Taibbi Does Mitt

[vt]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

Why was this issue never raised when John Kerry ran in 2004? Through his marriage to Teresa Heinz, his wealth far exceeds Romney. Yet because he is a Democrat possibly, the press never brings it up. Kennedy, Johnson? I don't recall demands here either.

It is also curious when reporters were asking people like Nancy Pelosi about releasing her taxes for a number of years back (She was third in line for the Presidency as Speaker) she quickly said no, and didn't demand romney release his either.

It's disingenuous to bring up something for a candidate for one party when it's not required of the other.

Don't forget apple and dozens of other corporations openly keeping earnings offshore to avoid taxes.

Being an independent I don't trust either party. There are more important problems in this country than jealous journalists whining about a conservatives wealth, when they ignore the same for the liberals.

[lektrode]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

Taibbi a day later . . .


Again, that's not to say leveraged buyout deals don't work for investors. They frequently do. But such deals are designed for the benefit of the investor – not for the takeover target. It's two different sets of interests that have been mistakenly portrayed, in the press, as being aligned.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...#ixzz2539lWSaM

fascinating discussion here don/all

very much looking forward to more of it - esp this part:

Why was this issue never raised when John Kerry ran in 2004? Through his marriage to Teresa Heinz, his wealth far exceeds Romney. Yet because he is a Democrat possibly, the press never brings it up. Kennedy, Johnson? I don't recall demands here either.

It is also curious when reporters were asking people like Nancy Pelosi about releasing her taxes for a number of years back (She was third in line for the Presidency as Speaker) she quickly said no, and didn't demand romney release his either.

It's disingenuous to bring up something for a candidate for one party when it's not required of the other.

Don't forget apple and dozens of other corporations openly keeping earnings offshore to avoid taxes.

Being an independent I don't trust either party. There are more important problems in this country than jealous journalists whining about a conservatives wealth, when they ignore the same for the liberals.

+1

its also quite interesting that we almost never see any news story about romney without some mention of his religion.

i never would've known that harry reid is ALSO A MORMON, (not that i have anything against them, as they seem to do a great job running the state of UT, SLC in particular - once one gets past the POV of recent arrivals) had it not been for a less than flattering piece about him in one of the los wages (vegas) newspapers....

just another example of how the lamestream media picks and choses which 'facts' they want to highlight - with most of em highlighting anything/everything that makes the repubs/conservatives look bad....

or worse, simply IGNORING anything of material import to the discussion - since, nears i can tell, the 2 most important issues for the media/DNC-industrial complex are 'marriage rights' and 'abortion rights' - with little or NUTHIN else - apparently in the liberal mindset, the economy takes a backseat to social issues....

which is PRECISELY how the current occupant - the most inexperienced, bought-by-FIre, IN-EFFECTIVE, clueless on how the economy-actually-works administration in history - managed to get elected.

and THEN what happened?

[BadJuju]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

Why was this issue never raised when John Kerry ran in 2004? Through his marriage to Teresa Heinz, his wealth far exceeds Romney. Yet because he is a Democrat possibly, the press never brings it up. Kennedy, Johnson? I don't recall demands here either.

The times were different. The American worker was around its peak in the 60s and wealth inequality was less then as well. The American worker, despite decades of deprivations by 2004, was still much more wealthy than now. The issue of wealth inequality is front and center these days because your average American is so much poorer than before. It doesn't help that Romney is pretty much a card-carrying member of FIRE and their champion these days. Obama is as well, but he wasn't born into wealth nor does he possess extreme wealth like Romney.

[vt]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

Wait till Obama leaves office. Both clinton and Gore made $100 million after leaving.

I've heard this time it's different way too often. If someone works their entire life and gets wealthy honestly, then why bring it up.
If one criticizes wealth creation, they need to be even handed. Kerry married his; Romney earned his.

Just because times get difficult does not mean that anything has changed. Many of the largest fortunes were born in the most difficult times. I hope you can find a way and get rich, as you are young and have the opportunity.

[vt]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

The main street media is not doing it's job anymore. Instead of going after both sides with equal fervor, they've become a propaganda arm for the DNC. Fox does the same for the RNC., but they are vastly outnumbered, through attract bigger audiences than many of the MSM.

Case in point John Corzine: the Goldman golden boy of the left.

Give me passionite journalists who will uncover FIRE whereever it transgresses!

[sunskyfan]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

I think most of us watching from the outside new Mitt Romney a long time ago the way he is described in the article. BUt, the Republican establishment choose him despite what the vibe of the primaries were. The gut wrenching distortions they are coming up with to paint Romney as something electable is saddening in many ways. As a Democrat, I long for a healthy debate because that is the American system. Until the Republicans own their mistakes concerning finance will we have a new debate and new solutions.

[lektrode]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

That's fair. I was on it in 2008. I was off by 2010. Silly me.

+1
altho the thrill was already gone and THEN, the morning-after depression set in....

[lektrode]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

The times were different. The American worker was around its peak in the 60s and wealth inequality was less then as well. The American worker, despite decades of deprivations by 2004, was still much more wealthy than now. The issue of wealth inequality is front and center these days because your average American is so much poorer than before. It doesn't help that Romney is pretty much a card-carrying member of FIRE and their champion these days. Obama is as well, but he wasn't born into wealth nor does he possess extreme wealth like Romney.

uhh.... thats not exactly The Truth

but it has made for some great story lines - course its NEVER about the fact that he's also part of the top 1%
but the story that he WASNT 'born into wealth' = pure BS/propaganda (designed by the liberal-media-industrial complex to sell THEIR product)

at least the other candidate is more or less (usually less) candid about this particular topic, but some of the more flagrant LIMOSINE LIBERALS would rather have The Rest of US believing that its the 'rich republicans' that are The Evil Hypocritters

you know, people like al gore, who tell us we need to 'conserve' and pay more taxes on carbon emissions, while he makes 10's to 100's of millions from all this, and then WONT back the only real alternative - all the while 'residing' in a number of airconditioned 8-10,000sqft houses?

but boy oh boy, is that ole romney one baaaad rich dude....

Wait till Obama leaves office. Both clinton and Gore made $100 million after leaving.

I've heard this time it's different way too often. If someone works their entire life and gets wealthy honestly, then why bring it up.

If one criticizes wealth creation, they need to be even handed. Kerry married his; Romney earned his.

.....

because it suits the story line, about the bad ole rich republicans who got that way on taxcuts?
and kerry wouldnt have been able to marry it, had he not been a made-member of the political aristocracy.

[lektrode]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

The main street media is not doing it's job anymore. Instead of going after both sides with equal fervor, they've become a propaganda arm for the DNC. Fox does the same for the RNC., but they are vastly outnumbered, through attract bigger audiences than many of the MSM.

Case in point John Corzine: the Goldman golden boy of the left.

Give me passionite journalists who will uncover FIRE whereever it transgresses!

+1
but gotta give matt credit tho, he's been far more dog-on-a-bone after em than most - but i'd be even more impressed to see him work over the O-man like he's doing to the mittster...

we can still dream and/or hope for change, cant we?

[jk]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

you can pour a private pension plan into an ira. the private pension contribution limits are higher, and the investment restrictions potentially much fewer. presumably mitt's $30million ira account got such infusions.

[vt]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

Yes, no problem here. Defined benefit plans allow larger contributions as you age and income rises. These are the type of plans that unions use, including public unions. The trick union members use is to take advantage of things like "high five": basing their pension on the highest five years of compensation. It's not uncommon for a public employee to have a pension of $100K that is indexed to inflation.

Romney probably took the pension he had earned, rolled it into an IRA, and when he left invested in private equity deals; then just let compounding work for him in the decades after he left. Anyone can do this; you just have to be willing to take the risk. Of course you could wind up losing everything in your IRA by doing so.

[flintlock]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

Romney has been a FIRE guy his whole life. FIRE is bankrolling his campaign. His top contributors in order are 1) Goldman Sachs, 2) JP Morgan, 3) Morgan Stanley, 4) BofA, 5) Credit Suisse, 6) Barclays, 7) Wells Fargo...

Now I'm supposed to believe he'll bite the hand that has feed him so well all these years?

Nixon didn't grow up with a silver spoon. And he wasn't President during an era of an economic and political culture captive to financial interests. I'm not so sure it pays to draw parallels between them.

Those banks always bankroll both sides to hedge their bets. And I agree, Romney won't bite their hand either, just like Obama wouldn't. The only real solution would be if people like the Occupy Wall Street protesters and Tea Party would wise up and occupy Capital Hill instead and actually fix the root of the problem. Force Congress to stop accepting money from businesses in any form. The politicians work for us, Wall Street does not. So hold OUR elected officials responsible. Not the men who's job is to represent their shareholders and themselves. But no, instead they prefer to focus on the duality model we've been brainwashed into thinking is the only way. That you have to be liberal or conservative. Either for or against something along strict party lines. That you can never find common ground. People are being played by both parties to our own detriment.

[flintlock]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

Let me provide the "proof" of illegality that flintlock requires: Mitt's $30 million IRA account. There is no legal way that he could have created such a large IRA balance with $2,000 a year contribution limits, even if he began when IRA's were first created 40 years ago. The only way would be to grossly and fraudulently undervalue select Bain assets and then cause Bain to sell these grossly undervalued assets to his IRA for $2,000 when they were really worth millions.

