republicans… that graph came from the Democratic Freedom Caucus.
    As Tom said, it all depends on who is doing the rating and based on what set of question.

  15. Thomas L. Knapp

    @19,

    That Nolan Chart you refer to took the votes of Ron Paul on civil liberties issues and compared the votes of a “libertarian” Republican caucus in the US House to them, versus the votes of Democrats.

    Of the 22 Republican members of that caucus, two voted as often as 60% of the time with Paul in favor of the libertarian position. Democrats Barney Frank and Cynthia McKinney both voted with Paul 80% of the time.

  16. Steven R Linnabary

    LOL

    Writing an essay about Krugman’s economics SHOULD be like shooting fish in a barrel.

    Should be.

    And then “Mr Libertarian” says this:

    Capital gains are a wonderful, beautiful, magical thing…

    HUH??

    A real “libertarian” would oppose taxation on PRINCIPLE….

    But all we get is boiler plate Root-rant about “liberals” and his family. Word for word, the same tired rant we’ve been listening to for years.

    BTW, the “Tea Party” is dead. Has been for quite some time, but obvious to anyone watching the SC election returns last weekend.

    PEACE

  17. Root Is Wrong -- Again

    Root: the LP has always described itself as “fiscally conservative and socially tolerant.”

    Always? Not exactly.

    For a while, the LP described itself as “fiscally conservative and socially liberal.”

    That’s right. Not “tolerant,” but “liberal.” The “L word.”

    Then some people complained that the LP shouldn’t identify itself as conservative or liberal.

    So it rebranded itself as “fiscally responsible and socially tolerant.”

    The LP once called itself both conservative and liberal. Then it dumped both words.

    Root is either ignorant, or is rewriting history. The LP never called itself conservative and tolerant. The “C word” was always married to the “L word.” They were used together, then dumped together.

    Maybe some Root supporters have changed that recently, but it’s an Orwellian rewrite of history.

  18. Root Is Projecting -- Again

    Root is projecting.

    He’s insanely jealous of his vastly more successful classmate, Obama.

    Root is obsessed with fame. He always rants about how famous he is. Yet Obama dwarfs Root in the fame department.

    500 years from now, historians will still analyze and reassess Obama, both positively and negatively.

    At the same time, everything Root has ever written, about Obama or anything else, will be lost to history. No one will bother to keep Root’s rants in print over the centuries. The internet will be gone, replaced by unforeseeable technological advances, and all of Root’s books will have been trashed and pulped.

    No wonder Root is insanely jealous of his vastly more famous and successful classmate, Obama.

  19. Thomas L. Knapp

    Steve L @22,

    Please don’t become the only person Earth, other than Root himself, to refer to Root as “Mr. Libertarian.”

    Side note on media: I notice that Gary Johnson published a response to the State of the Union. Got an email from his campaign telling me where to read it.

    Guess where the front-runner for the LP nomination posted his response to the SOTU?

    On a Republican site.

    Not just any Republican site, either.

    Dondero’s Republican site.

    Someone should probably take him in hand and explain to him why that was a really, really stupid idea.

  20. Tom Blanton

    The Tea Party isn’t dead. They have all become Gingrich-Libertarians.

    Economically impossible and socially retarded.

    They are for limited imperial empire.

    They stand for reducing the rate of government spending while increasing spending for defense, intelligence, prisons, immigration control, the drug war, and privatization of bureaucracy – all while cutting taxes and reducing the deficit.

    They know what the real threat to America is:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/project2000/5400496186/in/set-72157625409533181

  21. paulie

    Projecting @23 How do you know? Have you been to the future?

    TLK @24 Both friends of Roger Stone. Pffft.

    Speaking of SOTU responses I have been meaning to post a bunch of them here but the computer keeps dying. I see Trent got the CP, can someone else do the rest (LP, BTP, SPUSA etc)?

  22. Thomas L. Knapp

    @23,

    “500 years from now, historians will still analyze and reassess Obama, both positively and negatively. ”

    Probably only in academic circles. In “general history” he’ll be treated as a minor part of a minor group of similar presidents (Bush 14/Clinton/Bush 43/Obama/?).

    There’s still some popular history on the French monarchy as such, but very little on Louis XIII in particular.

  23. Ad Hoc

    Obama still has a year (or more likely five) left, so we have no idea what he will be most remembered for.

  24. Brian Holtz

    everything Root has ever written, about Obama or anything else, will be lost to history.

    No, the text contents of the first couple decades of the web will be trivial for future centuries to store and index. (Hello to everybody in the year 2512!)

    No one will bother to keep Root’s rants in print over the centuries.

    “Print”?

    is projecting. He’s insanely jealous of his vastly more successful

  25. Thomas L. Knapp

    “the text contents of the first couple decades of the web will be trivial for future centuries to store and index.”

    That claim relies on a number of assumptions that are easy, but not necessarily safe, to make.

    For example, the assumption that humanity will not, at some point in the 500 years following now, suddenly be forced to spend most of its time and effort surviving a nuclear winter, an interstellar invasion, or even just a reprise of the Middle Ages, leaving little ability for, or time or interest in, making sure the Geocities archive and so forth aren’t lost in the mists of time.

    Also, Sumerian clay tablets are easy to store and index, but not many people can, or care to, read them.

    Or, to take something newer — but not 500 years old, only 200-odd:

    As Mailie, an’ her lambs thegither,
    Was ae day nibbling on the tether,
    Upon her cloot she coost a hitch,
    An’ owre she warsl’d in the ditch:
    There, groaning, dying, she did lie,
    When Hughoc he cam doytin by.

    Wi’ glowrin een, and lifted han’s
    Poor Hughoc like a statue stan’s;
    He saw her days were near-hand ended,
    But, wae’s my heart! he could na mend it!
    He gaped wide, but naething spak,
    At langth poor Mailie silence brak.

    Is there any particular reason to assume that all the stuff we’re writing today won’t look about like that to people 500 years from now? I know that some people do still read and admire Burns, but it’s a small niche thing.

  26. Brian Holtz

    nuclear winter, an interstellar invasion…

    “Lost to history” was a claim about the fate of Root’s writings in particular, not about civilization in general. “You’ll be forgotten because all of civilization will be destroyed” is not quite the zing that Root’s obsessed stalker was aiming for.

    care to read them

    “Lost to history” was a claim they’d be lost, rather than just read very little.

    Is there any particular reason to assume that all the stuff we’re writing today won’t look about like that to people 500 years from now?

    Yes. Modern telecom and recording technology mean that English speakers will never again suffer the spatiotemporal separations that are necessary for the sort of linguistic divergence that created the Lowland Scots dialect and then left it behind.

  27. paulie

    Languages still evolve. For example, I’ve noticed that in the last 20 years many English words have become Russian words. That’s in 20 years, not 500.

    BTW, if some of the predictions about life extension with nanotechnology and other new technologies pan out, in 500 years we may not just be reading archived commentaries from Root and/or Obama, but new ones, since they may still be alive.

  28. paulie

    So, Brian, your prediction is that 500 years from now English will be pretty much exactly as it is today, and you’re quite certain of this?

  29. Brian Holtz

    Paulie, the network externality of a language is measured by all its speakers, not just its native speakers. Your source counts English in the lead, with 1.5B.

    The number of human langauges in use is plummeting, but that number will not hit 1.

    “Exactly as it is today” are your words, not mine. I’m just saying that in 500 years, billions of people will have access to the current text of the web and will be able to read its English quite readily.

    @36 Hmm, an endofhistoryitis diagnoses from someone who conjures “nuclear winter, an interstellar invasion, or even just a reprise of the Middle Ages”. Tom, I didn’t say history will end. I just noted that linguistic isolation has already ended.

  30. Ayn R. Key

    @14, @15, @16, @17, @18, @19

    I guess facts scare Wayne.

    Plus he’s very annoyed that we noticed that he just confessed to being a conservative instead of a libertarian.

    “Fiscally responsible and socially tolerant” or “fiscally conservative and socially liberal.” NOT “fiscally conservative and socially tolerant.”

    Try again Mr. Republican.

  31. paulie

    Paulie, the network externality of a language is measured by all its speakers, not just its native speakers. Your source counts English in the lead, with 1.5B.

    Yes, because English is the primary language of commerce right now, as French and Latin were in their day. If the Chinese economy surpasses Europe and North America, you might logically expect Mandarin to become the primary global language of commerce and the main foreign language learned by foreigners, rather than English.

