Comments on: Obama, the super-rich and the election http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2012/11/09/obama-the-super-rich-and-the-election/ Sun, 28 Jul 2013 14:34:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: youniquelikeme http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2012/11/09/obama-the-super-rich-and-the-election/#comment-11517 Mon, 19 Nov 2012 19:58:23 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1801#comment-11517 Well written, Ms.Freeland. The rich ‘uncle Scrooges’ took their money bags back to the money bins for hording. And then un-liked Romney on Facebook!

seejayjames and logicus, I do some of my investing with companies that are more likely to be “good people” and happily move on if they prove otherwise. I agree it would be grand for people like us to be able to identify the ones who have more “value’ in society.

Just as I would boycott for bad service, poor customer relations and unethical practices, so would I invest for being ethical, socially and environmentally responsible and are good to their employees and customers and not just shareholders and upper management.

Looking at the list of major Corporations to see which are considered “socially responsible”, I see a dubious list of businesses and banks where most are have been in the headlines for the bad things they do. No wonder no such “real” asset list exists… but if it did I would surely use it as a guide line. Nice to see there are others who think as I do…

]]>
By: seejayjames http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2012/11/09/obama-the-super-rich-and-the-election/#comment-11457 Sat, 17 Nov 2012 21:05:31 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1801#comment-11457 @logicus: Great post, well-said and insightful. Without some way to ameliorate the income inequality, we keep heading towards disaster on many fronts.

I’d love to see implemented a “list of acceptable companies”, as you say…for example, if a given business does X Y and Z (maybe keeps the wage gap low, allows flexible scheduling and paid vacations, provides great benefits, etc.), then they would qualify for some nice tax breaks. In other words, if those at the top of the company want to do the right thing by providing more for their employees (like paying them a living wage rather than minimum wage) and they therefore take a hit financially for providing it, they should be rewarded to reduce that hit somewhat.

Of course the details would be complex, but it would be a great step in the right direction. It would be a similar to companies which work with fair trade organizations or organically-grown foods: there’s obviously an economic penalty (these things simply cost more) but there’s a huge benefit for human rights, for the environment, for animals, or whatever else. It’s high time we considered what things are really “worth”, which means a lot more than just a dollar figure.

Life is far more complex than money, and there are many things you simply can’t put a price on. Why do we keep trying to?

]]>
By: logicus http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2012/11/09/obama-the-super-rich-and-the-election/#comment-11435 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:39:18 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1801#comment-11435 I enjoyed reading your recent book on the plutocrats/oligarchs. Keep up the valuable reporting. If possible, please add some more thoughts in the next edition on how to remedy the inequality. A more prescriptive book however might displease the rich censors!

The plutocrats in the western “democracies” seem to do quite well ruling indirectly whether through the Obama types or more hands-on through the Romney types. However they know that when the rule becomes too direct and repressive and the rewards too unequal, as in much of the world, instability and violence follows.

The current US system won’t change as long as people continue to participate. When the non-voters outnumber the voters, we might achieve some reform. And let’s stop buying/doing business with banks/ companies where the bosses’ total remuneration is more than say 50 times the lowest-paid minimum wage worker. That’s already a quite generous $1m/year. Does anyone maintain a list of acceptable companies such as PETA does for animal-friendly products?

]]>
By: logicus http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2012/11/09/obama-the-super-rich-and-the-election/#comment-11430 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:15:43 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1801#comment-11430 I enjoyed reading your recent book on the plutocrats/oligarchs. Keep up the valuable reporting. If possible, please add some more thoughts in the next edition on how to remedy the inequality. A more prescriptive book however might displease the rich censors!

The plutocrats in the western “democracies” seem to do quite well ruling indirectly whether through the Obama types or more hands-on through the Romney types. However they know that when the rule becomes too direct and repressive and the rewards too unequal, as in much of the world, instability and violence follows.

The current US system won’t change as long as people continue to participate. When the non-voters outnumber the voters, we might achieve some reform. And let’s stop buying/doing business with banks/ companies where the bosses’ total remuneration is more than say 50 times the lowest-paid minimum wage worker. That’s already a quite generous $1m/year. Does anyone maintain a list of acceptable companies such as PETA does for animal-friendly products?

]]>
By: AdamSmith http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2012/11/09/obama-the-super-rich-and-the-election/#comment-11303 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 01:41:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1801#comment-11303 @LysanderTucker – Well said. The American protectionist tariff was originated by George Washington and Alexander Hamilton to protect American workers. It worked cleanly and quickly.

The American Tariff that made America grow to a gigantic commercial power for a hundred years. When America joined the WTO, it was the signing away of the future of the American middle class. America must abrogate its WTO membership and tear up NAFTA.

We need an immediate 50% tariff on all imported goods into America. New American manufacturers would spring up like grass after a rain.

This would not only create jobs here, it would also enable us to approach a balanced budget.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff

Your second idea, removing the monopolies is to complex to be politically possible. The American tariff, on the other hand, is simple and has a history of outstanding success.

]]>
By: borisjimbo http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2012/11/09/obama-the-super-rich-and-the-election/#comment-11301 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 01:08:28 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1801#comment-11301 Gee, I wonder how much of all that plutocrat spending trickled down . . .

]]>
By: maximillianwyse http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2012/11/09/obama-the-super-rich-and-the-election/#comment-11300 Mon, 12 Nov 2012 23:30:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1801#comment-11300 Many “plutocrats” went at this like they were buying a sports team, full of testosterone, ego, and ignorance. A lot of them will pack up their money and go home, to avoid further embarassment. But not all.

Politics is a serious business, emphasis on business. There is a nascent coalition of deep pockets that are vested in the beltway, or want to be, and that see the need for leaders who can move the party base to support electable candidates.

The ideology will have to change. The agenda, less so.

maximillianwyse.wordpress.com

]]>
By: Foxdrake_360 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2012/11/09/obama-the-super-rich-and-the-election/#comment-11299 Mon, 12 Nov 2012 21:34:15 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1801#comment-11299 “Among the losers in the United States this week are the super-rich, who spent unprecedented millions to evict President Barack Obama from the White House”

1st – There’s more money where that came from.

2nd – They are not the “losers,” we are.

3rd – Obama IS as much their man as Romney was.

4th – Obama WILL not “hold the line,” he will fold like a cheap suit. He’s the only politician who negotiates in reverse.

5th – There is NO real choice, only the illusion of it, and I voted for Obama. What choice do we really have? Romney would have just killed us out-right.

6th – There won’t be real change until the “super-rich” are visited by Black Hawk helicopters at their compounds in the middle of the night – like Bin Laden was. Put down a few of them, and there might be some real change.

]]>
By: LysanderTucker http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2012/11/09/obama-the-super-rich-and-the-election/#comment-11278 Mon, 12 Nov 2012 15:37:20 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1801#comment-11278 Everyone seems to be concerned with the income of the wealthy and if we should tax them at this or that rate, but No one seems to want to attack the real issue of how they became that wealthy. I’m all for free trade, but on an international level it means a great leveling of the living standard, which is what we’re seeing. The 1st world will fall and the 3rd world rise and we’ll all be 2nd world, so to speak. There are only two ways to combat this. Either bring back the protectionist tariff so that jobs and manufacturing come back, along with higher prices and better quality, or, and this would be my preference, remove the monopolies and privileges that these companies and individuals operate under.

]]>
By: LoveJoyOne http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2012/11/09/obama-the-super-rich-and-the-election/#comment-11238 Sun, 11 Nov 2012 13:26:12 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/?p=1801#comment-11238 IntoTheTardis,

Don’t worry. The Fiscal Cliff will give Boehner and friends the opportunity to shine before the midterms by showing America they know how to compromise – opportunity which they will totally blow.

Of course they’ll refuse to compromise – just as they did the last time. They don’t know what the word means.

This time, Obama will call their bluff. That will spell the end of Bush’s tax cuts and the Republicans will get the blame. He’ll be able to pick and choose which laws he signs and which ones he vetoes.

2014, here we come.

]]>