This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Obama's Bloomberg Interview - Live Webcast

Tyler Durden's picture


With AAPL -2% and stocks at the lows of the day, we wonder whether Obama has bought puts or calls today... President Obama sits down with Bloomberg White House correspondent Julianna Goldman at the White House today for his first television interview since the election to discuss the fiscal cliff - now just four weeks away. Live stream below:






- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:33 | 3032821 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Explain to me again why I should watch this?

<Never mind. I never get the joke the first time around.>

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 19:07 | 3033788 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

just tell him prosecuting bankers is like a "special" tax on the "special" rich. 

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 22:20 | 3034371 Freddie
Freddie's picture

It is a shame that Americans do not have the courage to overthrow muslim tyrants like the Egyptians.  The Egyptains are lucky because their military will side with the people. America has pensioned idiot cowards with grad degrees like General Cornhole Petreaus/Betrayus who are too busy cornholing muzzie chicks with mick names like Kelly.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:33 | 3032823 Tsunami Wave
Tsunami Wave's picture

blah blah blah... stfu you incompitent idiot.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:38 | 3032837 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Oblabla, President of the United States of America.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:48 | 3032870 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture



***Rich = Those making from approximately 50,000 to 500,000 or so, I guarandamntee that's who will pay the highest additional % of their incomes as taxes, whether by the deletion of deductions, or outright changes to increases in marginal tax rates, or increases to or alteration of treatment to particular categories of income (e.g. dividend, etc.).

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:53 | 3032899 Tsunami Wave
Tsunami Wave's picture

he'll get his fucking retarded wish... inflation destroys the middle, working and poor classes.  hyperinflation destroys them plus the rich, and everyone else.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 15:38 | 3033257 redpill
redpill's picture

It gets really tiresome watching these fucks trying to turn the debt tsunami facing our nation into one more chapter of "eat the rich" utuopian social agenda bullshit.  The Feds could take every penny earned by people who receive $250k+ income this year and it wouldn't make a fucking dent.  Which is a real problem, because as has been demonstrated many times, once you impose draconian taxes on incrementally high income, people simply stop making it.  So you might get a short term bump in tax revenue, but it quickly vanishes as the earners decide to play golf instead of work for 25 cents on the dollar, and then you have decreased overall economic activity in the long run.  Why these dumbfucks seriously think that is going to turn out better for anyone is beyond me.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 15:51 | 3033309 jayman21
jayman21's picture

And they continue to be reelected.   Personal responsibility was last seen somewhere in the 1950s.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:17 | 3033372 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

When he starts saying no more homework because it favors the rich then you know its endgame...just like that dipshit in France.  Say anything to keep the masses happy...that is until it all starts falling apart.  Look at Egypt, then Greece, then Spain, then Portugal, then Italy then out your front door!

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 22:23 | 3034380 Freddie
Freddie's picture

The Egyptians have courage. They are not cowards watching "college ball", NFL, NBA, NASCAR and American Idol on the HD brainwashing box for idiots.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:22 | 3033386 SmallerGovNow2
SmallerGovNow2's picture

BHO doesn't give one shit if it raises revenues or not.  For this lame it's all about "fairness"....


I'll tell you what is fair, a flat 10% income tax for EVERYONE and Zip, Zero, Nada single deduction.....

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:41 | 3033449 you enjoy myself
you enjoy myself's picture

yep.  once you stop working from the premise that his priority is actually a vibrant economy then his decisions make a lot more sense.  don't forget TOTUS' answer when charlie gibson, in a rare moment of journalism, asked why O would raise capital gains when its been shown over and over that more revenue comes in from lower rates.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:46 | 3033451 redpill
redpill's picture

I disagree, because income is a very subjective thing and can be easily hidden by criminals and the extremely wealthy alike.

What is truly fair is to repeal the 16th amendment, eliminate the IRS, and establish a single point of sale transaction tax on new retail goods and services.  It takes tax compliance out of the hands of those who would exploit it, removing the inherent conflict of interest while getting government out of our private financial lives at the same time.  Want to know how much tax you paid?  It's on your receipt.  Too poor to pay taxes?  Buy second-hand.  Illegal immigrant used to getting paid in cash and not paying taxes?  Sorry you're part of the pool.  Wealthy with a football-team sized group of tax accountants at your disposal that shelter your income in various shell corporations and offshore accounts?  Game's over.  Might as well bring your money back home and save the tax compliance fees.


Tue, 12/04/2012 - 19:09 | 3033794 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

you just proved why it will never pass. but I agree

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:06 | 3032948 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

It's his game...he fools his kool aide followers into believing he s really helping them.  By raising taxes on the rich he looks like Robin Hood to the foolish masses.  By not limiting deductions he let's the rich keep their money.  It's all smoke and mirrors and only the desperate fools who choose not to believe (the masses who voted for him) will end up being used and thrown away like human garbage.  These guys are from Chicago...what they do has nothing to do with helping anyone but themselves and their cronies, they just lie better than anyone onthe planet.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:08 | 3032964 HelluvaEngineer
HelluvaEngineer's picture

Rich = You don't have an EBT card (yet)

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:41 | 3033452 you enjoy myself
you enjoy myself's picture

rich = you have an alarm clock

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 17:25 | 3033573 overmedicatedun...
overmedicatedundersexed's picture

wtf is wrong here on about missing the point...O bum a wants MORE MONEY FOR BIG GOV..I am sick of the bloated fascist central gov we have now and YOU idiots here talk about giving them MORE.. wake the fuck up.

socialist communist EU posters here want big gov want more taxes want the control over every fucking one of us.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 17:26 | 3033575 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

Rich means you work for a living...even if you make less than the fucktard next door who lives off the benfits of a bloated welfare system...

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:29 | 3033053 Mr Poopra
Mr Poopra's picture

It's naive to assume this is anything but an engineered collapse.  The question is, will your mind allow you to grasp the ramifications of that information.  Enjoy the ride, protect each other, and defend liberty.  The consciousness shift is real.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:00 | 3032931 Stoploss
Stoploss's picture



So be it.. Bring it retard, bring it. 




Better start hiring.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:23 | 3033022 yogibear
yogibear's picture

Being  on the government payroll does have it's benefits. For example if you work for the SEC Wall Street provides you with all the porn you want to keep you busy.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 17:34 | 3033595 Blankenstein
Blankenstein's picture

Obama should start by collecting that $642 million from that hypocritical old coot Buffett.  


Uncle Warren:  "taxes for thee, but not for me"

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:38 | 3032836 shutdown
shutdown's picture

A commercial. Typical

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:39 | 3032841 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Obama spent some time in the weeds this morning and had a hard time making it in after the round.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:38 | 3032839 Everybodys All ...
Everybodys All American's picture

Drinking game: Take a swig every time his says "folks".

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:52 | 3032869 The Gooch
The Gooch's picture

or "uh"

edit: as in "welfare er uh uh wall street reform"

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:40 | 3032844 doomandbloom
doomandbloom's picture


Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:40 | 3032846 slaughterer
slaughterer's picture

"Let me be clear" fuck you!

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:33 | 3033425 akak
akak's picture

"Make no mistake": Obama is a amoral puppet of higher powers, and eagerly sucks their cocks for the chance to publicly play the nation's ostensible leader.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 19:12 | 3033799 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

it's almost as if they all do that. Most rapidly declining corrupt empires share this talent.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 23:41 | 3034650 MiltonFriedmans...
MiltonFriedmansNightmare's picture

Caligula comes to mind...

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:41 | 3032848 climber
climber's picture

He could sell that desk behind him to make some money. The guy from Pawn Stars would cut him a nice deal.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:25 | 3033397 SmallerGovNow2
SmallerGovNow2's picture

pawn stars, a glimpse of our future.  learn to barter...

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:42 | 3032858 youngman
youngman's picture

I am listening...all vague ideas..nothing proposed...not one detail....not one...why can´t he just lay out his ideas...actual ideas...HIS ideas...he is just saying bring me a deal..bring me something...that is not leading folks...this guy is really a loser

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:56 | 3032915 Tsunami Wave
Tsunami Wave's picture


pick 1 reason:

A )  He doesn't have any original ideas

B )  He is an idealogue, whose philosophy is for the rich to... uhhhh.. pay for expensive entitlements.. that can't actually pay for these expensive programmes

C )  He's only waiting for his opposition to speak... so he can shoot down and criticize their ideas

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 17:24 | 3033552 Blankenstein
Blankenstein's picture

If there was a journalist left in America that was worth his salt, he would ask the Obaminator to explain his views on the state of the economy and what Fed policies he currently agrees with and what policies he would like to see changed or implemented at the Fed.  No prepared statements, just Obama's assessments and opinions and ideas as youngman said.  Talking at length, a la Ron Paul ,giving in-depth, concrete solutions to our soaring debts and increasing economic problems.  This would expose his lack of understanding of any of the financial problems facing our country.  


Tue, 12/04/2012 - 23:44 | 3034658 bulldung
bulldung's picture

He can't , he knows only bully economics,aka confiscatory taxation for the benefit of the bully. 

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 17:54 | 3033642 Weyland_Yutani
Weyland_Yutani's picture


Would be nice to see his college records too but they are sealed off for eternity. I mean, how would they explain that enrolled as a foreign exchange student to all these fancy schools?

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 23:52 | 3034681 MiltonFriedmans...
MiltonFriedmansNightmare's picture

Here's a plan for the Repugnantcunts, very simple, so even the orange one can understand. Stop negotiating with the compromiser in chief and draft a bill. Draft a bill that leaves the tax rates on the top two tiers unchanged. Cut the rest by 10%. Then go home and watch Oblahblah explain to the middle class how he is their champion, freaking hippocrit that he is. That would be the plan if the Repugnantcunts were who they claim they and not corporate cronyist lieing fucks.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:44 | 3032860 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

Meh, I'm not really into reruns.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:43 | 3032861 Frank N. Beans
Frank N. Beans's picture

one of these two people is worth watching

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:44 | 3032862 Bubble
Bubble's picture

who gives about that. more importantly...

amazed the gap down at the open wasn't bigger
Apple 2.36M Share Block Trade Crosses at $574.10

that's a chunk of stock. rumours expected on zerhedge soon. come along

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:45 | 3032864 djsmps
djsmps's picture

He wants a top business executive in his administration. Perhaps Jon Corzine?

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:48 | 3032875 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

As much as I disagree with taxes I hope he taxes the fucking shit out of the rich since those stupid cocksuckers put him in office. Give the bastards what they asked for. Of course that won't be the case.. We will be the ones getting screwed. Best bought and paid for puppet you could ever want.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:28 | 3033045 seek
seek's picture

I think it's well established he's not going to tax the people who put him in office. The 0.1% (or 0.01%) will get to keep playing the same games they always have with cap gains, donations, etc.

The middle-"rich" with actual earned income (say 60K to 1M) are totally fucked, though. I'm in the 1% and just did a 2013 tax review with my accountant last week, my effective tax rate (fed + state) is going from ~35% to ~42% between the Bush cut expiration and all the Obamacare add-ons. That's a 20% increase, and it's just the beginning of the end.

This is only going to get worse as we approach the big crash. I think some of the other posters suggesting using Argentina as a model are correct. The government will continue to harp about the rich paying their share and go after people "evading" taxes, and people will continue to fall for the lie that raising income tax rates will fix this, completely papering over that the real money is lightly taxed capital gains.Eventually capital controls and the like, but again, orchestrated to protect the truly elite rich while sucking the last drops out of the productive classes. Then the big crisis will finally hit hard, and they'll propose the US model itself on some social welfare state as in Europe (and we've see how well that served them!)

It's fairly terrifying to cruise a site like reddit and see so many advocating a return to a 90% tax rate when they have zero concept of capital gains, or how fucked we are due to spending.

The best plan now is to be lower-middle-class on paper and hold one's savings outside the traditional banking system. Of course most folks here already have been doing that.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 15:43 | 3033287 sdmjake
sdmjake's picture

GO long coins and boating trips

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:40 | 3033441 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

+1 Seek. I'm seeing and hearing the same exact thing as you are, daily. I think AMT is going to sodomize many solidly middle class people, and that there's at least an even chance that the mortgage deduction goes away, which will really be a mind screw for many in the still ridiculously overvalued RE areas (D.C. is a great example).

Obamacare taxes/fines are also going to be a nasty, nasty surprise for  many. They have no idea how nasty b/c they really haven't been paying attention. Hell, the PREMIUMS and co-pays on that "free" Obamacare ARE GOING TO BE MORE than what they're currently paying for private insurance premiums and co-pays, and they WON'T BE ABLE TO OBTAIN that private insurance once Obamacare kicks in fully (employers are going to drop insurance benefits left and right, however they do it):


"If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it's free." 

-- P.J. O'Rourke

Unaffordable Cost Seen for Some Under Affordable Care Act

...The landmark health-care law, which survived the threats of repeal and a Supreme Court review, now confronts another hurdle: living up to expectations. As the administration spells out the details, many uninsured will be surprised at how much they will have to pay. It may involve “very substantial amounts,” and “there still will be a significant number of people who can’t afford health coverage,” said Ron Pollack, head of Families USA, a consumer group that backs the law.


A family of four earning $75,000 will pay $7,125 in annual premiums and as much as $8,333 in co-pays and deductibles, according to a preliminary estimate by the Kaiser Family Foundation. A single 40-year-old earning $30,000 will pay $2,509 in premiums and as much as $3,125 in cost sharing. For a 60- year-old making $40,000, the amount will be $3,800 in premiums and up to $4,167 in out-of-pocket costs, according to Kaiser.

Do you see? All those Everest, & University of Phoenixicans, who are extended-extended-unemployed or making minimum wage will be covered, families will catch that much needed "break," and seniors will rejoice! That family of 4 pulling down 75k will be thrilled to pay 15 1/2 k a year (or 20% of their total income). Those MANDATORY premiums and co-pays are only equal to an approximate 212% of most peoples' net-negative savings/extra cash!!! Wait until companies use the most ingenious methods to drop people from private or privately administered insurance onto the O-care dole.


Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:48 | 3032876 4exNinja
4exNinja's picture

As much as I disagree with many of Obama's policies...the "tax the rich" comment makes PERFECT SENSE if the goal is to fix the deficit. Those tax cuts don't lead to economic growth in the first place because "trickle down economics" clearly don't work. No sane investor will go "mhhhhh, this investment looks nice...but omfg I have to pay 20% taxes instead of 15%...yeah, let's forget about this investment". People who support the tax cut for the rich are DISHONEST and I want to punch them in the face if they claim it's "creating jobs" or "stimulating growth in the economy". 

On another note: Am I the only one who read the GOP's proposal and realised that they don't actually mention WHAT they'll cut? What kind of plan is that??? That's like me saying "I'm gonna save $1m next year...don't ask me how though, just trust me...I'll save it."

Haven't they learned? The whole "making bold statements that aren't backed up by concrete plans" thing really harmed them during the election...and now they just continue making the same mistake all over again. What a bunch of clowns!



Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:51 | 3032894 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

I'm not really a major fan of taxes, but I do think that all those "OMG WE'LL STOP CREATING JOBS" empty threats are exactly that. The simple fact is that they've had all this time to create extra jobs, but haven't.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:59 | 3032928 4exNinja
4exNinja's picture

I agree 100%.

Also, it's a FACT that poorer people (middle class & poor) will actually spend all their saved paying for services, buying more food, taking a vacation, sending kids to a better school, buying that new TV they always wanted, etc. 

The rich on the other hand don't necessarily do that. I for example earn a nice chunk of money every year, but if I look at what I did with that money I realise that it hasn't really created any jobs (invested in gold and bought real estate in Uruguay and other booming countries). I would be surprised if other wealthy guys didn't do the same. If you buy gold (sound investment over the past few years), you create ZERO jobs...and the same goes for a lot of other investments. 

So in short:

If the goal is to balance the budget in a way that STIMULATES THE ECONOMY (or at least doesn't harm it), taxing the rich is a good way to go about it. Trickle down economics DON'T work, so I see no point in allowing Romney to pay 13% while his maid pays double. Not only is it not fair, it also doesn't benefit the economy. It's basically welfare for the rich, paid for by cutting services and increasing taxes of poor people who WOULD stimulate the economy with savings.


Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:07 | 3032954 RSBriggs
RSBriggs's picture

And you're a fucking idiot that doesn't know squat about what he's talking about.  You could tax 100% of the income of those that make over 1 million dollars, and it wouldn't pay down 1% of the deficit.  When you start giving 4 million dollars per year to charity, then you can start a discussion about Romneys tax rate, you fucking liberal troll. 

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:15 | 3032975 4exNinja
4exNinja's picture

Nice ad-hominem attack...classy :D

I never said that alone would fix it, but it's a one of the measures that would have a good effect on the deficit while not harming the economy. Also, giving money to the Mormon cult isn't the same as doesn't create jobs and it doesn't benefit society. What's next? Are you going to call taking a Scientology class "charity" too? 

I won't insult you with any swear words because I'm not a 12 year old boy...

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:28 | 3033044 ElvisDog
ElvisDog's picture

Not harming the economy? You are either ignorant or a bought-and-paid for Obama operative because the "rich" also do a disproportionate share of the discretionary spending in this country. Liberals seems to have this fantasy that increasing taxes results in "free money" that can be spent to expand the economy. The reality is if you take more money from someone (the evil rich in this example) that person has less money to spend on other things. And because the government tends to not allocate money wisely, the net economic effect of raising taxes is negative. Here's a real-world, real-time example for you. Look at what is happening in France right now. Has raising taxes in France improved their economy or employment picture? Like I said, you're either ignorant or a troll, take your pick.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:39 | 3033085 MillionDollarBogus_
MillionDollarBogus_'s picture


Voicing an opinion is not deserving of a troll comment.

Just say why you disagree and move along...


Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:44 | 3033106 4exNinja
4exNinja's picture

Of course the government spending needs to be streamlined too...but raising tax revenues by taxing the poor and middle class isn't the most effective way given that they (read: NOT THE GOVERNMENT!) actually end up spending those tax savings on good and profucts that stimulate the economy.

The point is, rich people saving money don't necessarily (read: often don't) spend it on things that stimulate the economy...and that's a fact. Tell me, how exactly is buying FB stocks stimulating the economy (as in: not just WS paper profits)? How is me buying more gold with those tax savings stimulating the economy? It's NOT, and that's exactly why taxing the rich is a way to raise revenues (which needs to happen as austerity alone won't fix it) without harming the economy.

Of course the entire raising taxes on the rich is pointless if you harm the middle class in the process, or if you use those increased tax revenues for inefficient government programs (like paying some previous Army food supplier £1.5b to "ease the transition"). But that's another subject that of course deserves to be addressed. 

They need to do 2 things:

1) Raise taxes in a way that doesn't harm the economy...and yes, raising taxes (and fixing loop holes) is necessary if you're honest about wanting to balance the budget.

2) Streamline the government and fix inefficient wasteful departments that have no greater benefit. 

Claiming taxing the rich would somehow harm the economy is laughable given that taxes were higher during Clinton while economic growth was MUCH better. 

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 15:16 | 3033209 ElvisDog
ElvisDog's picture

Okay, but you still need to explain the most current example of raising taxes on the rich - France - and what is happening to the French economy and employment situation at this very moment. The incoming Socialist government raised taxes substantially on the rich and what happened? Economic growth went negative and unemployment increased.

So, for us to consider your point or even take you seriously, how do you explain what is happening in France with your "raising taxes on the rich won't harm the economy" thesis?

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:33 | 3033424 SmallerGovNow2
SmallerGovNow2's picture

I will wager a gold eagle that you did not score over 400 in math on your SAT's....

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 17:29 | 3033582 Oldballplayer
Oldballplayer's picture

Streamlining the government?

I spent the early 90's streamlining the company I worked for.  I was in charge of these massive initiatives and everyone in the company knew that not only was I responsible to make the changes we needed to make, but I had been granted pretty much carte blanche authority to "do what it takes." 

It was a nightmare because no one wanted to change and everyone thought they did it best. 

Our company was about fifteen years old and very agile.  It took three years to implement the programs that added millions to our bottom line, and ended up being easier to manage and account for.

The government is 200 years old and it is a nightmare.

The only way you can streamline the government is with a firehose and a shovel.

And unless I am wrong, the armed peasants are not in the street yet.  So...while your comment is accurate--goernment should be streamlined--it is pure folly to begin to think its possible.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 15:02 | 3033152 ChanceIs
ChanceIs's picture

>>>If you buy gold (sound investment over the past few years), you create ZERO jobs...and the same goes for a lot of other investments.<<<

Sorry.  It is every Americans duty to buy gold.  Gold at $10,000 sends several signals to TBTB: 1) the plebians "get it," 2) the market gives the true worth of the buck price signal, and 3) the Fed, crony bullion banks, the US Treasury and everything else in there manipulating the system gets vaporized on the short squeeze.  Why bother your Congressman to end the Fed when you can drive gold to $10K and get the same result w/o the BS.  And get a lot more personal satisfaction.

>>>If the goal is to balance the budget in a way that STIMULATES THE ECONOMY (or at least doesn't harm it), taxing the rich is a good way to go about it.<<<

The ONLY way to look at the decision of who gets to spend the surplus harvest is who will invest it better.  If you think that the government will do it better, think Solyndra, the Iraq war, etc.  If you think that the private sector might do it better, then think donations to Congressmen.  I will say that most agree that Bill Gates and Steve Jobs showed more investmetn acumen than the government or crony capitalists could imagine in their wildest dreams.  Take the chance and go witht he private sector directing surplus expenditures - less downside and way more upside.  Enhance the Department of Justice to throw the crony capitalist bast&^ds in jail when they get out of line - because they will.

The federal government actually exists for very few good reasons: defense department, justice deparetment, foreign policy.  The government isn't authorized under the Constitution to stimulate the economy, they can't because of the conflicts of interest, and if that wasn't bad enough, they don't know the first place to start. 


Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:26 | 3033405 overbet
overbet's picture

They are afraid to create jobs because of the radical in office. Thats why no jobs in ""all this time". 

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:53 | 3032902 Mr. Lucky
Mr. Lucky's picture

John Wayne Gacy is a clown compared to this crowd.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:17 | 3032999 Quinvarius
Quinvarius's picture

lol.  maybe do "is" in caps.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:59 | 3032930 earnyermoney
earnyermoney's picture

Let's go over the cliff. Tax hikes for you. Put your money where your mouth is if you think the government is so efficient at spending your income. Tax the rich with higher rates? cynical BS. The rich have carve outs in the tax code so the higher rates will not apply to their income. Why are Dems scoffing at closing carve outs in the tax code?

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:07 | 3032961 4exNinja
4exNinja's picture

Higher taxes wouldn't actually bother me all that much...wouldn't change my lifestyle in the least. But yeah, those loop holes need to be closes on top of increasing taxes. Pretending the deficit can be fixed largley by austerity measures is dishonest...I mean, just look at the debt clock. The amount is so large by now that it's clear you could never save enough to balance it.

The important thing is to focus on increasing taxes (and fixing loop holes of course) in a way that doesn't harm the economy. Not subsidising for-profit companies that don't need it (*cough* Exxon *cough*), closing loop holes and taxing the rich are all ways that help fixing the budget without causing economic harm. So that should be the starting point. 

At the same time they need to improve effeciencies of the government. It can't be that the company providing food to the US Army is allowed to rip them off...simply because they have an ex-General lobbyist who calls in a few favors. Why? Because YOU and I are paying for it!! For crying out loud, they just switched food provider and paid that old company £1.5b (!!!!) to "ease the transition". ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? 

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:22 | 3033019 earnyermoney
earnyermoney's picture

I'll agree to higher taxes if I see across the board budget cuts in every Federal agency. A cut means you get less money YoY. Not this baseline growth shite that defines Washington. Only in DC can a 10% rise in a budget be considered a cut because you did not get your 20% increase.

Eliminate DHS and TSA. F the government paper pushers. Greedy bastards all.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:36 | 3033079 4exNinja
4exNinja's picture

I actually agree with you. It can't be that they call it a "cut" when that cut just means the level of increase is slightly (!!) smaller. It's the same bullshit they pull off when quoting unemployment figures...or when they somehow miraculously exclude working poors (who increased by a TON recently). 


Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:23 | 3033024 ElvisDog
ElvisDog's picture

No sane investor will go "mhhhhh, this investment looks nice...but omfg I have to pay 20% taxes instead of 15%...yeah, let's forget about this investment"

Are you kidding me? That's exactly how investors think. It's always about risk versus return and return-on-investment. What you wrote above reduces the return by 5% but doesn't reduce the risk at all. That might be the difference between making an investment and finding something else to do with your money.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:34 | 3033069 4exNinja
4exNinja's picture

If 5% smaller net returns cause you trouble the investment isn't worth it in the first place. 

I am involved in a lot of large real estate deals for example, and depending on how you structure those deals you can pay 3-5% more or less in taxes. Not a single time in 11 years have I seen an investor turn down an investment based on having to pay 5% more in taxes because it wasn't possible to make those savings...not once! And I'm talking about deals of $ those 5% sound like a lot but are inconsequential for investor appetite. 

Look at HK's real estate market for example, they increased the tax burden for buyers...but guess what, a lot of prices are already bouncing back from the original "shock". 

Or let me ask you this: If you trade Forex, and suddenly you have to pay 20% in taxes instead of 15%...would you stop trading? A profitable trader won't just stop trading because he now pays 5% more in taxes...

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:54 | 3033141 moroots
moroots's picture

All well and good, but you left out the fact that a) most real estate deals are funded with other people's money, so the increase in tax rates actually lowers the cost of the leverage due to the tax deductibility of interest, b) many real estate deals are tax losers up until the property is sold, thus tax rates don't affect operating income at all, and c) a substantial portion of the return in a real estate deal comes from the sale of the property, which as it is the terminal cash flow the tax bite is substantially deferred.

The decision to accept/reject a proposed plan expansion or new piece of equipment or whatever would be substantially different when someone has equity in the deal and the incremental cash flows are more important than the terminal cash flow.  In such a case, changes in tax rates might cause a project that would be accepted at a 20% marginal rate to be rejected at a 25% rate.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 17:57 | 3033649 Blankenstein
Blankenstein's picture

The people who will get screwed when the tax rates on investments are raised will be private sector employees, most who do not have pensions to live on when they retire.  A million dollars saved for retirement is not much for two people to live on for 15 - 20 years assuming they retire at 70.

 This will screw those under 50.  We will have reduced social security and money saved for retirement will be taxed at higher rates because TPTB want to rape the middle class savers.  This won't hurt the mega-wealthy.  When you already have millions of dollars, a tax increase doesn't affect your standard of living or determine whether or not you will be impoverished when you are to old to work.  

These politicians aren't trying to fix the economy, they are trying to transfer the remaining middle and upper middle class wealth to the .1%  Just watch, more bailouts when banks start failing again, and more payments to the likes of Warren Buffett and Lloyd Blankfein.  And those increased taxes will help fund these bailouts.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 18:03 | 3033661 dynomutt
dynomutt's picture

I have to call bullshit on the claim that buying gold doesn't create jobs.


What about:

 1. miners and their ancillary needs

 2. truckers/shippers ...

 3. mints ...


When you buy an AGE, you are helping to employ several thousand people in the US and elsewhere.


4. retailers ...

5. radio/TV personalities ...

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:48 | 3032883 Samsonov
Samsonov's picture

While Obama plays chicken with the other socialist party, the Republicans, the charts for a large number of companies suggest one thing: a top.  There appears to be a "batten down the hatches" attitude forming.  Year-end is close, and the more stupidity that flows from Washington, the more antsy anyone with anything to lose will become.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:49 | 3032884 Archetype
Archetype's picture

Word cloud delivered straight to the algos without making a single question any clearer, quite the opposite.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:49 | 3032885 climber
climber's picture

Do you think they told him that he was the political dysfunction?

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:59 | 3032923 overmedicatedun...
overmedicatedundersexed's picture

when o bum a says we need to tax the wealth of the rich as well as the income you know he is true to the comrades..if he never tries, that, then he is just shuk'n and jive'n and pimp'n the ho's call demorats. He never touches the FED for it's the hand that feeds..knows were the butter gets on the bread..gotta get that multi million dollar estate in Hawaii he done good for a nigga. w/o  two dimes to rub together. he done good.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:51 | 3032892 Alcoholic Nativ...
Alcoholic Native American's picture

This staged fiscal cliff debate is as fake as the election.  No amount of raising taxes can cover government debt.  The FEd is free floating the entire economy.  Good cop Obama is fully controlled and his 2nd term was assured on may 1st 2011.


