Comments on: “Bailouts and Bullshit,” Part One http://www.theagitator.com/2009/03/15/bailouts-and-bullshit-part-one/ It rankles me when somebody tries to tell somebody what to do. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:37:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 By: Andrew Williams http://www.theagitator.com/2009/03/15/bailouts-and-bullshit-part-one/comment-page-1/#comment-251894 Andrew Williams Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:46:10 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/?p=12448#comment-251894 BAM! BAM!

]]> By: Rick H. http://www.theagitator.com/2009/03/15/bailouts-and-bullshit-part-one/comment-page-1/#comment-251636 Rick H. Mon, 16 Mar 2009 08:45:01 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/?p=12448#comment-251636 <i>but it misses the point that this is borrowed, not taxed money.</i> I'm no economist, but borrowing against future generations strikes me as <i>obscene</i> compared to the minor, casual immorality of taxation. Go ahead and tax people, and then we can see what programs they <i>really</i> support with their own bread. Don't allow everyone to pretend there's no day of reckoning for this endlessly bloated bubble economy. Someone, someday, will pay for the spending spree. but it misses the point that this is borrowed, not taxed money.

I’m no economist, but borrowing against future generations strikes me as obscene compared to the minor, casual immorality of taxation.

Go ahead and tax people, and then we can see what programs they really support with their own bread. Don’t allow everyone to pretend there’s no day of reckoning for this endlessly bloated bubble economy. Someone, someday, will pay for the spending spree.

]]> By: KBCraig http://www.theagitator.com/2009/03/15/bailouts-and-bullshit-part-one/comment-page-1/#comment-251622 KBCraig Mon, 16 Mar 2009 06:36:18 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/?p=12448#comment-251622 My main disappointment in the full episode was Stossel's mis-statement of the issue about private toll roads that were killed in Texas. Nobody objected to a private company buying land, building roads, and collecting tolls. Instead, we objected to the fascist economic model of public risk for private gain, the use of the power of the state to seize massive amounts of land by eminent domain, and the use of public tax money to build these roads with the intent of turning them over to a private group for guaranteed profit. I'm 100% for private roads, but "private" was <b>not</b> what we killed in Texas. My main disappointment in the full episode was Stossel’s mis-statement of the issue about private toll roads that were killed in Texas. Nobody objected to a private company buying land, building roads, and collecting tolls. Instead, we objected to the fascist economic model of public risk for private gain, the use of the power of the state to seize massive amounts of land by eminent domain, and the use of public tax money to build these roads with the intent of turning them over to a private group for guaranteed profit.

I’m 100% for private roads, but “private” was not what we killed in Texas.

]]> By: Les http://www.theagitator.com/2009/03/15/bailouts-and-bullshit-part-one/comment-page-1/#comment-251601 Les Mon, 16 Mar 2009 03:59:00 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/?p=12448#comment-251601 <i>His main economic point seems to be that Nancy Pelosi misspoke a couple of times.</i> This statement is as inaccurate as you're making Stossel out to be. It was a terrible, condescending and patronizing production in many places, but the piece on the stimulus was about much more than Pelosi's gaffes. His main economic point seems to be that Nancy Pelosi misspoke a couple of times.

This statement is as inaccurate as you’re making Stossel out to be. It was a terrible, condescending and patronizing production in many places, but the piece on the stimulus was about much more than Pelosi’s gaffes.

]]> By: DJB http://www.theagitator.com/2009/03/15/bailouts-and-bullshit-part-one/comment-page-1/#comment-251511 DJB Sun, 15 Mar 2009 22:32:07 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/?p=12448#comment-251511 "Pure hackery" Give me an example of TV "journalism" that isn't. “Pure hackery”

Give me an example of TV “journalism” that isn’t.

]]> By: Radley Balko http://www.theagitator.com/2009/03/15/bailouts-and-bullshit-part-one/comment-page-1/#comment-251462 Radley Balko Sun, 15 Mar 2009 17:40:12 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/?p=12448#comment-251462 This was merely the introduction. And I don't think Stossel has never disguised the fact that he has a point of view. He's just more up front about it than most other TV journalists. This was merely the introduction.

And I don’t think Stossel has never disguised the fact that he has a point of view. He’s just more up front about it than most other TV journalists.

]]> By: bobzbob http://www.theagitator.com/2009/03/15/bailouts-and-bullshit-part-one/comment-page-1/#comment-251435 bobzbob Sun, 15 Mar 2009 17:09:31 +0000 http://www.theagitator.com/?p=12448#comment-251435 About the time in this video that Stossel stands in front of the white house with a mega phone, even the most pot-addled libertarian should realize that this isn't journalism, its a biased hit piece. The only coherent statement made by the panel of anonymous "economists" is that taking money out of the economy will reduce growth, true- but it misses the point that this is borrowed, not taxed money. HUGE difference that stossel knows his audience is too stupid to pick up on. His main economic point seems to be that Nancy Pelosi misspoke a couple of times. Pure hackery. About the time in this video that Stossel stands in front of the white house with a mega phone, even the most pot-addled libertarian should realize that this isn’t journalism, its a biased hit piece.

The only coherent statement made by the panel of anonymous “economists” is that taking money out of the economy will reduce growth, true- but it misses the point that this is borrowed, not taxed money. HUGE difference that stossel knows his audience is too stupid to pick up on.

His main economic point seems to be that Nancy Pelosi misspoke a couple of times.

Pure hackery.

]]>