Sam Stein: Average Americans Who Don't Support Higher Taxes On Rich Are 'Voting Against Their Self-Interest'
Remember "What's The Matter With Kansas?" That was liberal native Kansan Thomas Frank's extended kvetch over the refusal of average Jayhawkers to engage in class warfare by supporting soak-the-rich policies.
The same mindset was on display on Morning Joe today. The Huffington Post's Sam Stein asserted that the failure of many less-than-rich Americans to support tax increases on the rich amounts to voting "against their own self interest." View video after the jump . . . including the amusing moment when Stein sulks about getting interrrupted by Scarborough.
Stunning how Stein doesn't seem to understand something that those average folks he's so frustrated with do: that taking more money from entrepreneurs and sending it to Washington will hurt, not help, prospects for all Americans. And don't miss the moment half-way through the clip where Stein sulks over being interrupted by Scarborough.
SAM STEIN: From 2009 to 2011, corporate profits went up I think 46% roughly. Meanwhile, during the same period employee compensation went up about 5.7% So the actual disparity of wealth is growing, and it's not a political issue in the slightest. And it's remarkable that --
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Hold on, hold on --
STEIN [visibly irritated by Scarborough's interruption]: It is your show.
. . .
STEIN: When you have a concentration of wealth, by logic you would think that people at the bottom, which constitute the majority, would be very outraged by it. And a lot of times you have people who vote against their own self interest. And I think that's what really galling for a lot of Democrats who look at the situation and say, how can we have a president who hasn't made or prosecuted the case that the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy need to be done with? I mean, that is what is driving a lot of the angst of the progressive base.
- Mark Finkelstein's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
my comment disappeared?
Submitted by jon_torlin on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 9:10am.
What happened to the comment I left here earlier? Did I say something wrong?
-Jon
jon t
Submitted by Mark Finkelstein on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 9:17am.
I haven't deleted any comments. Is it possible you posted to another thread? Try reposting here.
No it was here
Submitted by jon_torlin on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 9:43am.
Maybe it got deleted when you updated it with the transcript.
All I said was this guy doesn't give the average Americans for being smarter than he thought and that I was sick of this class warfare nonsense.
No big, was surprised and was sure I did it. Can't be losing my mind on Friday already. ;-)
-Jon
I lose comments also
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 12:50pm.
On too many occasions, I hit the "Save" button and assume I have posted a comment. Unfortunately, the comment disappears in the internet nether and I get logged off of NewsBusters. This usually happens when I spend 20 minutes researching and posting a fantastic comment, backed with links and sources. It's a huge pain in the rear!
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Bang the class warfare drum.
Submitted by Red Jeep on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 9:26am.
Bang it often.
Us poor must demand to be given other people's money. See the economy is static. So if the rich have most of the money so the poor can't get any. We have to make everyone equally poor.
Self Disinterest?
Submitted by Pilgrim1949 on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 9:30am.
Like, furr shurrrr, duuuuude......
Self-interest you say?
I don't know about you, but in a time of economic uncertainty and ever-tightening corporate budgets, I know that I would most definitely love to increase the financial squeeze on my employer, slash MY company's potential profit margin and force them to either go out of business and close their doors or be forced to LAY OFF(!) huge numbers of employees just to stay afloat.
Sure sounds like a winning scenario to me! How selfish of me to think otherwise! How about the rest of the people inhabiting the REAL world?
Still waiting for that utopian, substance-induced, Liberal Democrat wet-dream of some poor person magnanimously and selflessly offering me a job to support my family. Happens all the time, right?
Not on this planet, not in this universe. Which, of course, explains where these other people must live!
"Ye canne change the laws of physics....." but some politicians believe that with the right legislation you can pretend they don't really apply to your own pet projects...
What?
Submitted by Bill The Bold on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 6:39pm.
Tax increases would be a combination of a few points along with the elimination of a few loopholes. Back to levels that prevailed during the Reagan/Clinton years. Weren't those good years? Why all the doomsday talk?
Member of the working class
Submitted by MrLuigi on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 9:37am.
What Sam Stein and those who occupy the left side of the political spectrum don't understand about people like me is we prefer freedom over government tyranny, which in my opinion includes confiscatory taxation. I reject calls for "shared sacrifice" when the discussion of entitlements are discouraged by a system of speech codes (political correctness) designed to demonize anyone with the temerity to bring up the costs of medicaid, medicare, social security etc...
"Question to Ask"
Submitted by mad53PA on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 9:46am.
I would love for someone to ask Stein this question:
Sam, did you pay your taxes this year?
If so, did you take any deductions or did you simply pay as much as possible?
We all know the answer to that!
At the end of the day, the left loves their money as much as anyone else.
They just think it should come from the "unwashed masses".
Not just Stein...
Submitted by C-townGiant on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 10:09am.
Any and every Democrat/liberal/advocate of progressive taxation needs to be queried in this fashion:
We all know the answers to these questions...http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/219338/who-really-cares/thomas-sowell#
Try these pointed questions. I have. You would be amazed how quickly a liberal shuts his/her mouth when put on the spot. They have no defense against this, because the only choices they have are hypocrite or liar.
Yet Another in the Long Line of Economic Morons on the Left
Submitted by Comrade Jim on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 10:11am.
Stein, like all the other left wing economic idiots, doesn't make the distinction between wealth and income. Taxing income is taxing the creation of wealth. And the working poor depend on the economic activity generated by creating wealth. It is their best chance to generate their own wealth. So when the Left shoots at the rich (meaning high income) they hit the middle class and poor. The Left is the real enemy of the poor because the they keep the poor from gainful employment and block their chance to advance.
I know, I am overlooking the fraction of the brutal Left who actually want to keep the poor down to use as a constant irritant and political hammer. But I am putting Stein in the useful idiot category. That is where most of the media are.
Please, Mr. Stein.
Submitted by almostacowboy on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 10:33am.
Would you and your father, Ben (joke), please not be so arrogant as to think you know what's in my best interest. I promise to take personal responsibility for my decisions -right, wrong, or indifferent - in regard to what I decide is in my best interest.
Who hires people, the poor or rich?
Submitted by ohio granny on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 11:01am.
How many people do you know that work for poor people? I don't know anyone unless you count all the government people it takes to funnel money taken from the working class to give it to the poor.
When there are no more so-called rich and wealthy there will also not be anyone left to pay for the government because there will be no one left working to pay taxes. Only the illiterate or willfully ignorant refuse to understand this.
Obama is either illiterate or willfully ignorant or he is just a liar. Personally I think he is a liar and ideologue. However since he continues to hide all of his grade transcripts, maybe he really is that dumb.
Who The Heck??
Submitted by Joe W. on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 12:26pm.
Who in the hell does this dude think he is to tell ME what's in MY best interests??
i.e., Why wouldn't you want more of other peoples' money?
Submitted by krendler on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 12:47pm.
Spread the wealth.
Obama said it all, right then and there.
America should have listened.
HuffPo's Sam Stein and The Nation's Chris Hayes...
Submitted by Conservator on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 12:50pm.
...are regulars on MSNBC. Both are are arrogant kids and I certainly don't need them to calculate what's in my own best interest and more important, the needs of our country.
SAM STEIN: "From 2009 to
Submitted by deerjerkydave on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 12:52pm.
SAM STEIN: "From 2009 to 2011, corporate profits went up I think 46% roughly. Meanwhile, during the same period employee compensation went up about 5.7%"
If Sam wasn't biased he would reveal that the Dems controlled both houses of congress and the white house for most of that time period. So blaming Republicans is purely partisanship. Maybe the uncertainty of TARP, the Wall Street bailouts, the housing market crash, Obamacare, massive debt, massive regulation, failing entitlements, and a credit downgrade have something to do with why businesses aren't taking many risks with their money right now.
------------------------
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite. -James MadisonCherry Picker
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 1:01pm.
I can't stand this sort of cherry picking when it comes to using start and end dates and statistical analysis. What was the relationship to corporate profits and salaries from 2007 to 2009, when profits at many corporations fell by 100%?!?!
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Unless the employees.....
Submitted by almostacowboy on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 3:07pm.
are accepting the direct financial risks associated with the running of a business, this type of comparison is ridiculous...........unless you're a socialist.
OBTW - my pay didn't go up 5.7% in those 2 years.
We need higher taxes to pay for thugs like this guy!
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 12:52pm.
Union leader draws lucrative pension perk based on false information.
I'm suuuuuure this is just an anomaly and a one-off.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Once again the left has it
Submitted by rbosque on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 1:13pm.
Once again the left has it wrong.
How many times must we go through this?
Taxing the rich heavily will only result in portfolio flight, loopholes, and hiding funds. If they have businesses, they will hire less, invest less and they will forego (K) capital expansions. And even if the rich do invest, the extra taxes will be passed on to consumers especially if the products are more inelastic and there is greater producer surplus.
Liberals think that human behavior is inelastic but people vote with their feet and go somehere else to do their business like overseas and how does that help the poor? Already we are seeing population shifts from blue to red states, and that alone speaks voulumes about the disasterous effects of overtaxation and overregulations. California, Illinois, and New York residents are fleeing their states.
It is a demonstrable fact and still...the left rigidly believe in their ideology. Incredible.
How dare a company make money after losing money for 3 years!
Submitted by vyger on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 1:21pm.
How evil of them! Burn it down. They should not be allowed to keep anything they make. Give all to the government who may or may not decide to give some back to the American people. More than likely it will be better spent on teaching African men how to wash themselves after sex!
Effing idiots like this need to be punched in the teeth for being stupid.
Don't you love it when your
Submitted by okie-pastor on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 2:36pm.
Don't you love it when your ideological opponents tell you that you are voting against YOUR SELF interest?
I'm always weary when my opponent tells me how to vote, but when they condescend to pretend it's for my benefit shows their arrogance and how ignorant they believe we are.
Infuriating!!!!
yes I do
Submitted by Bill The Bold on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 6:36pm.
But in this case they are not being opposed on ideological grounds but on practical ones. If you are really concerned with our mounting debt and also don't want to lose your rights to future gov services like medicare or social security or free roadways, safe air travel and many others then the only answer is raise taxes on the very wealthy. Failing that, the cuts will be deep and the economy will shrink and eventually your taxes will go up. oh sure, maybe fed income taxes will go up a few points but there will be a whole host of other subtle but real tax hikes on consumption, resource usage and public services. these tax hikes will be felt most acutely by working class and low income Americans.
Taxes will go up. Unavoidable. The point this guy is making is a very real one, tax the rich more now and everything gets better for all of us or protect the rich from tax hikes and most of us will suffer for it. Unless you are very rich and greedy then protecting those people from tax increases is against your interests. Well, unless your interests include you yourself paying more taxes and getting less for it.
In my view this issue couldn't be more about reality and less about ideology than any other.
Tax the Rich!
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 6:43pm.
Pretty bold there, Bill. "Tax the rich!" What level of income is "rich", and where would you tax it, on a federal level? Conversely, where would you put the cut-off for no tax on lower income earners?
Do you have an ideas, or are you just exposing philosophies? And are you going to change your mind again and admit you are mistaken a day or two after making this post?
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Well deserved critisizm
Submitted by Bill The Bold on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 6:53pm.
of my somewhat schizophrenic posts on the matter. As to the rich and where I think that is pretty much determined as those individuals with ADJUSTED gross incomes over $250k, $300k for couples. the fed income tax on those folks would revert to pre-Bush cuts as they were supposed to by law a few years back. the cap gains tax needs to revert to Reagan levels of 20 or 25% and the estate tax needs to also revert to Reagan levels, albeit with a higher threshold on the exemption--perhaps $5 million. Failing that, all of us, except the rich as defined above, will see our taxes go up.
Maybe we could hike the fed rate 1 point from $250-750k then 5 points for incremental income after that.
What do you mean 'where would you put the cut-off for no tax on lower income earners?'?
No Federal Income Tax
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 7:46pm.
How much income should someone make before they start paying any federal income tax at all?
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
The ignorance is astounding
Submitted by Denny Crane on Sat, 09/03/2011 - 2:00am.
The tax rates DON'T MATTER. They do not correlate to tax receipts. Federal tax receipts will never go above 21% of GDP. They have only broken 20% 3 times EVER. The average in a decent economy is 18%. No matter if the top rate is 35% or 91%
The problem is Spending Plain and Simple. This year the feds are spending 25% of GDP. This is unsustainable. Period. Sacrifice has to start in the Federal government. Until they get their spending back below 20% there is nothing that raising taxes will accomplish.
What increases tax revenue? A thriving economy.
What makes a thriving economy? A stable predictable environment. As long as there is so much uncertainty like obamacare, and proposals that are all over the board, companies will not take chances. They will batten down the hatches to protect themselves.
Raising taxes only does one thing, makes it harder for business and the market to thrive.
As far as the argument that the disparity between rich and poor getting wider, on an individual scale that has a little truth to it. But considering the amount of millionaires has DECREASED by about 40% over the last 3 years, The over all wealth held by the wealthy has dramatically decreased.
We Are The 53%
The non support of taxing the
Submitted by TerryWest on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 3:33pm.
The non support of taxing the wealthy isnt going against self interest, it's going against the Obama administrations self interests, which are two very different ideas and directions then Americans of all incomes want to go.
Insulting is expecting Americans to support going after the wealthy to continue this destructive ( for all incomes) dysfunctional ( for all Americans) merry go round ride we are on.
HuffPo's Sam Stein dosent seem to give Americans credit for being very aware of the massive failure and destrcutive repurcussions this adminsitration's idea's and policys have had on all incomes, the trillons of dollars spent with nothing but cut or over bloated social services, job loss and increasing trickle up
poverty to show for it.
Instead he hangs out that old share the wealth carrot hoping those with less grab it and support more of the same self destructive policy's, He spins the tale even though he is unable to prove that the trickle down fairy is real.
Amazon
Submitted by Bill The Bold on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 3:43pm.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericsavitz/2011/09/02/amazon-offers-to-hire-...
maybe I need to rethink my support of higher taxes on corps?
Since when do left-wingers care about self-interest?
Submitted by Phryj1 on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 4:35pm.
They're all about putting society first at the expense of the individual. A core tenet of leftism is what I call statist altruism, i.e. the gov't being able to force everyone to put EVERYBODY ELSE'S interests before their own. It's why the left loves welfare and redistributionism, and the whole "at some point, you make enough money", "when we spread the wealth around, everybody wins" thing. Self-interest has no place in leftist collectivist philosophy. In fact, to altruists, self-interest is amoral/unethical.
Anyone who supports the left is not only voting against their own self-interest, they're voting against self-interest itself.
Progressives seem to be completely averse to facts and logic. Apparently, reality has a conservative bias.
scary
Submitted by dmacleo on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 6:21pm.
they are scared because many of us do not advocate stealing from someone to help ourselves.
thats called integrity, ethics, and morals you fools.
Who are you planning on stealing from?
Submitted by Bill The Bold on Fri, 09/02/2011 - 6:42pm.
You do know that any tax hikes on the rich will not result in checks to you, right? They will pay for our wars, debt and freebies we all take for granted.
How, exactly, Bill the Mold ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 09/03/2011 - 1:14am.
are you able to type while ensconced in a straight-jacket?
According to you, tax hikes on the rich:
"-- will pay for our wars, debt and freebies we all take for granted."
You are a freaking moron.
I mean that in the way of constructive criticism; relevant to which, note the correct spelling of 'criticism'.
MD