Greed is good....GOP

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
G

Guns Guns Guns

Guest
Almost a quarter of a century has passed since the release of the movie “Wall Street,” and the film seems more relevant than ever.

The self-righteous screeds of financial tycoons denouncing President Obama all read like variations on Gordon Gekko’s famous “greed is good” speech, while the complaints of Occupy Wall Street sound just like what Gekko says in private: “I create nothing. I own,” he declares at one point; at another, he asks his protégé, “Now you’re not naïve enough to think we’re living in a democracy, are you, buddy?”

According to the prediction market Intrade, there’s a 45 percent chance that a real-life Gordon Gekko will be the next Republican presidential nominee.

I am not, of course, the first person to notice the similarity between Mitt Romney’s business career and the fictional exploits of Oliver Stone’s antihero.


GreedIsGood.png


In fact, the labor-backed group Americans United for Change is using “Romney-Gekko” as the basis for an ad campaign.

But there’s an issue here that runs deeper than potshots against Mr. Romney.

For the current orthodoxy among Republicans is that we mustn’t even criticize the wealthy, let alone demand that they pay higher taxes, because they’re “job creators.”

Yet the fact is that quite a few of today’s wealthy got that way by destroying jobs rather than creating them.

And Mr. Romney’s business history offers a very good illustration of that fact.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/09/opinion/krugman-all-the-gops-gekkos.html?_r=1
 
The Los Angeles Times recently surveyed the record of Bain Capital, the private equity firm that Mr. Romney ran from 1984 to 1999.

As the report notes, Mr. Romney made a lot of money over those years, both for himself and for his investors.

But he did so in ways that often hurt ordinary workers.

Bain specialized in leveraged buyouts, buying control of companies with borrowed money, pledged against those companies’ earnings or assets.

The idea was to increase the acquired companies’ profits, then resell them.

But how were profits to be increased?

The popular image — shaped in part by Oliver Stone — is that buyouts were followed by ruthless cost-cutting, largely at the expense of workers who either lost their jobs or found their wages and benefits cut.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/09/opinion/krugman-all-the-gops-gekkos.html?_r=1
 
Romney made his fortune in a business that is, on balance, about job destruction rather than job creation.

And because job destruction hurts workers even as it increases profits and the incomes of top executives, leveraged buyout firms have contributed to the combination of stagnant wages and soaring incomes at the top that has characterized America since 1980.
Now I’ve just said that the leveraged buyout industry as a whole has been a job destroyer, but what about Bain in particular?

Well, by at least one criterion, Bain during the Romney years seems to have been especially hard on workers, since four of its top 10 targets by dollar value ended up going bankrupt. (Bain, nonetheless, made money...)



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/09/opinion/krugman-all-the-gops-gekkos.html?_r=1
 
Contrary to conservative claims, liberals aren’t out to demonize or punish the rich.

But they do object to the attempts of the right to do the opposite, to canonize the wealthy and exempt them from the sacrifices everyone else is expected to make because of the wonderful things they supposedly do for the rest of us.

The truth is that what’s good for the 1 percent, or even better the 0.1 percent, isn’t necessarily good for the rest of America — and Mr. Romney’s career illustrates that point perfectly.

There’s no need, and no reason, to hate Mr. Romney and others like him.

We do, however, need to get such people paying more in taxes — and we shouldn’t let myths about “job creators” get in the way.






http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/09/opinion/krugman-all-the-gops-gekkos.html?_r=1
 
Denounce Obama? Why would they do that? With QE1 through QE3, he's kept them rich. He's donated to the banks who made billions off of extremely low interest loans. He's done everything Wall Street wanted.

There is nothing for them to complain about. All the greed they wanted he fed.
 
Denounce Obama? Why would they do that? With QE1 through QE3, he's kept them rich. He's donated to the banks who made billions off of extremely low interest loans. He's done everything Wall Street wanted. There is nothing for them to complain about. All the greed they wanted he fed.

That's a pretty radical sidestep, Dancin' Dalai.

This thread is about Romney.

Emi0l.gif
 
That's a pretty radical sidestep, Dancin' Dalai.

This thread is about Romney.

