Reddit mentions of The Real Crash

To be fair, cepheus42 was recalling Ben Stein's run-in with Peter Schiff, not Shiller and Ben Stein wrote a pretty nice review for Peter Schiff's most recent upcoming book, The Real Crash:

>“Peter Schiff is an original thinker, a man of startling insight and honesty, in many ways, a genius. I have learned that you disagree with him at your peril. He is one of the few men of finance of whom I wish I could say I had paid more attention to. Live and learn. Read and learn.” -- Ben Stein; author, actor, political and economic commentator

I can't imagine many other political commentators doing that.

I agree with you, that going to college is assumed, rather than thought about. I read Peter Schiff's book, "The Real Collapse: America's Coming Bankruptcy", and in it, he discusses the economics of working at a McDonald's during high school, then going on to management at the restaurant, versus going to college and getting student loans and a four-year degree for a field in which you can't find a job. The kid who stuck with McDonald's is far ahead of the kid with the degree and the student loans financially, and there is nothing saying you can't work on a degree nights and weekends if at some point you find your career limited by not having that piece of paper.

Not everyone is cut out for college, and not everyone needs a degree to have a successful career. I think young adults are much better served by considering all possibilities, rather than just trotting off to college automatically.

Food for though: here is a section on corporate income tax from The Real Crash

---

>Kill the corporate income tax
>=============================

>While the individual income tax is the most harmful tax, the corporate income tax is the dumbest, because the truth of the matter is that corporations don’t pay taxes, they collect taxes.

> Corporations can do three things with their earnings: (1) pay bonuses to their employees, (2) pay dividends to shareholders, or (3) retain the earnings for future expenditures, make capital investments and grow the business.

> When a corporation pays bonuses (of course this applies to all forms of employee compensation), those expenses are deducted, but the recipients pay personal taxes on whatever they receive. So in that respect corporate earnings paid to employees would be taxed even if no corporate income tax existed. Similiarly, when a corporation pays dividends, shareholders pay income taxes at the personal level on their dividend income. Of course, since dividends are not deductible, the corporation also pays the tax at the corporate level as well. To avoid double taxation, many corporations pay no or very low dividends (though this has changed somewhat due to the Bush tax cuts, which temporarily lowered the tax on dividends to 15 percent). Instead they use their earnings to buy back stock. The point is that if we abolished the corporate income tax, corporate income would still be taxed to the extent it was paid out to their employees or shareholders.

> The one exception would be retained earnings. Why would we want to tax retained earnings? Earnings are retained for one purpose, and that is to facilitate the growth of the company. They are used to make capital investments, fund acquisitions, and hire more employees. To the extent that taxation diminishes corporate earning, it diminishes a company’s ability to grow.

> If we simply abolish the corporate income tax, corporations will be better positioned to grow their earnings, which the government could later tax when those higher earnings are paid out to employees and stockholders. In the meantime, the economy would grow and jobs would be created.

> The corporate tax code is another reason why businesses finance so much of their expansion through debt. If a company saves up to buy equipment, it pays taxes on those savings. If it instead borrows to buy equipment, there are no savings to be taxed, and the interest is deductible. Expanding through debt is as legitimate as expanding through savings, but why should our tax code prefer the former? It’s not as if we have too little
debt in our country.

> There’s an emotional appeal to the corporate income tax, though. Corporations aren’t popular. They are the embodiment of evil for many people. It’s nice to think that these evil corporations are paying taxes.

> But corporations don’t pay taxes. Corporate taxes are paid by consumers, employees, or shareholders. All of these are people. So, if you work for a corporation, own stock, or buy anything from a corporation, you are paying a hidden tax. If we abolished corporate income taxes, it’s not as if this would simply benefit corporate profit.

> Some eighty-year-old retired widow collecting dividends is the one paying the corporate income tax, and so she’s paying a 35 percent rate despite living on a cat-food diet and a fixed income. That’s hardly the picture people have of corporate income tax, but that’s the truth.

very good book on the topic Peter Schiff is basically as libertarian as it gets. I think he goes a little overboard, but really he is absurdly more knowledgeable about the topic than I am so who am I to judge.

It would solve so many free speech issues for one. Also, most states spend 90% of their budget on schools and prisons, public choice would allow for great savings in state budgets. One size fits all solutions do not work, especially for children! The best public choice plan I've read is in Peter Schiff's The Real Crash, chapter on education reform.

Who better to explain these views than Schiff himself!

A great introduction and entertaining read is Peter Schiff's own How an Economy Grows and Why It Crashes

This video is a good intro to what he's talking about

And at the risk of sounding like a complete shill: The Real Crash: America's Coming Bankruptcy

https://www.amazon.com/Real-Crash-Peter-D-Schiff/dp/1250004470

I don't understand why then people like Peter Schiff have widely sold books with many rave reviews after they predict something that many people would widely discredit?

http://www.amazon.com/The-Real-Crash-Americas-Bankruptcy-How/dp/1250004470/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top?ie=UTF8

and

http://www.amazon.com/Crash-Proof-2-0-Economic-Collapse/dp/111815200X/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1410667853&sr=1-3

As an economist, what do you have to say about this Peter Schiff interview? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ch-cuMIcmXQ

I suggest you do a little research yourself. Schiff is a spectacular talker and debator - he's probably better on camera than he is on paper. He's regularly on business/economic TV shows, he very often gives lectures, and he hosts the 2 hour "Peter Schiff Radio Show" 5 days a week.

That said, he has written 3 or 4 great books, detailing the reasons for previous crash (and future ones!), and how an economy grows and why it crashes, as well numerous articles that I'm sure won't take long to google.

His books:

Crash Proof

The Real Crash: America's Coming Bankruptcy

How an Economy Grows and Why It Crashes


Btw, Schiff, being an American, focuses primarily on the US economy, but 90% of what he says can be applied directly to here in the UK. We are the United States little brother.

Not really a surprise...he's a typical permabear. He's usually wrong but it doesn't matter for him. There are just enough crazy people out there who ignore all logic and statistical evidence and believe that everything is going to hell every year. And since Schiff panders to their views he still has a loyal following. Just look at all these positive reviews on his book. Makes me want to gag knowing that this guy is still taken seriously by a lot of people.