Remember when Bill O’Reilly threatened to quit his job if tax hikes for millionaires were enacted? And then recanted? Well, it looks like Round 2 has just begun – Ding! Ding! Ding! In tonight’s Talking Points, O’Reilly threatened to stop “aggressively putting any money in the market” if President Obama raises capital gains taxes from 15% to 30%.
O’Reilly devoted an unusually long Talking Points segment to this subject so near and dear to his pocketbook heart. At about the 4:10 mark, he said, “President Obama would double the cap gains tax rate to 30% for EVERYBODY! Mr. Romney would keep it at 15%. Now, if you double cap gains, that would prevent me, a private investor, from aggressively putting any money in the market. The risk/reward is simply too great. I’m sure I’m not alone in that thinking.”
This strikes me as about as likely as O’Reilly quitting his job. Where’s he going to put his money if not in the market? In a savings account? CD? An investment that pays high dividends? According to O’Reilly, “Obama would tax dividends – stuff you get from savings, at 43.4% in the top bracket!” That’s an even higher rate than the capital gains tax.
This is not the first time O’Reilly has threatened to stop investing if capital gains go up. It probably won’t be his last, either. Whether he’ll really carry it out is another question.
As The New York Times noted, the current capital gains tax rate of 15% is the lowest such rate since the Great Depression.
“You make a lot of assumptions about what happens in my class. Why would you assume what is posted here ends up in class?”
Professor, this is a private, politically-themed blog — if what gets posted here ends up in your economics class, that actually says more about YOU than it does us.
“Or that my job is to indoctrinate rather than just teach theory?”
I was merely echoing the sentiments expressed by various rightwing noisemakers about public education in general, and higher education in particular — especially whenever President Obama takes the time out to talk to students . . .
“But if you donât believe me, check my reviews.”
I did; your students rate you 4.3 out of 5 overall, including 4.5 in helpfulness, 4.2 in clarity, and 2.0 in easiness.
The hotness category was left blank; draw your own conclusions . . .
“Moreover, since I personally favor drug legalization, a very small international presence for war etcâ¦I clearly donât follow some line with which you have associated me.”
Ah, I love this part: the good old, libertarian, “I believe in personal freedom” fallback. “Finally, I enjoy the fact that most of the posts here cannot engage me without using an ad hominem attack . . . "
Other than mentioning the {apparent fact} that you’re a professor of economics at a California college, what “ad hominem attack” did I make in my post?
Professor, you took time out of grading papers for your summer sessions — or whatever it was you were doing — to make a comment on a political blog.
That comment had two parts: a personal declarative {"I won’t be investing either"} and a statement of opinion {"O’Reilly’s got it right — AGAIN"}
I could care less about the former, and I suspect few other people do . . . I would, however, like to reiterate what Aria requested, something you failed to do in your following screed: exactly WHERE did BillO “get it right”?
.
@patrick tolle: ROFL — and here I thought it was a simple cranial immersion into the anal cavity; something else BillO appears to suffer from.
With all the apparent maladies he and other Faux sNooze employees seem to have, Rupert must have one heckuva health plan . . .
.
Because we got an article and two sources citing where he’s wrong.
What is it with rightwingnuts making threats/promises they can’t keep?
.
I’d almost let him skate just so I wouldn’t have to hear him be such an adult baby again.
