HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Ben Stein on Fox: There I...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 04:43 PM

 

Ben Stein on Fox: There Is "No Reputable Study" Proving Raising Taxes On The Wealthy Impairs Growth

Ben Stein Tells An Angry Charlie Gasparino There Is "No Reputable Study" Proving Raising Taxes On The Wealthy Impairs Growth

http://mediamatters.org/video/2013/01/12/ben-stein-tells-an-angry-charlie-gasparino-ther/192206

I really can't believe they had him on again to discuss the economy after this previous appearance...




16 replies, 1860 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 16 replies Author Time Post
Reply Ben Stein on Fox: There Is "No Reputable Study" Proving Raising Taxes On The Wealthy Impairs Growth (Original post)
Follow The Money Jan 2013 OP
Angry Dragon Jan 2013 #1
samsingh Jan 2013 #5
sakabatou Jan 2013 #2
LonePirate Jan 2013 #3
brooklynite Jan 2013 #4
DogPawsBiscuitsNGrav Jan 2013 #6
kysrsoze Jan 2013 #7
hay rick Jan 2013 #8
Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #9
Scuba Jan 2013 #10
bemildred Jan 2013 #11
The Wizard Jan 2013 #13
mac56 Jan 2013 #12
BainsBane Jan 2013 #14
Follow The Money Jan 2013 #15
HughBeaumont Jan 2013 #16

Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 04:47 PM

1. Death threats coming next

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #1)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 05:04 PM

5. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 04:50 PM

2. He may be an economist, but I still hate him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 04:50 PM

3. Someone has just been blacklisted by Faux News

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 04:51 PM

4. If your tagline is "fair and balanced" you DO have to throw out an occasional disagreement...

...by the way, it's Monday. What did DONALD TRUMP opine about on Fox & Friends?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 05:13 PM

6. Actually we've proved the opposite. Letting the 99% get away with NOT paying taxes has hurt the

 

economy. Government has to make cut backs now and we never saw that trickle down affect they kept bragging about.

I saw a bumper sticker a couple of weeks ago that said - How's that trickle down thing working for you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 05:24 PM

7. This is twice in a few months Stein has eschewed the RW talking points. I think he's starting...

to see the buffoons he's cavorting with as they really are. When Ben Stein thinks you're nuts...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 05:44 PM

8. Ben Stein has been saying this for years.

here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x440306

When the recession ends, though, we will be facing very large budget deficits, even under the best projections. Unless the Federal Reserve is just going to print money — usually a dangerous road to inflation — how will we pay for government, except through taxes? And who has the money to pay, except the rich? So unless I am missing something, don’t we have to tax the rich, defined in some sensible way?"

Hmmm. Bush tax cuts overboard.

Stein on another subject:

"I’d like to bring up one more little bijou about the economic crisis. I read that Lawrence H. Summers — wonderful guy, fine economist, former Harvard president, high-ranking economic adviser to Mr. Obama — was paid about $5 million last year by a large hedge fund, D. E. Shaw. Some other high-ranking Obama advisers were also fantastically well paid by the finance sector.

Of course, this phenomenon didn’t begin with this administration. The last Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., was the head honcho of Goldman Sachs and was paid hundreds of millions by it. (Yes, that’s one of the banks that we as taxpayers supported with many billions, via the A.I.G. conduit.)

I know people and I know money, at least the basics. If anyone thinks that a man who has had a taste of honey from Wall Street on that scale will ever really crack the whip on Wall Street, he’s dreaming. Wall Street knows how to get its hooks into government. This is how the world works. Money talks."


and here:http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2980579

From his NYT op-ed letter to presidential candidate John McCain in 2008:

What to do? You appear to have changed your mind over time and have recently shown more support for the Bush tax cuts than in the past. If you become president, you can just keep up the (latter-day) Republican game of make-believe. You can propose still more tax cuts, create still more deficits and add to the debt, and say to yourself, like Louis XV, “Après moi, le déluge.”

Or, you can raise taxes. But whom to tax? The poor are, well, poor. The middle class is struggling to pay for its middle-class life. That leaves the rich. It would be lovely if we did not have to tax them. Many have worked hard for their money. Many have created useful businesses. Many of them are fine people.

But as Willie Sutton said when asked why he robbed banks, “Because that’s where the money is.” By definition, the truly rich have a lot more money than they need. If they don’t, then they are not rich by my standards. The first step toward putting our house in order, once we are past the seemingly looming recession, is much higher taxes on the truly rich and serious enforcement to prevent offshore tax evasion.

TO put it even more starkly, the government — which is us — needs the money to keep old people alive, to pay for their dialysis, to build fighter jets and to pay our troops and pay interest on the debt. We can get it by indenturing our children, selling ourselves into peonage to foreigners, making ourselves a colony again, generating inflation — or we can have some integrity and levy taxes equal to what we spend.


Stein saying this after the initial fiscal cliff deal on taxes and mentioning incomes "of like say, 2, 3 million a year and up..." is important. He acknowledges that the 39.6% rate for top earners is inadequate to raise the needed revenue. The 91% top marginal income tax rate that was prevalent in the 1950s and 60s applied to income in excess of $400,000. $2 million would be an approximate equivalent in 2013 dollars. This is an important part of the "fiscal cliff" debate context and Obama should be using the bully pulpit to push the point home. He has not. Sadly, his taxation policies appear less progressive than Mr. Stein's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 05:46 PM

9. Wow. For once, he's right.

Since when does Ben Stein, creationism apologist, give a shit about science, fact, data and evidence?

Amazing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 06:07 PM

10. He's still a prick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 06:09 PM

11. And actually, it works the other way, taxing the rich puts money back in circulation,

so it increases growth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bemildred (Reply #11)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 06:33 PM

13. Front loaded tax cuts

as in the Bush tax cuts do not provide incentive for the wealthy elites to put money back into the economy as in job creation. Instead they encourage sending money to off shore tax havens, never to circulate into the economy. The tax code also encourages and rewards the wealthy elites who ship jobs off shore.
Their ultimate goal is a two tiered economy with a permanent underclass (slaves) to provide cheap labor and no alternatives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 06:26 PM

12. Bueller... Bueller...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 07:22 PM

14. "I hope I'll be able to leave here alive"

Likely a common fear for guests on Fox.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #14)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:46 AM

15. yes, the intelligent ones anyway

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Follow The Money (Original post)

Tue Jan 15, 2013, 11:54 AM

16. Broken Clock, Twice a Day . . .

And to hell with Chuckles LastGasparino. Pretty bad when you move to Faux because CNBC isn't arch-right-wing ENOUGH for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread