Krugman: Rich people are assholes and hypocrites.

Whaddaya think?

"Forbes magazine runs a cover story alleging that the president of the United States is deliberately trying to bring America down as part of his Kenyan, “anticolonialist” agenda,the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s." LOL

Op-Ed Columnist
The Angry Rich
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: September 19, 2010

Anger is sweeping America. True, this white-hot rage is a minority phenomenon, not something that characterizes most of our fellow citizens.

But the angry minority is angry indeed, consisting of people who feel that things to which they are entitled are being taken away. And they’re out for revenge.

These are terrible times for many people in this country. Poverty, especially acute poverty, has soared in the economic slump; millions of people have lost their homes. Young people can’t find jobs; laid-off 50-somethings fear that they’ll never work again.

Yet if you want to find real political rage — the kind of rage that makes people compare President Obama to Hitler, or accuse him of treason — you won’t find it among these suffering Americans.

You’ll find it instead among the very privileged, people who don’t have to worry about losing their jobs, their homes, or their health insurance, but who are outraged, outraged, at the thought of paying modestly higher taxes.

For one thing, craziness has gone mainstream. It’s one thing when a billionaire rants at a dinner event.

It’s another when Forbes magazine runs a cover story alleging that the president of the United States is deliberately trying to bring America down as part of his Kenyan, “anticolonialist” agenda, that “the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s.” When it comes to defending the interests of the rich, it seems, the normal rules of civilized (and rational) discourse no longer apply.

Instead, it has become common to hear vehement denials that people making $400,000 or $500,000 a year are rich. I mean, look at the expenses of people in that income class — the property taxes they have to pay on their expensive houses, the cost of sending their kids to elite private schools, and so on. Why, they can barely make ends meet.

And among the undeniably rich, a belligerent sense of entitlement has taken hold: it’s their money, and they have the right to keep it. “Taxes are what we pay for civilized society,” said Oliver Wendell Holmes — but that was a long time ago.

The spectacle of high-income Americans, the world’s luckiest people, wallowing in self-pity and self-righteousness would be funny, except for one thing: they may well get their way. Never mind the $700 billion price tag for extending the high-end tax breaks: virtually all Republicans and some Democrats are rushing to the aid of the oppressed affluent.

And when the tax fight is over, one way or another, you can be sure that the people currently defending the incomes of the elite will go back to demanding cuts in Social Security and aid to the unemployed. America must make hard choices, they’ll say; we all have to be willing to make sacrifices.

But when they say “we,” they mean “you.” Sacrifice is for the little people.

Full Article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/opinion/20krugman.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

 

Perhaps rich people (the ones who pay the HUGE bulk of the Federal income tax) see Congress spending like a drunken sailor with no accountability.

Congress should be more prudent and judicious with the public purse.

Maybe it's Krugman who is the asshole!

 

Krugman- a childless closet queen who has no problem kicking the can down the road to future generations that he'll never have.

As he goes through his rainman routine in his million dollar home, he conveniently fails to recognize that the rich aren't against higher taxes, the rich are against wasteful spending that creates higher taxes.

At the end of the day, it is merely inconvenient for the rich to have to "modify" their income; but it is a real shame that the time and money they spend trying to protect their wealth could have been used to help find solutions and create jobs.

Of course that would mean pursuing pro-business policies-- business creates jobs, not Washington DC-- but Krugman and his overlord are too busy holding the economy back because they are both trying to "level the playing field" for their protected classes (minorities and queers).

It was one thing to skate in to the white house on outrage regarding business, its quite another to continue the campaign in the face of high unemployment.

You think some bumpkin cares about CEO pay now, if that CEO is willing to give him a job?

Meanwhile Obama's handicap has gone down 3 strokes, he's seen some awesome concerts, and his kids are pre-accepted at Harvard.

Now just pay up, bitch!

 

Barack's fcking them too? Man, he's merciless. Just one black guy can do all this? Heck, at ET almost every thread is about him. Glad I voted for him.

 

Paul Krugman is a commie half wit.

 

The NYTimes are commie half-wits.

 

Krugman said this as he looked at himself in the mirror while counting his money. :eek:

Actually, I don't care want he thinks and am amazed at the useless crap like this that people here continue to post.

 

Clinton says give the Democrats 2 more years to fix the economy. Then if it does not turn around, throw them out. What are BO's odds? Poor to a lost cause at this juncture. Since blacks are 13% of the population, who do you think put him in office? Sorry, he will get blamed.

 

clinton needs to go back and read the definition of insanity.

"doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results"

2 more years indeed

 

Clinton is an optimist. The democrats will get thrown out anyway.