On yesterday’s Cashin’ In, host Eric Bolling and regular guest Michelle Fields started off a discussion of President Obama's focus on income inequality by sneering and making fun of it and him. But regular guest Jonathan Hoenig took the nastiness to a whole new level when he praised income inequality as “a virtue.”
Bolling’s first shot was to call Obama’s Christmas vacation, “chilling on the taxpayer’s dime.” Fields added her own snideness: “If we’re on the subject of inequality, can we talk about why it’s fair that he goes to Hawaii and I can’t? That to me is vacation inequality.”
Bolling apparently liked the jeers so much, he repeated them to Fox News Democrat Bob Beckel: “Bob, you and I didn’t go to Hawaii, but the President and the First Family was in Hawaii enjoying a nice taxpayer-funded vacation.”
Beckel asked, “Is there any President who hasn’t gone on a taxpayer-funded vacation? …Is that the best you got?”
Bolling could hardly stop laughing at what he and Fields perceived as their cleverness: “NO! …I haven’t heard a president come back from vacation, the first topic is the income inequality gap after he spent two weeks in a hot tub in Hawaii.”
I have a feeling that rule for Bolling and Fields is: no vacations for Democratic presidents, and plenty of vacation for Republican presidents.
But Hoenig’s comment took the cake. He declared, “Income inequality isn’t a problem, it’s actually a virtue.” He spoke of “evil egalitarianism,” and emphasized, “We’re not all the same.” He continued, “The only way Obama can make us all the same is by cutting down …the tall poppies, the achievers among us.”
From there, Bolling segued to attacking the War on Poverty. He said, “In the 50 years since that war (on poverty) has begun, …the poverty level hasn’t budged. It started around 15-16%, here we are $15 trillion later, and guess what, it’s still 15%.”
However, according to a study by the Columbia Population Research Center at Columbia University (found via Media Matters), government programs have cut poverty nearly in half today. In 1967, they cut poverty by 1%.
Not surprisingly, Bolling’s solution for poverty is more tax cuts. He asked, “Why not make the corporate business rate lower? It’s 35%, make it 15%.”
But an editorial in U.S. News & World Report makes a compelling argument that our effective corporate tax rates are so low that "entrepreneurs and investors" are "already as strongly incented as they can possibly be:"
Big companies enjoy a huge buffet of credits, shelters, deductions, and other preferences that reduce their rate to an average of 13 percent. Many profitable companies pay no federal income tax at all. Regardless of our nominal rate, our real corporate tax rate is among the lowest. Further cuts cannot stimulate growth.
No mention by Bolling of that.
But let’s consider for a moment who, more often than not, are rewarded and uplifted by the work of men like Jonathan Hoenig. Investors or stock traders much like bankers allocate wealth accordingly and starve or feast on the degree of their success
Read more at http://www.newshounds.us/fox_news_regular_hoenig_income_inequality_isn_t_a_problem_it_s_actually_a_virtue_01122014#OKgAv6T6qc7zhqzO.99
Yea, those Enron employees who were encouraged to buy Enron stock while the Management was selling theirs when they knew it was going bust, would probably find your words a little hollow.
I suspect the same could be said for those who were conned by a derivative scam that made those running the scam rich, while putting the home-owners and “investors” in the poor house. Are those the banksters you’re referring too?
Rules and laws are for the poor it seems.
The FACT that you don’t seem to understand, you idiot troll, is that Hoenig does NOT “work”; he’s a fucking stock investor and pundit. As a stock investor, he “earns” his money by handling OTHER PEOPLE’S money and taking a percentage of THEIR investments. And, as a pundit, he tells people how they should live their lives without having the first clue of how they ACTUALLY live.
And if you think he’d give 2 seconds of thought about your defense of him, well, unless you earn a minimum of $100 grand a year, I seriously doubt he’d even bother with you.
Now, go back and learn to read.
Oh, and as for that “modern revision of the practice of human sacrifice and supernatural worship for the good of the tribe,” well that’s actully a little thing called SOCIETY. And just remember your little criticism the next time FoxNoise hosts some persecuted Christian whiner or has Father Johnny on the show: Jesus Christ himself told a rich man that he should sell all his worldly goods if he wished to follow Jesus. And the guy walked away. I’d say that I’m in better moral standing with my idea than you or the FoxNoise talking heads.
Yeah. Didn’t think so.