Tony Snow On The Issues
Tony Snow On The Issues
Fox News’ Tony Snow is the new White House Press Secretary. Here’s a look at where he stands on some key issues:
ON BUSH’S ENERGY POLICY: “This year’s presidential clunkers included an energy policy filled with stuff that even Jimmy Carter abandoned…It is as if some huckster got the chief executive’s ear and told him about the can’t-miss investment of the future: cellulose fermentation. Impressed, the president wants everybody to invest. It’s like a chain letter, only compulsory.†[Townhall.com, 2/3/06]
ON BUSH’S MEDICARE AND EDUCATION POLICIES: “Bill, how does the president persuade conservatives in his own party that he’s one of them, given what we’ve seen with spending? You’ve seen Medicare, you’ve seen an education bill. These are things, I dare say, that if they’d been done under Bill Clinton, Republicans would have been howling.†[Fox News Sunday, 11/30/03]
ON RACIAL INEQUALITY: “Those eager to exploit differences between blacks and whites in America ignore the fact that the differences have all but vanished.†[Townhall, 1/20/06]
ON PROGRESSIVE TAXATION: “Furthermore, progressive taxation undermines the notion of shared citizenship…The federal law thus treats economic success the same way it treats embezzlement or murder — as a forbidden activity to be punished with increasingly harsh sanctions.†[Townhall.com, 3/2/01]
ON THE RULE OF LAW: “The president, in his responsibilities as commander in chief, sometimes has to do things that may or may not comport with the law…[T]he argument has always been that the constitutional obligation to serve as commander in chief sometimes pushes aside contemporary laws. [O’Reilly Factor, 1/20/06]
ON HIGH GAS PRICES: “Why is that per gallon crude oil price so high? Because people are jittery. You’ve got a guy in Iran saying we’re going to build a nuclear weapon. You’ve got people complaining about Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon. There are jitters about the stability of the Middle East.” [O’Reilly Factor, 4/18/06]
ON THE VALERIE PLAME INVESTIGATION: “Now, it turns out that [special counsel] Peter (sic: Patrick) Fitzgerald doesn’t — can’t even identify any harm. She wasn’t a covert agent. She wasn’t compromised. As a result, what you’re doing is possibly sending a senior administration official off about a faulty memory over something that wasn’t a crime.†[O’Reilly Factor, 2/3/06]
ON RELIGIOUS CONSERVATIVES: “Conservative columnist Tony Snow criticized [former Sen. Robert] Smith and other ‘Taliban Republicans’ for their rigid views. ‘The Taliban Republicans take a dark view of human nature,’ Snow wrote. ‘They consider the rest of us a bunch of potential dupes and regard society as a stew of corrupting influences.’†[Church & State, 9/99]
Topic Cloud
Again proving that for either enough money or power some people will sell out their principals to anyone.
April 26th, 2006 at 9:04 amON PROGRESSIVE TAXATION: “Furthermore, progressive taxation undermines the notion of shared citizenship…The federal law thus treats economic success the same way it treats embezzlement or murder — as a forbidden activity to be punished with increasingly harsh sanctions.â€
Sounds about right
April 26th, 2006 at 9:07 amTony thinks he’s going to be an “advisor” to Bush…but he’s an outsider, period.
Once he gets a good look at the inner workings of the Bush regime — and realizes he has no power to affect it, spin it, or even make sense of it — I do believe Tony will either go mad, or quit.
April 26th, 2006 at 9:11 amPS: Five bucks says his new Bush nickname is “The Snowman.”
April 26th, 2006 at 9:12 am…or “Tony the Tiger.”
April 26th, 2006 at 9:13 amTony Snowjob is ready to take over for Scottie, who just can’t swallow back all those lies any more.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but Scott McClellan will find there is an opening over at Fox Network, now and he won’t even need to leave the administration: a lateral transfer, so to speak.
April 26th, 2006 at 9:13 amSo basically, TP should love him !! He’s a conservative who’s not afraid of calling out the President when the President is a bone-head. I would think that rather than see Tony as a “sell out”, you’d see Bush adding to his staff another person who actually possesses a brain … or maybe that would be way too cognitively dissonant to admit.
April 26th, 2006 at 9:15 amI would bet Snow will last under a year and will claim the health or I want to spend time with my family issues……Any takers on the bet………Blessings
April 26th, 2006 at 9:16 am[…] It’s official: Bush names Tony Snow press secretary. Yes, the same Tony Snow who has roundly an dsoundly criticized this president on his Fox News shows. Think Progress has some of the details: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/26/snow-on-issues/ [link] […]
April 26th, 2006 at 9:18 amFinally realized who Toni reminds me of..
April 26th, 2006 at 9:23 amMax Headroom
The federal law thus treats economic success the same way it treats embezzlement or murder — as a forbidden activity to be punished with increasingly harsh sanctions.â€
Sounds about right
Comment by squegeeboo
You know, Squeeze, its a little early for that lame-assed crap. Snowjob dosn’t need any help from you to sound like a rich, elitist asshole.
April 26th, 2006 at 9:23 amTony Snow’s posts from Free Republic:
http://www.archive.org/ details/ TonySnowonFreeRepublic.com
April 26th, 2006 at 9:23 amTwo words, very appropriate for a WH Press Secretary:
Snow Job.
Thank you. that is all.
April 26th, 2006 at 9:30 amOn the issues? So what? Doesn’t matter to the Republican cattle.
Does the preznit look manly on the Tee-Vee? Does he make Peggy Noonan wet?
That’s all that matters to that filth.
April 26th, 2006 at 9:34 am.
How lucky for the TP crowd Tony Snow’s name avails itself so easily to mockery.
But in reality, he’s not that bad of a guy. He shown himself to be critical of Bush in the past….
I mean of course he backs the guy, he’s his public spokesman for God’s sake…
April 26th, 2006 at 9:38 am#14………
“Well I coulda’ been an actor, but I wound up here…
I just have to look good, I don’t have to be clear…..
Come and whisper in my ear, we need dirty laundry…”
(from the song ‘Dirty Laundry’ by Don Henley)
April 26th, 2006 at 9:41 amThe problem wasn’t that they weren’t getting the message out. The message was loud and clear, and when the people learned the truth (and how much it differed from official White House statements), they rejected the message! Bolten’s “plan” can’t possibly be “working great” because there hasn’t been any change yet. How could it be working? It hasn’t even started!
Wow, you Bush supporters really do need some professional help.
April 26th, 2006 at 9:44 amAnvilhead, calling you delusional would be stating the obvious - so I won’t. Only a mullet like you could possibly think the appointment of snow would raise bush’s numbers by ‘10-20 points’. What if the October surprise is indictments all around in the Abramhoff scandal?
April 26th, 2006 at 9:44 am#11 “You know, Squeeze, its a little early for that lame-assed crap. Snowjob dosn’t need any help from you to sound like a rich, elitist asshole.”
Thats what you get for living in the central time zone, out here in the east I’m already on cup of joe #3.
April 26th, 2006 at 9:46 amOff topic, I know, but worth a look:
http://peacetakescourage.cf.huffingtonpost.com/animations/wwjd.html
April 26th, 2006 at 9:46 amAmid rampant speculation, it is rumored that Fox News and the Bush administration will be collaborating on a new program direct from the White House. An unnamed Fox source has confirmed the speculation and has provided some further information to Thought Theater. Bucking the trend towards reality based programming; the show is expected to be loosely based upon the selective facts surrounding the internal workings of the President and his policy operatives. The source went on to say that the program will have a superficial talk show - game show format where reporters will be allowed to ask questions and then each member of the White House Press Corp will use a hand-held device to vote on whether they believe the answers that are provided by Tony. Once the question and answer session is completed, the reporter with the most correct votes will enter a soundproof booth with Helen Thomas.
Helen will be wired with a microphone. Tony then turns on Helen’s mic and allows her to ask a question. Once the question has been asked, the Press Corp votes again on whether the question should be allowed or whether the winning reporter in the sound booth should bitch slap Helen and end her questioning. The unnamed source, when pressed, refused to acknowledge that the tabulation system had been provided by Diebold. At that point Brit Hume’s voice was overheard in the background calling for security. The phone then went silent. Efforts to contact (Juan) the source have since failed.
more observations here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com
April 26th, 2006 at 9:47 amWith all of the above Snowman, you still decided to cast your lot with a gang of losers. Of course you think you can step in and change things.
Wrongo. Nothing will change this president. So the little man is going to let you sit in on meetings, eh?
I will bet your little ass that he did not tell you that himself, but some lowly ass hugger said that the prez agreed to it, right?
Despite YOUR differences with the boy wonder you have still drank all the kool-aid you can hold.
April 26th, 2006 at 9:58 amDamn right!
Nope, once they are down we figure we have won. Our mistake from the sixties.
Link?
So basically you agree that Bush is using war to further his political power.
Yep, we seriously don’t want to see another Great Depression, or World War, you know, because those things aren’t exactly fun and games.
Same to you.
April 26th, 2006 at 10:00 amBUSHS POLLS ARE GOING UP NOW!
Comment by ANVILHEAD — April 26, 2006 @ 9:45 am
Any chance you’ve got a link to support that hammerhead?
April 26th, 2006 at 10:01 am#19, I love your handle. I used to drive a 69 Eldorado and we called it the Quadragulp. Giacomo, excellent points. My concern about him is that he is an editorial guy, not a journalist. His mind is made up on a few things that I think regardless of contradictory statements he might have to defend, he knows, as they say, just enough to be dangerous. Spin, slant, opinion, what ever you want to call it is usually selective in using facts just below the full truth line to sunbtantiate the main point that the commentator is delivering. I think he will do an even better job at stifling the press corps than Mr. McClellan did. I think Tony will have a much longer leash.
April 26th, 2006 at 10:01 amI was listening to NPR on the way in to work (my tape player broke, and the chatterers were talking aboutthe impact of Snow. One asked, “Is this a good move for Snow? I mean, with Bush’s numbers sinking…”
and the other chatterer said, “Well, you know, it could be like a CEO coming on board at a company in trouble…”
Made me remember why I don’t listen to NPR any more.
Thinking a new press secretary is going to improve your position is like thinking you’re going to win the gunfight because you’ve got a new buckle for your gunbelt.
April 26th, 2006 at 10:04 amAll the President’s supporters couldn’t understand how folks like Paul O’Neill and Richard Clarke and the 8 generals could disagree with the administration behind closed doors yet get in front of the cameras and praise Bush and his bunch as if they were saints; when they left the administration, their comments turned to criticism about the war plan.
Now, we have Tony Snow. His situation is just the opposite. He has criticized the President in the past but must be one of its most ardent supporters now that he is joining the administration. In other words, he is the one that now must look good and praise Bush in front of the reporters and cameras no matter what discussions go on behind closed doors, and no matter what his personal or professional feelings are towards Bush.
For all the rightwingers, how do you square that?
April 26th, 2006 at 10:08 amWay to hand the right wing their talking points about how “independent” Snow is. The MSM is already emphasizing the fact that he criticized Bush, giving Snow a sheen of integrity and making Bush’s decision as bipartisan.
Liberal bloggers dropped the ball on this one, and picked up the conservative’s water.
April 26th, 2006 at 10:09 am#20 Dork, go back to class.
April 26th, 2006 at 10:10 am#14, you have your head up Snowjobs brain tunnel.
April 26th, 2006 at 10:13 amAt last – undeniable PROOF Fox News is Bush’s mouthpiece!
http://blogdebogs.blogspot.com/ 2006/ 04/ snow-job-fox-news-now-unequivocally.html
April 26th, 2006 at 10:17 am#30
Whatever “independence” Snow had is now irrelevant. He is destined to become just another administration hack.
April 26th, 2006 at 10:18 am#30 I think the dropping the ball on this one comment might be related to one of my favorite sayings. Lissette Model said” There is nothing more mysterious than a fact clearly stated” Here try it yourself repeat this ” The White House’s new press secretary is Tony Snow”. Does it for me. WTF was my first thought.
April 26th, 2006 at 10:19 am[…] [UPDATE: Also see what Tony Snow has to say on the issues.] […]
April 26th, 2006 at 10:19 am#27 ‘Quadragulp’ - funny and true, hadn’t heard that one before, maybe I’ll re-stamp the carb on my current project with that! I restore classic cars and have a friend who’s re-doing a ‘69 Eldo - beautiful automobile. I agree with you on snow, scotty was an amateur, snow is more of a ‘pro’ - a word with several meanings, hahahaha
April 26th, 2006 at 10:23 amBush&Co needed a new spokesman because Scottie has no credibility. So why not an arranged marriage between the White House and Fox News? For a while, Snow will be observed, but sooner or later the press corps will see they are victims of the snow job carried off by Rove. Snow thinks he will have a voice in policy — he will have to be reminded that he is simply to report policy.
April 26th, 2006 at 10:26 amHis pompous attitude, coupled with his ego will surely make for some fireworks before he finally leaves the post for “health reasons.”
Changing the messenger is not going to change the message - and the public is finally getting the message.
Anvilbrain-Squeezetoy, keep up the good work!…ya gott’em go’in,push harder,lie,put stuff in caps!..yell, you know all the things we talked about. Pick up you checks at the office tonight.
Your Troll Advisor
I hate my job
April 26th, 2006 at 10:26 amAnvilbrain-Squeezetoy, keep up the good work!…ya gott’em go’in,push harder,lie,put stuff in caps!..yell, you know all the things we talked about. Pick up your checks at the office tonight.
Your Troll Advisor
I hate my job
April 26th, 2006 at 10:27 amWiseup
When do I talk in caps? And where did I lie on this? I mearly stated my agreement with Snow about feeling progressive taxation is wrong.
April 26th, 2006 at 10:30 amI like the “Quadrajet” moniker too. Had this carb on various vehicles through the years including a ‘72 Olds 98 & ‘76 Chevy K10 pickup. The carburetor really sucked–and I mean that in a good way!
April 26th, 2006 at 10:34 amQJ, #37 yeah we had all sorts of names for that car, The Finmobile, Eldomyrado, dumb stuff. My favorite thing to do was take it out on a long, runway long, stretch with the AC on and punch it and the routine was sensational, first the car would stall just for a nanosecond then lurch like a pack of sled dogs chasing a cat and the the floating would accur while having just one hand on the wheel just floating at 90. We would have to go let the car cool down for a while before we brought it home or my dad would get pissed if he smelled the brakes. Pure driving hedonism, bench leather seats, no hump in the floor board and 8.5 mile to the gallon. When we sold it I took the 8.2 ltr badge off the grill and put it on my accord. Good luck to your buddy. Sorry to all about the OT.I’ve reached my Snow saturation point.
April 26th, 2006 at 10:37 am#37
Thought you might be into old cars after seeing your screen name on your posts. I’ve got a 1974 Trans Am that I’m hopefully going to restore before summer’s over. My Dad bought it new. Looking forward to hitting the road in it again!
April 26th, 2006 at 10:38 amTONY SNOW WILL BE A GREAT propagandist COMMUNICATOR FOR THE utterly corrupt EXCELLENT BUSH cabal,banana republic ADMINISTRATION.
April 26th, 2006 at 10:49 am#42 - yeah, they suck for sure - when I fill up at the station I use the clerk always smiles and says ’see you tomorrow’.
#43 - ahhhh, those were the days, eh fly-man? Now that little stunt would cost you about $12! My buddy’s car was sitting out for several years and developed water leaks - right now it’s more of a ‘Smelldorado’ than and Eldorado, but it’s getting there.
#44 - nice car WC, lots of fun and a good investment if you’ve seen the prices on them lately.
Sorry to all for the OT:)
April 26th, 2006 at 11:01 amANVILHEAD troll always amuses me on TP threads! His/her posts are very simple-minded just like Bush himself in many ways > lol. ANVIL has the mind of a 16 year old, who never progressed past the 10th grade > I think that happened to Dubya too!
April 26th, 2006 at 11:18 amSquegeeboo, no one has ever denied that under progressive taxation, the rich pay a larger percentage. That’s why they call it “progressive taxation”. The problem is that Snow is under some misguided belief that someone “earning” $250,000 should pay only the same (quite likely, very low) percentage that someone earning $25,000 pays. Let’s look at some simple math:
April 26th, 2006 at 11:28 amUnder the current taxation system, the guy with the $250,000 pays the same percentage of Social Security and FICA taxes but only up to $90,000, leaving him with $160,000 that is TOTALLY exempt of these taxes. The guy with the $25,000 has to pay that percentage on his entire salary. (The only significant difference would be that the richer guy would most likely have to pay the employer’s share of SS/FICA as well, but that still is paid on only $90,000.) At present, if I’m not mistaken, the rate stands at 7.65% (or 15.3% for those qualifying as self-employed), which means the guy with a $25K salary has roughly $1912 withheld while the guy with the $250K salary has $13,770 withheld (well, not technically withheld; it has to be paid directly to the gov’t by that person). Now, simple subtraction leaves Mr 25K with $23088 while Mr 250K is left with $236,230. All other taxes are more difficult to figure accurately because OF the progressive income tax. (Now, I make more than $40K a year and each pay period, I have roughly 11% of my income withheld for Federal taxes and, most years, I actually owe the Feds more money.)
