Cenk Uygur vs. Ben Shapiro Politicon 2017
Cenk Uygur vs. Ben Shapiro Politicon 2017
let's analyze the credibility and the
arguments of ben shapiro the great
conservative sensation the reason people
are permanently poor in the united
states is not because they don't have
money it's because they suck with money
the reason people are temporarily more
is because they don't have money there
isn't a problem or okay this is
self-evident folks that's how you
controversial if your private before in
america your entire life you are not
great with money by definition okay you
are maybe one person to me and so there
you have it if you're poor it's simply
your own fault you're bad with money it
has nothing to do with the family you're
born into the neighborhood that you grow
up in the school that you attended it's
all just because you're bad with money
it's a little bit more complex than that
these factors all influence the life
outcomes of individuals i believe in
personal responsibility to an extent but
shapiro doesn't mention that there are
schools in poor areas that receive less
funding this definitely affects the
quality of education students are able
to receive let's look at what was posted
on the daily wire which bench peer owns
this was about his debate with him and
shank when the dust settled ninety-five
percent of the voters in a Twitter poll
posted by daily wire Joe Shapiro is the
Cenk Uygur vs. Ben Shapiro Politicon 2017
clear winner this is the result of
Shapiro's philosophy of debating a
leftist all right let's stop right here
do you think that if the Twitter poll
would have been posted by The Young
Turks 95 percent of people would have
said that Shapiro was the winner
fat chance so let's go down to the last
two paragraphs and read it says it was
the bloodbath tank was a stuttering mess
like Jeb during the primary debates or
marked 1 mu student another said it
looked like an animal playing with its
food you could see it in Shapiro's face
when I asked him in his book signing you
know you won that debate right he
replied I know and we shared a lot so
let's watch that actual debate that it's
Cenk Uygur vs. Ben Shapiro Politicon 2017
referring to and see if tank got
destroyed right so first of all it is
fair to say that of course the 1950s and
60s were different we just come out of
the war so but you have to consider all
the different factors
one was that factor another factor that
was the one I mentioned so so when
Republicans are conservatives say well
high taxes by definition will lead to
slower growth well we know because of
our experience in 1950s and 60s that
isn't true now you can say there are
other factors but you can't say that the
highest marginal tax rate being seventy
or even 90% slows that growth because he
didn't and it wasn't in Japan in
Switzerland it was right here you seem
to be identifying a higher tax rate in
the nineteen fifties with higher level
of growth so if that's the case why not
just tax everybody at a hundred percent
we can have massive growth from here to
eternity because we're talking about
taxes do you think we'll see you tax
reform and the in the next few months
here okay so let me try to address all
that in your in your question as well so
just real quick look guys I said it
however many questions ago of course you
have to find the right balance on all
these issues including taxes so I never
said there is no end to how much you
could whine oh yeah so so the this leads
to know wait a minute this leads to big
government versus small government I'm
so you're asking me what the ideal tax
rate is and then you get a straw man
Cenk Uygur vs. Ben Shapiro Politicon 2017
there for a second and said it should be
a hundred percent I never said that
no in fact I said no you when the middle
class has more money disposable income
they spend it why because they're not
living the lap of luxury they're not
saving it for their yacht so they need
to buy food for their family they need
education for their family so they spend
it and it goes back into the economy if
you just give it in supply-side
economics to the rich and hope that it
trickles down on us eventually decades
later what they wind up doing it with it
is something that it's logical they save
it but that means it does not
recirculate in the economy and that is
why when you have lower taxes ironically
the economy does worse but of course
it's a balancing act okay so now you're
making a strong case for Keynesian
economics which is totally fine
obviously the the problem with Keynesian
economics is that it doesn't even work
in theory because again once you go to
the logical extreme which is remove all
of the money from the rich people who
are saving all their money and give it
to all the poor people to buy hamburgers
that doesn't help the economy or spur
the economy what Spurs the economy
is a higher level what
let's burn oh yeah it looks like bench
pure absolutely destroyed him in that
debate just smashed him to pieces I mean
in reality the debate was pretty even
they went back and forth each of them
made some good points but that show is
Cenk Uygur vs. Ben Shapiro Politicon 2017
that Shapiro was pretty misleading in
his article cherry-picked the students
that he interviewed and that he put in
there do you think that if he
interviewed anyone and they said that
they thought shank one II think that he
would put that in the article of course
not
and so this just goes back to the point
the Shapiro isn't gonna be objective
when he's trying to build his public
image when he's trying to build a
fortune I mean he does bring up good
points at times but for him to be
beholden as this great intellectual
that's that's a little bit far-fetched
Zizi first appear to some pretty
impressive as he beats college students
as he goes in towards universities
across the nation but in that debate he
Cenk Uygur vs. Ben Shapiro Politicon 2017
didn't destroy shank I was watching the
debate another intellectual like Sam
Harris and see how good he could do
