This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The CEO Letter Heard Around The World "Vote Obama; Lose Your Job"
NewsBusters reports on THE letter from David Siegel, the founder and CEO of real estate company Westgate Resorts on Monday threatened to fire some employees if Barack Obama is reelected and carries out his plan to raise taxes on the so-called rich. The following are highlights from an email message sent by Siegel to his staff that was obtained and verified as authentic by Gawker. "The economy doesn't currently pose a threat to your job. What does threaten your job however, is another 4 years of the same Presidential administration."
Subject: Message from David Siegel
Date:Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:58:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: [David Siegel]
To: [All employees]
To All My Valued Employees,
As most of you know our company, Westgate Resorts, has continued to succeed in spite of a very dismal economy. There is no question that the economy has changed for the worse and we have not seen any improvement over the past four years. In spite of all of the challenges we have faced, the good news is this: The economy doesn't currently pose a threat to your job. What does threaten your job however, is another 4 years of the same Presidential administration. Of course, as your employer, I can't tell you whom to vote for, and I certainly wouldn't interfere with your right to vote for whomever you choose. In fact, I encourage you to vote for whomever you think will serve your interests the best. [...]
Now, the economy is falling apart and people like me who made all the right decisions and invested in themselves are being forced to bail out all the people who didn't. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed 42 years of my life for. Yes, business ownership has its benefits, but the price I've paid is steep and not without wounds. Unfortunately, the costs of running a business have gotten out of control, and let me tell you why: We are being taxed to death and the government thinks we don't pay enough. We pay state taxes, federal taxes, property taxes, sales and use taxes, payroll taxes, workers compensation taxes and unemployment taxes. I even have to hire an entire department to manage all these taxes. The question I have is this: Who is really stimulating the economy? Is it the Government that wants to take money from those who have earned it and give it to those who have not, or is it people like me who built a company out of his garage and directly employs over 7000 people and hosts over 3 million people per year with a great vacation?
Obviously, our present government believes that taking my money is the right economic stimulus for this country. The fact is, if I deducted 50% of your paycheck you'd quit and you wouldn't work here. I mean, why should you? Who wants to get rewarded only 50% of their hard work? Well, that's what happens to me. [...]
Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate business, not kill it. However, the power brokers in Washington believe redistributing wealth is the essential driver of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth and this is the type of change they want.
So where am I going with all this? It's quite simple. If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, as our current President plans, I will have no choice but to reduce the size of this company. Rather than grow this company I will be forced to cut back. This means fewer jobs, less benefits and certainly less opportunity for everyone.
So, when you make your decision to vote, ask yourself, which candidate understands the economics of business ownership and who doesn't? Whose policies will endanger your job? Answer those questions and you should know who might be the one capable of protecting and saving your job. While the media wants to tell you to believe the "1 percenters" are bad, I'm telling you they are not. They create most of the jobs. If you lose your job, it won't be at the hands of the "1%"; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country.
You see, I can no longer support a system that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, so will your opportunities. If that happens, you can find me in the Caribbean sitting on the beach, under a palm tree, retired, and with no employees to worry about.
Signed, your boss,
David Siegel
For those unfamiliar with Siegel, he is the founder and CEO of Westgate Resorts, a real estate and timeshare company.
He and his wife were also the subject of the recent documentary "The Queen of Versailles" about their desire to build the largest home in America.
According to Gawker, they were worth over a billion dollars in 2007, but that could be less now as a result of the real estate bust.
»
- 45776 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I think real estate should be allowed to crash and that the market should be allowed to reset. I think in the process, this douchebag would likely survive, but his employees will likely be out of a job. That douchebag made his money in a government supported false market. Unfortunately, that market likely siphoned off resources that could have gone to otherwise productive parts of the economy. Capital was mis-allocated and that douchebag cashed in on it. Now there is nothing particularly wrong about that... it is what it is... but it's his hypocrisy in bashing the very government that created a market for him to milk that is a little much. But again... he doesn't give a shit about any of it really... this was his opportunity to be the center of attention... that's his MO. Theater... as I said in my very first post of this thread. The false left vs. right divide is built on theater. This douchebag supplied it. But if it wasn't him, it would have been someone else.
errr... double post
what about the hundreds of thousands of USPS employees, hmm. . .
that would be a larger percentage of ex-military in service to the postal unions, a substantial employer.
going postal, hmm.
this is so stupid its beyond belief - the product lines and geographic responsibilities are IMPOSED - by congress - not profit and loss strategy - rural delivery is a loss / multiple classifications of products are a loss and fedex and ups are skimming the cream - wake up !
Kridkrid
I agree with you completely, fuck him. Feel sorry for his wife and kids however. If you saw the documentary, you'd know what I'm talking about.
