[Video] Peter Schiff Schools the 99% Into Oblivion

www.mrctv.org...


Ok seriously, i'm not against the occupy wallstreet initiative....completely
I am against police brutality, no doubt about it
I am against over-regulation and mass lobbying

But to just blindly hate the rich?
Not every rich person is evil and not ever 99%'er is goodhearted.

I am not against civil non-violent protesting but I am against stupidity
not everyone is stupid at the OWS protests, there are "End the fed" protesters there too

But damn man, EDUCATION!

That gave me a good laugh. Thanks ha ha.
2nd

reply to post by ModernAcademia


Those people are idiot's the middle class already get's over 3 trillion in tax cuts and pay less in taxation that he does they don't get that and never will.

And I agre that Buffet is about as Senile as they come anymore and yes education is needed there big time.

The dude already pays half of his income in taxation but nope not good enough.

They have been brainwashed OWs is plain and simple mass manipulation and disinformation for the simple fact no one person with those figures have done the research to back them up.

Hell i was just reading the worlds first trillion dollar corporation is chinese.

"Note to OWS: If you're going to try and debate someone as knowledgeable as Peter Schiff on economic matters, arrive with more than recitations and talking points. He'll really make you look bad."

Now that was funny

Peter Schiff seems to be only popular here at ATS when he's speaking about economic doom. With regards to this video not so much with the OWS crowd.

I am leaning against the OWS more and more by the day.

Emotions are not a form of government. Emotions do not fix tough problems.

The more this goes on, the less rationality I am seeing.

I gotta say Peter Schiff definitely has some balls to go down in the crowd and debate with them.
He does have a good point and people need to stop protesting about taxing the rich, because like he said the rich do pay taxes. I mean if they made a $10,000,000 income for the year and paid 35% to taxes, that's 3.5mil... More then most people will make in a lifetime. Not including most rich Donate their own money to good causes.

Steer away from taxing the rich and focus on ending the Fed.

Peter Schiff is a class A BS artist. He wishes he was a 1%er. I doubt he pays half his income to taxes. I also love how me misdirects the argument away from a casino wall street mentality that came to the brink of exploding the US economy, and then FORCED US to bail THEM out.

Right off the bat, he makes a mistake.

The 1% has absolutely zero interest in bringing anyone else from the 99% into their little club. That would be bad economics and (gasp!) Socialism! So, for him to offer to bring that lady up to his economic level is disingenuous.

That goes to establish credibility of the speaker in this instance.

Next he goes onto asking the lady about what she thinks him paying his fair share is. She answers that she believes that they should repeal the Bush era tax cuts, tax cuts that have never been paid for. So, she believes that his tax rate should just go up to the level they were at during the Clinton era.

She answered his question, yet he ignored that, and went on asking what his fair share should be, it's hard to debate someone, when they ask a question, and don't bother to listen to the answer.

Then, he goes about lying saying that he pays more than 35% in taxes. (see, the problem with the rich is that they can't understand that their business tax, and their personal income tax are actually two separate things, this is because after getting used to embezzling money off of their business, they can't differentiate between the two incomes.)

As corporations and businesses are now people, it's quite odd for the rich to understand that their business is separate from themselves. They believe they are getting gouged with too much tax, but it's the cost of doing business. Sorry, but that's the breaks. If they didn't want that high of taxes, they should pay themselves a dollar a year and perk themselves out from their business to live on. Huge tax cut right there off the top.

He claims that he gives the government half of what he earns. (This of course is a lie, otherwise he needs to fire his tax accountant)

You are right, not every rich person is evil, and not every person under that 1% is good. But let's get real here people. These rich people aren't going to fill up with money and trickle it down to the lower classes. And giving them tax break after tax break after tax break isn't going to get the economy moving again.

The rich have a junkie mentality as far as money is concerned. A junkie doesn't get more generous with their drug of choice just because they have a lot of it. (some do but most will just use it all themselves)

To the rich, money is their drug, and the more of it they have, the more of it they want. The rich didn't get that way by writing a lot of checks.

They got rich by doing business, something that they have been too scared to do for far too long. Yes there is risk in business, and sometimes especially in a down economy it is a hard thing to spend more money, but that's the only way we are going to get this economy moving again is by these 1% business owners to start "creating jobs", they can't be scared of what tomorrow will bring, they just have to make an investment in this country and start hiring people again. Then they would see, a little way down the road. That their investment will have dividends. Because if enough business owners start hiring people, unemployment will go down, and the economy will recover and in the long run it will make them a lot more money than sponging off of Uncle Sam.

Originally posted by HauntWok
The 1% has absolutely zero interest in bringing anyone else from the 99% into their little club. That would be bad economics and (gasp!) Socialism! So, for him to offer to bring that lady up to his economic level is disingenuous.

Here's the issue that you don't get
you know what allows the 1% to be 1%'ers? Over-Regulations!
He is against mass overregulations

the 1% is attacking the rich instead of mega corporations
Peter is talking about rich people not mega corps.

They should be at the white house protesting not telling well to do people who invest wisely to give more money to people who want hand outs.

Originally posted by HauntWok
Next he goes onto asking the lady about what she thinks him paying his fair share is. She answers that she believes that they should repeal the Bush era tax cuts, tax cuts that have never been paid for. So, she believes that his tax rate should just go up to the level they were at during the Clinton era.

She answered his question, yet he ignored that, and went on asking what his fair share should be, it's hard to debate someone, when they ask a question, and don't bother to listen to the answer.

It's even harder to answer questions when people keep interrupting you

In my opinion, as far as YOU are concerned this is not about the 1% vs. the 99%
To YOU this is partisanship

That was great! Not one person could come up with anything but some sort of slogan. The lady is in the mortgage business. Isn't the mortgage business a major part of the problem? And how can that crowd support Buffet? They listen to his bs as he gets richer and richer. Has his firm paid their back taxes yet? Yeah, he might be fighting over $23 million from the early 90's but they still owe around a billion dollars. If he believes he and his cronies should pay more then do it.

Reply to post by HauntWok

I do not think anyone could have said it better. What are you doing in Nov 2012? Seriously. Run for President.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

More Peter Schiff against OWS



Really alot of these people have no idea why they are standing there protesting

What chance do we have when protesters are idiots?

Originally posted by Arekoteya
I gotta say Peter Schiff definitely has some balls to go down in the crowd and debate with them.
He does have a good point and people need to stop protesting about taxing the rich, because like he said the rich do pay taxes. I mean if they made a $10,000,000 income for the year and paid 35% to taxes, that's 3.5mil... More then most people will make in a lifetime. Not including most rich Donate their own money to good causes.

Steer away from taxing the rich and focus on ending the Fed.

Shilling for the rich.
A nickel a word.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


When he was asking what percentage of his income they think he should pay, I wish somebody would have asked "How much do you make each year?" Because hearing somebody say "I only get to keep half of the money that I work for" sounds a lot worse than "I only get to keep $8 million each year!".

This guy was a real quick thinker though, he had those protesters looking dumbfounded. To answer his question, yes, I would love to be a part of the 1%. In that position, I could use the money to buy advertisements for the occupy protests. But then people would think I was some corrupt guy trying to undermine them with my money and co-opt the movement.

To answer his other question, I don't know how much you make, but assuming he is extremely wealthy because he's a CEO, let's say....$10 million per year. I think while 70-80% sounds insane, when it's put in actual dollar value, $2-3 million each year is still a ton of money.

reply to post by Arekoteya


you realize that the america of past -------> 1948-1973 was the golden years. new schools, roads, nice neighborhoods, etc.. that AMERICA was the envy of the world..

And guess what???

the rich paid taxes MUCH higher than 35%---it was at times up to 90%...and guess what??

the rich still, while paying 90% tax rate, had more than everyone else. duh...

Originally posted by Arekoteya
I gotta say Peter Schiff definitely has some balls to go down in the crowd and debate with them.
He does have a good point and people need to stop protesting about taxing the rich, because like he said the rich do pay taxes. I mean if they made a $10,000,000 income for the year and paid 35% to taxes, that's 3.5mil... More then most people will make in a lifetime. Not including most rich Donate their own money to good causes.

Steer away from taxing the rich and focus on ending the Fed.

are those "donations" made to avoid paying tax?

meaning, do they "donate" money which would be taxed and gone anyway?

or do they donate money which would otherwise NOT have been taxed?

reply to post by ModernAcademia

Here's the issue that you don't get
you know what allows the 1% to be 1%'ers? Over-Regulations!
He is against mass overregulations

That's not true. In fact, part of the reason that we are in this economic mess was because of deregulation. Remember the housing bubble/crisis? The reason that people were getting those shifty sub prime mortgages was because back in the early part of the naughts they deregulated a lot of the financial markets, which led to people getting loans they really had no business getting, then, these banks sold off those loans that they knew were bad to other banks and so on and so forth and I'm sure you know what happened next.

The point of this is that deregulation isn't always a good thing and if you deregulate everything as business wants, it just means that the big guys will just get bigger. It doesn't help the small business owner. The idea that if you deregulate everything that small business will outpace big business is preposterous.

Besides the fact that as we have seen, if you give into business demands, they just demand more. Remember last year when they said that they couldn't hire anyone because they were afraid that the Bush era tax cuts were to expire. They gave in, and extended the Bush era tax cuts, and so the economy is fine now right? WRONG! They next turned on Obamacare, (I kinda don't blame em for that one) and once they get rid of the "idiotic" idea of having to provide health insurance for employees (cause those bastards live too long as it is am I right?) next it's deregulation, then eliminating the EPA, then eliminating minimum wage, then eliminating child labor laws, on and on and on, always dangling the carrot of job creation out there.

They should be at the white house protesting not telling well to do people who invest wisely to give more money to people who want hand outs.

Like AIG, or GM, or Chrysler, or the Oil companies? Those people asking for hand outs?

Yea, lets not forget who the people who have their hands out for the most freebies from the government are. It ain't the poor, it's the rich. Pissing on the poor people and telling them the peasants have no bread, and then respond with: "Let them eat brioche." That's not the right answer.

It's kinda hard to sit there and flip off the poor for being poor and asking for a cut of the pie when the rich are at the government trough themselves. Where is the self reliance in the rich when they are asking for a handout themselves with tax breaks and subsidies, and 0% interest loans?

In my opinion, as far as YOU are concerned this is not about the 1% vs. the 99%
To YOU this is partisanship

This is about what is right and wrong in America. There's a simple way to fix this economy, and it's not by giving the rich tax break after tax break after tax break, it's by companies hiring people and investing in this nation again. If they don't do that, companies will just be at Uncle Sam's teat forever begging for handouts instead of doing business.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia


But to just blindly hate the rich?
Not every rich person is evil and not ever 99%'er is goodhearted.

That comment alone shows absolutely clueless you are about this movement, more MSM parroting

It's too bad so may don't have the prper information to make the important points.

No one even mentioned the derivitive market. There has been no regulation in that area and it has caused some of the biggest problems.

He is proposing deregulation, which in all fairness, in some cases is true would help. But the free market has proven to be unstable when self regulation is the sole check and balance.

It's because in theory a self regulating free market would keep itself in check, based on stricly profit and loss calculations.
The problem that is not accounted for is the human factor. When a person or people decide to use unethical practiced to decieve or defraud the market, it causes ripple effects, like the derivitive market.

Since the government has no way to prove liability at the highest levels, because someone lower down will always get the blame, there can be no accountability without a striclty regulated market.

As for subsities, they should only be used for infrastructure or social projects.


As for Wallstreet they have constructed the system through lobbyist. With deregulation lobbying power would become even more pronounced, because the lobbying could be focused even more on other aspects that help these industries. The copanies won't just stop lobbying because you deregulate.

It is unfortunate that no one in that area had true fiscal understanding. It just became a pro-deregulation rallying point. Some were even converted to that idea without full understanding.

reply to post by ModernAcademia







More Schiff who are the idiot's.