But, let’s work under the Steve Forbes “flat tax” fantasy with a low-end 10% Federal tax on both men. Mr 25K will pay $2500 while Mr 250K will pay $25,000. Now, you (and Steve Forbes) may think that’s perfectly fine and sufficient; however, look at what each man has left after those taxes (including the SS/FICA withholding figures from above). Mr 25K will have $20,588 and Mr 250K will have $211,230. But, figure in the other things that Mr 25K has to spend that $20,588 on–rent, food, clothing, insurance, utilities, transportation. Rents across the country are pretty hefty for a DECENT place to live (and at $25K a year, it’s not likely he’s going to own his own home) unless one is living with one’s parents. Food prices, if you haven’t done any grocery shopping, are pretty high, especially if one wishes to eat healthy. Clothing is fairly high, even at “discount” shops like Wal-Mart and Target. And, insurance? Well, Mr 25K may actually have to pay more as a percentage of his income since he’s likely to be younger than Mr 250K, and auto insurance, even on older cars, can be quite high for people under 25 (and, if you have a new car that you’re financing, you’re more than likely to have to take out full coverage because of the financing); of course, the more you’re willling to pay as your deductible will bring down your insurance premium, but only so far. Utilities and transportation can actually be linked in terms of percentage of salary since both are subject to the cost of oil; in the northern states, you’ve got winter fuel costs that skyrocket because of natural gas, coal and heating oil, while in the Deep South and West, you’ve got summer energy bills that skyrocket because of air conditioning needs. The transportation costs, well, I have to presume that you’ve seen prices at the pump lately. Mr 25K pays the exact same cost as Mr 250K for a gallon of gas (unless one uses a different grade of gas, but that’s more likely a choice), but that single gallon takes a greater percentage of Mr 25K’s wages than it does from Mr 250K (also, Mr 250K may be more likely to have a newer car which wastes less gas–even a big old SUV can be more fuel efficient than a small car that’s several years old and hasn’t been scrupulously maintained).
Plus, let’s not overlook the fact that today’s richest people rarely pay more than 35% of their total income in taxes while 50 years ago, they’d be paying over 60% of their income in taxes, thanks to this highly misguided notion that the rich are “overtaxes”.
#46
If Dad had only ordered it with the 455…then we’d be talking about some real money!
Ahhh…we may be off-thread, but it’s nice to take a moment and recall the good old days…
April 26th, 2006 at 11:58 am#48 Sounds like that gives Mr. 25K incentive to work his way up the ladder to a higher income level where he has more disposable income and dosn’t feel the pinch, as opposed to taxing the higher income levels more and more and partially negating the fruits of hard work. Most of what you stated as extra costs to a lower salary can be negated thru personal choice, high heating bills? I kept my heat at 55 this winter, and even with higher oil prices, I saved over 1/3(nearly 1/2 actually, but not quite) compared to last year when it was at 65, invest 30 bucks of that savings in a sweater, and you don’t even notice. Making 25K a year and having a new car? Bad personal choice, instead you get some old P.O.S, with a low enough blue book to keep your insurance low, when you become Mr. 250K and can afford a new car, then one can also afford a higher insurance policy. Large food bills? Pasta and the occasional chicken is cheap, stop eating out or buying expensive foods. Clothing? Sure its expensive, but you don’t need to buy it all that often, 300-400 hundred a year gets you more then enough, unless you have a suit and tie job as opposed to buisness casual, and at 25k a year, odds are its not suit and tie.
That said, I am Mr. 25k(actually around 27k, but close enough)
Alternativly you have the fair tax being pushed by people such as Boortz, that would be a consumption tax, and would include a refund to everyone that covered the tax on the cost of living for you and your family. This way if you spend more, you pay more to the feds. Rich people tend to spend more, so they contribute more, but this way its a choice, and everyone pays the same percantage.
April 26th, 2006 at 12:14 pm[…] thanks to the fine people who edit wikipedia.org I found some interesting quotes Snow has said in the past about Bush and issues facing the country. fun stuff. […]
April 26th, 2006 at 12:31 pm[…] thanks to the fine people who edit wikipedia.org I found some interesting quotes Snow has said in the past about Bush and issues facing the country. fun stuff. […]
April 26th, 2006 at 12:31 pm[…] Also, Tony Snow On The Issues: ON BUSH’S ENERGY POLICY: “This year’s presidential clunkers included an energy policy filled with stuff that even Jimmy Carter abandoned…It is as if some huckster got the chief executive’s ear and told him about the can’t-miss investment of the future: cellulose fermentation. Impressed, the president wants everybody to invest. It’s like a chain letter, only compulsory.” [Townhall.com, 2/3/06] […]
April 26th, 2006 at 12:37 pmSounds about right
Comment by squegeeboo — April 26, 2006 @ 9:07 am
Then you must be really against those things called American democracy or meritcoracy (however screwed up they are at present). You shure are looking towards the future feudal kingdom, as this is exactly the outcome of such policies. No progressive taxation + no inheretance taxation = infinite accumulation of wealth in fewer and fewer hands passed from generation to generation = feudalism. It is rather simple, is it not?
And it is happening in quick pace, all statistics now show that the greatest disparity ever in history of man now exists between the richest 200 families in the US and the rest of the world. The gap is increasing rapidly. Soon the top 0.01% of the population will own more then the remaining 99.99% combined.
I hope you do like being a feudal serf, because that is the future you are pining for. Your “incentive” to work harder bullshit is laughable. There is already no way for you to climb up that ladder, and in the future such opportunities will be closed to even the most crafty of ruthless operators who still, very very rarely, manage to score today.
April 26th, 2006 at 12:51 pm“Then you must be really against those things called American democracy or meritcoracy”
A progressive tax on income would be directly against a meritocracy, you make a higher income due to your merit, an income which you propose taxing higher, making your merit less worthwile then it would be in a non-progressive tax world.
There is already no way for you to climb up that ladder- tell that to the boys at google, or anyone who starts out making 25k and hits 100k plus. They all climbed the ladder.
“Your “incentive†to work harder bullshit is laughable.”
April 26th, 2006 at 1:00 pmSounds like someone dosn’t perform well at work, and instead of working at improving is instead bitter at people who do perform well and are rewarded for it.
A progressive tax on income would be directly against a meritocracy, you make a higher income due to your merit, an income which you propose taxing higher, making your merit less worthwile then it would be in a non-progressive tax world.
Untrue. Personal income and merit have long since been de-coupled, if they were ever coupled. Example: an owner of an oil field, passed from father to son, produces no merit to society, yet collects vast sums. A socialite bimbo, who knows nothing about running hotel chains, which operation is self-sustaining and managed by other, hired people, produces nothing and yet receives massive amounts in return. A CEO of a failing company, who drives it into the ground, still receives his 5000% greater then an employee salary (plus bonuses) and produces nothing in return. Some operations, like Wal-Mart, are downright predatory, trading the national interests for quick profit for few individuals. And then thwere the chief profeeteer dies, his heirs, who have no input in the self-sustaining operation of the chain, receive billions.