"Less tax, less government and if you don't want these jobs then go and create your own"
I agree, but the point is that exactly zero of those jobs would exist today in the absence of unprecedented government backstopping. Those 7K jobs being held hostage should not exist in the first place.
aint no fortuna...
Spoken like a true and entitled peasant...well said!
sarc
Thanks robSLOB - spoken like a true hard working entrepreneur... pray tell, your employees must be well trained if a busy guy like you can spend all day posting glib one liners on fringe blogs!
double sarc
indeed...as the saying goes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP70v45IL10
it is now completely clear that the republican party has gone rogue. welcome to the new republican nazi party. what with all the game playing going on with the voting in swing states by republican sec. of states. painfully watching the debate, it was so clear that romney is a finely tuned, crafted and programed used car salesman. nothing more and nothing less. IDIOT fits nicely. i have said several times that the twin baininite boys are one cell phone recording away from killing their chances. telling one gruop this and then telling another gruop the exact opposite hours later, like it is 1840....you know....before the pony express and telegraph......complete morons the both of them. 30 years for congress to balance a budget....REALLY??????
It's not the republican party and it's not the democrats. It's our system. We "vote" every four years for party chairman of a uniquely American fascist state. It doesn't matter who is elected. NDAA didn't happen on Romney's watch, or Bush's. The proliferation of drones flying over our heads will happen whoever is elected. The illusion of freedom hides what is already a police state, rapidly progressing towards something that will be impossible to ignore for the average serf, soon enough.
"voting" for our dictator helps to create the illusion. Anything that helps to feed that illusion is good for the illusion. Participation in the system, letters like this one from this schmuck, calling Obama a marxist, putting up an obama yard sign, taking one down... it's all a part of the illusion.
Take your partisan BS elsewhere.
I'm sorry, are you talking to tyler for posting this partisan article about a nazi business owner and his threats to his employees? was it something i said? was it something the repubilcan sec of states are doing? hey, here is a history lesson. did you know that every single confederate state has to have the federal department of justice sign off on all changes to the ex-confederate state's voting laws? please explain how what the yankee swing states are doing about voting doesn't qualify for the same tactics the southern states did a century from 1865 to 1965? does your "take your partisan BS elsewhere" qualify as a "partisan" statement? was it my "baininite" comment that was partisan?
have you seen the reports about the little nazi coal mine owners that gave his workers the day off to attend the "baininite" rally? yea, the owner did that kind action for his employees...without pay of course. i really love the part where this good little nazi "strongly" recomended that his employees' give to his PAC!!!!! gee, i can spell N A Z I, can you?
but but but...i freely admit that i may have a leg up on you. you see my father was a highly decorated naval aviator during WWII and he taught me how to spell fascist. then there is my uncle who was a highly decorated u.s. army ranger during WWII. hey, nidstyles read up on the army rangers during the battle of anzio in italy and you will understand why he taught me how to spell nazi.
so nid, may i please be as partisan as i like?
So what is a good term to describe the Obama campaign touting their "saving" GM (in other words, vote for me, I ensure you have a job)? Hint...look at the relationships between industry and government in Mussolini's facisti government in Italia in the 1920s that paved the road for Chancellor Hitler (sorry for the big words...I realize you were probably "educated" in the American public school system).
What about SEIU and other unions pushing for paid leave to support political campaigns (of Democrats)? Why can a union shop state demand dues from members, then funnel those dues to a political party or PAC and not draw your "Nazi" lables? How is one a civic virtue and one an evil comparable to the war crimes of the National Socialists?
As for your father and uncle, why do you believe you can wrap yourself in the honor of their service? Patriotism by proximity? Awesome! You should wear their medals too!
But no, you're clearly right. 4-legs good, 2-legs bad. Baaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh. No chance a Democratic administration will start wars, increase the number of Drones conducting targeting killings (even against American citizens) across the globe, sign a law that allows indefinite detention without charge or trial of citizens, buy millions of rounds of expensive hollow points for "training," extend the "Patriot Act" or other such evil right wing policies.
thank you. you make my points exactly, very good examples of the fascist models. nothing in my statements has been pro obama at all, i am simply pointing out fascist tactics endorsed by the current republican party neocon bullshit, period. a party that has nothing in common with my values anymore. as far as the democraps, they never have. note to self: wasn't ronny reagan president when he signed off on the chrysler bailout?
Apologies for the education and medals cheap shots.
Calling a republican a fascist creates a knee jerk reaction for many. It's assumed, immediately, that you are a democrat. Giving up the left vs. right programming is hard for some... even for those who have gone far down the path... oh... and you just called out Reagan :-).
I can not take anything you say seriously. You are incapable of formulating a rational argument or discussion.
What a fucking prick this guy is! "I'm not going to tell you who to vote for, but if you want to keep your job... ahem!"
Good thing that never happens at any union meeting...
Seriously....he just wants to pay less taxes and is threatening his employees in order to make him even more incredibly richer than all of them, what a douche....I wonder how that went over with his employees. "The economy is not a threat to your job" - yeah...OK
And Obama is not a puppet. Or are you just being a muppet?
So Mitt Romney is the solution?
Mr. Siegal, I ask you, how exactly does Mitt Romney plan to fund his massive expansion of the military industrial complex? How do his policies differ from Comrade Obama's in any significant way? The answer is, they don't.
So Mr. Siegal, if you plan on voting for Mitt Romney, then you must also begin planning for shrinking the size of your workforce as you outlined in your email. If you feel the need to vote for a candidate that believes in restoring the economic freedoms that our Republic was founded upon (as you hint in your email), then I urge you to write in Ron Paul on November 6th. Otheriwse you are yet another ignorant American that is voting for a continuation of the failed policies that have brought us to this exact point in history. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.
Bring a sharpie, because those plastic comptuer screens are a bitch to write on with a pencil. Since Ron Paul deliberately chose to NOT register as a write in candidate, his name will not be available on the ballot.
When exactly did your vote matter in the first place?
If you are that hell-bent on having your vote be "counted" by our shadow government, then vote for Gary Johnson or anyone other than Obomney.
My point simply is that voting for either puppet will bring the same continuity of agenda. So either don't vote at all, vote for GJ, or write in RP.
Depends on what you want from the "election." My sole criteria this year is "who do I vote for to ensure Eric Holder isn't Attorney General?" Way I see it, only one (albeit shitty) choice exists. Besides, the back-up plan if Robot's AG is an equal turd is to vote D in the 2014 mid-terms. Sweet sweet gridlock.
Now, if I were to switch my criteria to "I want to send a message to the "2" parties that they're day is ending", then clearly a write in of RP would be the answer.
+1 A write in or not voting is a vote for obama and for bernanke
A Romney Presidency Could End the Fed’s Easy Money
http://www.investingdaily.com/15752/a-romney-presidency-could-end-the-feds-easy-money
Yeah, Romney will shut down the banksters who run the country. LOL.
Get.The.Fuck.Out
I vote every time I exchange some FRN's for junk silver.
pods
Top Contributors
Mitt Romney (R)
1 Goldman Sachs $891,140 2 Bank of America $668,139 3 JPMorgan Chase & Co $663,219 4 Morgan Stanley $649,847 5 Credit Suisse Group $554,066Barack’s Wall Street Problem is Now America’s
Top Contributors 08
Barack Obama has a major Wall Street and Washington problem that the media so far is refusing to acknowledge or explore. He is in the pocket of the Wall Street firms and mortgage security companies that are at the center of the collapse of the real estate bubble. He is closely tied to at least two of the Fannie Mae principals. As Ricky Ricardo would say, “Barack, you got some splaining to do.”
Let’s start with the numbers. Why is a first term Senator pulling down almost $300,000 a year from Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, Countrywide Financial, and Washington Mutual? He has not even completed his fourth year in the Senate and received a total of $1,093,329.00 from these eight companies and their employees. (all data from OpenSecrets.org). John McCain’s numbers, according to OpenSecrets.org for the period 1990-2008 (i.e., 18 years worth of data) only collected $549,584.00. In other words, Barack is receiving $273,582.25 (and 2008 is not over) per year while McCain raised a paltry $30,532.44.
Want another shocker? Barack Obama has received more from one source–Goldman Sachs $542,252.00–than McCain has from all of the companies combined. Who the hell is more beholden to lobbyists? And why does a junior Senator from Illinois rate this kind of dough?
Why are these firms and their employees showering Barack with their cash? Although the conventional wisdom wants to pin the Wall Street debacle on Republican greed, the reality is that the real estate market and the big players on Wall Street have been a Democratic game. McCain’s hands are clean when it comes to this mess. That is not spin, that is a fact. He proposed legislation back in 2006 to start addressing the abuses of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but the Democrats would have none of it.
So what's your point?
wow so McCain proposed legislation in 2006 when the housing bubble peaked in June 2006. Right on time huh
what's telling is that the tide switched. not that it matters, as both candidates will let wall st run wild via the fed, but romney will certainly let them do anything they want, including ramping up prop trading desks with the implicit promise of future bailouts when things DO go wrong again. throw israel in the mix and you have the 2 largest cancers on America , wall st and the military industrial complex, running full speed ahead
either way, we're fucked
Pretty much says it all. If the Vampire Squid says you're cool, YOU are not for the preople of The United States.
The Fed isn't the problem the politicians are they could get rid of the Fed tomorrow at least Romney would get rid of Ben and stem the slide into a Socialist Totalitarian shit hole
Clinton, Quigley, and the New World Order
http://www.theendrun.com/clinton-quigley-and-the-new-world-order
You're lost in the red vs. blue charade. You need to reexamine a bunch of assumptions.
