Listen to the John & Gordy Show on WMDX 92.7 FM...John Peterson (victim/hostage).
Pages
▼
Friday, May 4, 2012
Harrison Schultz defends Occupy, Hannity left Bewildered spitting Profanities.
Harrison Schultz took on Sean Hannity, (this is his second visit to Fox News) and showed how easy it is to make these ideologues look stupid. Cliched cartoon hosts really do insult the viewers intelligence...but then we are talking about the Fox News audience, nevermind?
Check out this link for what many feel is video proof. And to those anonymous trolls leaving your odd commentary, keep it up, it's says more about you than anything I can say:
...shows how the cops are responsible for the drug problem in Minnesota and are using tax payer money to get young people high on illegal drugs. It is very interesting that the police are conducting their DRE op in Peavey Plaza where OWS people are active.
lol - Shultz looked like a whining little child, and could not back up a single word he said... My mind is reeling at the thought that there's a single person out there who thinks he came off looking "good." LOL
Wow... Just...Wow...
"The NYPD is sending rapists to our camps..." Tin foil hats anyone?
You have got to be kidding or work for the Obama administration to believe that Schultz said anything resembling even a bit of intelligence or education.
And by the way, a guy calling himself "Democurmudgeon" notes; "Wow, oh wow, at how many conservatives are so afraid to use their name."
He then goes off to deflect attention from the idiocy of Schultz decrying the police tactics of "sending rapists into occupy camps" by pretending vote fraud isn't real.
Really? You think Schultz won that one? I dislike Hannity, but that guy made the OWS movement look like a bunch of tin-foil hat conspiracy theorists, who want everything for free.
Next time, don't make it so easy for the right. Jeez.
I'm not registered on this blog, so my name will show up as anonymous for now. I guess that means I'm "afraid" to use my name, as Democurmudgeon said. Wait... "Democurmudgeon"? Is that YOUR name? I want to see your driver's license.
Someone hiding behind a user name while calling others cowards because they don't post their names is not only a coward himself, but also a hypocrite.
So c'mon, "Democurmudgeon", what is your name? Or are you a coward?
"As an unemployed former liberal radio talk host that can't find a job in one of the most liberal cities in the country... As long time real estate guy, I've also hosted a radio show on the subject. So basically, I know what I'm doing."
How big of a loser must you be if such a liberal, knowledgeable, long time "real estate guy" and radio talk host can't get a job in one of the most "liberal cities" in America?
You are a hypocrite. While you support the OWS movement, and its war on the so-called one percent, you live in a house in Middleton that is worth almost a million dollars! I would say that puts YOU in the one percent, wouldn't you John?
John Peterson, you live in a house worth almost $1,000,000, but you have the audacity to complain about the one percent? You're like Michael Moore and the rest of those liberal millionaire elites who rail against the rich. What hypocrites!
You better hope they never hold an "Occupy Middleton" rally, or some of the 99% might show up at your house and throw a chair through your windows!
Also, in your own words: "I'm not a flame thrower, but someone who enjoys the the painful smiles of conservatives as they struggle to deny the avalanche of facts tumbling their way. I liked to ask the "follow-up question," the one they can't answer. I spent one year in hell working with conservative radio host and dummy, WIBA'sVicki McKenna, a left right match-up that blew up after just so many collisions between reality and her rabbit hole logic. ... Please leave a relevant comments, I will respond. I will also remove any comments meant for trolling purposes."
So let's see if you really mean what you say, or if you are a coward like you accuse us of being. Will you delete my comments about you living in a million dollar house, and being a hypocrite? Or will you answer those charges? You claim to enjoy asking the questions that make conservatives squirm, but are you man enough to answer some hard questions?
Harrisn Schultz came across as a typical participant trophy winner whiner, especially the next day when Hannity had him on his radio show and offered him a job. So the guy who wants free education, housing, medical, dental, vehicle and day care, who is an anarcist, will only work for six figures a year starting pay? Wow, hypocrisy
In your February 12 stint as fill-in radio host, you played a song directed toward Governor Walker. One of the lines of the song said, "You better go back to school, study our democracy..."
John, maybe you should go back to school. We do not live in a democracy. We live in a republic. Someone as smart as you purport to be certainly must know that.
Sorry, blogging about other stories that mean something. Back again. All the trivial comments, gee, which one to get to first.
I don't rip on the rich, so you're starting from a false premise. I rip on the greedy that want to get rich off the poor. Easy?