This man is a total POS snake.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:52 | 3032896 Watts_D_Matter
Watts_D_Matter's picture

love the freudian slip by barry...he was trying to do welfare...hmm I mean Wall street reform   Classic Barry

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:54 | 3032897 fly
fly's picture

I thought the BS campaign was over-apparently not! If they are gonna raise taxes, CUT sick of the DC assclowns yet once again, tumbling from their clown cars and taking US all, right over the cliff.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:53 | 3032898 LongSoupLine
LongSoupLine's picture

STFU and do something for the country you fucking Chicago piece of fucking welfare supporting, union blowing shit.  fuck off.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:53 | 3032901 ken
ken's picture

More of this, should keep the people from rioting.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:58 | 3032903 ThisIsBob
ThisIsBob's picture

"Tax the rich." Sure, but what a load of pandering political bullshit. 

How about stopping government bail outs and subsidies to for-profit corporate entities, and easing up on the drones, etc.?

And date nights, etc.  You're not in the NBA , Barry, you're in the White House.



Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:00 | 3032933 James-Morrison
James-Morrison's picture

We are all "rich" in America.

Classic definition of trickle down, as in the income level of rich will trickle down to engulf us all.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:03 | 3032941 4exNinja
4exNinja's picture

Taxing the rich should go alongside your other suggestions. I won't be holding my breath though...not until money is removed from politics :(


PS: And that would be the same for any president really...GOP or democrat, doesn't matter. They're all bought sock puppets by now. 

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:53 | 3032907 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

Best free market system? Does he really think people believe him when he says that? Hey Totus a free market needs bad businesses to go bankrupt in order to flourish.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:59 | 3032924 syntaxterror
syntaxterror's picture

With Bubble Ben buying 60%+ of US debt; with ObamaCorp backing 90% of mortgages; and with ObamaCorp running healthscare; and with ObamaCorp doling out $1 trillion+ in student loan debt, yeah, it's the best free enterprise system out there. More like the new Soviet Union.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:03 | 3032945 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

Don't forget the Obummer insurance (Aig) banking(Citi), automotive(GM), and telecommunications(Obummer phones) lines of business.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:54 | 3032910 PLove
PLove's picture

Tin Foil hat works great.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:27 | 3033043 monad
monad's picture

Steel is better. And kevlar...

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:56 | 3032917 syntaxterror
syntaxterror's picture

When does this talentless loser begin his 4-year golf vacation?

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 13:58 | 3032921 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

Good Lord the puke commentators afterwards are just as pathetic as he is.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:00 | 3032932 The Master
The Master's picture

I can watch human beings talk to puppets on PBS.  This isn't a big deal.

Wed, 12/05/2012 - 20:43 | 3032967 TWSceptic
TWSceptic's picture

The US government is a criminal entity:



Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:09 | 3032973 grunk
grunk's picture

Julianna Goldman's bio:

Born in Bethesda, Maryland, in 1981, Goldman is the daughter of Barbara Goldberg-Goldman and Michael Goldman. Her father is a partner in Silverberg Goldman & Bikoff, a Washington law firm. Her mother is the founder and president of a human resources agency and sits on the board of the National Jewish Democratic Council


Washington insider, Bloomberg mouthpiece.

Why didn't she just bring knee pads?

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:29 | 3033051 spekulatn
spekulatn's picture


Goldman’s parents, Michael and Barbara, are major Democratic donors. During the 2012 cycle, the Goldmans contributed at least $5,400 to Obama and $1,000 to the Democrat National Committee. Barbara Goldberg Goldman sits on the Executive Committee of the National Jewish Democratic Council and served as co-chair for Obama’s Jewish Community Leadership team in 2008.

"It is unclear if Obama is aware that his interviewer’s parents have been major supporters and volunteered for his campaign.

Obama personally delivered a birthday cake to Julianna Goldman in May. The reporter celebrated her birthday aboard Air Force One after a trip to Afghanistan. Obama led the press cabin in a round of “Happy Birthday.”

Goldman was married to former television reporter David Shuster."

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:20 | 3032978 Quinvarius
Quinvarius's picture

every dam day?  man.

somehow gold managed to not go up 100 on this insanity.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:23 | 3033023 resurger
resurger's picture

This douche whistles when he speaks ... 80% of the time.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:25 | 3033033 q99x2
q99x2's picture

Arrest him for treason.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:27 | 3033036 zilverreiger
zilverreiger's picture

Ben prints 40 (soon +45 = 85 ) Billion USD per month indefinitely. And they worry about 160B tax from richies.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:27 | 3033041 mendigo
mendigo's picture

I wish zh would step-back andlook beyond the bull-shit here.
Don't we have enough demographic pandering media.
ZH used to do a good job of keeping it real.
Clearly the real story is they are both playing the public and angling for advantage. Clearly they are not addressing the issue responsibly and honestly. It would appear likely that we are going to go at least partly over the cliff. Which means were already partly over the cliff as we've got a fat ass. The problem is they are both capture by a minority of thier constituents. Imagine of one of them was actually trying to fix the problem.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:24 | 3033393 jomama
jomama's picture

i haven't read anything you've submitted, unless I missed it?

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:34 | 3033066 sbenard
sbenard's picture

Obama's evil ideology is just coveting and stealing on a societal scale. Frederic Bastiat called it "legalized plunder". It transforms the duty of the rich to voluntarily share, into the right of leeching lemmings to use government to steal. NO society prospers under that ideology. It doesn't merely fail. It DESTROYS! It destroys financially, economically, morally, and militarily.

This is why I remain convinced that when the US Government debt bubble pops within the next few years, calamity is certainty!

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:38 | 3033082 dracos_ghost
dracos_ghost's picture



Ruh roh, he's using The Bernank's internet meme, somethings afoot.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:24 | 3033392 James-Morrison
James-Morrison's picture

" Take off" after the Cliff? I still can't figure out which one is Thelma and which one is Louise. Boehner or Bronco?

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 14:45 | 3033110 Quinvarius
Quinvarius's picture

obama seems to think the economy is going to recover after debt talks.  more likely he knows qe4 is just around the corner.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 15:46 | 3033292 grid-b-gone
grid-b-gone's picture

The Bush tax cuts were supposed to be an incentive to invest in opportunities that would, in turn, create jobs.

Those jobs were supposed to generate taxes that would make the tax cut revenue neutral.

The tax breaks were extended because the weak economy may not have allowed the wealthy enough opportunities to put their tax breaks to proper use.

The wealthy who did not use this time of lower taxes to invest in job-creating endeavors should lose the tax break.

Those who think they deserve an extended tax break should not only document the jobs they directly created (list SS numbers of those hired due to tax break investment), but they should also outline how a continued tax break would lead to even more personally-created jobs.

Some endeavors, like opening payday loan offices, even if they directly created jobs, will not count.

Almost by definition, those who continue to receive the tax break would have limited personal gain because much of their tax break must be rolled over into even more jobs-producing investments to keep the tax break active.

Too many want to just assume wealth=wealth creation=jobs creation. This is not the case.

I suspect at least 80% of the Bush tax breaks for those making over $250K went into commodities speculation, PMs, personal consumption, giving offspring a head start via loans or tuition, or political contributions to keep the breaks in place. 

Weak jobs growth is proof enough that the stated objective of the Bush tax breaks has not been met. 

At the very least, suspend the tax breaks until they are automatically restored when employment participation gets back to the pre-2008 level.

This time, get the jobs up front.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 15:50 | 3033305 Catullus
Catullus's picture

Tax individuals more until corporations hire more people !!!! Rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:06 | 3033351 pragmatic hobo
pragmatic hobo's picture

I'm really confused about this whole "raise the tax on rich" thing ... wasn't the bush tax supposed to expire anyway regardless of the budget deal struck last year? If so, why is "raising the tax" even an issue now? Furthermore if obamma goes through with the so called "tax increase" but not back to the level of pre bush tax cut isn't that effectively another round of tax cut for the rich?

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 16:54 | 3033487 grid-b-gone
grid-b-gone's picture

You've got it correct. Half the battle these days is phrasing the issue in a sound bite that sticks and frames the issue with its intended spin.

The Bush tax breaks were intended to provide a greater economic benefit for the economy, but income distribution stats suggest it was just a tax break for a political and economic segment that wanted a tax break and was able to make it happen.

Jobs are just an imaginary carrot to grease the political skids. No business hires unless lost sales may result from not hiring.

Tax breaks do little to create demand and to the extent they do, market distortions are often the result.

So, mohair subsidies and the Bush tax breaks persist. 

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 17:23 | 3033567 Oldballplayer
Oldballplayer's picture

These idiots are driving a car without any oil in it.  And they are arguing about getting another mile per gallon by adjusting the air in the front left tire.

And the morons in the media are getting all worked up about it.

When this whole thing goes under, these folks will be standing around in a circle jerk wondering what happened.

Fucking retards.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 17:43 | 3033609 Weyland_Yutani
Weyland_Yutani's picture

This sorry excuse for a president has never even run a lemonade stand. And we are supposed to take economic advice from this guy?


Tue, 12/04/2012 - 17:46 | 3033623 akak
akak's picture

Obama's motto:

If life gives you lemons ..... tax the fuck out of them!

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 17:56 | 3033645 Weyland_Yutani
Weyland_Yutani's picture

The fecal cliff.

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 18:07 | 3033673 dynomutt
dynomutt's picture

Some of these fatcats need a Fecal Microbiata Transplant to help reverse their condition.


Obummer can make that happen.


/It's a Joke! Laugh!

Tue, 12/04/2012 - 20:24 | 3033998 robertocarlos
robertocarlos's picture

Higher taxes are going to keep the NHLPA on strike for another 2 years and then Canada will have no choice but to invade. We're going insane here/.

Wed, 12/05/2012 - 00:14 | 3034718 bulldung
bulldung's picture

Republicans control the house . They just need to take courage and do the right thing . Ignore the bully economics of Obama. They will be held responsible regardless, so they may as well lower taxes on earned income,keep cap gains stable and thus really stimulate the real economy. Velocity of money will greatly raise revenues and what the heck,the Fed's going to make up the difference until we get positive Govt cash flow or revolution anyway.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!