New Adventures of Queen Victoria by Pab Sungenis for September 20, 2011

  1. Avatar
    pickyX2  over 12 years ago

    And just when did Obama learn anything about economics?

     •  Reply
  2. Nebulous100
    Nebulous Premium Member over 12 years ago

    Be fair, pickyX2,

    .When did Economists ever learn anything about economics?And if they’re so smart, how come they ain’t rich?

     •  Reply
  3. Obedient
    Basqueian  over 12 years ago

    That does seem to be the Republican mantra “Science = bad”

     •  Reply
  4. Krazykatbw2
    grapfhics  over 12 years ago

    and ecology? That’s pretty dismal too.

     •  Reply
  5. Jason lunford
    bt  over 12 years ago

    Economics is not a science (or not a hard science, anyway), despite what economists like to pretend. That’s not to say it doesn’t use scientific method, but like sociology, psychology, or political science, it is subject to entirely unpredictable patterns of human behavior. Not that it isn’t useful, but it is a social science and not the equivalent of chemistry or physics.

     •  Reply
  6. Dragonfly clip art  9337
    CeeJay  over 12 years ago

    Relax! It’s just political satire.

     •  Reply
  7. Missing large
    WayneZombie  over 12 years ago

    The full joke is “Economics is called the dismal science because most economists are such dismal scientists.”

     •  Reply
  8. Missing large
    LocoOwl  over 12 years ago

    So it is just dandy to deliberately misquote people because that is what you believe they really think?

    Pab, editorizlizing is not your forte. Stick with what you know how to do,.

     •  Reply
  9. Missing large
    Technojunkie  over 12 years ago

    Keynesian Economics, that most universities teach, says that tax revenues rise linearly with tax rates. So 100% tax gets you 10 times the tax revenue of a 10% tax. Also, government can pay people to work and get even more money back from the stimulus.

    Austrian Economics, that Ron Paul and others follow, says that’s crap. As tax rates rise people work less. Also, expecting the stimulus effect of government paying people to work to generate more money than the government paid out is laughable, otherwise you could create infinite wealth by constantly increasing federal spending. The rising unemployment rate after so much stimulus backs this up. Figure out the optimum tax rate, make that your maximum, and beyond that you’re going to have to cut spending. Simplifying the tax code with the Flat or Fair Tax plans so you can’t game the system like GE does makes sense.

    mises.org is a good place to start for Austrian economics reading.

     •  Reply
  10. Nebulous100
    Nebulous Premium Member over 12 years ago

    Clinton and a Republican Congress balanced the budget with enough surplus to pay down the deficit in 10-20 years.Bush immediately lowered taxes and began deficit spending.(Yes, I understand the Wars, but never before were there further tax cuts DURING a war.)And then the Banks crashed.

    And everybody blames President Obama because he didn’t wave his Magic Wand and make every American a billionaire, while defending the country against Godless Communists and Godful Terrorists by eliminating all taxes and privatizing Social Security and Medicare but not moving towards Socialized Medicine (unless, of course, you happen to be retired, and then Socialized Medicine must be supplied to you at the expense of anyone who still happens to have a job).

     •  Reply
  11. Avatar
    deangup  over 12 years ago

    So good!

    John Maynard Keynes was rich.

     •  Reply
  12. Photo on 2010 11 08 at 15.31
    peachyanddanny  over 12 years ago

    Perry despises science because Orgo kicked his buttocks.

     •  Reply
  13. Deficon
    Coyoty Premium Member over 12 years ago

    Science bad! Firing good!

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From New Adventures of Queen Victoria