    “Exactly as it is today” are your words, not mine. I’m just saying that in 500 years, billions of people will have access to the current text of the web and will be able to read its English quite readily.

    I can read English quite readily, but I still struggle understanding some passages of Shakespeare, much less Chaucer.

    I just noted that linguistic isolation has already ended.

    Not necessarily. For example, space travel and colonization at light speed may become commonplace, and unless some way around the light speed barrier is discovered, some humans may live years away – each way – from any type of communication or visitation with other humans.

    Or, civilization may collapse.

    We may event go extinct.

    The possibilities are virtually endless.

  32. zapper

    “… it all depends on who is doing the rating and based on what set of question.”

    Important quote from above …

    And for those who actually do something with electoral contests, don’t forget …

    “The outcome of an election depends not so much on the voters as on those who do the counting, and those who monitor them.”

  33. Ayn R. Key

    I like how Wayne declared me a leftist. I guess compared to a traditional conservative, a believer in Hamilton’s plan of using government intervention to enrich businesses, I would appear to be a leftist, since I believe in Jefferson’s plan of not using the government.

  34. zapper

    For the Chinese language to move beyond its national limitations and become an international language it will first need to abandon the character system of writing that is so difficult to master that 200 million Chinese adults remain totally illiterate.

    While spoken Chinese is pretty to hear and easy to master, despite the emphasis on tones, the Chinese character writing system requires the memorization of 0ver 50,000 distinct characters with no intrinsic pronunciation system, making it nearly impossible to master. Even native speakers cannot retain this complex writing system in their memories without constant use and refamiliarization. Computers require the use of pinyin for input as a character keyboard is not possible.

    Of course, the Chinese being patient and always planning secretly ahead have already adopted pinyin – an alphapetic writing system for the Chinese language based on transliteration using the ABCs – and have been instructing all children in its use since the late 70s.

    When the vast bulk of the generations never taught in pinyin have expired, some 50 years from now, the Chinese language will be available to all through pinyin and charaters will have been quietly dropped. Interestingly, the Chinese economy and military hegemony should be competitive if not dominant by then as well.

  35. Ad Hoc

    Capital gains?

    Many in the US have gone from 401k to 501k…

    501k

    When one’s economic situation has become so tenuous that their entire net worth is in the pockets of their jeans.

    Sorry, bro, can’t go drinking tonight, the wife raided my 501k.

  36. paulie

    I’m talking about on Earth.

    Yes, human extinction is a distinct possibility. That’s why I serve on the scientific advisory board of the Lifeboat Foundation

    Thanks for the link. From the about page:

    Lifeboat Foundation is pursuing a variety of options, including helping to accelerate the development of technologies to defend humanity, including new methods to combat viruses (such as RNA interference and new vaccine methods), effective nanotechnological defensive strategies, and even self-sustaining space colonies in case the other defensive strategies fail.

    Your foundation foresees a possible future where human life may exist, but not on earth (perhaps because Earth has become uninhabitable for humans, although that is just one possible scenario).

    Despite the (temporary?) end of linguistic isolation, our language continues to evolve with new slang, new pronunciations, and so forth.

    Supposing English is still a commonly spoken language among beings that still largely resemble modern humans in 500 years, I’m far less confident than you are that the English they speak will be anything like the English we speak.

  37. Thomas L. Knapp

    BH@38,

    “Tom, I didn’t say history will end. I just noted that linguistic isolation has already ended.”

    Linguistic isolation has been mitigated. That mitigation may be permanent, or not. I see no reason to assume either conclusion.

  38. Brian Holtz

    @45 Again, the claim is just that the English of today’s web will be trivially readable. The only question is which technology will do more to keep it that way: telecom+recording, or machine translation.

    The probability of a language, format, or corpus getting lost is inversely proportional to the amount of interesting information stored in it — all the more so when it’s digital.

    Re: extinction, the other dangers that my fellow Lifeboaters worry about are pretty much in the noise compared to the (nevertheless minimal) dangers of Earth-crossing asteroids and small stray black holes. My survey of possible dangers is at http://humanknowledge.net/Thoughts.html#PossibleCatastrophes

    (One danger I didn’t comment on is the possibility that this universe is a simulation that might get turned off. However, arguments from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_realism suggest that “we” would be just fine if that happened.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *