Free Publicity on CBS for Millionaire Liberal's Call to Tax the Rich
CBS's Chris Wragge spotlighted a millionaire's bid to raise taxes on the rich on Thursday's Early Show, all the while omitting that his guest is a big money donor to liberal candidates like Al Franken and to Moveon.org. Wragge didn't bring on any opponents of higher taxes, nor did he play sound bites from them. Instead, he played three clips from proponents, including former Clinton aide Robert Reich.
Wragge and co-anchor Erica Hill trumpeted the "so-called patriotic millionaires [who] are begging Congress to raise their taxes" as they teased the segment three different times before it began. Hill did mention once that "they also spoke with a critic who said if they want to pay more, then they should make a contribution on their own, instead of raising taxes on all millionaires."
But instead of turning to one such critic, the morning show played live footage of the Occupy Wall Street in lower Manhattan to introduce a slanted lead-in report about the liberal-leaning millionaires, which failed to include one sound bite from an opponent. It did have two clips from Reich and one from former Google executive Doug Edwards:
WRAGGE (voice-over): Appearing on Capitol Hill Wednesday, former Google executive Doug Edwards urged lawmakers to end the Bush-era tax cuts for his fellow millionaires.
DOUG EDWARDS, FORMER GOOGLE EXECUTIVE (from press conference): We believe that the point-one percent- we- should pay more taxes. We want to pay more taxes.
WRAGGE: According to one study, millionaires now pay a smaller percentage of their income in taxes than ever before, down more than 50% in the last 50 years. (clip of protesters chanting, "The whole world is watching!") Occupy Wall Street protesters charge that the dramatically-lowered tax rate has created the greatest disparity in income between wealthy and average Americans in history. (clip of protesters chanting, "We are the 99%!") Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich agrees.
ROBERT REICH, FORMER SECRETARY OF LABOR: The 400 richest Americans now own more of America than the bottom 150 million Americans-
WRAGGE: And Reich says America's wealthiest have a moral responsibility to their country.
REICH: The fundamental problem is that we are losing equal opportunity in America.
Wragge then turned to his guest, former AOL executive Charlie Fink. The CBS anchor did toss the conservative argument about the rich being perfectly capable of contributing revenue to Fink, and later inquired if raising taxes would hurt job growth, but the millionaire brushed both aside:
WRAGGE: ...I'm sure there's some people out there that are also saying, you want to pay more taxes? Well, go ahead. You've got all this money? You do it. What do you say to the people that just say, if you want to do this, just voluntarily check the box that says, you want to pay more taxes and you take care of it? You've got millions and millions of dollars.
FINK: Well, I don't think that the United States government is a charity, nor do I think that, you know, a few dozen or a few hundred individuals donating is really going to help the country solve its physical problems. So asking people to voluntarily donate to the government is like rather like asking one person in a rowboat to row.
WRAGGE: So you've got these other millionaires together, and you come up with this plan of getting all millionaires to pay more taxes. How do you get that message out? How do you cast a wider net?
FINK: Well, first of all, our message is very simple, which is just let the Bush tax cuts expire. Has any nation in history cut taxes to its wealthiest citizens while launching two open-ended foreign wars? So we have dug ourselves a hole much deeper and bigger than the one dug in World War II, which was paid off, by the way, with taxes in the range of 70% to 90%, and that was under Republican President Eisenhower, and certainly, nobody wants to see that. So I think, in the short term, paying 39.6%, which we paid under the tremendous economic expansion of the '90s- there is no evidence that the low-tax environment that we've experienced for the last ten years has created any jobs at all.
WRAGGE: We've got an unemployment problem right now. Jobs is a huge issue across the board. How do you respond to the criticism of those who say that raising taxes on the job creators, the wealthy, kills jobs?
FINK: But that's simply a lie. People who create jobs create jobs because of demand for their products and services, not because of taxes. Taxes are never, never a factor in deciding to hire someone.
Despite asking these right-leaning questions, Wragge failed to mention that Fink, who lives in the DC metro area, is a thousand-dollar donor to Democratic Party campaigns and to liberal organizations. In the 2008 cycle, he donated several times to Obama's presidential campaign, as well as to the recount fund for Sen. Franken in Minnesota. He also donated to MoveOn.org in 2007. He also contributes to The Huffington Post.
- Matthew Balan's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Post contact
Submitted by dan iroticiv on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 4:27pm.
Newsbuster needs to start posting phone numbers, emails, contact information, we need to start do our own occupying. As long as we sit back and allow the media to skew the news, they will keep doing it.
Not even Obama agrees with that; he extended the Bush tax cuts
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 4:41pm.
FINK: ". . . Taxes are never, never a factor in deciding to hire someone."
Hmmm. Unless I'm living on another planet, I believe that the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) has already granted waivers to paying the Obamacare tax to over 1400 businesses and organizations, ranging from the McDonald's Corporation, to AARP, to labor unions. The most common reason offered is that compliance would force the employer to either reduce/eliminate health care to employees, or lay workers off.
So if Fink is correct, HHS has further invalidated Obamacare for reasons unbeknownst to us, though our guesses would probably come close.
Free Publicty?
Submitted by Clevenative on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 4:41pm.
Really? You’re worried about “free publicity” coming from CBS when you support and work in concert with the propaganda arm of the Republican Party under the guise of Fox news? What about the “free publicity” that literally MADE the Tea Party – or the ginned up raucous support that came out of Fox “reporters” on the scene at some (fizzled) Tea Party rallies, looking like the barkers who rile the audience at the opening of a late night TV show? (All documented – and digitally recorded, BTW)
"Fair and Balanced" Fox News should be taken to court for the "free publicity" and advertising they provide Republican candidates.
It isn’t news that these "Patriotic Millionaires" have formed an alliance and are coming forward in the media? The shocking “story” here should be that Fox News is the ONLY channel NOT recognizing them as an important "news" event. I wonder why?
Absolute, utter hogwash from Clevenative,---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 5:06pm.
though predictable, as he is a porcine putz; perpetually pushing pure propagandist pap.
MD
Cleve,
Submitted by Agnostic on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 5:08pm.
Ask these same millionaires if they are willing to tax wealth instead of income and let us here their tune. Taxing income is a sure way to make sure the rich stay rich and reduce the ability to travel between income brackets.
Don't care about FOX news because the whole media theme in news is a lost cause when it comes to truth. At best a news outlet can point you in the right direction.
TEA Party was over represented by FOX (at least on-line since I don't watch the station) and that bothered me until I saw the rest of the entire media industry prop up and then cover for the OWS. Two wrongs may not make a right but sometimes you can garner some type of truth from the middle.
BTW, doing a quick search came up with several stories linking the term 'patriotic millionaires' with FOX news and their many outlets.
I commend you, Agnostic
Submitted by Clevenative on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 6:07pm.
Wow, someone willing to debate an issue without one word of vile name-calling and personal attacks. Maybe there is hope for this website after all.
Actually, if you follow the beginning of the OWS movement you'll find that their biggest concern was the lack of recognition from the media. If there had been even 20 Tea Party protestors on Wall Street, Fox News and even the rest of the media would have reporting on it from day one. And if any had been arrested it would have been the lead story on Fox News 24/7 for weeks to come.
May I suggest you watch this report from the first week of the movement, which explains the origins and "early" media coverage (or lack thereof)...
Will Bunch on mainstream media’s failure to cover Occupy Wall Street protests
His guest also helps explain the lack of media coverage.
The only thing that brought them media attention was when the police pepper sprayed those 4 women already corralled in a orange fence behind a police barricade. And after the arrests numbered thousands for occupying The George Washington Bridge (which Bloomberg allowed to shut down for the entire day just the day prior for filming a Spiderman Movie) - Or when violence erupted out of police brutality such as in Oakland.
And of course, once the wealth-coddling conservative Republican “think tanks” had reason to take notice of any “violence” from the protestors (or violence they could at least spin to link to the protestors such as a non-related shooting just outside the protest in Oakland) , they circled the wagons, and decided how they would portray the protestors. The rest is history.
Like I’ve said – the reason behind the protests will not die, regardless how the media portrays it. The mistake is to underestimate a lull in activity as meaning the movement has fizzled. Just ain’t gonna happen. Two months is but a blink of the eye in terms of a movement like this. However popular or unpopular the tactics used as part of the experimentation to find a best method to express the discontent, it still is, and will always be, a “populist” movement geared at gaining support and awareness of the reasons behind the social inequities 99% of us face. Sooner or later everyone will agree it is not an “anti-capitalist” movement but rather an anti-corruption movement aimed at changing the status quo and lessening, if not removing, the inequity in our Wall Street Banking culture that is causing the death of the middle class and has been a big part in crippling the world economy.
So, you're a member of 1% of the 99%?
Submitted by UpNorth on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 6:18pm.
"Social inequities 99% of us face". Us? Got a hippie in your pocket?
And which brutality in Oakland? When Olsen got hit in the head by something thrown by the Occutards? Is that what you're referring to?
Boilerplate BS from Clevenaive* ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 6:41pm.
"Wow, someone willing to debate an issue without one word of vile name-calling and personal attacks. Maybe there is hope for this website after all."
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-balan/2011/11/17/free-publicity-cbs...
This turd is either so stupid that he is completely oblivious to the fact that most of his posts contain vile name calling and personal attacks against the right; or he is just another lying lib troll.
Obviously the latter, as every single troll uses a variation of that trite line, as though they come in peace, seeking debate and/or enlightenment but are invariably unjustly chastised by rabid conservatives.
Lies, I tell you, lies, from a liberal master arse-muncher.
MD
* - h/t 26CX for 'Clevenaive' - though I always read it as "Clevenastilynaive".
Yeah except
Submitted by Clevenative on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 7:51pm.
Attacks on your ideology or sacred cows and false idols is not quite the same as childlish name-calling like "idiot" "asshole" "libtard" and all the usual knee-jerk hate-filled personal-attack reactions to anything I post that I have been getting. I don't expect most of you to even understand that. Nor should I expect it to end - It's apparently just the nature of the beast I'm dealing with here.
You're free to believe whatever you want to believe - and I should be free to tell you why I think it's misguided or just plain wrong. The vile and often-vulgar name-calling is like water down a duck's back - but hey, feel free to continue if it makes you feel better about yourself.
You name call your ass off, Clevenaive, ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 8:49pm.
then make a comparative judgment in your favor?
You are a phony piece of crap.
MD
Awwwwwwwwwww, c'mon MD - the
Submitted by killa37 on Fri, 11/18/2011 - 12:51am.
Awwwwwwwwwww, c'mon MD - the guy comes from a well-know Republican family, has worked for Republicans as well as been involved with Republican fundraisers..................he's been a honcho for some big Fortune 500 companies...........he's now a union guy.............he's got a very high impression of himself.............and we're not intelligent or nuanced enough to 'get' what he has been telling us, from on high!!! I've actually been intimidated by him since he started posting here - it's kind of like being in the presence of.................Obama????
killa---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 11/18/2011 - 12:56am.
if Cleventine/Clevenaive isn't Obama's kissing cousin, I'm sure he would like to be. :o)
MD
"Occupy Newsbusters"
Submitted by SickofLibs on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 6:25pm.
Time for this sanctimonious troll to go home.
Wow. You packed a lot of
Submitted by Free Stinker on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 6:30pm.
Wow. You packed a lot of propaganda into that. Amazing.
I'll take your most obvious mistake. The Tea Party rally's received very little coverage. Oh, they were covered, but not nearly to the extent that OWS was, and with none of the favorable coverage that OWS received.
Compare how the Tea Party "spitting" incident was reported about, vs. the lack or reporting about OWS rapes, suicides, assualts, & murders.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
And the same people who were,
Submitted by killa37 on Fri, 11/18/2011 - 12:46am.
And the same people who were, and still ARE, disparaging the TEA Pary movement - from Boy Barry, Ms. Botox, Harry the Weasel, the MSM, and all the rest of the usual suspects..............ALL were (and might still be - depending on the outcome) coming to the support of the OWS bowel movement...............including all of the behind-the-scenes backers, organizers, and players. I just don't think that it's going the way that they want it to go, so they're in some kind of 're-calibration' mode right now, and of course the fools following their orders just keep acting like the angry sheep that they always have been. I'll bet a month's wages that 75% of those dopes couldn't tell you, in any coherent language, exactly WHY they are there.............anybody wanna take me up on that??? Where's Clevie-Poo????
again cleve*
Submitted by cajun2 on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 6:37pm.
Your post is again filled with talking points to justify a "movement" that so far has done nothing but destroy property, put peoples lives in jeopardy, and create chaos. If the OWS movement has rational issues to discuss about our country, none that I have found so far, then the targets of this protest is totally off the mark.
The corruption that you mention, is in Washington DC from decades long members of congress and insiders that no longer care about the American people but their own enrichment, party power, and re-election. Corporations work within a multitude of rules, regulations, and MANDATES, while trying to make a profit to continue operations. That is free market enterprise. When it goes awry, take a look at those who create or erase the REGULATIONS. Any "solutions" the OWS movement has released so far are based on ignorance and naivete'
There are approximately 25OO major corporations in the US, there are 27.2 million small businesses. The majority, 67% of all non government jobs are provided by those small businesses. If the OWS demands, as vague as they seem, are considered, it will result in more damage to those small businesses than any major changes occurring to large corporations.
If the protestors had anything positive in mind, they would not be destructive, they would not be willing to be supported by those who openly call for the destruction of our capitalist system, our free market system, our individual freedoms. If they truly had change in mind, change that would benefit ALL Americans, they would be protesting DC, the WH, Congress, the IRS, the FED, and an ever growing government. The bigger the government, the more ordinary Americans must surrender in order to feed the shark. That will result in a society like China. Where every single citizen lives in poverty, work hard at the COMMAND of the government and the only RICH are the elites in power in government.
If this is the ultimate goal of the OWS movement, then you will see a greater degree of negative response to the movement. Rational people will agree to change that benefits most Americans but rational true Americans will NEVER agree to tyranny by any name.
What a change of tune from 2008!
Submitted by Clevenative on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 8:34pm.
"Your post is again filled with talking points to justify a "movement" that so far has done nothing but destroy property, put peoples lives in jeopardy, and create chaos."
WOW! That sounds exactly like The Boston Tea Party! See I told you they were all patriots!
I'll remind you again, dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
Rational true Americans have had enough of this "trickle-up" bullshit and you're seeing it manifested in cities and states across the nation. Keep your heads buried in the sand and keep on pretending the whole nation thinks just like you. I wouldn't expect anything less.
No one is calling for the "destruction of our capitalist system" - That's YOUR narrative not the narrative of OWS. Quit lying - Oh, I forgot - you folks can't help yourself.
Much like The Tea Party movement - exact demands differ from "faction to faction". There is no one "leader" or even "leadership structure". Last week HuffPost published results of surveys of those demands and most mimic the hopes and demands of the majority Americans.
Capturing Occupy Wall Street Movement Demands
These are the top 4 categories of demands
I. Policies to reduce/eliminate corporate influence in politics
Eliminate corporate personhood / End corporate personhood / Policy to separate corporations and people / Overturn Citizens United versus Federal Election Commission (2008 Supreme Court decision) / Repeal the decision that dollars equal free speech
Campaign finance reform / Election finance reform / Election Change / Campaign laws / Public financing of elections / Complete reform of elections
Get corporate money out of elections / Get dollars out of politics / End corporate support of politicians / Money in politics
II. Policies to reform the tax structure
Progressive taxes / Raise taxes on the rich / More taxes above a certain income level / Tax wealthy / Tax the upper classes more / Tax the rich / Raise taxes on income above US $200k / Tax higher incomes
Increase taxes on corporations / Make corporations pay their fair share of taxes / Taxing financial transactions
Reduce taxes / Decrease taxes / Tax relief
Eliminate tax loopholes / End tax loopholes
Tax reform / Change the tax code
Fair taxation
Tax code that favors the middle class
III. Policies to create jobs
Jobs / Create more jobs / Program for full employment / Real jobs program / Universal jobs program / Move from unproductive job sectors / Organized discussion on jobs / Get American back to work / Putting people to work / Job plan / Obama's Job Plan.
IV. Policies related to healthcare
Universal healthcare / Healthcare / Healthcare policy
Single-payer healthcare / Single-payer
Nationalize healthcare
Affordable healthcare
More sustainable healthcare
This is followed by concerns for Environment and Energy, Defense, and Education.
It ALL sounds like "Rational true Americans" to me.
Like i said - don't get too hung up on the "if it bleeds it leads" mainstream media news. There's more going on here than what the media might chose to highlight.
This is much deeper than that and has the potential of making the 60's and 70s protests (or the sell-out Tea Party movement) look like child's play. Americans want TRUE change. The civil unrest will only be as "extreme" as "the people" are pushed into, and if the powers-that-be wake up before that, this could be a more tame and civil transaction than what it took to end the War in VietNam and liberate women and many minorities in the 60s and 70s.
I am in no way advocating violence - but if you think the anger will simply go away if not addressed - then you're only fooling yourself.
poor cleve*
Submitted by cajun2 on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 8:52pm.
It is obvious your WISHES are one thing, TRUTH is evasive.
Are these true American Patriots? Try again
This is no grassroots protest
I am not old enough to remember the Boston Tea Party but I vividly remember the 60's and 70's protests. RATIONAL people did not approve of those protests either. You deny the wish for violence but then point out that the "anger " will not go away. It appears to me that you believe the end justifies the means.
Your lists are demands for major changes to our country but typical of ideology, no where is there included solutions nor any consideration for consequences. This is why OWS is not getting much support. It is rather juvenile and self serving and sorry, not all inclusive.(99%) Excellent examples of ideology but no practical application.
Those who are so naive to believe this is about a utopian society over our current capitalist society is a prime example of the return of USEFUL IDIOTS.
Now your commie friends are scaring the Hell out of little kids
Submitted by Dave. on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 8:56pm.
...who are just trying to get to school so they don't wind up like the moocher, leech and tick protesters someday.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Clueless troll. OWS agenda
Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Fri, 11/18/2011 - 12:33am.
Clueless troll. OWS agenda is, give me free money, give free health care, gimme a job but don't expect me to work. Your cut and paste rants pathetic.
Biggest pile of horse manure
Submitted by killa37 on Fri, 11/18/2011 - 1:01am.
Biggest pile of horse manure since his last post............this guy IS a cliche!!!
Cleve,
Submitted by Agnostic on Fri, 11/18/2011 - 1:12pm.
You did know that there were many of the founders against the Boston Tea Party? Not really important though.
The highest form of patriotism is not dissent. Dissent and the inalienable rights of the citizens to demonstrate dissent is an absolute need for a free society. The highest form of patriotism is seen in Arlington and other such areas around the world where patriots made the ultimate sacrifice. If you are going to go off on a specious argument about people being in the military and under orders - don't bother. While it may not be 100% representative there is enough patriotic blood spilt for me to disregard disparaging remarks that may hold some truth but do not represent the whole.
Actually I am glad to see these demands boiled down to coherent statements instead of the normal demands that had to be embarrassing the ethical leaders of the OWS.
I. Policies to reduce/eliminate corporate influence in politics
The person hood of a corporation that the left seem to be so upset about generally has helped the bundlers for the Democratic party in recent years. It hasn't always been this way but corporate money has been flowing mostly towards the Democrats and for understandable reasons. They are the party that want to put limitations on business therefore they are the party that needs to be influenced.
In the end the person hood concept of corporations has little to no effect on the political influence due to the existence of third party bundlers and lobbyist. But person hood does have limitations on corporations that are actually a good thing from a legal standpoint.
Both sides want corporate money out of elections but the right also wants special interest groups out of the picture because while big oil pours in the money so does big environmentalist. There are several such opposing views that pump money into the system.
Personally I'm all for limitations on campaigning. I've seen some decent ideas including set funding but until we can adequately address the 'charities', the main parties spending issues and the overwhelming advantage given to the incumbent in any limitation on spending - we are just floundering.
II. Policies to reform the tax structure
You would have to tell me what you think is fair before I could give a response to this. I actually don't have a problem with disproportionate tax rates but I do think that it is not fair that nearly 50% of the population pay no income tax. Too many other taxes are hidden or accepted and therefore not as political as the income tax.
III. Policies to create jobs
The role of government in creating jobs is to simply maintain the job limiting activities and rhetoric to a level that allows the growth of the economy and therefore the growth of the labor pool. Government creating jobs is like pumping water from the deep end of the pool to the shallow end and expecting the level to go up. Businesses have to expand, new markets need to be created (the evil income gap creates markets), expansion has to occur in the private sector, profits have to be earned, reinvestment has to happen, etc...
IV. Policies related to healthcare
Once again the role of government in healthcare is one of being a barrier. In a limited function that can be very helpful to society but as the barriers increase and start to multiply the system set up to protect the patients starts to hurt the patient in increased costs, poorer service and ultimately a reduction in quality as the best and the brightest find more profitable means of employment. I've worked in healthcare for a while now and I can tell you every time the government starts to make a change the doctors, insurance companies and hospitals are set to make changes to keep their doors open and those changes are almost never beneficial to patients.
