We showed a Charlie Rose interview with Pete Peterson, co-founder of the Blackstone Group, sometime ago.
Here is a prior interview in 2004 on entitlements and the need to end preferential tax breaks for the wealthy.
Pete Peterson Interview, Charlie Rose, 2004
September 4, 2008 3:15am by Barry Ritholtz
This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment. The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client. References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others. The Compound Media, Inc., an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here: https://www.ritholtzwealth.com/advertising-disclaimers Please see disclosures here: https://ritholtzwealth.com/blog-disclosures/
What's been said:
Discussions found on the web:Posted Under
Previous Post
Bush = Good Economic Record ?Next Post
Taking a Closer look at Other 3+% GDPs
Tax breaks for the wealthy encourage despots to leave their perches, they promote democracy.
Tax breaks for the wealthy encourage drug, weapon, and porn dealers to go legit as the high incentives make it irresistible.
Tax breaks for the wealthy encourage few abortions since wealthy people can spend the extra money on children.
Tax breaks for the wealthy encourage stay-at-home moms, more consumption of things rich people buy, and more guns in the hands of people who want to protect their massive pile(s) wealth. Have you ever sat next to a poor person in a nice clean pew? No.
Tax hikes do the opposite. Four more years.
Mr. Peterson said that wages grow as the economy and productivity grow. Ha, I have not heard that one in a while. Another economics truism bites the dust. Then again, this interview is from 2004.
Four more years??? Did you not listen to the interview?
The rich simply will not want to live in the resulting America.
You will have old people dying in the streets.
Dying of starvation as well as illness.
It’s you! your ideology will lead to the outcome you believe in. Survival of the fittest is what it is.
Not nice.
I am all for fairness.
It would be fair to see the most qualified Presidential candidate elected.
That would be John McCain.
I hope more people with mature adult experience vote than people with naive backgrounds easily susceptible to the Liberal Media and Hollywood sales pitch.
Remember one thing…
Barack Obama was elected to the Senate in November of 2004. LESS than 4 years ago. After being HAND PICKED by the left for obvious reasons and THRUST upon the stage at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. Remember…he did not hold a National office 4 years ago today.
He is an elitist media CREATION. HAND PICKED by the ultra liberals in power and PROMOTED shamelessly by the leftist media and entertainment industry (Hollywood).
If you liked the Carter years…you will LOVE the Barack Obama years. And for those to young to know what the Carter years were like…you only have to know they were arguably the worst 4 years in the last half century with President Carter arguably the worst President of this past half century.
Carter was my CinC. Talk about manufacturing dialog. Its taken me 25 more years to see just how big the curtain is.
Lets remember items: (from memory) 3 Mile Island – a non significant event, thankfully no others here; tunnels found under Korea’s DMZ, a non event by collapsing em; Iran hostage crisis, rescue attempt failed, non eventful war; hostage caused gas crisis, ashame we sent Carter back to GA before he could nip the mideast gas/oil situation similar to nuclear safety.
The President Reagan exchange day I still remember … ummm .. then comes the 1st pile of debt build; Iran-Contra Affair; Tear down this Wall; Reagan dime; Uhh … the church, government, media are tools … thank God for blogs.
Reagan years was the catalyst exchange of the cold war machine curtain for the economic war curtain. This web we wove is … I’m tired of writing.
anybody can make their house look great by borrowing and spending … seems the American way is get somebody else to pay the bill and interest via creative financing … I’m coming around to that way of thinking … Jubilee.
Kirk, I respect your opinion and have, as a veteran of the US Army, defended your right to have and express that opinion.
That being said, I don’t care if Obama’s a friggin’ werewolf. I’m not voting for McCain.
Democrat’s: tax and spend
Republican’s: spend
All the available data suggests that Republicans have consistently spent more as a percentage of GDP than Democrats.
Republican’s are the real Elitest trying to keep the rest of america out of their country clubs.
What we need is a stronger middle-class. Obama will reduce taxes for 95% of the population. Not everyone’s taxes will go up.
In the end everyone benefits from a stronger middle-class: Business, and the wealthy alike.
@Mike
Obama will reduce taxes for 95% of the population. Not everyone’s taxes will go up.
Um, no, just because you heard it on tv and then repeat it doesn’t make it so. You can’t have the massive govt. expansion obama wants without taxes going up, across the board. The tax code is already steeply proggressive, somehow it is “fair” to make it more so.
95% of the US tax paying population barely contribute the blackhole in Washington. Obama’s plan is merely a redistribution of wealth from the rich to whatever class you want to call it. Neither party has a candidate prepared or willing to fix the issues facing the US in the future.
Pols have one job…to get re-elected.
The US is on a steady decline with brief spurts of “hope” along the way. The Feds have been using “exotic” mortgages far too long. It will play out exactly like the housing debacle…but on a much larger scale.