Care to try your bullshit again?
There is already no way for you to climb up that ladder- tell that to the boys at google, or anyone who starts out making 25k and hits 100k plus. They all climbed the ladder.
That is not climbing the ladder, that is not even reaching for its first rung. The first rung is at 100 million net wealth or somewhere thereof.
Sounds like someone dosn’t perform well at work, and instead of working at improving is instead bitter at people who do perform well and are rewarded for it.
Certainly! I (and some 5 billion of other people) have failed to be born with the name of Walton. All my fault you see. Lined up in the wrong queue and the rest is history, no? And thus our combined life-time labour and efforts are, according to the moron Economic Royalty apologists, worth less then those of Paris Hilton’s of the world, who contribute so much to society as to warrant being rewarded far more then all the cancer researchers and doctors combined, right? That is 5 or so billion people and all ther efforts are worthless (and the gap is increasing) then Bill Gates + Waltons + 16 or so other families in the US. And that is a sustanable, normal, situation according to you?
April 26th, 2006 at 1:17 pm56
FACTSONLY
Bill Gates + Waltons + 16 or so other families in the US.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:28 pmBill Gates isn’t one of them, he has repeatedly said he is giving away most of his fortune to charity before he dies. He actually supports the estatetax (But feel free to use his name as a fact)
So instead you offer what? At a persons death, their entire business is dissolved/portioned off to create extra oppurtinity for everyone, at a cost of economic turmoil on a national, if not international scale at the death of every giant tycoon, and smaller shake ups at regional levels for region wide chains?
“Example: an owner of an oil field, passed from father to son, produces no merit to society, yet collects vast sums.”
The son has merit thru running the business, it might not be as fair as if he worked his way up to it, but it still is merit, anything at a level that high would tend to have a board which decides if he stays or not. If he runs it into the ground, others take over his area, and its back to business as usual.
Instead of being jealus of people with more then you, try working towards that level. Greed makes the world go round, its why capitalism has done so much for humanity.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:31 pmBill Gates isn’t one of them, he has repeatedly said he is giving away most of his fortune to charity before he dies.
I see his Public Relations firm is doing its job. Ala Carnegie, Rockefeller and others, all vile scum and yet who managed to “rehabilitate” themselves in the eyes of naive public by building libraries and what not with some of their loot. It was Rockefeller who used to toss dimes (as in 10 cents) to people wherever he went, making sure reporters wrote copiously about his “charity”.
Most of Gates’ “charity” is composed of suspicious deals where Microsoft products are valued at their “retail” prices, where agreements are signed with foreign governments enshrining Microsoft monopolies in their education systems etc, and where Gates receives massive tax windfalls.
No dice with the PR campaign.
He actually supports the estatetax (But feel free to use his name as a fact)
That would be Gates Senior, his lawyer father, who seems to have retained some shred of decency, not Bill Gates.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:38 pmThe first rung is at 100 million net wealth or somewhere thereof.
Their you go, set the first rung so far out of your reach, so that it’s not even worth trying for, this way you can complain about the unfairness of it all with out even trying to move your way up in the world. If you put the first rung at 100K, then you’d have no one to blame but yourself for not reaching it.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:43 pmSo it would be better for the FEDERAL government to have your money so it could spend it like this?
$500,000 for construction of the Sparta Teapot Museum in Sparta, North Carolina. Supporters of the project claim that the museum “will expose its visitors to an unexpected art form the teapot.â€
Jim Harrell III (D-Alleghany)
$950,000 for a parking facility at the Joslyn Art Museum in Omaha, Nebraska.
$11,605,000 for “the Crown Jewel of youth soccer tournaments” (I still say soccer isn’t a friggin sport)
$450,000 added by the House for plantings on the eastern front of the Capitol.
$591,017,000 added in conference for eight additional C-130J aircraft.
$4,200,000 for shrimp aquaculture research in Ariz., Hawaii, La., Mass., Miss., S.C., and Texas. According to USDA testimony, “The goal of this program is to develop a sustainable domestic shrimp farming industry in the United States.†The timeline for this program appears to be indefinite. Since 1985, $65.7 million has been appropriated for this research.
http://www.cagw.org/ site/ PageServer?pagename=reports_pigbook2006
I would just as soon leave it to who has it rather than let the government spend it how it wants
April 26th, 2006 at 1:47 pmI never can understand why anyone who is NOT rich defends them > lol. Unless you are in the top 10% income bracket, you are considered an indentured slave or a serf by the Bush Regime! The middle class is being destroyed in America and soon will be like Haiti, and the rest of the Third World > 90% of the population working like slaves till they die and 10% living fabulously well, while the top 1% live like kings over everybody! Go to Haiti and take a look at America’s future under Bush and the GOP > you will NOT like what you see!
April 26th, 2006 at 1:51 pmSo instead you offer what? At a persons death, their entire business is dissolved/portioned off to create extra oppurtinity for everyone, at a cost of economic turmoil on a national, if not international scale at the death of every giant tycoon, and smaller shake ups at regional levels for region wide chains?
First, there should be no “giant tycoons”, progressive taxation should make that extremely unlikely in face of free markets clearly failing in this regard. A “giant tycoon” is a sure sign of a failure of the marketplace, i.e. lack of competition. If competition operated as Adam Smith intended, the “giant” part of the “giant tycoon” cannot hapen, being instead replaced by hundrends of much smaller “tycoons”.
Progressive taxation and estate tax are last resort remedies intended to stop the obvious instabilities and imperfections of the marketplace from causing it to self-destruct completely.
Given the relative harm of the existance of gigiantic corporations and the upheaval that is caused by their partitioning, the choice is clear: the partitioning is far lesser of the two evils.
The son has merit thru running the business,
A land owner does not “run” anything. He simply owns, sits back and collects as long as the natural resource lasts. Thats it.
Most trust fund kids do the same. It is the trust fund that does the running, the kid collects and snorts cocaine. That’s about it.
Instead of being jealus of people with more then you, try working towards that level. Greed makes the world go round, its why capitalism has done so much for humanity.