That "socialist" shit hole you describe represents well over 50% of all jobs in America, directly or indirectly.
Shut down government and let the chips fall where they may.
Romney, Welch and Siegel won't be able to pack their bags fast enough to escape the misery they've created and benefited from thus far.
You should try actually reading it you socialists are easily fooled of course it's not all your fault the public schools have dumbed down the majority. That's a huge part of the problem over 50% and guess what people know what's coming from socialist thugs which is why the intelligent people have prepared.
Clinton, Quigley, and the New World Order
snip
I’ve been doing a lot of research lately, and I recently came across this little-known quote while reading through Bill Clinton’s book My Life. In Chapter 24, on pages 338-339, he writes (emphasis added):
Recall that Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar. Recall also that one of Clinton’s professors at Georgetown was Carroll Quigley, and that he has quoted Quigley and payed homage to him as a mentor many times in his speeches, including his 1992 nomination acceptance speech. In My Life he discusses the “lasting impact” that Quigley’s “insights” had on him.
On page ix* of The Anglo-American Establishment, Quigley writes:
And what were the goals of this “Group”? According to Quigley (Tragedy and Hope, p. 324; emphasis added):
You'll end up killing alot of your own and when the rest of you try to invade those who have prepped you won't find easy targets like the urban areas you prey upon.
You know, a lot of us have read all the shit you cut n paste here before, and we know what it means.
You ought to try some realism for a change.
You really shouldn't be calling Anarchists a bunch of Socialists. It just embarasses you....
Romney might get rid of Bernanke...But he would just replace him with someone like Evans.
Here's the thing Severin we won't really know that unless/until he was elected but Ben's gotta go. Romney is in many ways the anthesis of a Wall St. insider it's not like he worked at Goldman Sucks for example.
Romney’s Fed chief: Who would get the job if the Republican takes the White House?
snip
“The American economy doesn’t need more artificial and ineffective measures,” Romney’s campaign said after the Fed announced its latest strategy to pump more money into the economy in September, a policy aimed at bringing down unemployment. “We should be creating wealth, not printing dollars.”
John B. Taylor (mentioned first more at link)
Yet again, Romney's campaign only began resembling RP's regarding the Fed AFTER it was clear that following the convention, RP's followers and other members of the Liberty movement would not be supporting him.
You're playing the "lesser of two evils card." "Well I hate Romney, but at least if we elect him Bernanke will be gone."
You're talking about a guy that is a CARBON COPY of Obama on every important issue.
Romney supports NDAA as written.
Romney still supports the Federal Reserve system (even if he says he doesn't like Bernanke).
Romney DOES NOT support sound money.
Romney wants to EXPAND the military industrial complex.
Romney wants to preemptively attack Iran.
Romney DOES NOT want to leave the UN.
Romney DOES NOT believe in dramatically shrinking the size and scope of government.
Romney DOES NOT support the 2nd amendment.
Romney SUPPORTS banker bailouts.
Romney DOES NOT support a free market.
The list goes on and on. I will remind you once again, voting for the lesser of two evils means you're STILL voting for evil.
As far as getting the fuck out the Daily Kos called they want the commie socialists back sounds like you would be better suited over there along with the other's who recently infested and ran down ZH
Thats pretty funny. I'm a Libtard Goldbug you clown.
About as far away from a commie/socialist as you can get.
Yes, keep telling yourself that Fed puppet Romney will end the Fed. Romney supports Bernanke and the Fed. He only began bashing the Fed to try and gain support from the Liberty movement.
A Sharpie? Couldn't you just have said you're a blonde and you vote and left it at that?
no worries, Ben can print more
Comrade = Friend (translation)
Just to be clear.
smirk/
Second day of the NAV shark attack on Bill Gross's PHK (PIMCO High Income Fund). Still has another $3.5 down to go to rejoin NAV. Bye, Bill.
Save the cheerleader, save the world
You're a moron along with the 43 other people that "upped" this. The country is already lost, you blaming it on Obama is playing right into thier hands. Wake the fuck up morons....
The odd thing is, if Obama gets in I become a multimillionaire (15 mil) with an investment I got into a year ago. He is supposed to give the company I got into, a grant of millions, only after he is elected...
if only more CEOs thought this way
We do.
Yes we do.
Only those on Uncle Sam's tit don't.
Some (cough...h_h...cough) stopped paying for employees health insurance when ObamaCare passed, because it is stupid to pay twice via taxes and premiums.
I promise this fact, not threat, will go through my employees' minds in the voting booth.
hedgeless_horseman
So?
Do you really think the creator of Romneycare will repeal anything in Obamacare his programs little brother?
I would suggest there will be an even greater spread during Romney's eight year term.