Greg0658 – I agree with you. Palin could be the Pope – and I wouldn’t vote McCain/Palin.
Last 8 years have been a disaster. It’s not about who has more experience – it is about what the people who are in control of everything accomplish with their power.
To the Republicans I say “Your Fired!”
“The tax code is already steeply proggressive, somehow it is “fair” to make it more so.”
Really? What was the top tax rate for the top tax bracket over the years. I for one would not mind seeing some pre-1980 tax brackets to remind Neo-Cons what that is like.
Ah, here it is:
http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php
Behold.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/151.html
As late as the year I was born (1963), there was apparently a 91% tax bracket.
A few years back I sent a copy of Peterson’s book to an old pal of mine who is an upper management, Kellogg biz school grad kind of man. He absolutely scoffed at the entire notion that our monstrous debtor status, our unfunded upcoming mega-trillions in obligations, were even a problem. His response was essentially that it’s like carrying a mortgage, and that we could always sell off the interstate system (really, no shit, he said that!). Now who would buy the interstates if not to make them tollways? And that’s the kind of tax my pal abhors when overt. Covering the cost of debt with more debt, and burying his children with the obligations seems to be a-ok, however. Hmmmm, I digress.
I’m left with two observations. First, people tend to simply ignore bad stuff, even facts, and assume everything will always been as good or better than now (like Kudlow!). This is a delusional world view. Second, I wouldn’t pay for my kids’ to go to Kellogg. I suspect that Kellogg pumps out MBAs that create goofy worthless debt models and sell them as money markets to organizations that have never heard of due dilligence. Ok, full disclosure: my daughter goes to the University of Chicago…but she ain’t a biz major; this is good because I wouldn’t pay for her to be indoctinated with the Friedman nonsense either…
Funny,he never mentions reducing the defense budget or getting us out of the war economy. Guess that is too impolitic for a Republican.
@Blackhalo
Really? What was the top tax rate for the top tax bracket over the years. I for one would not mind seeing some pre-1980 tax brackets to remind Neo-Cons what that is like.
Before you come at me with your weak arguments and the link that you clearly didn’t actually study instead of just looking at the numbers maybe you should look back at what the pre 1980’s economy and stock market looked like, say from 1968 to 1980 as a starting point. Or perhaps you would do well to know that in the 70’s when those top marginal rates were much higher the top 1% of earners paid far less than the overall amount of tax they pay today. Why? because wealthy people find ways to hide the income and will do so again if taxes increase, don’t be fooled that “this time will be different” because obama can “change” things.
Go talk to the person in NYC that makes $250k a year and has two kids in private school to see if they feel rich. I think not. Remember that the top marginal rate lumps those that make a very high income with those with ultra high incomes.
Scott in Chicago,
That’s so funny because I’m about 1/2 way into this video and was considering the same point you make.
The Defense Department is the ULTIMATE entitlement program! He doesn’t even talk about that!
Our war economy that spreads the jobs based on the military around to every congressional district such that every part of this country is invested in this special kind of corporate welfare.
We need to cut defense 1st. People should read Chalmers Johnson and his discussion of the military industrial complex and American empire. This isn’t left-wing stuff. This is real.
Not only is Chalmers Johnson real but so is Paul Farrell at http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/why-we-love-americas-outrageous/story.aspx?guid={0D31C880-32CD-4BA1-8133-329EA57CB069}.
BTW, I speak from the proverbial Peoria. Illinois, that is. I have many years as a beneficiary of the war economy, not in Peoria. I must state that I see it as a driver of the economy and not in a sustainable way. Peterson in no manner even touches on this. He is a one tune player. Most politicians wont touch the war economy either.
@Rayo
“Before you come at me with your weak arguments and the link that you clearly didn’t actually study instead of just looking at the numbers maybe you should look back at what the pre 1980’s economy and stock market looked like, say from 1968 to 1980 as a starting point.”
I do not quite see how pointing out that top bracket tax rates are at a historical low, is a weak argument. I was merely discrediting the “steeply progressive” revisionism.
The rest of your post makes no sense to me as it just seems to be a lot of whining about those that benefit the most from a society should not shoulder the greatest burden.
Private schools? 250K? Particularly telling is the complaint about the very rich, being lumped in with the insanely rich and not being able to grasp how someone making under 30K might feel unhappy being lumped in with both.
Personally, I think the federal tax rate should be flat and mandated to be at a % to cover the budget and that all other federal taxes should be abolished, including payroll taxes which are REGRESSIVE and not included in most Neo-Cons calculations of who is paying the most tax. In addition it is my opinion that the first 15-30K of income should be tax free. No other deductions should be allowed.
I would also prefer cap gains to be at the same rate. Anything less and the super rich would game the system and start moving income into cap gains.
Corporate tax is stupid, but it should either be at the same rate or none. Corporations should not have “personhood” unless they are taxed as one.