Greed makes the world go round? You must be kidding. You mean Einstein came up with the Theory of Relativity out of greed? How many hundreds of billions is his estate worth? How about Plato, Mozart, Da Vinci and so on? All greedy bastards? Your view of the world is truly frightening, where animalistic (yes greed is something animals do, not sentient beings) instincts are not only not to be shunned but where they are to be worhsipped and extralled. A truly dark and depressing scenario.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:52 pmI never can understand why anyone who is NOT rich defends them
Because all of these morons secretely believe the propaganda: that if they only worked a little harder, if they only run faster up the hamster wheel a little bit they too will become the next Waltons.
Sad really.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:56 pmI never can understand why anyone who is NOT rich defends them
I never understand why anyone who is not a criminal defends the way they are treated.
I never understand why anyone who is not a terrorist defends the way they are treated.
I never understand why anyone who is not on death row argues against the death penalty.
I never understand why anyone who is not pregnant has a view on abortion
I never understand why anyone who is not on welfare supports it
Because it’s the right thing to do.
The middle class is being destroyed in America
April 26th, 2006 at 1:57 pmThe destruction of Unions started before Bush, not that he’s helped but it’s not a partisan issue. Opening up free trade about killed them.
I would just as soon leave it to who has it rather than let the government spend it how it wants
Comment by Tundra — April 26, 2006 @ 1:47 pm
Who will pave the roads, build public schools, pay the teachers, build the sewage & potable water systems, lay down the electricity network, build & maintain dams and levees, fund Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, provide the veterans’ benefit system, fund the construction of seaports and airports, insure for home loans & student loans (when not actually providing these loans), fund public universities & subsidise private ones?
Sure there are egregious examples of misuse of public funds -you listed a few. The solution is to get rid of “pet projects” and pork that only buy political favors, not to abolish all taxes. What you are saying is we should throw the baby out with the water.
April 26th, 2006 at 1:58 pmBecause all of these morons secretely believe the propaganda: that if they only worked a little harder, if they only run faster up the hamster wheel a little bit they too will become the next Waltons.Sad really.
Yeah Sad to see a progressive with no dream or vision.
April 26th, 2006 at 2:00 pmYeah Sad to see a progressive with no dream or vision.
Oh I have a Dream and Vision. The Dream is a meritocratic society where the rewards are proportional to the person’s merit to that society. I have a Vision of a place where the weak and the disadvantaged are cared for, where opportunities to succeed (but not to take over) are granted to all those who wish to make an effort and where common decency and not greed is the ruling law.
April 26th, 2006 at 2:05 pmANVILHEAD… WHAT SURPRISE TO THE NEOCONS HAVE FOR US? ANOTHER PLANE FLYING INTO A BUILDING? SO THEY CAN RAMP UP THE HYSTERIA TO WIN ANOTHER ELECTION? SOUNDS LIKE A PERFECT NAZI-NEOCON PLOY TO ME!!!
THIS WILL HELP BUSH’S POLLS 10 OR 20 POINTS. A LITTLE OCTOBER SURPRISE AND MOST OF THE COUNTRY WILL BE BACK WITH BUSH AND THE REPUBLICANS—- AND WE’LL KEEP CONTROL OF CONGRESS.
BOLTENS PLAN IS WORKING GREAT.
Comment by ANVILHEAD — April 26, 2006 @ 9:32 am
April 26th, 2006 at 2:10 pmInstead of being jealus of people with more then you, try working towards that level. Greed makes the world go round, its why capitalism has done so much for humanity.
Comment by squegeeboo — April 26, 2006 @ 1:31 pm
This would be true in an ideal world, one where merit (meaning good work ethics, honesty, hard work, and all the other things we were all brought up to respect and strive for) equals financial success. Reality is, it does not. The single biggest indicator of one’s social class is the parents’ wealth.
This is no “Left” vs “Right” issue -many conservative publications have already pointed out how (upward) social mobility has been steadily declining over the years.
From The Economist:
The past couple of decades have seen a huge increase in inequality in America. The Economic Policy Institute, a Washington think-tank, argues that between 1979 and 2000 the real income of households in the lowest fifth (the bottom 20% of earners) grew by 6.4%, while that of households in the top fifth grew by 70%. The family income of the top 1% grew by 184%—and that of the top 0.1% or 0.01% grew even faster. Back in 1979 the average income of the top 1% was 133 times that of the bottom 20%; by 2000 the income of the top 1% had risen to 189 times that of the bottom fifth.
April 26th, 2006 at 2:10 pmEver higher society, ever harder to ascend
66
The solution is to get rid of “pet projects†and pork that only buy political favors, not to abolish all taxes.
April 26th, 2006 at 2:13 pmI’m not saying to get rid of all taxes by any means. I just think that they can reduce everyones taxes quite a bit by controlling spending. I don’t like the idea of having all of the extreme cases and then saying, “well the rich should pay for them”. If the government cleaned itself up (alot) I might change my mind on some of it. For now they waste so much and keep looking for ways to get more.
#63
Adam Smith “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.”
With out greed, there is no reason to do anything beyond substanance for the majority of people in the world. Sure there are a few exceptions, but generally their estates grow in wealth after greedy people take their ideas and concepts and build upon them.
Why does the farmer farm more then his family needs? So he can sell it, making money, to provide for his own family, the more he can sell the more he can provide. With out that farmers greed you would starve (Assuming your not a farmer)
April 26th, 2006 at 2:14 pmI do believe that Americans should have a right to NOT have their tax money used for the “Military-Industrial-Complex”! Most of the federal funds go to the military, so time to cut off that cash cow!
Tundra > you claim to live in Alaska > correct? How do you like the massive corruption in your state by the Gov. and your 2 GOP senators? Do you want Alaska to be completely trashed for the Oil Cartels? ( My mother years ago lived in Barrow for a year to work with the Eskimos.)
The American dream is to be able to move up in life economically, but under Bush that becomes less and less possible! It is not wise to worship the super rich > most of them did NOT earn their wealth by hard work, but by shady investments and back door corruption!
April 26th, 2006 at 2:18 pm68
The Dream is a meritocratic society where the rewards are proportional to the person’s merit to that society.
Who decides who has more merit in your world?