I think Romney is the Republican stealth "left" candidate.
They have been worried about how to return to the center for a long time.
Romney goes all John Roberts which also winds up stealing many Democrat issues.
Save this and get back to me after his first term.
Gave you a green.
Bicycle Repairman
I don't play that social network green/red bullshit.
I either make a statement or I don't.
Anyway the Romney showing a more human side makes sense.
Politics can't go any further right, even with all the totalitarian shit.
They still need some kind of cya allowing people the illusion of freedom.
"They still need some kind of cya allowing people the illusion of freedom."
So RobamneyCare = freedom? I don't think so.
I did agree that Romney is basically what used to be called a "Rockefeller Republican", before that species went extinct due to extreme lack of voter interest. Romney's entire campaign is a complete lie, even in the context of the phony left/right paradigm.
I usually cant stand Gully's posts, but he's correct on this.
Romney is the ultimate Flip Flopper/Liar. Want proof? (20 minutes worth)
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e80_1345168212
Bay of Pigs
Like any of us are invited to each others daughters Quinceañera
And I bet you have very fond memories of your own --- the year before last.
I may be fucked either way. If ObamaCare isn't ended, every employee I have will be instantly terminated and is eligible to reapply as a private contractor. Many will not.
The "fiscal cliff" is another issue which will hurt me too if not resolved.
It's a fucked up world we try to make a living in. Harder every day.
I employ 325 give or take a few. They all get handed a shit sandwich and I hate it.
side note how much does your bug in bag way? I like your FN idea for weight
Like Jack Welch? One of the biggest tit suckers.
Winston Churchill
Would you happen to have a photo of Tranny Uncle Sam?
I think I can dig up one of Venus Van Damme for you.
Banzaii,are you out there ?
Gully has a request.
Winston Churchill
The enticing Venus
http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_widt...
D.C. streetwalker ?
9/10 are exactly like that up there.
Winston Churchill
Seriously?
You have no clue as to who that is and where it comes from?
I laughed my ass off watching Venus interact with her new friends.
You can probably name the companies and CEO's that are not SUCKING UNCLE SAM'S TIT on 1 hand.
GOVERNMENT IS THE SINGLE LARGEST EMPLOYER, CONTRACTOR AND SPENDER.
Like walking on your knee caps much?
Correction:Only you "GAME OF THRONES'feudalist motherfuckers do.
--it's the default excuse for not being a good businessman.
Being GOOD at business doesn't mean your employees get to live like Chinese coolies in order for you to PERSONALLY succeed-no matter what you've been told.
Snap out of it.
Pray tell what is a good businessman? Give me just one example of a business that is flourishing exclusively on income from private sector and where you can prove that all their private sector customers are not in any way shape or form being on the government payroll themselves?
You can't. Give it up.
Mine for instance.Or almost any with less than 50 employees.
ie; the largest emploers overall in the economy.
There are corporations, and then there are corporations.
It's not about the size of your company. If you're not directly receiving contracts from the government, somewhere down the line your customers or their customers are paid by government in one form or another.
My point is you cannot take government out of the business equation because government is the single largest employer, consumer and spender.
Do we need to reduce the size of government? Heck, yes. But then it would reduce the size of mega corporations as well and you'd hear much wailing and gnashing of the teeth on Wall Street.
And you're all fucking idiots....
Sheeple,
Like a greedy SOB threatening his employees so he can make even more money.
Yeah, that exactly what the Fascist States of Amerika needs!
That guy is clearly rayciss.
raysist - corrected it for you
No--he 's not "raycis' OR" Raycisss"---he's just a straight-up ASSHOLE.
Fixed THAT for you.
Money doesn't give a fuck what color you are--it spends the same.
No it does not. The point of the post is to highlight the rediculous arguments used to discredit 'truf'.
He may be an asshole. I don't know. All I know is he disagrees with the Teleprompter, therefore he must be discredited in the most stupid way possible.
That is how the issue is presented to the unwashed.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Why Obama nation sounds exactly like abomination? I think romney would sound the same though.. No helping here, hopium depleted..
If Siegel thinks it's bad now, wait till the fairness doctrine comes to the US.
Wait till the CFPB gets going. Every business in amerika will be flooded with lawsuits...
Somebody's planning on going Galt.
Some guy named John.....spelled with an H. Not that other guy.
sound and fury
Who says fear mongering should be left to the government?
<<New boss, same as the old boss.>>
Who says that stating the truth does not elicit fear. There is a difference between telling seniors that they will lose their benefits if someone is elected and an employer telling his employees that he will retire if he gets taxed more. Other companies are planning to downsize and turn full-time jobs into part-time jobs because of Obamacare (Obama likes that term now). This guy didn't threaten his employees, he simply told them his plans depending on what happens in the election.
I get your point very clearly. But where did he say he would retire if Obama is re-elected? And does this mean Congress has no say about taxes?
"So where am I going with all this? It's quite simple. If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, as our current President plans, I will have no choice but to reduce the size of this company. Rather than grow this company I will be forced to cut back. This means fewer jobs, less benefits and certainly less opportunity for everyone."
Right here...
So which one is it? Retire or downsize the company?
I took the last sentence to be a broad declaration that if motivation is lost why continue? It was a general statement. The part about downsizing the company was very specific. If Obama gets in some people will be let go.
Either way he was telling his employees some or all will lose their jobs if Obama is elected. That may or may not be true. Like I said.....is Congress no longer a factor? Don't the Republicans control the House?
For the employees, your questions about Congress are irrelevant. Whether he downsizes (as other companies are planning) or retires, some people will lose their jobs. That he has explained this to his staff would seem to be an honorable thing to do, i.e., "this is my thinking, take it for what its worth."
As for Congress, yes, Republicans do control the House but they do not control the Senate. In the founders ultimate wisdom, it takes both houses to pass legislation.
Like I said I get your very valid point.
From my point of view he is talking his (business) book so to speak. He is dependent (just as most of us are) upon a "system" that continues to "work". At this point in the exponential decay that means more and more printing/spending.
Both candidates, regardless of their public statements made in order to get (re)elected, are captured by the system. So even if their methods are slightly different, they will still march to the wall street bankster military industrial pharma energy complex beat.
I grant you that one can see his letter as reasonable notice to his employees. Since he is a who's who it can also be considered propaganda and fear mongering.
Well, I agree that there are two issues here, the micro-economic aspect of a private employer and the macro-economic/political issue of a failed and corrupt government. That said, many people are becoming frustrated and beginning to speak out (Jack Welch, Steve Wynn) which should be commended. It is not fear-mongering, however, simply to tell the truth even though the truth is fearful to many people.
"It is not [insert choice here], however, simply to tell the truth even though the truth is fearful to many people.
I agree. From whatever source the truth may come. I'm sure you agree with that, right?
It is up to each person to determine the truth for himself. And so it is for those who work Siegel based on their experience with him and how much they have been able to rely on what he has told them. As you do not have that experience (unless you work for him), you cannot make that determination.
That the majority of humanity does not seem to have the ability to think critically for themselves leaves open many opportunities for them to live a life of deception, both self-deception and by direct manipulation from others. What is your source for truth, the NY Times? Fox News? Zero Hedge?
I am just as susceptible to confirmation bias as anyone.
“Maybe each human being lives in a unique world, a private world different from those inhabited and experienced by all other humans. . . If reality differs from person to person, can we speak of reality singular, or shouldn't we really be talking about plural realities? And if there are plural realities, are some more true (more real) than others? What about the world of a schizophrenic? Maybe it's as real as our world. Maybe we cannot say that we are in touch with reality and he is not, but should instead say, His reality is so different from ours that he can't explain his to us, and we can't explain ours to him. The problem, then, is that if subjective worlds are experienced too differently, there occurs a breakdown in communication ... and there is the real illness.”
? Philip K. Dick
And it only takes control of the executive branch departments (and their subsidiaries) to issue new regulations (including fines) which can be done without Congressional approval.
Which, of course, is the biggest problem. Congress is slow for a reason. Representatives go to Washington thinking that they should pass a bunch of laws to show that they are doing their jobs. They would serve the public better by spending their time repealing laws instead. Giving the President the power to write laws by memo is absurd. Even more absurd, though, is that Congress has allowed it to happen without a single challenge to this made-up executive authority.
Let's get one thing perfectly clear: If Siegel is making money, regardless of which shill occupies the Oval Office, he will continue in business. It's all about money. The email is merely a public pout session... or as Colbert noted the other night, it's Siegel's declaration of membership in the P.I.T.Y. Party.
That you cite Colbert tends to invalidate your comment from the onset.
What doth it matter from whence the truth cometh?
4 more years???
Both candidates will inflict irreparable harm to all productive US citizens (or are we now subjects?)
Since when does speaking out ugly truths equal fear mongering?
he's going galt!
Sorry to break it to you, Mr. Siegal, but the same goes for Romney. You can't say "don't vote for the socialist," because both candidates are socialists.
Also, doesn't it feel like the bond bubble started bursting today?
"Burst. Or burst not. There is no starting." - Yoda
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ4yd2W50No
Romney will be better for the billionaires. They don't care about the deficit or stopping World War III. They only care about having more fiat to stuff into derivatives and QEinflated equities.
the REALLY funny part is;
They've created a situation where they are stranded on top of the mall with Ving Rhames--and Ving is running out of shotgun shells--but they think if they can make it to the yacht--they'll be OK.
Only thing is: THERE'S NOWHERE LEFT TO RUN.