What my house is worth in none of your business, and I wish you were right. If you were right, I'd say were headed for another housing bubble. But, this is a political blog. It shows me that envy is really at the root of your "keep up with the Jones" mentality. "Someones got something I don't, so I hate them" logic. Even if it's food stamps.
Biggest point: Hannity tried to brand Occupy and Harrison with the folly of others. Individual incidents that vilifies everyone, a standard conservative ploy. Look how it worked for teachers. In Madison, conservatives even vilified the police and firefighters. If you disagree with authoritarians, they'll come after you.
And that's why I'm not as critical of Harrison. Hannity is laughably dumb, not name calling but true, and he's a B.T. Barnum sensationalist. The comments here only back that up, without actually arguing "for or against" the Occupy Movement.
There are names for one party authoritarian movements. Look it up sometime.
Oh, and my name is after the title of the blog, in plain sight, top of the page. I don't mind comments, but please after this, make your case about Occupy and not the phony outrageous picky stuff that distracts from an economy that's crushing labor.
Free health care, free college education, free dental, free housing, free transportation... I am assuming, maybe incorrectly, that since you think Mr. Schultz was such a genius in his interview with Mr. Hannity that you agree with these points.
Someone as smart as you obviously knows that nothing is free. Are doctors going to work for free? Are college professors going to work for free? What about the thousands of support staff that make it possible for a college to function... the custodians, the administrators, the construction workers, the security personnel... are they going to work for free? No, of course not. So who pays them? The evil corporations?
What if we raised the tax rate on corporations to 50%? Would that be enough to pay for everyone to go to school for free, have free medical care, free dental, free housing, free transportation? Maybe we could raise corporate taxes to 75%. Would that do it?
Let's say that would be enough. Have you thought this through? This may come as a shock to you, but regardless of the tax rate that corporations are charged, corporations do not pay taxes. It's true, and I'm not talking about the special tax breaks that President Obama gives to corporations like GE. I'm talking about every corporation.
A tax is a cost to a corporation. Corporations have three ways they can pay increased costs. They can have their employees pay it, through lower benefits and wages. They can have their stockholders pay it, through lower dividends. They can have their customers pay it, through higher prices. Which one of these is going to be used to make up for the increased tax costs that will be required so everyone can have free education, etc.?
So am I wrong about you? Do you really agree with what Mr. Schultz says? Am I one of the idiots you are talking about?
You said, "I don't rip on the rich, so you're starting from a false premise. I rip on the greedy that want to get rich off the poor. Easy?
What my house is worth in none of your business, and I wish you were right. If you were right, I'd say were headed for another housing bubble. But, this is a political blog. It shows me that envy is really at the root of your "keep up with the Jones" mentality. "Someones got something I don't, so I hate them" logic. Even if it's food stamps."
I ask you, who gets to determine who is greedy and getting rich off the poor? To the homeless man, $100 might be a lot of money. To me, someone who lives in a $775,000 house with a pool and a boat in their driveway is pretty well off. The difference between me and the OWS crowd is that I do not begrudge people the right to make money, and I don't claim to have the right to decide when they have made too much.
Trust me, Democurmudgeon, there are plenty of people in the OWS movement who would paint you as greedy.
Oh, sorry, I forgot to make one more point. You say that what your house is worth is none of my business, and I agree with you. But why is it your business how much a corporation makes for its shareholders?
To Expendable....Nicely written position. I'll try to be brief:
Competition will hold down how much a company wants to make up for higher taxes by including it in the price of their product. Pass it along to customers? A competitor may win that war, but that's the free market.
I don't think that tax rates for corporations should go up, not many liberals do. We think the loopholes should be removed. Tax rates should be raised on those who have done well with everything they've been given to succeed. When rates were 91% for income above $1 million, how did the economy do in the 50's and 60's? Did people stop innovating? Did people stop trying to make more money? Did we have the greatest middle class back then?
And another false premise; getting free college, health care...etc. I will have to point to Europe and their similar tax systems, where they have higher taxes, that pay lower rates for almost everything because they have a bigger pool. Sweeping generalizations like yours and like many conservatives doesn't bring us solutions. Every system in the world could use tweaking, like ours. But we as a country think we have to come up with our own "wheel," which is crazy.
I have never proposed anything that would effect shareholder profits, except maybe higher taxes on their dividends. I pay taxes on that too. I'm not greedy. Raise the rate to that of an individuals income bracket. Another false premise.
Finally, if you don't have the ability to determine what is selfish and greedy, I can't help you. Like Paul Ryan's budget, it takes from the poor and middle class and gives to the rich. True? That's morally wrong, even the Catholic Bishops and church think so. Ryan disagrees with them because Ryan is a sociopath, and doesn't get it. That's not name calling, he's got all the traits.
On more thing, Republicans want to raise federal taxes, or start taxing, the poor and middle class. Tell you what, when the rich pay 15.4% FICA on their incomes above $110,000, which the poor and middle class pay and rich don't, we can talk about it, but it won't change my mind.
"Competition will hold down how much a company wants to make up for higher taxes by including it in the price of their product. Pass it along to customers? A competitor may win that war, but that's the free market."
All manufacturers would be in the same boat, tax-wise. Do you believe that stockholders would put up with such a loss in revenue for long, or that the employees would put up with a reduction in benefits? Just so you know, I live in a right to work state, so admittedly I am not very knowledgeable about unions. It may be that Unions would gladly give up benefits and salaries so the company can afford those higher taxes without raising prices. HAHAHA!!! Sorry, I almost got through that with a straight face! :)
"And another false premise; getting free college, health care...etc. I will have to point to Europe and their similar tax systems, where they have higher taxes, that pay lower rates for almost everything because they have a bigger pool."
Have you watched MSNBC or CNN lately? Do you know how well the EU is doing? What are those austerity measures that the Eurozone wants to place on the PIIGS?
"I have never proposed anything that would effect shareholder profits, except maybe higher taxes on their dividends. I pay taxes on that too. I'm not greedy. Raise the rate to that of an individuals income bracket. Another false premise."
Actually, I agree with you here. We're not that different in our beliefs. We can both agree that the reason Warren Buffet pays a lower rate than his secretary is that she pays INCOME TAX and he pays CAPITAL GAINS TAX. It's apples and oranges, and disingenuous for Mr. Buffet and President Obama to play that game with the dumb masses. Personally, I would like to see something in place like the Fair Tax or some other flat tax that would eliminate all loopholes. I'm with you on this!
"Finally, if you don't have the ability to determine what is selfish and greedy, I can't help you."
I have my own idea about what constitutes greed, but I don't feel it is up to me to legislate it. Changing the tax structure as I mentioned about would make greed a moot point anyway.
"On more thing, Republicans want to raise federal taxes, or start taxing, the poor and middle class."
Not to beat a dead horse, but the Fair Tax does not tax those below the poverty line. I'm just sayin'.
Shareholder's will have to face the reality that maybe they'll have to hold off on increasing their profits, or maybe lose a little. Hell, they're consumers too. But I forgot, corporations don't share in the pain, they just make more and more...
By the way, the unions actually gave in on the health care and pension contributions. They knew they had too, you know, hard times.
Republicans aren't talking about a flat tax, they're talking now about a federal tax for the poor and middle class. They don't like it when those with lower incomes get the Earned Income Tax Credit.
Question; if conservatives are not happy about the poor being exempt from the federal tax, then consider this; I'm angry that the rich don't pay the 12.2 percent federal FICA tax that I have to pay on everything I earn. They're getting a huge tax break. Why should they stop paying that once they make more than $110,000? All things being equal...plus, it would save Soc. Sec.
A flat tax would not bring in the kind of money necessary to maintain government, and wouldn't that penalize success too when you take away important "job creating" tax deductions? And one thing to consider, any major tax shift would cost the government over a trillion bucks for the conversion, or more. Can we afford that?
My name is Dave, and your writeup regarding the exchange between Shultz and Hannity is just deluded. If it's an attempt at spin, i would have suggested you just chalk it up as a loss and move on. If you truly believe this, then you have a problem with accepting reality. Shultz was outmatched, not by anything clever presented by Hannity, but by nothing more than the simple questions Hannity presented him. His (Shultz) defense of the OWS violence and rapes was absurd. His expectations for a 'free product society' was embarrasingly naive and utterly laughable. And his admission that he lives off of private loans and has made no real effort to find a job was the nail in his coffin. Hannity owned him. OWNED him. The quicker you accept that as truth, the less harm to your credibility you'll do. Even liberals admit this was a train wreck.
Democurmudgeon said, "Competition will hold down how much a company wants to make up for higher taxes by including it in the price of their product. Pass it along to customers? A competitor may win that war, but that's the free market."
This is just silly. for this to work you'd have to enact it in a vacuum, you get that right? You understand that for anything like this to work you'd have to have the WHOLE WORLD prescribe to the theory, right? If you raise taxes to a 50% -75% rate in the US, EVERY major business would migrate to greener pastures. You understand that Wall Street isn't the only stock exchange, right? you understand that businesses can move to other countries, right? You realize that we already have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, right? What would stop Fortune 500 companies from migrating to countries that a 50% LOWER tax rate, and would welcome the income and new jobs with open arms? Your analysis is childlike. It's 4th grade economics and it doesn't apply to the new world market. Please, please just stop dude. It's naive fantasy.
I never said the corporate tax rates should go up, I said the income tax rate should go up. You can do better than a 4th grade reader can't you? The higher taxes would be state based, like property taxes and smaller breaks for energy use. State competition is killing our local economies, and something has to be done to limit the bidding war.
Anyway, what's to stop a new Fortune 500 from replacing the old? We need some new corporate blood.
And if a company doesn't mind taking the political and economic heat for abandoning the U.S., then they should go, and depend on the laws and policies of a foreign government. Good luck with that. If the laws are corporate friendly, let's assume they're already there anyway. Hey, that's the free market.
Oh, and I'm sorry, did suggest Wall Street created jobs?
Harrison was not entirely free of making a few suspicious comments, but again, the topic never got deeper than Hannity's attacks.
Free college is seen in many European countries and around the world. Free health care is seen all around the world too. But "free," is really means paid for via a higher tax rate. The costs are greatly reduced when everyone pays in. Free means you don't take out loans, or write checks, or use a debit card or pay cash for treatment.
His other list of free things I can't address, because Hannity didn't ask him about them. He should have. And you should expect more from those you agree with ideologically.
"Free college is seen in many European countries and around the world. Free health care is seen all around the world too. But "free," is really means paid for via a higher tax rate. The costs are greatly reduced when everyone pays in. Free means you don't take out loans, or write checks, or use a debit card or pay cash for treatment."
[sarcasm]Like I said before, Europe certainly is doing well. They're a great example for us to follow.[/sarcasm] Crap, the sarcasm tag isn't working.
And like Dave said, you should just forget defending Mr. Schultz. It's a lost cause. I am being absolutely serious here, Democurmudgeon, he is not worth your effort. By defending his performance on Mr. Hannity's show, you are painting yourself with a very unflattering brush. I am a conservative, but even I would admit that there have been plenty of conservatives who have said some wacky things, as I'm sure you would admit there have been several wacky liberals. Mr. Schultz does not speak for all liberals. I'm pretty sure you can defend your ideas intelligently without help from him.
There you go... high praise and free advice from your conservative friend, The Expendable.
What I'm finding from the conservative response here is that I'm the tightwad, and you guys don't mind getting bigger and bigger bills from you're corporate friends and "job creators."
All this freedom you guys talk about. How free are you when it comes to car insurance? homeowners insurance, health insurance, utility companys, phone company, cable company...etc.? What we're really free to do is buy stuff, that's if we have a job or discretionary money, and drive anyplace we want. Wow, had that already in the 1960's.
I'm the cheap one, you people don't give a damn about saving money and getting more for less. "Protecting" this now stupid and meaningless word you throw around like confetti, freedom, is so frustrating. You've taken the word and trashed it.
Keep it up, let Hannity distract you from the Occupy message, and get pushed around by corporate power. Enjoy. I've tried to stop you, but even the Great Recession wasn't a strong enough message to reconsider your positions.
Well I assume then you agree, Obama's done well by comparison to Europe.
Unless you forgot to read the articles, Europe went with the austerity program pushed by Ryan and the Republicans, and it didn't work. I can't believe you're throwing "Europe" at me. Read, read, read. Voter threw out the conservative.
I remember when France vote in their conservative president, my conservative friend called me and rubbed it in. "See." He was happy.
No calls now. Read the articles, austerity like in Walker's Wisconsin isn't working. One year and negative jobs, would you have so patient with Obama? No you WEREN'T. You people will never admit your ideology has flaws. That's why you're party is now so extreme, you don't expect anything of them. You defend their mistakes by comparing them to fantasy mistakes created by the GOP spin machine.
In desperate times, people turn to conservative politicians. I wish fear allowed for other options.
lol - Shultz looked like a whining little child, and could not back up a single word he said... My mind is reeling at the thought that there's a single person out there who thinks he came off looking "good." LOL
ReplyDeleteWow... Just...Wow...
"The NYPD is sending rapists to our camps..." Tin foil hats anyone?
You have got to be kidding or work for the Obama administration to believe that Schultz said anything resembling even a bit of intelligence or education.
ReplyDeleteWow, oh wow, at how many conservatives are so afraid to use their name.
ReplyDeleteAs for "The NYPD is sending rapists to our camps..." Tin foil hats anyone?"
Voter Fraud? tin foil hats anyone?
"Spitting profanities"? Serious?
ReplyDeleteAnd by the way, a guy calling himself "Democurmudgeon" notes; "Wow, oh wow, at how many conservatives are so afraid to use their name."
He then goes off to deflect attention from the idiocy of Schultz decrying the police tactics of "sending rapists into occupy camps" by pretending vote fraud isn't real.
Really? You think Schultz won that one?
ReplyDeleteI dislike Hannity, but that guy made the OWS movement look like a bunch of tin-foil hat conspiracy theorists, who want everything for free.
Next time, don't make it so easy for the right. Jeez.
Harrison Schultz thinks the police sent rapists to the park to make OWS look bad? This guy is pathetic.
ReplyDeleteI'm not registered on this blog, so my name will show up as anonymous for now. I guess that means I'm "afraid" to use my name, as Democurmudgeon said. Wait... "Democurmudgeon"? Is that YOUR name? I want to see your driver's license.
ReplyDeleteSomeone hiding behind a user name while calling others cowards because they don't post their names is not only a coward himself, but also a hypocrite.
So c'mon, "Democurmudgeon", what is your name? Or are you a coward?
OWS=LOSERS
ReplyDeleteWhat about all those Occupy people marching with Guy Hawkes masks or bandanas over their faces? Are they also "afraid"?
ReplyDeleteFrom your main page:
ReplyDelete"As an unemployed former liberal radio talk host that can't find a job in one of the most liberal cities in the country... As long time real estate guy, I've also hosted a radio show on the subject. So basically, I know what I'm doing."
How big of a loser must you be if such a liberal, knowledgeable, long time "real estate guy" and radio talk host can't get a job in one of the most "liberal cities" in America?
You are a hypocrite. While you support the OWS movement, and its war on the so-called one percent, you live in a house in Middleton that is worth almost a million dollars! I would say that puts YOU in the one percent, wouldn't you John?
John Peterson, you live in a house worth almost $1,000,000, but you have the audacity to complain about the one percent? You're like Michael Moore and the rest of those liberal millionaire elites who rail against the rich. What hypocrites!
ReplyDeleteYou better hope they never hold an "Occupy Middleton" rally, or some of the 99% might show up at your house and throw a chair through your windows!
Also, in your own words: "I'm not a flame thrower, but someone who enjoys the the painful smiles of conservatives as they struggle to deny the avalanche of facts tumbling their way. I liked to ask the "follow-up question," the one they can't answer. I spent one year in hell working with conservative radio host and dummy, WIBA'sVicki McKenna, a left right match-up that blew up after just so many collisions between reality and her rabbit hole logic. ... Please leave a relevant comments, I will respond. I will also remove any comments meant for trolling purposes."
ReplyDeleteSo let's see if you really mean what you say, or if you are a coward like you accuse us of being. Will you delete my comments about you living in a million dollar house, and being a hypocrite? Or will you answer those charges? You claim to enjoy asking the questions that make conservatives squirm, but are you man enough to answer some hard questions?
Harrisn Schultz came across as a typical participant trophy winner whiner, especially the next day when Hannity had him on his radio show and offered him a job. So the guy who wants free education, housing, medical, dental, vehicle and day care, who is an anarcist, will only work for six figures a year starting pay? Wow, hypocrisy
ReplyDeleteIn your February 12 stint as fill-in radio host, you played a song directed toward Governor Walker. One of the lines of the song said, "You better go back to school, study our democracy..."
ReplyDeleteJohn, maybe you should go back to school. We do not live in a democracy. We live in a republic. Someone as smart as you purport to be certainly must know that.
Sorry, blogging about other stories that mean something. Back again. All the trivial comments, gee, which one to get to first.
ReplyDeleteI don't rip on the rich, so you're starting from a false premise. I rip on the greedy that want to get rich off the poor. Easy?
What my house is worth in none of your business, and I wish you were right. If you were right, I'd say were headed for another housing bubble. But, this is a political blog. It shows me that envy is really at the root of your "keep up with the Jones" mentality. "Someones got something I don't, so I hate them" logic. Even if it's food stamps.
Biggest point: Hannity tried to brand Occupy and Harrison with the folly of others. Individual incidents that vilifies everyone, a standard conservative ploy. Look how it worked for teachers. In Madison, conservatives even vilified the police and firefighters. If you disagree with authoritarians, they'll come after you.
And that's why I'm not as critical of Harrison. Hannity is laughably dumb, not name calling but true, and he's a B.T. Barnum sensationalist. The comments here only back that up, without actually arguing "for or against" the Occupy Movement.
There are names for one party authoritarian movements. Look it up sometime.
As
Oh, and my name is after the title of the blog, in plain sight, top of the page. I don't mind comments, but please after this, make your case about Occupy and not the phony outrageous picky stuff that distracts from an economy that's crushing labor.
ReplyDeleteFree health care, free college education, free dental, free housing, free transportation... I am assuming, maybe incorrectly, that since you think Mr. Schultz was such a genius in his interview with Mr. Hannity that you agree with these points.
ReplyDeleteSomeone as smart as you obviously knows that nothing is free. Are doctors going to work for free? Are college professors going to work for free? What about the thousands of support staff that make it possible for a college to function... the custodians, the administrators, the construction workers, the security personnel... are they going to work for free? No, of course not. So who pays them? The evil corporations?
What if we raised the tax rate on corporations to 50%? Would that be enough to pay for everyone to go to school for free, have free medical care, free dental, free housing, free transportation? Maybe we could raise corporate taxes to 75%. Would that do it?
Let's say that would be enough. Have you thought this through? This may come as a shock to you, but regardless of the tax rate that corporations are charged, corporations do not pay taxes. It's true, and I'm not talking about the special tax breaks that President Obama gives to corporations like GE. I'm talking about every corporation.
A tax is a cost to a corporation. Corporations have three ways they can pay increased costs. They can have their employees pay it, through lower benefits and wages. They can have their stockholders pay it, through lower dividends. They can have their customers pay it, through higher prices. Which one of these is going to be used to make up for the increased tax costs that will be required so everyone can have free education, etc.?
So am I wrong about you? Do you really agree with what Mr. Schultz says? Am I one of the idiots you are talking about?
You said, "I don't rip on the rich, so you're starting from a false premise. I rip on the greedy that want to get rich off the poor. Easy?
ReplyDeleteWhat my house is worth in none of your business, and I wish you were right. If you were right, I'd say were headed for another housing bubble. But, this is a political blog. It shows me that envy is really at the root of your "keep up with the Jones" mentality. "Someones got something I don't, so I hate them" logic. Even if it's food stamps."
I ask you, who gets to determine who is greedy and getting rich off the poor? To the homeless man, $100 might be a lot of money. To me, someone who lives in a $775,000 house with a pool and a boat in their driveway is pretty well off. The difference between me and the OWS crowd is that I do not begrudge people the right to make money, and I don't claim to have the right to decide when they have made too much.
Trust me, Democurmudgeon, there are plenty of people in the OWS movement who would paint you as greedy.
Oh, sorry, I forgot to make one more point. You say that what your house is worth is none of my business, and I agree with you. But why is it your business how much a corporation makes for its shareholders?
ReplyDeleteTo Expendable....Nicely written position. I'll try to be brief:
ReplyDeleteCompetition will hold down how much a company wants to make up for higher taxes by including it in the price of their product. Pass it along to customers? A competitor may win that war, but that's the free market.
I don't think that tax rates for corporations should go up, not many liberals do. We think the loopholes should be removed. Tax rates should be raised on those who have done well with everything they've been given to succeed. When rates were 91% for income above $1 million, how did the economy do in the 50's and 60's? Did people stop innovating? Did people stop trying to make more money? Did we have the greatest middle class back then?
And another false premise; getting free college, health care...etc. I will have to point to Europe and their similar tax systems, where they have higher taxes, that pay lower rates for almost everything because they have a bigger pool. Sweeping generalizations like yours and like many conservatives doesn't bring us solutions. Every system in the world could use tweaking, like ours. But we as a country think we have to come up with our own "wheel," which is crazy.
I have never proposed anything that would effect shareholder profits, except maybe higher taxes on their dividends. I pay taxes on that too. I'm not greedy. Raise the rate to that of an individuals income bracket. Another false premise.
Finally, if you don't have the ability to determine what is selfish and greedy, I can't help you. Like Paul Ryan's budget, it takes from the poor and middle class and gives to the rich. True? That's morally wrong, even the Catholic Bishops and church think so. Ryan disagrees with them because Ryan is a sociopath, and doesn't get it. That's not name calling, he's got all the traits.
On more thing, Republicans want to raise federal taxes, or start taxing, the poor and middle class. Tell you what, when the rich pay 15.4% FICA on their incomes above $110,000, which the poor and middle class pay and rich don't, we can talk about it, but it won't change my mind.
Thanks for the many thoughts and challenges.
"Harrison Schultz defends Occupy, Hannity left Bewildered spitting Profanities."
ReplyDeleteWhen did Baghdad Bob start blogging in support of the OWS movement?
"Competition will hold down how much a company wants to make up for higher taxes by including it in the price of their product. Pass it along to customers? A competitor may win that war, but that's the free market."
ReplyDeleteAll manufacturers would be in the same boat, tax-wise. Do you believe that stockholders would put up with such a loss in revenue for long, or that the employees would put up with a reduction in benefits? Just so you know, I live in a right to work state, so admittedly I am not very knowledgeable about unions. It may be that Unions would gladly give up benefits and salaries so the company can afford those higher taxes without raising prices. HAHAHA!!! Sorry, I almost got through that with a straight face! :)
"And another false premise; getting free college, health care...etc. I will have to point to Europe and their similar tax systems, where they have higher taxes, that pay lower rates for almost everything because they have a bigger pool."
Have you watched MSNBC or CNN lately? Do you know how well the EU is doing? What are those austerity measures that the Eurozone wants to place on the PIIGS?
"I have never proposed anything that would effect shareholder profits, except maybe higher taxes on their dividends. I pay taxes on that too. I'm not greedy. Raise the rate to that of an individuals income bracket. Another false premise."
Actually, I agree with you here. We're not that different in our beliefs. We can both agree that the reason Warren Buffet pays a lower rate than his secretary is that she pays INCOME TAX and he pays CAPITAL GAINS TAX. It's apples and oranges, and disingenuous for Mr. Buffet and President Obama to play that game with the dumb masses. Personally, I would like to see something in place like the Fair Tax or some other flat tax that would eliminate all loopholes. I'm with you on this!
"Finally, if you don't have the ability to determine what is selfish and greedy, I can't help you."
I have my own idea about what constitutes greed, but I don't feel it is up to me to legislate it. Changing the tax structure as I mentioned about would make greed a moot point anyway.
"On more thing, Republicans want to raise federal taxes, or start taxing, the poor and middle class."
Not to beat a dead horse, but the Fair Tax does not tax those below the poverty line. I'm just sayin'.
Bagdad Bob never left, he just got a job with the likes of this Peterson guy and the Obama machine.
ReplyDeleteShareholder's will have to face the reality that maybe they'll have to hold off on increasing their profits, or maybe lose a little. Hell, they're consumers too. But I forgot, corporations don't share in the pain, they just make more and more...
ReplyDeleteBy the way, the unions actually gave in on the health care and pension contributions. They knew they had too, you know, hard times.
Republicans aren't talking about a flat tax, they're talking now about a federal tax for the poor and middle class. They don't like it when those with lower incomes get the Earned Income Tax Credit.
Question; if conservatives are not happy about the poor being exempt from the federal tax, then consider this; I'm angry that the rich don't pay the 12.2 percent federal FICA tax that I have to pay on everything I earn. They're getting a huge tax break. Why should they stop paying that once they make more than $110,000? All things being equal...plus, it would save Soc. Sec.
A flat tax would not bring in the kind of money necessary to maintain government, and wouldn't that penalize success too when you take away important "job creating" tax deductions? And one thing to consider, any major tax shift would cost the government over a trillion bucks for the conversion, or more. Can we afford that?
My name is Dave, and your writeup regarding the exchange between Shultz and Hannity is just deluded. If it's an attempt at spin, i would have suggested you just chalk it up as a loss and move on. If you truly believe this, then you have a problem with accepting reality. Shultz was outmatched, not by anything clever presented by Hannity, but by nothing more than the simple questions Hannity presented him. His (Shultz) defense of the OWS violence and rapes was absurd. His expectations for a 'free product society' was embarrasingly naive and utterly laughable. And his admission that he lives off of private loans and has made no real effort to find a job was the nail in his coffin. Hannity owned him. OWNED him. The quicker you accept that as truth, the less harm to your credibility you'll do. Even liberals admit this was a train wreck.
ReplyDeleteDemocurmudgeon said,
ReplyDelete"Competition will hold down how much a company wants to make up for higher taxes by including it in the price of their product. Pass it along to customers? A competitor may win that war, but that's the free market."
This is just silly. for this to work you'd have to enact it in a vacuum, you get that right? You understand that for anything like this to work you'd have to have the WHOLE WORLD prescribe to the theory, right? If you raise taxes to a 50% -75% rate in the US, EVERY major business would migrate to greener pastures. You understand that Wall Street isn't the only stock exchange, right? you understand that businesses can move to other countries, right? You realize that we already have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, right? What would stop Fortune 500 companies from migrating to countries that a 50% LOWER tax rate, and would welcome the income and new jobs with open arms? Your analysis is childlike. It's 4th grade economics and it doesn't apply to the new world market. Please, please just stop dude. It's naive fantasy.
I never said the corporate tax rates should go up, I said the income tax rate should go up. You can do better than a 4th grade reader can't you? The higher taxes would be state based, like property taxes and smaller breaks for energy use. State competition is killing our local economies, and something has to be done to limit the bidding war.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, what's to stop a new Fortune 500 from replacing the old? We need some new corporate blood.
And if a company doesn't mind taking the political and economic heat for abandoning the U.S., then they should go, and depend on the laws and policies of a foreign government. Good luck with that. If the laws are corporate friendly, let's assume they're already there anyway. Hey, that's the free market.
Oh, and I'm sorry, did suggest Wall Street created jobs?
Harrison was not entirely free of making a few suspicious comments, but again, the topic never got deeper than Hannity's attacks.
ReplyDeleteFree college is seen in many European countries and around the world. Free health care is seen all around the world too. But "free," is really means paid for via a higher tax rate. The costs are greatly reduced when everyone pays in. Free means you don't take out loans, or write checks, or use a debit card or pay cash for treatment.
His other list of free things I can't address, because Hannity didn't ask him about them. He should have. And you should expect more from those you agree with ideologically.
Democurmudgeon said...
ReplyDelete"Free college is seen in many European countries and around the world. Free health care is seen all around the world too. But "free," is really means paid for via a higher tax rate. The costs are greatly reduced when everyone pays in. Free means you don't take out loans, or write checks, or use a debit card or pay cash for treatment."
[sarcasm]Like I said before, Europe certainly is doing well. They're a great example for us to follow.[/sarcasm] Crap, the sarcasm tag isn't working.
And like Dave said, you should just forget defending Mr. Schultz. It's a lost cause. I am being absolutely serious here, Democurmudgeon, he is not worth your effort. By defending his performance on Mr. Hannity's show, you are painting yourself with a very unflattering brush. I am a conservative, but even I would admit that there have been plenty of conservatives who have said some wacky things, as I'm sure you would admit there have been several wacky liberals. Mr. Schultz does not speak for all liberals. I'm pretty sure you can defend your ideas intelligently without help from him.
There you go... high praise and free advice from your conservative friend, The Expendable.
What I'm finding from the conservative response here is that I'm the tightwad, and you guys don't mind getting bigger and bigger bills from you're corporate friends and "job creators."
ReplyDeleteAll this freedom you guys talk about. How free are you when it comes to car insurance? homeowners insurance, health insurance, utility companys, phone company, cable company...etc.? What we're really free to do is buy stuff, that's if we have a job or discretionary money, and drive anyplace we want. Wow, had that already in the 1960's.
I'm the cheap one, you people don't give a damn about saving money and getting more for less. "Protecting" this now stupid and meaningless word you throw around like confetti, freedom, is so frustrating. You've taken the word and trashed it.
Keep it up, let Hannity distract you from the Occupy message, and get pushed around by corporate power. Enjoy. I've tried to stop you, but even the Great Recession wasn't a strong enough message to reconsider your positions.
Well I assume then you agree, Obama's done well by comparison to Europe.
ReplyDeleteUnless you forgot to read the articles, Europe went with the austerity program pushed by Ryan and the Republicans, and it didn't work. I can't believe you're throwing "Europe" at me. Read, read, read. Voter threw out the conservative.
I remember when France vote in their conservative president, my conservative friend called me and rubbed it in. "See." He was happy.
No calls now. Read the articles, austerity like in Walker's Wisconsin isn't working. One year and negative jobs, would you have so patient with Obama? No you WEREN'T. You people will never admit your ideology has flaws. That's why you're party is now so extreme, you don't expect anything of them. You defend their mistakes by comparing them to fantasy mistakes created by the GOP spin machine.
In desperate times, people turn to conservative politicians. I wish fear allowed for other options.