Historian who confronted Davos billionaires leaks Tucker Carlson rant

a reply to: ErrorErrorError

I don't think it's a job of a historian to come up with solutions to economic problems. His job is to raise awareness about the problem

Not really, he focused primarily about discussing raising tax rates. The issue is not tax rate, the issue is deductions. Even dipsh1t Carlson brought that up, not Bergman.

Although he did talk about tax havens , so cudo for that .However, talking about tax rate is completely irrelevant as long as you have 80K+ pages of tax loop holes and deductions.

In my opinion, Bergman won on k.o. Especially when he pointed out that Tucker is a millionaire and Tucker lost his #

If his goal was to irritate Carlson then yes he won.

If his goal was to bring attention to the real issue of deductions and tax havens then no.

At the end of the day they are all millionaires, left or right, and would fight for less taxation of the rich.

Agreed, but the key on fixing the issue is doing away with deductions and foreign tax havens not tax rate.

originally posted by: mobiusmale
This guy was advocating for "70, 80, 90%" marginal tax rates as some kind of way to return to economic glory days, and Tucker let him have his say, and allowed that a discussion on taxation was warranted.

The interview devolved after Bregman started attacking Carlson simply because he is a "millionaire being paid by a billionaire"...orange man bad, you know, and success bad too...saying that Carlson was taking "dirty money", saying he was part of the problem, and that Bregman was "speaking truth to power".

Just because you are being rude and obnoxious when in the presence of your betters, does not mean you are speaking truth to power. You actually have to have a point.

Sidestepping the fact that megaconglomerates with vested interests control the narrative and only allow mouthpieces that support their agenda on the air is disengenuous.

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: KnightErrant

I don't care about that

My posts are about how all the trump minions would react

do they pay you for being the poster child for TDS? If not, I'd axe somebody.

a reply to: network dude

Great response

a reply to: TinySickTears

My posts are about how all the trump minions would react

I feel like that accurately describes the majority of your input that I witness on this site.

LoL. Always the bloody Trump minions. Gggrrhh. Those mindless cretins.

My point was that Tucker is worth something to a many people compared to Maddow, Some CNN anchor, or most other mainstream television pundits nowadays. They will defend or at least empathise with him in situations such as this because he is regularly a voice of reason. Whereas the others are generally foolish faces who have lost most of their credibility via falsified and fraudulent stories and a ton of biased BS, so if they were to slip up like this, they would be lambasted even more as they (imo at least) should be trying to improve their standing in the world of journalism.

a reply to: KnightErrant

Cretins

Yup

You got that one correct

a reply to: TinySickTears

Clever.

Thanks for playing, mate. You offer nothing of substance.

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: jjkenobi

No
It's a fact
If maddow or Some CNN anchor said it you would all be talking # about it.

Fact

Talking about it - you mean like expressing amazement that something remotely intelligent or coherent actually escaped her lips? Maybe...

But 'talking #' - meaning criticising? No, not at all.

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: KnightErrant

I don't care about that My posts are about how all the trump minions would react

If Rachael Maddow is your finite end all be all 'clarion' of Truth Telling I worry for your sanity and the hundreds of others that watch her program.

Are you arguing over your favorite MSM propagandist now?

This forum has gone so far into the dark side its unreal

a reply to: KnightErrant

Carlson has more journalistic integrity