Emi0l.gif

It comes from the OP...

The self-righteous screeds of financial tycoons denouncing President Obama...

I'm sorry if I actually pay attention to what you pasted and you don't. But stop trying to drag the conversation off-topic. I know it is your thread, but it wasn't me who didn't bother to read what you cut and pasted.
 
It comes from the OP...I'm sorry if I actually pay attention to what you pasted and you don't. But stop trying to drag the conversation off-topic. I know it is your thread, but it wasn't me who didn't bother to read what you cut and pasted.

It was you that tried to make the thread about Obama, who is demonized by the Koch-ed up defenders of the 1% at every turn.
 
A pro-Romney TV spot running heavily in Iowa touts an unproven claim that the candidate “helped create thousands of jobs” as CEO of an investment firm.

When we asked the super PAC sponsoring the ad for proof of its claim, a spokeswoman said: “We aren’t supplying that information.”

And so far, neither is the Romney campaign.

The ad from super PAC Restore Our Future also rehashes Mitt Romney’s claim that he didn’t raise taxes in Massachusetts when he was governor, when in fact he raised hundreds of millions in new government “fees.”


http://factcheck.org/2011/12/unproven-jobs-claim-in-pro-romney-ad/
 
Here, for 2008 (as reported by the IRS and calculated by Forbes) are the average effective individual income tax rates, as a percentage of adjusted gross income, for various income groups.

[TD="width: 145"][/TD]
[TD="width: 80"][/TD]

[TD="width: 145"][/TD]
[TD="width: 80"][/TD]

[TD="width: 145"] Size of AGI [/TD]
[TD="width: 80"] Average Tax [/TD]

[TD="width: 145"] (in $) 2008 [/TD]
[TD="width: 80"] % of AGI [/TD]

[TD="width: 145"][/TD]
[TD="width: 80"][/TD]

[TD="width: 145"]1-25,000[/TD]
[TD="width: 80"]1.76[/TD]

[TD="width: 145"]25-50,000[/TD]
[TD="width: 80"]5.32[/TD]

[TD="width: 145"]50-100,000[/TD]
[TD="width: 80"]8.41[/TD]

[TD="width: 145"]100-200,000[/TD]
[TD="width: 80"]12.59[/TD]

[TD="width: 145"]200-500,000[/TD]
[TD="width: 80"]19.50[/TD]

[TD="width: 145"]500-1,000,000[/TD]
[TD="width: 80"]23.92[/TD]

[TD="width: 145"]1-10,000,000[/TD]
[TD="width: 80"]24.47[/TD]

[TD="width: 145"]10,000,000 +[/TD]
[TD="width: 80"]20.89[/TD]

[TD="width: 145"]109,736,000+[/TD]
[TD="width: 80"]18.11[/TD]

[TD="width: 145"](top 400)[/TD]






http://www.forbes.com/sites/janetno...effective-federal-income-tax-rate-is-just-11/
 
In the United States, individuals and corporations pay income tax on the net total of all their capital gains just as they do on other sorts of income. Capital gains are generally taxed at a preferential rate in comparison to ordinary income (26 U.S.C. §1(h)). This is intended to provide incentives for investors to make capital investments, to fund entrepreneurial activity, and to compensate for the effect of inflation and the corporate income tax. The amount an investor is taxed depends on both his or her tax bracket, and the amount of time the investment was held before being sold. Short-term capital gains are taxed at the investor's ordinary income tax rate, and are defined as investments held for a year or less before being sold. Long-term capital gains, which apply to assets held for more than one year, are taxed at a lower rate than short-term gains. In 2003, this rate was reduced to 15%, and to 5% for individuals in the lowest two income tax brackets. The reduced 15% tax rate on qualified dividends and long term capital gains, previously scheduled to expire in 2008, was extended through 2010 as a result of the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 signed into law by President George W. Bush. This was extended through 2012 in legislation passed by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama on Dec 17, 2010. As a result:
  • In 2008–2012, the tax rate on qualified dividends and long term capital gains is 0% for those in the 10% and 15% income tax brackets.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_gains_tax_in_the_United_States
 
Back
Top