What “Professions” are worth more than others? Do you happen to do that now or plan on doing that if this was to come about?
where opportunities to succeed are granted to all those who wish to make an effort
April 26th, 2006 at 2:22 pmThat exists now. There are many ways for someone who has motivation to succeed. There are many people out there even in the private sector who are just looking for promising youths to help.
For now they waste so much and keep looking for ways to get more.
Comment by Tundra — April 26, 2006 @ 2:13 pm
Ah -then I misread your post.
I can agree with you pork, government waste need to go. I am obviously against all budget “earmarks”: they have no public oversight, no accountability, no disclosure.
Not embarking the nation in misguided military adventures would also help balance the budget…
April 26th, 2006 at 2:23 pmAdam Smith “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.â€
In other words, Einstein never existed and never did his research.
When will you Capitalist Religion addicts (as oposed to Capitalist Economy advocates) get it through your heads that Capitalism is a mere economic theory, restricted to a very narrow domain, and which requires a long list of pre-conditions to operate. An optimal capitalist society is that of a large number of small businesses catering to well-informed consumers who have absolute freedom to choose between suppliers. That is the pipe-dream scenario, far removed from real world, and somehow which you insist on citing constantly. In real life, Capitalist theory needs a lot of pruning and adjusting and prodding to function even semi-effectively and it has a lot of internal instablities which, when unaddressed, lead to self-destructive implosion of the whole scheme. That is the difference between the theory and practice.
That is why it is best to leave the forces of capitalism and animalistic greed to apply to places where they can do most good, that is in a marketplace of small businesses competing with each other on goods which consumers understand well.
All of this breaks down horribly once some of these businesses attain massive scale or when they become owners of some significant portions of national resources or in a great number of other circimstances.
Also the greed aspect, since you are so fond of it, is also lost in the case of inheretance. The greed of the heir has no positive (or negative) impact on the workings of a trust-operated butcher shop. Inheretance taxation simply resets the Capitalist engine to its starting point for each new generation, forcing their greed, as you put it, to make the effort all over again.
April 26th, 2006 at 2:29 pmI do believe that Americans should have a right to NOT have their tax money used for the “Military-Industrial-Complexâ€!
How about any other purpose I don’t like (I’m a vet so my money would still go to the military) Say welfare or congressional raises?
Tundra > you claim to live in Alaska > correct?
Ummmmm, no I live in New York. But if you want to talk about the corruption by my congressmembers we could do that.
It is not wise to worship the super rich
I don’t worship them, I also don’t despise them and demand they should be penalized more for it.
most of them did NOT earn their wealth by hard work, but by shady investments and back door corruption!
April 26th, 2006 at 2:29 pmThen they should be prosecuted under the laws they broke, not using some shaddy tax move to get back at them.
75
I am obviously against all budget “earmarksâ€: they have no public oversight, no accountability, no disclosure.
Here Here!!!
Not embarking the nation in misguided military adventures would also help balance the budget
Certinally wouldn’t hurt
April 26th, 2006 at 2:31 pmInheretance taxation simply resets the Capitalist engine to its starting point for each new generation, forcing their greed, as you put it, to make the effort all over again.
It dosn’t reset the Capitalist engine, it just moves it from the private sector to the gov’t sector.
April 26th, 2006 at 2:32 pmWho decides who has more merit in your world?
Some things are decided by democratic vote (such as Universal Medicare spending) and some others by Capitalist market forces (such as where to buy the next loaf of bread).
What “Professions†are worth more than others? Do you happen to do that now or plan on doing that if this was to come about?
It is easy. When the profession or activity is not subject to balanced, self-sustaining market forces, then its value has to be determined by other means. For example, natural resources are not something which is subject to market forces, they are the property of a nation. Their extraction however is not and left to a large number of businesses to conduct, and whose actions are driven by markets.
That exists now. There are many ways for someone who has motivation to succeed. There are many people out there even in the private sector who are just looking for promising youths to help
That is untrue. I am not a youth and speak from a perspective of many years of experience both as an employee and as a business owner. Yes, that’s right, I do own a business but that did not blind me to the reality of things. Most my peers succeed by, frankly, cheating and thieving the hell out of it. That is the only “reliable” method today. Someone posted you the Economist excerpt about upward mobilitty. Even they do know it.
April 26th, 2006 at 2:38 pmPost 77 Tundra > Why the Alaskan sounding screenname? No tundra that I know of in New York > lol.
As for New York politicians I would agree with you about your 2 so-called Democrat Senators! I never trusted Schumer > he has always been a snake in the grass! Sen. Hillary Clinton has always been a Republican! Her husband was a Democrat untill he started hanging out with Bush Senior! I have NO respect for Hillary > she is a warmonger and a liar like Dubya!
I would never cut funds to veterans who served in our military > I do not consider them as part of the profiteers who gather wealth from warfare! When I mean cutting the cash-cow military, I am referring to the armaments CEOs and other vermin who profit from wars!
April 26th, 2006 at 2:42 pmIt dosn’t reset the Capitalist engine, it just moves it from the private sector to the gov’t sector.
How the taxation money is spent is a completely different discussion. One can argue that governments need, due to their extraordinary power, an extraordinary oversight. I am not arguing against that. But again, that is a different aspect of the problem, one that has its own completely separate set of issues.
April 26th, 2006 at 2:46 pm”Testing 1234
April 26th, 2006 at 5:11 pmtest
Adam Smith was a fool. He created the idea of the “Invisible Hand” all the libertarians have such a high opinion of. He also believed that excessive profits invited competition, which is inherently wrong. He was extremely naive in believing that what is good for one was good for society. He is the capitalist’s answer to Marx. Both were full of idealism and were very utopian believing in systems which were flawed because they underestimated human potential for abuse and dishonesty. Smith believed that competition would force companies to be honest and forthright when in fact the opposite is true as self-interest would cause people to use less than above-board tactics to eliminate competition. History has proven that the invisible hand is actually a non-existant hand. From the industrial revolution which led to unions and government regulations, first in Britain and later in the US, because of the exploitation by the corporations against the labor force (particularly women and children) to the Enrons and Worldcoms of today have proven that unfettered greed is not, after all, a good thing.
April 26th, 2006 at 7:27 pmIf you want a fair tax we should tax wealth. That would directly tax those who benefit from our capitalist economy. The average person (those who live off of their income) cannot afford to create wealth as most of that income is used to provide a living for their families. A taxation on income, therefore damages the middle and lower class by inevitably cutting into their basic necessities while the wealthy just don’t by those extra private jets. The working class is creating wealth for corporations with very little to show for it, certainly not any security, while the very fact that the rich have wealth means they can create wealth without actually creating anything (simply the accumulation of wealth). Yes, this tax would affect the rich far more than the poor and that is the way it should be as the rich get the benefits of our society that others don’t. The wealthy benefit the most from our tax dollars (yes, those “entitlement programs”for the poor are miniscule to the benefits the rich receive.) The rich get far more out of investments in infrastructure than the average Joe, they get far more say in the policies that come out of Washington, $400 bil in coporate welfare. I certainly think you should be taxed for what you get out of the system and the rich are by far benefitting from our policies and our revenue.
April 26th, 2006 at 8:00 pmWhy is it people are under the odd impression that THEY EARNED their inheritance?
April 26th, 2006 at 10:23 pm[…] Interestingly, even Snow has been critical of the President throughout Bush’s term, going as far as saying that “George Bush has become something of an embarrassment,†among other quips. Some have argued that this may show that we’re entering an era where we’ll see Bush more open to some feedback that conflicts with his own views, but Snow’s arguments point toward those of the most extreme conservative variety. To paraphrase a few: Bush’s tax cuts are too progressive; Racial inequality doesn’t exist; Bush hasn’t been siezing enough power for the executive branch; Bush has expanded the government too far; etc. […]
April 26th, 2006 at 10:31 pm[…] Nonetheless, Think Progress has gone and culled some great criticisms that Snow has hurled at the Bush administration (and now they have a good Tony Snow on the issues). I don’t think this is insightful or anything or really advances the debate about issues, but it is pretty embarrassing for the Bush administration — OR it’s potentially to their benefit since it’s somewhat of a sign saying, “Anyone who argues that it’s all ‘yes men’ around here is certainly wrong.” […]
April 27th, 2006 at 3:12 am[…] ON RELIGIOUS CONSERVATIVES: “Conservative columnist Tony Snow criticized [former Sen. Robert] Smith and other ‘Taliban Republicans’ for their rigid views. ‘The Taliban Republicans take a dark view of human nature,’ Snow wrote. ‘They consider the rest of us a bunch of potential dupes and regard society as a stew of corrupting influences.’” [Church & State, 9/99] All links at website: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/26/snow-on-issues/ BUSH GETS HIS NEW OSAMA TAPE [image] http://www.bartcop.com/order-obl-tape.jpg […]
April 27th, 2006 at 12:45 pm[…] Tony Snow On The Issues http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/26/snow-on-issues/ […]
April 27th, 2006 at 12:49 pmWhy do so many otherwise eloquent and grammatically proficient Americans write ‘then’ when ‘than’ is required (e.g. squegeeboo and FactsOnly)? I’m just a humble Norwegian who wonders about such things.
April 27th, 2006 at 12:53 pmI’m just a humble Norwegian who wonders about such things.
Comment by Magnus — April 27, 2006 @ 12:53 pm
I don’t speak Norwegian, and I am guessing you speak British English.
In American-accented English, “then” and “than” are pronounced alike -no difference at all. Thus the confusion.
April 27th, 2006 at 1:31 pmInvestment Advisor
Can it be that your server is infected with a virus - I get an Virus warning when I open your site with Firefox - Just for your Info.
March 15th, 2008 at 5:13 pmJessie
I found you while searching google today. You’ll be happy toknowyour site was at the top of the results. Anyway. I added you to my Digg bookmarks. Good stuff!
March 18th, 2008 at 5:07 amanna nicole smith kim
March 18th, 2008 at 9:58 pmInsurance Small Business Health Insurance Nationwide Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 19th, 2008 at 4:46 pmtycoon games
March 20th, 2008 at 11:01 pmInsurance Automobile Insurance Home Owners Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 3:25 pmAss Tight Ass Ass Worship
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 8:56 amUniversities In South Carolina
I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
March 24th, 2008 at 2:37 amKevin
S. The Citroen DS article offers a pictorial illustration of US-model vs. For larger business travel accounts these travel agents take
March 30th, 2008 at 5:09 pmBad Credit Loans Personal Loan Auto Loan Calculator
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:36 amfarmer’s market
I Googled for something completely different, but found your page…and have to say thanks. nice read.
April 4th, 2008 at 2:07 amHealth Insurance California Health Insurance Michigan Health Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 5th, 2008 at 12:08 amTammara
As soon as your recognize that you are able to control your thoughts happiness will come within your reach.
April 5th, 2008 at 12:48 amSapphire
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow.
April 5th, 2008 at 6:21 amNicole Linkletter Pictures
Man i love reading your blog, interesting posts !
April 6th, 2008 at 4:44 amHotels Doubletree Hotel Chicago Hotels
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 6th, 2008 at 9:19 amclassic automobile car insurance
Good post. I am looking into these issues on my blog.
April 6th, 2008 at 1:06 pmAccounting Financial Financial Success
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 6th, 2008 at 2:05 pmNew Buisness Credit
How To Get Small Business Credit
April 7th, 2008 at 10:10 amAlaska Cash Loan Quick Credit
I have to say, that I could not agree with you in 100%, but it’s just my opinion, which could be wrong.
April 7th, 2008 at 4:15 pmVacation Rental Travel Search Engines Costa Rica Travel
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 8th, 2008 at 12:28 amYoung Girls Young Teens Angus Young
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 8th, 2008 at 1:01 amEllie
Hello, I have a few websites of my own and I must say that your site is really top notch. Keep up the great work on a really high class resource Free Mp3 Download.
April 9th, 2008 at 3:11 pmPatty
The search for the truth is the most important work in the whole world ? and the most dangerous. ~ James Clavell
April 13th, 2008 at 6:11 pmdirect federal student loan
Thanks, this is good stuff. You are spot on.
April 13th, 2008 at 9:20 pm