Categories that should be there but probably not the way you would think:
V. Education reform
VI. Energy reform
I'm sorry but any virtues the OWS crowd had when the started they lost shortly after they received endorsement from the media and unions (including Hollywood). It is not there fault that they were a magnet for the worst sort or that it took too long to come up with a coherent message but they did allow themselves to high jacked and in the end the media excels in taking over the message. They were a positive force in the media as long as they could be used to counter the TEA Party or to bludgeon Republicans with questions from the left but they are outliving their usefulness to the media.
How is it that the leaders of every major news organization have ties to liberal groups, companies or people yet you still seem to believe the stereotype of the Conservative owned media simply because they are big business? Even the head of FOX supported Hillary Clinton for President.
Americans do not want change - Americans want improvement. Unfortunately the OWS crowd only offer the same type of change the Obama administration has given us and that is to a socialist society where the leaders are beholden to special interest groups. The only difference is the name and goals of the special interest.
CHRIST ALMIGHTY WILL YOU GET A LIFE
Submitted by Keef Olbermann on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 9:13pm.
Some of us have problems with NewsBusters bloggers' ongoing games of gotcha; some of us think that some conservative commenters sometimes cross lines of good taste and legitimate criticism; some of us enjoy arguing with intelligent liberals for mutual edification; some of us find intellectual merit in liberal ideas but reject the philosophy as shallow and materialistic and divisive; all of us find this site a valuable resource and an adequate substitute gauge of the current media/cultural environment for those of us who don't subscribe to cable but read instead.
And then there's this dipshit who turns out ten-paragraph screeds about the same stupid things over and over at every hour of the day and attracts comment after comment of people who just have to take the bait and give more grist for the stupid mill. You have no verbal felicity; you have no particular intellectual ability save for inordinate self-esteem. For someone who claims fealty to fact or logic you show literally nothing of it: every paragraph is some straw man about "Christians" or "right-wing" X Y or Z.
Now you're going to laugh at me and say that I'm being worked up and by extension am taking the trollbait I'm railing against. Ooh! A right-wing hypocrite! And you're damn right. I spend literally less than an hour a day on the Internet and my time - to me, at least - is too valuable for you to be part of it. Try walking outside sometime. The air is bracing this time of year.
I see in another post that your habits indicate that you have a small penis. Well I have a large penis. So there. And that's all you'll get from me.
Vita brevis, dumbars longa
If mutual edification is not---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 9:23pm.
the end result of arguing with an intelligent liberal; was the exercise then no more than an ongoing game of gotcha?
MD
No, it just means the liberal wasn't listening (nt)
Submitted by Keef Olbermann on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 9:25pm.
.
Clevie-Poo has a union
Submitted by killa37 on Fri, 11/18/2011 - 1:04am.
Clevie-Poo has a union job..............he's got LOTS of time to sit in front of his (EVIL corporate made) computer!!! I'lll bet the guy has a cell phone too!!! And a car!!! Well, he said he's a property owner..........that's really un-American!!!! Maybe his property is nicer than mine??? Maybe he makes more money than me?? Maybe his car is nicer than mine??? If so...........then I WANT THEM!!!! I DESERVE THEM!!! IT'S MY RIGHT!!!
Funniest thing I've read here in a while
Submitted by Blonde on Fri, 11/18/2011 - 1:19am.
Thanks, Big Guy!
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
When you're stupid, please at least coordinate with one another
Submitted by WingletDriver on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 4:53pm.
Fink: "Well, I don't think that the United States government is a charity, nor do I think that, you know, a few dozen or a few hundred individuals donating is really going to help the country solve its physical problems."
Maybe Fink should have consulted Robert Reich. According to Reich in the same segment, the 400 richest Americans have as much as the bottom 150 million. 400 sounds like a few hundred to me.
But read his answer more closely and you'll realize that ole Fink didn't really answer the question of why he doesn't voluntarily pay more. Put his answer together with Reich's most likely false analysis and you'll realize that this is not a plea to tax millionaires, but a demand to tax anyone who produces anything.
I wonder when they'll ask Robert Reich shy in the Clinton years they specifically exempted performing artists and athletes from the higher tax brackets. Their argument at the time was that it wasn't recurring income, but more like a bonus or capital gains. A difference without distinction.
Pay up then
Submitted by Mulligan22 on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 4:55pm.
If you REALLY want to pay more then go ahead and start and if taxes do get raised you'll have a head start. But NOOOOO you guys ain't gonna do that.
Our President constantly calls for the rich to pay more. Well he IS rich. He is in the 35% tax bracket yet he pays around 26% because he takes deductions. He takes every deduction and loop hole he can to lower his taxes, yet he calls for others to pay more. Hypocrisy 101. He should lead by example but NOOOOO e won't.
Fink is
Submitted by HockeyKid on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 5:03pm.
the former director of Consumer Marketing and Brand Management at Google, and one of the famous "Google millionaires" who got in early, rode the whale, then took the money and ran. He clearly knows nothing of HR and labor costs, especially for small businesses.
As a sole proprietor, I can attest to the fact that if my taxes (or any other expense category that is a cost to the company) go up, I may certainly have to cut my staff. Pick the category: health insurance, minimum wage, taxes--Congress threatens small business every time they fool around with any of them.
Say I employ two people: an experienced technician and a minimum-wage trainee. They consume 100% of my available labor budget. When the minimum wage gets raised, guess who loses his job? It's not the experienced technician; I need him to get work done. The trainee gets the boot, as is the case in every business across the country. That's why raising the minimum wage costs jobs. Additionally, without extra labor, my ability to satisfy customers goes down, slowing my company's growth. Multiply that across every small business in America, and you get the beginnings of a recession, where everybody is worse off. Liberals don't understand any of this. They're like brand new chess players who only see the consequences of one move at a time ("higher minimum wage means the little guy gets more money"), and they're trying to play in the world of grand masters.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Tax the rich, but don't ask them to donate money to the Treasury
Submitted by CO2Maker on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 5:50pm.
Check out this Daily Caller story.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/17/patriotic-millionaires-demand-higher-t...
or
http://tinyurl.com/7xww7e4
Fink is on a guilt trip
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 7:43pm.
FINK: "Well, first of all, our message is very simple, which is just let the Bush tax cuts expire."
Uh . . . These are the Obama tax cuts. The Democrats extended them and Obama signed them into law.
FINK: "Has any nation in history cut taxes to its wealthiest citizens while launching two open-ended foreign wars?"
We'd have to do some research on the British Empire, which was fighting at least one war throughout the reign of Queen Victoria. But regarding the tax cut, all income tax filers got a cut.
FINK: ". . . So I think, in the short term, paying 39.6%, which we paid under the tremendous economic expansion of the '90s- there is no evidence that the low-tax environment that we've experienced for the last ten years has created any jobs at all."
Much of the 'tremendous economic expansion of the '90s" was attributable to the dot-com (.com) bubble, which was bursting before Clinton left office. Additionally, no one was paying 39.6% then just as no one pays 35% today. The tax code had plenty of shelters, write-offs, and deductibles then, too.
The question for Mr. Fink, and I think it is a fair one: "Did you take any deductions in your 2010 tax filing, and what was your actual rate?"
Arrogant millionaires
Submitted by NotFondOfLibs on Thu, 11/17/2011 - 9:41pm.
It is absolutely bizarre that 2 dozen arrogant but undoubtedly successful millionairs have the audicity to think they can stand in front of Congress and think they speak for all other millionaires in the country and say "we need to have our taxes raised." I am not a millionaire but if I were, I would have a few words for that arrogant, a** kissing group that they definitely would not like. It is also unfortunate that we have a media which plays up this group of grand standers and 2 legged hyenas.
I had to LAUGH when I read
Submitted by killa37 on Fri, 11/18/2011 - 1:08am.
I had to LAUGH when I read that story yesterday...........and since Yahoo is my default news carrier here on my computer, it read 'millionaires STORM Congress asking to pay more taxes'!!!! You can't make this stuff up!!! You think these guys are that stupid or naive??? And do you think they will be paying any MORE than they allready do??? If they were so adament about it, they allready WOULD HAVE!!!!!
Morons..............I don't care HOW rich they are.........but the bigger morons are the ones who believe their crap!!!
There were less than a dozen
Submitted by eaglewingz08 on Fri, 11/18/2011 - 10:38am.
There were less than a dozen tea party stories in one year following creation of the movement. The media hoped to deprive the groups of publicity so that they would die from lack of exposure. They didnt and that's when the lamestream media went into hyperdrive to slander and libel tea partiers to drive up their negatives.
In contrast except for a few media outlets which still practice journalism, the media has written scads of stories endlessly positive abot poopstockers and again libeled tea partiers by comparing them to these idiotic leftwing fascists. The major media have ignored downplayed and whitewashed the violence and crimes of the poopstockers whereas they manufactured reports of alleged crimes and racism and other misconduct by teapartiers that never happened.