OOPS.
Can't "Blame Obama" for THAT. this unholy mess took a hell of a lot longer than four years to set up--and all the bullshitting ,lying, and just flat-out making shit up won't correct THAT.
You're making too much sense. +1
Will Romney be as good for the billionaires as Obama has been?
Actually the correct term is Fascist
Semantics, my friend. The problem is central planning, no matter what form it comes in.
I think we need to stop referring to Obomney as socialists. They are not socialists. They are corporate fascists with socialist tendencies.
I prefer rapists with cannibalistic tendencies.
But that's just me.
That's far more accurate. Plauz Juan.
I guess Mr. Siegel isn't paying attention to what Mr. Romney has to say (not that I am advocating Obama) about "widening the tax base" by stiffing the average American with a cap on deductions. Mr. Siegel seems to think that the two different shell game tax plans of these Presidential candidates is going to really make one difference over another while the dollar debasement continues. Fringe issues makes for great arguements amongst the many, while the few continue their plunder.
@Head
"stiffing the average American". Really? Why, because they actually would then pay taxes for government benefits that they use, and perhaps may use more than the "wealthy". How about a flat tax, this is in fact what Ron Paul suggests...and that is a REAL tax flattener now isn't it. I say if you have a dollar, you pay .15 cents. If you have 10 dollars, you pay 1.50, that seems fair to me. It's when a tax plan lacks objectivity and takes subjectivity into consideration that it becomes unfair. A subjective tax plan is what we have now...and it's ruining the country and has all but destroyed the political system.
Eventually you run out of other people's money my friend. That simple.
Jebus Monte Christo! The people that don't currently pay taxes don't worry about itemized Schedule A deductions. These deductions, of course, are a type of government subsidies, but these people are indeed paying taxes.
Ron Paul does not advocate a flat tax, rather he advocates NO INCOME TAX.
Equitable taxation is not the answer when considering $1.1 Trillion deficit spending.
Quite obvious. I understand but you're missing the point that we have 1/2 the population paying nothing. This cannot and will not last, it must change. As for No Income Tax, well...I have a unicorn I can sell you.
The election is the only hope of fixing the biggest of all deficits.
You do like unicorns considering Romney's position of growing our way out of the deficit has been proven mathematically impossible. Also, I don't see how his plan of increasing military spending (considering $1.3 Trillion in military spending and a $1.1 Trillion deficit) will do anything to dent the deficit. Drilling for oil will not help to decrease our deficit in the short to medium term. Education of our unemployed through some federal program will cost money. Labeling China a currency manipulator and getting on their ass won't do much to help in funding the deficit either.
You are obvioulsy missing the point as well. Fucking around with deductions for the 1/2 that do pay taxes, therefore increasing their effective taxable rate, is like trying to squeeze blood from a rock. Equitable taxation is NOT the answer. A reduction in the Federal Government is and I see no concrete plan of Romney to tend to that, neither do I in Obama.
The tax debate is the grand misdirection. It gets very heated because it is inherently a we v. they/me v. you discussion. But since there does not exist a tax base sufficient to cover the perpetual deficits and unfunded liabilities, tax structure is irrelevant to reality and only relevant to one another's differing views of how things ought to be. It's like arguing about who should bear the greater responsibility for bailing the water out of the Titanic's engine room.
Doc, the only 2 tax plans that have ANY legitimacy are (1) a consumption tax or (2) a flat income tax. Part of the problem this country has with special interests directing federal government (fiscal) policy is that they develop artificial conventions for enriching themselves and their industries. Screw all of these subsidies, because that is all they are. The only legitimate deduction that should be used in an income tax policy should be the number of dependents the person reporting their income is responsible for. So, my argument would also do away with differentials for marital status/head of household. Everyone wants "simple and plan-able". Well it can't get much simpler than that or going directly to a consumption tax AND we can eliminate the IRS in the process.
Correct solution but wrong assumption.
They do not want to get rid of their power, and a simple tax does just that.
pods
YUP... Tax breaks for worthless breeders...? Taxing the non-breeders more than the breeders sounds like " Part of the problem this country has with special interests directing federal government (fiscal) policy is that they develop artificial conventions for enriching themselves" ....Ubetcha
Awesome, a CEO with a brain and a scrote!
Me loves it!
Yeah a ceo that would be first in line at the corporate socialist trough for some obamamoney....these dickheads are all the same...socialism to save capitalism.....when this a-hole talks about redistribution of money to unproductive recipients, did he mean the hundreds of billions thrown at gm, aig, citigroup,etc?????? Fucking hypocrite......
Spoken by someone who has no idea (read: none) of what it is to be a CEO. And in absence of that, paints all with a broad brush. A cornerstone of socialism is eradication of identity and individual sovereignty - creating arbitrary classes and labels. That is diametrically opposed to the original (not prevailing) idea of America.