This kind of transaction is absolutely illegal in two ways. One, if he knew or should have known that these assets were worth more than $2,000, he overcontributed to his IRA and owes penalties for doing so. Second, selling your own assets to your IRA that is expressly prohibited by law. I don't think he could legally get around this requirement by causing Bain to sell its assets to his IRA for less than fair value, at it would be a fraud on Bain's shareholders.

Yeah right, he's so greedy he's going to break the law and probably destroy any political ambitions when caught, but then gives away his inheritance to charity.
http://floppingaces.net/most_wanted/...r-inheritance/



Why can't people get their minds around the fact that some people are so good at working the system for financial gain that they don't have to break the law to do it. That there are people out there so skilled at making money they don't have to break any rules. There are people out there to whom making a million dollars is like swatting a fly. Romney is very wealthy, but he doesn't even make the top echelon of the rich. Rail all day about the motivation and ethics of men who seek wealth by these means, but blame the system that allows it, not the shrewd gamesman who plays it to it's utmost.

[flintlock]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

I am always amazed when voters show dismay to find out "their guy" has feet of clay. Learn to treat presidential elections as a dog show, those with the best tricks and the best groomed may win, but they're still dogs.

[don]

Re: Taibbi Does Mitt

Jesse cuts through the bullshit. Obama did a marvelous job as an empty suit for the oligarchs. In the delirium of high hubris, it appears a front man may no longer be needed . . .

30 August 2012

This is a reprise of an interview with MIT economist Simon Johnson which was posted here in February, 2009.

Have we heeded Simon Johnson's warning? Has he proven to be prescient? Is crony capitalism and the kleptocracy becoming bolder, more aggressive, ever more demanding?

"I think I'm signaling something a little bit shocking to Americans, and to myself, actually. Which is the situation we find ourselves in at this moment, this week, is very strongly reminiscent of the situations we've seen many times in other places.

But they're places we don't like to think of ourselves as being similar to. They're emerging markets. It's Russia or Indonesia or a Thailand type situation, or Korea. That's not comfortable. America is different. America is special. America is rich. And, yet, we've somehow find ourselves in the grip of the same sort of crisis and the same sort of oligarchs...

But, exactly what you said, it's a small group with a lot of power. A lot of wealth. They don't necessarily - they're not necessarily always the names, the household names that spring to mind, in this kind of context. But they are the people who could pull the strings. Who have the influence. Who call the shots...

...the signs that I see this week, the body language, the words, the op-eds, the testimony, the way they're treated by certain Congressional committees, it makes me feel very worried.

I have this feeling in my stomach that I felt in other countries, much poorer countries, countries that were headed into really difficult economic situation. When there's a small group of people who got you into a disaster, and who were still powerful. Disaster even made them more powerful. And you know you need to come in and break that power. And you can't. You're stuck....

The powerful people are the insiders. They're the CEOs of these banks. They're the people who run these banks. They're the people who pay themselves the massive bonuses at the end of the last year. Now, those bonuses are not the essence of the problem, but they are a symptom of an arrogance, and a feeling of invincibility, that tells you a lot about the culture of those organizations, and the attitudes of the people who lead them...

But it really shows you the arrogance, and I think these people think that they've won. They think it's over. They think it's won. They think that we're going to pay out ten or 20 percent of GDP to basically make them whole. It's astonishing....

...these people are throughout the system of government. They are very much at the forefront of the Treasury. The Treasury is apparently calling the shots on their economic policies.

This is a decisive moment. Either you break the power or we're stuck for a long time with this arrangement."


Bill Moyer's Journal - Interview with Simon Johnson, February, 2009.

Johnson also wrote a piece in the Atlantic Magazine titled The Quiet Coup. It may be worth re-reading.

Here is the introduction to this in The Fall of the American Republic: The Quiet Coup d'Etat in August 2010.

"I am not so optimistic that this reform is possible, because there has in fact been a soft coup d'etat in the US, which now exists in a state of crony corporatism that wields enormous influence over the media and within the government.

Let's be clear about this, the oligarchs are flush with victory, and feel that they are firmly in control, able to subvert and direct any popular movement to the support of their own fascist ends and unslakable will to power.

This is the contempt in which they hold the majority of American people and the political process: the common people are easily led fools, and everyone else who is smart enough to know better has their price. And they would beggar every middle class voter in the US before they will voluntarily give up one dime of their ill gotten gains.

But my model says that the oligarchs will continue to press their advantages, being flushed with victory, until they provoke a strong reaction that frightens everyone, like a wake up call, and the tide then turns to genuine reform."

As far as I can tell, we are right on track for a very bad time of it. And you might be surprised at how far a belief in exceptionalism and arrogant superiority can go before it finally ends, or more likely, falls.

http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot...cial-coup.html