http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Munk
-----Original Message----- From: futurework-boun...@lists.uwaterloo.ca [mailto:futurework-boun...@lists.uwaterloo.ca] On Behalf Of michael gurstein Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 2:52 AM To: mspen...@tallships.ca; 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: Tax the rich more? And it must be costing someone an absolute fortune as given the self-regard of each none of them comes cheap--$500 K I would guess at a minimum just for speaker's fees... M -----Original Message----- From: michael gurstein [mailto:gurst...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 2:32 AM To: mspen...@tallships.ca; 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' Subject: RE: [Futurework] Re: FW: Tax the rich more? It seems to be to be a bit weird... when I glance at this originally I thought to myself... somebody is trying to do a joke... two highly intelligent economists/policy wonks with real world experience (for better or worse) against a couple of weird right wing ideologues... what kind of a debate is that going to be and who on earth is one trying to pander to... M -----Original Message----- From: futurework-boun...@lists.uwaterloo.ca [mailto:futurework-boun...@lists.uwaterloo.ca] On Behalf Of Mike Spencer Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 2:12 AM To: futurework@lists.uwaterloo.ca Subject: [Futurework] Re: FW: Tax the rich more? Arthur wrote (quoting James Russell): The Globe and Mail has had three op-ed pieces in the last week on why, really, the Munk debate tonight should NOT convince anyone that taxes for the richest should go up. It kinda makes me wonder if there won't be a pretty good argument made that they should. In any case, you can watch Paul Krugman and George Papandreau take on Newt Gingrich and Arthur Laffer on the subject tonight at 7, through live streaming (see links below). Ha! I spotted the piece in the Saturday (May 23) G&M by Rudyard Griffiths, "What the 99 per cent need to know about taxing the rich". I didn't realize, until checking on Arthur's post, that he is (according to Wikipedia) "...the moderator and organizer of the semi-annual Munk Debates." How unseemly for the moderator to take sides before the public debate even begins! Anyhow, what caught my eye in the article was his mention of the Laffer Curve as if it were a recognized representation of widely known economic insight. My knowledge of the Laffer Curve comes from Martin Gardner's eponymous and widely cited piece in SciAm (Dec '81 and in the "Knotted Doughnuts" collection). I didn't think anybody took it seriously and for the very reasons that Gardner offers. And now I see in today's G&M that Arthur Laffer himself is to be one of the debaters! And Newt Gingrich?! Yow. So, did anybody listen to the debate? I can only imagine that the two sides' arguments were essentially orthogonal. - Mike -- Michael Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada .~. /V\ mspen...@tallships.ca /( )\ http://home.tallships.ca/mspencer/ ^^-^^ _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@lists.uwaterloo.ca https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@lists.uwaterloo.ca https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@lists.uwaterloo.ca https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
