Dozens of America’s wealthiest taxpayers — including hedge fund legend Michael Steinhardt, super trial lawyer Guy Saperstein, and Ben Cohen of Ben & Jerry’s fame — have appealed to President Obama not to renew the Bush tax cuts for anyone earning more than $1 million a year. Calling themselves “Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength,” the 40-plus signers today launched a website and a campaign that they hope will draw support from others who agree that fiscal responsibility should begin with those who can best afford it — as their letter to Obama explains.
The Patriotic Millionaires campaign, pulled together quickly by the Agenda Project in New York City, just happens to appear on the same day as a new study from the Center for Responsive Politics revealing that half of the members of the House and the Senate are millionaires. That contrasts sharply with the general population, of whom fewer than 1 percent can claim millionaire status.

Some might see a correlation and potential conflict of interest in that last point. Obviously, irresponsible conspiracy theorists.

Not surprisingly, some of the super-rich declined to join the Patriotic Millionaires when the Agenda Project reached out to them. […]A Manhattan hedge fund billionaire said he believes the cuts should be extended and added that “the moneys should be used to pay down debt” — which sounds like the magical Republican plan to simultaneously cut taxes, wage war and drastically reduce the deficit. The same investor also complained that “anyone who has money is made to feel that they’re bad.”

Bad? Only if they’d rather force Grandma to eat cat food than pay their fair share.

  1. bobbo, not a student of the dismal science, but I am on a budget says:

    #32–sargasso==let them leave. Let them rot some other society from the core outward. Yes, capital formation is necessary in any society to create wealth. Having wealthy people around to invest is only “one” way to achieve this goal. Beyond stupid to CONFLATE the two.

    PUKE BIG LIE NO 1: the rich create jobs.

    What a bunch of BS–and you Pukes eat it like ice cream.

    Silly Hoomans.

  2. BigBoyBC says:

    You know, there has been nothing stopping them from paying more taxes to the government since the tax cuts were enacted.

    These guys claim to be patriotic, bet their tax people have been using every tax deduction and loophole for the last decade to save them a buck.

    I would bet they’ll continue to do so regardless of whither or not the tax cuts get renewed.

  3. foobar says:

    The top 1% of the US now take in 24% of the income. For comparison, they took in 9% in 1976.

    Seriously guys, that’s banana republic territory.

  4. bobbo, not a student of the dismal science, but I am on a budget says:

    #34–BigBoy==silly, silly, silly. Its not enough they recommend, advertise, and urge a change in legislation that is going to raise their taxes, they should be ignored in your view unless they give away their money in the meantime?

    You are a raging idiot, just like most Pukes. Proud of it too?

    #35–foobar==yes “banana republic territory” captures the situation fairly. And the puke monkeys reach for those bananas thru their self imposed bars.

    Silly Monkey Pukes.

  5. KevinL says:

    Hello 40 Patriots. You are allowed to pay tax in excess of what is owed. I would suggest writing the check now, why wait?

  6. ? says:

    Three excellent Bobbo posts in a row, what the fck?

  7. noname says:

    # 36 bobbo,
    “And the puke monkeys reach for those bananas thru their self imposed bars.”

    I agree with you, as Thomas Paine said “Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.”

    I do think the for profit News Media share in part blame for Voters’ ignorance. Just as Benjamin Disraeli said “Ignorance never settles a question.” It seems the News Media follows the same “Planned Obsolescence” or “never settle a question” policy to deliberately extend the news cycle with a limited useful information, so it will become obsolete or nonfunctional. Where Truth is Eternal, the cost is Vigilance, which; Americans have been conditioned not to pay.

    Americans have been conditioned by way of uncritical thinking, convenience and entertainment to accept premature explanations, superstitions that overstay their time.

  8. noname says:

    The technology is cool but using it to replace people, seems very Asian and as typical, very conformist. Although American’s also have their own cartoon idols, Walt Disney, Macy’s Thanksgiving day parade; it doesn’t seem to be on this level.

  9. noname says:

    # 41 bobbo

    “The Rooskies launched Sputnik to shake America out of its bible based stupidity and re-invigorated the sciences in public education.”

    Christianity has attacked science, often very undeservedly. The great pioneers of science, Kepler, Newton, Euler, Maxwell, Faraday, Kelvin and many others professed Christianity and accepted the Bible. Yet there still exist today non-mainstream yet current web sites claiming “Galileo Was Wrong”.

    There are stupid people everywhere!

    Soviet science does have some of the greatest achievements, just not all nor the lion share either. The Soviets enforced atheism, not to mention Pol Pot Comer Rouge Cultural Revolution lead to millions upon millions of deaths.

    In this era where Mass Media has to cultivate issues beyond merit to sustain eye-balls on commercials; Mass Media has deliberately cultivated the bogus notion that science implacably conflicts with Scripture.

    I do not believe this bogus fight worth sustaining, since it isn’t mainstream and it’s a fight only fools entertain themselves with.

    I do agree with “show Obama how to lead==and he was a Community Organizer” statement.

    Obama has turned out to be all speech and little substance. I don’t think he gets it, when he now says the public disapproval is more a matter of poor message communication with the public. His understanding of the public disapproval is poor.

    I also agree he inherited a calamitous mess, the public doesn’t fully appreciate and just how close the U.S. was to financial meltdown.

    That said, he was given the office to lead and not give excuses. I don’t think he has effective lead the country.

    I am starting to think, he views the office more as an achievement then as an opportunity to change the country for the better.

  10. Cursor_ says:

    “Roll back spending to 2001 levels, keep the Bush tax cuts, and there will be over a Trillion surplus to pay down the debt.”

    The cost of medicare, medicaid and the war effort is 1.6 trillion dollars alone.

    2001 bugdet total, was 1.9 trillion.

    Then you have to figure there is about 200 billion in the interest alone on public debt.

    You cannot cut medicare or medicaid as that affects too many baby boomers and older people. And you can’t get out paying the interest.

    So that means the war has to give up some money. Let’s say we can slash it in half, just for grins and giggles.

    So that is 1.4 trillion vs 1.9 trillion. And that is not including all the payroll needs of federal workers. Let alone projects we need to keep funding like infrastructure.

    So where is this trillion if we roll back to 1.9 trillion and we spend 1.4 trillion in health and half of what the DOD needs alone?

    Maybe you’re not a boomer, but these people are now in the health care system. Unless you’d like to cut them off or start the infamous “death panels”?

    And keeping the Bush tax cuts will cost us more in lost revenue and interest on the public debt.

    “Defund the EPA etc, reset all regulations to liberate business from onerous burdens to growth.”

    EPA 2011: 10.020 billion dollars.

    Yeah that’s gonna make a dint. And I guess you don’t have children. Because leaving the corporations to handle the environment will leave us like China in less than 10 years.

    “Then like the “roaring 20s,” we will have the roaring “10′s””

    Not even close because you can’t outgrow the problem. We would have to be showing double digit growth in the GDP for the next 70-75 years to outgrow the projected debts.

    What you espouse is contrary to what is real. I can only surmise that you are only parroting some fools’ ideas and not any of your own.


  11. ? says:

    The point is: that the more money someone makes, the more that person benefits from the (an) orderly society.  

    Orderly, not as in Police State, but as in a constructively organized and educated and employed/employable people, with a functional infrastructure and money system, and laws, a processes that make commerce work (including free speech).

    If you’re “rich”, and feel put upon, then leave, as we don’t need you.  Really, we don’t.  And when you get taken financially elsewhere, consider it the cost of your education.

  12. Thomas says:

    I’m curious why these millionaires cannot simply send in checks to the government now? Why wait until it is mandated? Sure they can strive for change, but they can also put their money where their mouth is.

    One of the biggest (and many) beefs with the tax code is that it is not indexed for inflation. You want the “rich” to pay their fair share? Base the bracket determination on the previous year’s tax returns. I.e., the income level for the bottom of the upper 1% bracket is determined by the previous year’s returns. So, why not make everyone in the lower 95% pay nothing and have everyone in say the upper 5% pay 99% of their income? That’s fair right? If you think that will work, I have this beach front property in AZ for sale…

  13. bobbo, to the left and right of Obama says:

    DumbThomas==its mathematical. The more people who pay tax, the less everyone has to pay. A concept so simple, even you should be able to understand it.

    But why stop the idiotic and irrelevant ad hominem there? Thomas==should YOU be able to comment at all if you aren’t donating extra money above and beyond your normal amount due? SHOULD YOU????? Why the hypocritical standard? And to be “fair” seems to me the opposite silliness should appeal to you: you should not be able to recommend no one pay taxes unless you don’t pay any taxes.

    Is it getting stupid enough for you???

    Silly Pukes, and Thomas is actually one of the smarter ones. Hee, hee. Thats how retarded they are.

    Silly Monkey Retarded Pukes.

  14. deowll says:

    #46 In theory you have a point.

    In practice organization and legislation is often not helpful. Thus you have two of our richest states, CA and NY, going belly up despite having huge tax revenues per per citizen compared to most states while at the same time making the cost of doing business in those same states increasingly prohibitive.

    People who want to create a better future for themselves and their families by their own efforts are leaving and prosperity is leaving with them.

    As for your last point, we used to suck in a large percentage of the genius level minds on planet earth. Now many of them come to the states, get an education and flee to greener pastures.

    It seems most of these people want to get rich and are willing to work long and hard to do so but bleeps like you want them to support you and the non contributing masses at a much higher standard of living than the economics of the situation can sustain.

    Of course there are at least a few governments around that are willing to take them in and let them innovate and create business empires while drawing off a little less blood.

    After looking at the numbers I think this house of cards is coming down in less than six years. I don’t think anybody can stop it and when it goes the social safety net is going to vanish.

    That normally means blood in the streets and what comes afterwords is not going to much resemble the comfortable and prosperous nation you grew up in. At best I’m guessing Castro’s Cuba.

  15. bobbo, to the left and right of Obama says:

    Ha, ha. Do-ill thinks he is showing even handedness by starting his vomit with “in theory.” But no, he leaves any analysis/balance for the dogma of “lower taxes” as the solution for anything and “taxes too high” as the source of every problem.

    Given the subject of this thread his argument that its only us jealous wage slaves that want to steal from the rich man’s hard work, it is doubly irrelevant/leaking dogma all over the place.

    Its probably true though: the Pukes would never work hard for reasons of personal integrity==they don’t have any. And the Pukes would never work for the personal pride of being recognized as being competent/a leader in their field==they don’t care about that.

    In a weird twist, they don’t even care (that much) about money. What they care about is just making sure they don’t have to pay taxes==and that is the hole in the bucket of their social theory, and why any country is better off without their kind==the lowest rank of social scum.

    I’ve got mine, screw you. And we should keep screwing you until you have nothing. Screw you, and all you, because My Money is Mine and you shouldn’t have any of my money. It’s mine, mine, mine.

    Almost sounds like little kiddies throwing a fit for having to share. Poor little babies==and yet they are adults.

    Hah. hah. Monkey Pukes. Not happy they have more than they need, only happy if they don’t have to share.

  16. chris says:


    NY and CA are going belly up because every state gets the same number of senators. The populous states transfer wealth to the less populated states through federally funded infrastructure, agriculture subsidies, and military basing.

    To your larger point about imminent collapse; let me reassure you, to an extent. I have been listening to a London School of Economics series of podcasts called “The Future of Finance.” I think it’s 10 economists doing 30min-1hr talks. I’m about half way through, and everybody seems to be in agreement AND correct about how to fix the problem.

    One of the speakers commented on the wonderment of all his colleagues that the lessons of the last few years haven’t been understood by the public.

    Basic lesson is the core of accepted trade/tax/regulation frameworks are wrong. The idea that government shouldn’t go near the market is as dead as Communism. Since both of the extremes are gone the only plausible path left is intelligent governance. That sounds pretty good to me.

    Only once everybody can accept that the goal of no government is as stupid as the total government can we move forward.

  17. bobbo, to the left and right of Obama says:

    Chris==you really don’t get it do you. The Republican Platform is that any and all taxes are bad. The lower the better and if some expert says that will leads to higher deficits, they are wrong because lower taxes leads to economic growth EVERYTIME in all places and circumstances because Regan said government was the problem. If programs are cut to balance the budget, that is what motivates poor people to stop resting on the dole.

    Lock solid, set in concrete, no doublebacks or erases. Whatever economist counsels for regulation just wants to enslave rich people.

    Just watch. Do-ill and Thomas will say just that after “in theory, you are correct.” THATS how dogma works in practice.

    Now, what your fancy economists ought to tell us is why more than about 5-6 people outside of the top 1% ((people (sic) like Thomas and do-ill)) think: “Thats Right!” The answer though is not found in economics, but rather developmental psychology or social psychosis.

    And there is 30-40 % of our population that thinks this way. Add a few more fringe/self destructive notions and you’ve got the whacko Republican Party destroying America from the inside.

    On the positive side, it only hurts if you think.

  18. B. Dog says:

    Yup, we’re hurting. Only 4% of U.S. households have millionaire status, unlike some places:

  19. Mextli says:

    We have become a society where fewer and fewer support more and more. Simply put the rich can afford tax shelters, exemptions, etc. and pay a small amount of taxes. The “poor” get more and more entitlements and Earned Income Tax Credit. So guess who is stuck in the middle?

    It is so absurd that the California Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of the state’s law allowing illegal immigrants to receive in-state tuition rates at public universities. How’s that safety net? This may be moot because it appears they might not have a public university system soon since the state is going down the drain.

    That’s just one reason I want to keep as much of my money as I can and I will not make any apology for it.

    Even Harry Reid says he want earmarks to remain so he can bring as much to his state as possible.

  20. Chris says:

    #30 – So you’re saying that people should only stand by their principles if everyone else similarly situated adopts those principles? Hey, why go volunteer at the soup kitchen unless everyone else that makes as much money as me goes and does the same? Why volunteer to serve in the military unless everyone else has to?

    Your analysis is asinine. If they think that their wealth is better distributed by the government, then they should just send in more money. Why does it matter what “millionaire X” wants to do with his money? You want to pay more taxes, then pay more taxes, period. Nobody is stopping them other than their inability to do so unless others are forced to.

  21. LotsaLuck says:

    Kudos to bobbo! 9 posts (out of the current 55).

    And 14 uses of the word ‘Pukes’ to designate Republicans. Which, I can only imagine, means that the R’s make him nauseous.

    Way to keep things classy!

  22. Bob says:

    #51, that is the rules that the state joined the union by, every state gets two senators (although representatives are decided by population like you want). If California, and New York didn’t want to live by those rules they should never have joined the Union to begin with.

    Or, instead of bitching that you don’t like the rules, you could pull for a much smaller federal government, that way more money would stay in the state, like it should have been from the beginning.

    Of course if you are honest with yourself, you would have to admit California and New York would be in the same situation, like most union mentality sates California does not have an income problem, they have a spending problem. Even if they had hundreds of trillions of dollars, they would still be broke. After all give a politician more money, and they see more ways to buy votes.

  23. Thomas says:

    You keep telling us how the rich do not pay their fair share. Well, it’s already the case that the upper 5% pay 53% of the tax. If we tax the upper 5% at 95% (safely more than double their current rate), that should be close to what the other 95% pay in tax anyway, right? Too much math for you?

    Of course, I’m being facetious. If you raise the upper tax bracket to 95%, tax revenue will go down but why would that matter to someone “mathematical” that feels that everyone paying the same percentage isn’t paying their fair share?

    =should YOU be able to comment at all if you aren’t donating extra money above and beyond your normal amount due? SHOULD YOU????? Why the hypocritical standard? And to be “fair” seems to me the opposite silliness should appeal to you: you should not be able to recommend no one pay taxes unless you don’t pay any taxes.

    I’m not the one saying that my tax rate is too low; these particular millionaires are. Why wait for the government? Why not simply send in what additional money they wish? Why wait until it is required by law? Show me a millionaire pushing to pay more taxes and I’ll show you a millionaire that has already figured how to avoid them.

  24. Mr Ed says:

    Republican = Selfish

  25. MikeN says:

    Nice point bobbo, now compare with what Obama said during a Democratic debate, which I have pointed out many times.

    It was pointed out to him that lower capital gains tax rates increased revenues, and Obama said he didn’t care, he wanted higher taxes as a matter of fairness.

  26. noname says:

    # 58 Thomas, When you can make billions instead of being a shrill, for a group of unpatriotic greedy so-called “Americans”; I’ll listen. Right now, I rather listen to someone who knows, what’s he is talking about.

    Warren Buffett 17.7 percent tax rate compared a bit too favorably with the 30 percent tax rate paid by his secretary.

  27. Alvin says:

    This so-called group, which is easy to connect the dots since they used the same web design, are a self-admitted Progressive group (commies).

  28. foobar says:

    Alvin, no duh! They used XHTML 1.0 Strict in their web design. Only god damn commies use that. Fascists on the other hand use HTML 4.01 Transitional.

  29. Bushed says:

    #62 – Alvin, I’m right there with you brother!

    Heck I just recently heard that Warren Buffett and Bill Gates Jr & Sr recently came out for this commie plot!

    We need more real patriots like Rupert Murdock. When the Aussie’s tried to get him to pay more taxes, like a true patriot he left those commie bastards and got instant citizenship in the US. Man, that’s a guy you can depend on!

  30. bobbo, to the left and right of Obama says:

    #58–Thomas==I never use the word/concept “fair” when discussing tax policy. I am much more PRAGMATIC in my approach==mathematical even. What do you “get” when you have tax policy “A” vs tax policy “B”? Now, that said, I will admit I don’t think it is “fair” or MAKES SENSE to go into debt to provide additional tax relief for people making over 10 Million per year.

    Thomas: if something doesn’t make sense, is it a fair thing to do? but the fairness issue is used to poke the rabble, I don’t care how anyone “feels” about the fairness issue. Budgets should be balanced, over time, as the will of the people is expressed. Set expenses and tax rate as required to achieve the balance/surplus as best we can. Its not “fair” for the current generation YOU and ME to steal from future generations as we have been doing for the last 70 years. Once again, what can be characterized on a fairness scale also MAKES NO SENSE from a PRAGMATIC results evaluation.

    Someone as even keeled and analytical as yourself should see the “error” in arguing the poor should be taxed the same as rich. The easy argument is to counter with tax everyone the same flat tax that is needed to BALANCE THE BUDGET but use disposable income instead of gross. Your mathematically fairness problem is met–easy peasy.

    The system is corrupt with the spoils going disproportionately to the SUPER Rich. That doesn’t bother me as much as people who will never benefit from that spoils system voting to keep it going to their own ECONOMIC injury because of overriding appeals to emotion.

    Why are you so emotional Thomas? And that wouldn’t bother me either except that idiot denial of reality takes the rest of us down with you.

    Yes, makes me want to PUKE for the children’s sake and the hyperinflation that is around the corner. So much pain and misery, disruption, and all unnecessary.

    Pukes indeed.


Bad Behavior has blocked 7967 access attempts in the last 7 days.