To you and others who have never really risked a significant portion of your stored labor for a venture, I would suggest curling up in a corner until you have that perspective.
i could lie and say that im a ceo, but rather, im self employed with a small staff............and you are correct when you state that socialism is the eradication of identity and individual sovereignty--creating arbitrary classes and labels--and yes, as the founding fathers had feared, that is what prevails in america today...thanks to the redistribution of money to the top banking/corporate interests---first in line debt backed fiat creation to bernankes favored sons, corporate special interests that prevail over the interests of the populace.........all the while placating/domesticating the proles with obama-phones, section 8, etc.....and simulataneously passing bi-partisan laws(repub h.r. bills btw) that rip apart the constitutional rights of american.......so what is your point mayhem? i really fail to see your point.......
Not every ceo would stand in line for handouts - a direct rebuttal to your original point. In fact, most entrepreneur-CEO's would not as it undermines the very essence of who they are. This guy is one of those. That was my only point. If you fail to see it, then I could lie and pretend I'm surprised. I'm not endorsing what he did, but your approach that (as I read it, perhaps incorrectly) he is just another slimeball who'd froth at the mouth for stimulus is misplaced.
no, my approach is that he is a partisan shill, looking to foment more "class warfare" between repub and dem sheep---and full of shit to complain about the redistribution to unproductive classes, as trillions of big bank treasury reserves sit in bens basement.......his "socialist" rant is disingenuous, as he knows full well that most of the "1%" have done nothing with the trillions thrown at them except save their own asses from the very system collapse that their binge helped bring on.................
Then say you think he's a partisan shill and leave the rest of the pablum out of it. Problem is, you can't help yourself...even in your last post here you assume that all of the 1% got there from having stuff thrown at them. It seems impossible for people to be wealthy of their own accord, as well as blood, sweat and tears. Until you realize that is a faulty assumption, you will be mired in your own mirage of things.
You are the one making broad assumptions......the majority of corporations and businesses in this country have had success through blood sweat and tears....i never said otherwise...but any ceo that rants about wealth distribution is either not informed of the facts or is a partisan mouthpiece....major corporations and banking institutions have been pampered under obama....multinational corporate taxes are near zero...libor collusion goes untouched, pentagon welfare through wars on libya, now syria and soon iran continue unfettered....and it will continue under romney....so this ceo is full....of....shit....neither party will set this country in the right direction.....
I am not making broad assumptions - just pointing out the exceptions to yours. I'm not debating your view as to whether his (implicit) endorsement of Romney over Obama is meaningful. But that was not your original point. Your original point was about ceos' (and this guy's) inclination to take handouts. That is a broad assumption with which I take issue. Now you are trying to morph the conversation into something else.
Now his employees are scared to lose their jobs and they will vote Obama to secure the social benefits for the unemployed!
Exactly. Unfortunately, most CEOs don't realize that their main labor is, more often than not these days, extracting tax dollars through one of the many teets of the Federal Boob Medusa. While corporate welfare is indeed larger than social wellfare, the plebes will vote from the government trough when they realize they may not have a trough of their own at work.
Can't argue with the gist of what he wrote, but this is the kind of statement that will get you swift approbation and punishment in Amerika circa 2012. And, yes, like Jack Welch, he probably has lied, cheated and stolen to amass his fortune. Those actions were/are wrong, but not the message.
You are absolutely right. I spent most of my life as a small business owner, and if this guy is worth a billion, he was aided and abetted by the stifling regulation and tax structure, whether he stole or not. Everyone in business is well aware that the government prunes the weaker competition. Well the pruning shears cut both ways eventually.
Welcome to Guantanimo, you traitor!
Obama's Chicago boys are going to pay him a visit. Find all sorts of reasons to shake him down. All of a sudden Westgate Resorts will have all sorts of violations and unlawful practices.
+1. Union troubles.
Send in the drones.
good thing he's not trying to use his position to influence his employees right to make their own decision on who they want to vote for....oh wait
That is laughable as he is part of the reason we had a housing bubble that was unsustainable, so one can attribute that he is a cause for the depression we're in.
Fuck you Mitt, fuck you Obama, and go fuck yourself sideways David.
He is also part of the reason people criticize capitalism, as system built upon unmitigated greed and materialism.
It hasn't been capitalism for a long time, Ray. When 4 out of 5 American jobs are depending on government contracts, subsidies, spending, welfare and what have you then that is no longer capitalism.
When the elite goes full retard and rehypothecates assets and leverages everything to the hilt, then they get bailed out and the Federal balance sheet is in the craper. That is NOT capitalism.
All these rich fucking parasitic leeches can kiss my ass and go to hell with their millions of worthless paper wealth. They can wipe their own asses with their paper for a change.