If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost) Followup O, the painful travails of a Democratic 1%er - whether to buy back his old $44M place in the Hamptons or settle for a château in the south of France   (nypost.com) divider line 16
More: Followup, Hamptons, Governor of New Jersey, MF Global, South of France, David Tepper, Jon Corzine  
•       •       •

1145 clicks; posted to Business » on 05 Jan 2012 at 10:12 AM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»   |    Get this fabulous T-Shirt and impress the methane out of your friends! shirt it!



16 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-01-05 09:33:00 AM
Man, it must really suck to have landed such a trollerific headline only to find it condemned to the barren swamp of the business tab. Sorry, subby, better luck next time.
 
2012-01-05 10:04:58 AM
Fallout from the Greek Default.

Must be because he's a demoncrat.
 
2012-01-05 10:23:18 AM
I enjoy the fact that you can get a greenlight with a headline that has absolutely nothing to do with the article just so long as you point out that some people in the 1% are democrats, as if that meant anything.
 
2012-01-05 10:29:53 AM
His new home is going to be a lot smaller than described in the article.
 
2012-01-05 10:33:38 AM
Party affiliation is completely irrelevant when discussing douche bags.
 
2012-01-05 10:36:04 AM
Is this where we AGAIN find out that Republicans can't differentiate between the idea that maybe the 1% should be a little less greedy - what Democrats want, and the idea that there shouldn't BE a 1% - what Communists (ie not Democrats) want.
 
2012-01-05 10:44:36 AM
vygramul: maybe the 1% should be a little less greedy -

I don't know if I'd even go that far. If people want to be greedy, shifty dickheads, so be it. I think they should be less greedy because my personal opinion is that it's immoral to put personal gain above everything else, but I wouldn't say I think we should legislate that.

What I have a problem with, and what I think most other people who are angry at "the 1%" have a problem with, is that there are too many special rules that only apply to the super wealthy so that they can continue to make exorbitant amounts of money through special privilege and unfair advantages rather than effort. For example, you shouldn't get special tax breaks on dividends. You shouldn't get special access to legislators and political candidates because you have a lot of money (i.e. money isn't speech and you shouldn't be allowed to use it as if it is so you can buy whatever candidate you think will best serve you).

I have a problem with greedy asswipes, but people should be free to be dickheads if they choose. What they shouldn't be free to do is manipulate the rules of the economy and politics to entrench and grow their wealth through unfair advantages and special treatment.

/ what Fox News Republicans heard in all that: "I'S IS A COMMIE AND I'S GONNE TAK YER GUNBS!"
 
2012-01-05 10:51:44 AM
vygramul: Is this where we AGAIN find out that Republicans can't differentiate between the idea that maybe the 1% should be a little less greedy - what Democrats want, and the idea that there shouldn't BE a 1% - what Communists (ie not Democrats) want.

Wanting to keep what you earn and spend it or donate it to whatever charity your wish as opposed to it being forcefully confiscated and redistributed by a inefficient, over-spending government is not "greedy".

If all these wealthy 1%er democrats think of themselves as being "greedy", they can donate their wealth to government. Nothing is stopping them. (of course they won't)

/is not a 1%
 
2012-01-05 11:48:52 AM
MilesTeg: vygramul: Is this where we AGAIN find out that Republicans can't differentiate between the idea that maybe the 1% should be a little less greedy - what Democrats want, and the idea that there shouldn't BE a 1% - what Communists (ie not Democrats) want.

Wanting to keep what you earn and spend it or donate it to whatever charity your wish as opposed to it being forcefully confiscated and redistributed by a inefficient, over-spending government is not "greedy".

If all these wealthy 1%er democrats think of themselves as being "greedy", they can donate their wealth to government. Nothing is stopping them. (of course they won't)

/is not a 1%


QED. Can't tell the difference between "you can keep your money and 1% status - just give a little more in taxes" and "you can't be wealthy".

Without society providing protection from man and beast alike, life is nasty, brutish, and short. Everyone owes society, perthaps none more so than the 1%, who wouldn't have what they have without society.
 
2012-01-05 01:06:33 PM
MilesTeg: vygramul: Is this where we AGAIN find out that Republicans can't differentiate between the idea that maybe the 1% should be a little less greedy - what Democrats want, and the idea that there shouldn't BE a 1% - what Communists (ie not Democrats) want.

Wanting to keep what you earn and spend it or donate it to whatever charity your wish as opposed to it being forcefully confiscated and redistributed by a inefficient, over-spending government is not "greedy".

If all these wealthy 1%er democrats think of themselves as being "greedy", they can donate their wealth to government. Nothing is stopping them. (of course they won't)

/is not a 1%


Is a false dichotomy.

There are not two extremes to choose from: 1) greedy and pay no taxes or 2) Give everything to society -this is FALSE CAPITALISM... as in "you don't know what you are talking about".

And for the record -the guy was in the financial derivatives market -specifically hedging on European Municipal Bonds... which if you haven't been paying attention are in the toilet.

Hurrr, if he was a repugnantan then his bonds wouldn't have fluctuated and he'd still be rich.
 
2012-01-05 01:32:08 PM
If all these wealthy 1%er democrats think of themselves as being "greedy", they can donate their wealth to government. Nothing is stopping them. (of course they won't)

You'll never be in the 1%. Stop defending them.
 
2012-01-05 02:49:41 PM
Splinshints: you shouldn't get special tax breaks on dividends.

People other than the super wealthy buy stocks that pay dividends.
 
2012-01-05 06:06:04 PM
wutchamacallem: Splinshints: you shouldn't get special tax breaks on dividends.

People other than the super wealthy buy stocks that pay dividends.


If you really believe that the impact on both classes is equivalent I have a bridge to sell you.

There should be no special tax breaks on dividends and the like. Income is income and you shouldn't get a tax break for making your money by not working for a living that somebody who does work for a living doesn't get. I make several thousand dollars a year on dividends alone, so I'm not saying this as somebody who would personally benefit or because I want to punish anybody, I'm saying it because it's the right thing to do.
 
2012-01-05 06:39:47 PM
vygramul: Is this where we AGAIN find out that Republicans can't differentiate between the idea that maybe the 1% should be a little less greedy - what Democrats want, and the idea that there shouldn't BE a 1% - what Communists (ie not Democrats) want.

I haven't heard one single elected democratic official ever suggest that capital gains rates for the truly wealthy should be increased to regular income rates (hell, I don't think I've even heard a democrat say capital gains rates for the wealthy need to go back to carter levels). if you can find any democrat that has ever dared mention this, that I, a republican advocate every time this discussion comes up, I'll give you $100. they don't, because those assholes are bought and sold by the very same 1%. they pretend to be on the side of the downtrodden, but they sell them out at every turn. you have no allies.
 
2012-01-05 07:14:09 PM
Splinshints: People other than the super wealthy buy stocks that pay dividends.

If you really believe that the impact on both classes is equivalent I have a bridge to sell you.

There should be no special tax breaks on dividends and the like. Income is income and you shouldn't get a tax break for making your money by not working for a living that somebody who does work for a living doesn't get. I make several thousand dollars a year on dividends alone, so I'm not saying this as somebody who would personally benefit or because I want to punish anybody, I'm saying it because it's the right thing to do.


Of course the impact is equivalent but maybe not in the same dollar amount and I hold some CBI so I don't need your bridges.
All income is not the same.
Fortunately, you don't get to decide what the right thing is for me to do.
 
2012-01-07 07:42:11 AM
You can burn him and stick him with a pitchfork too if you want subby. I mean, he's had his day. You never will.
 
Displayed 16 of 16 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »