Charlie Rose

doodah  08/24/2010 07:15 AM Report

pooltrader, -

That's it in a nutshell.

But shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Let's milk the song and dance for what it's worth, doo dah doo dah

pooltrader  08/06/2010 08:27 PM Report

what nobody seems to understand or try to understand is why isn't the economy turning around??????? They just say shit the stimuli isn't working. Its population stupid! Lets look at a case study. Japan has been trying to stimulate there economy for the past 20 years and they have failed, they have 200% debt to GDP! And now they are going to start to borrow money from the Chinese to continue this charade. They are doomed, and so is the whole world economy. Economic Growth is dependent on population. There is massive aging of the population in Japan. Also this is the trend globally! Exponential population growth stopped going up in 1963. 2.2 and is now around 1.2. Next time you speak to an economist ask him to explain to you how are we going to create eco growth without a world population expanding exponentially?

NeilMacCallister  08/06/2010 05:13 PM Report

winter, ..please don't say "Lets shoot for trillionaires" quite so casually?

I know what you meant, ..a satiric 'devil-may-care' acceptance of a few very high-living persons, and the rest of us 'dirt poor'.

But may we please refrain from using the weaklings' argument "shoot" next to anyone else's person or position?

***

And there really IS a "dimes worth of difference" between the people we vote into office, ..and that difference is the votes cast by you, me, and everyone else!

We are all our own saving grace, ..and our own worst enemies.

There is no anonymous "oligarch" behind the curtain pulling the strings.

We get what we vote, we get what we earn, we get what we deserve.

winter  08/06/2010 09:11 AM Report

You know what they say, there's not a dimes worth of difference between the two parties and they both serve at the pleasure of our oligarchs including 2nd and 3rd tier oligarchs. Lets shoot for trillionaires and the rest of America third world.

NeilMacCallister  08/06/2010 03:56 AM Report

Winter? ..you are almost surely a spring, ..or at most an early summer.

I've asked for no one to "keep feeding the wealthy", ..I only ask that no one steals from the public, rich or poor.

***

It's as if someone new has ridden into town. He headed straight for the local bank, confiscated all its money, and sent it all back to his New York City friends.

Then a guard is posted outside that local bank with a warning: "Anybody who comes to deposit any savings here, must first give me and my friends a share, ..and I want a larger share than that last guy used to take."

***

Now, you say the President is helping small businesses with that money, ..can you actually name one which got any help?

Buena suerte, amigo!

doodah  08/04/2010 08:30 PM Report

It'll be 'Zardoz' meets 'All the Presidents Men'.

doodah  08/04/2010 08:22 PM Report

I like the way you think, winter. Sounds like a great idea for a movie. We'll have modern Vandals sak those cryogenic 'resorts' and crush those pig brains before they can be re-installed. We'll copy 'Zardoz' (sort of) and make millions. .. I'll have my people contact your perople

jonnymel  08/04/2010 02:51 PM Report

I apologize for my previous post. My first. I reread it and was horrified by my inept writing. My posts will improve, I promise.

jonnymel  08/04/2010 02:35 PM Report

The fact that companies like Carlyle are freely investing in the "emerging markets" of Brazil, China when the United States desperately needs that money invested at home is a crime. The money boys don't get it.

They are going to withhold and divert funds that could be US investing until Obama is replaced with one of their boys and then we'll speak again about the redistribution of wealth. This time out of the pockets of the everyday American into back into the hands of the driven and the greedy.

The love affair with foreign investing and outsourcing at the expense of our own country is illicit, shameful, and incredibly damaging to our own welfare. Nail 'em up........

winter  08/04/2010 11:07 AM Report

If you listen to the right you'd think Obama was sacking the treasury like Mobutu or Marcos. What do you think he's doing. He's given small businesses tax breaks, but that

is deliberately ignored by the right since we have competition for control of the future being more in their sights than getting behind the course Obama's set for trying to stimulate the economy. Just keep feeding the wealthy and they'll take care of us is getting so old and pathetic; like some alien race making chattel of people who

work for a living. Make no mistake, up there in the umbrella organizations and bars across America the fix is in for hiring to be frozen in cryogenic statsus until their

messiah comes along and fattens up the oligarchs until they overflow onto the peons. More millionaires, more billionaires and more third world ...what a circus.

BENEZRAA  08/03/2010 11:46 PM Report

BRILLIANT CONVERSATION, WITH TWO CAVEATS:

(A) RE: TAXES - While it may be true that income taxes are not paid by perhaps one-half of Americans, there are at least two major reasons for this, (1) real wages for the average American, if he or she can find a job in this rotten economy, lag far behind even "sub-prime" existence cost levels, and, (2) the most regressive taxes, such as sales taxes, utility taxes, property taxes, etc. are at such high levels that America is deliberately driving more and more citizens into poverty; and...

(B) RE: CHARITY - A charity initiative such as the Gates-Buffett $600-Billion Challenge could significantly help Americans. Most of what is heard about these charities at and below street level pertains to charities overseas, e.g. in Africa -- which is fine, but, how about funding some free medical clinics here in the USA (perhaps Army style mobile MASH units) including oral surgery, or grant programs for micro-businesses here in the USA, or small mortgage grants, etc. If they already significantly support such charities right here at home, then I have spoken falsely for which I apologize. If I have spoken correctly, then I hope that such figures as Gates and Buffett will turn their attention homewards (I presume Mr. Goldstein already may do so, but, if not, then the same request applies). Similarly, local. State, and Federal legislative bodies ought to seek tax formulas that are more fair across the board, and do away with the regressive taxes that devalue the dollar every moment of the day.

AND A THIRD MATTER, NOT SPOKEN TO SUFFICIENTLY BY ANYONE: The USA loses too much farmland and too many family farms to the pressures of costs of middlemen and costs of land pressures as cities implode and mushroom out to devastate the countryside. As a nation, how can we be so stupid as to fail to "bale out" our farmers, and instead, we bail out (when we should put in jail) the industrial wasters, who pave over the farmland?

doodah  08/03/2010 10:32 PM Report

Re:NeilMacCallister 08/03/2010 03:26 PM

Yes, I recall half the 'experts' "not enough stimulus"; and the other half yelping, "too much stimulus". And that is a good question, thank you for reminding me, so much talk about extra stimulus money not being used (no need for it). Now this guy saying, "we need more" (did he say that? I don't remember; it's been a few days.).

I hate the subject of taxes (but since you brought it up). If "half of Americans pay no taxes".?. (again, I don't remember Rubenstein saying that), but if he did, it's probably because so many people aren't making any money any how any way. It's pretty hard to tax nothing. Or $10, as you claim. .. like the midnight cowboy

doodah  08/03/2010 10:01 PM Report

Obama is trying to do what every President does (except for LBJ), he's trying to get re-elected. I heard this morning, he's going to blame W. Bush some more (as part of the strategy). I had to laugh. But then again, it might work for him (if things don't get even worse then they already are). If we start winning in Afghanistan (fewer American and civilian deaths without giving up ground) (praying for NO deaths). The oil leak is stopped for good, and real progress is made with the clean-up (maybe some new inventions) and a lot is learned. And if the economy can recognize a reasonable bottom and it's more clear it's not going drop out again. Then if Obama wants to blame W. some more (to entertain the 'anchormen'), and hotheads like me ;)(maybe Bush will fight back; or even better, AGREE with Obama LOL) . Then, right or wrong, he'll likely be President again.

NeilMacCallister  08/03/2010 07:59 PM Report

Gee, Winter, ..you rave on about "The most pathetic of opportunists who has no clue about what Obama is trying to do".

But I have to wonder: "What is President Obama trying to do?"

You didn't mentioned what you believe that to be.

winter  08/03/2010 06:49 PM Report

Emerging markets eh? Code for find labor that will work for slave wages, live in shacks and eat next to nothing so you can keep the difference and your wife can go out and buy 1,000 dollar purses. THERE IS NO SHAME. You know who you are but have become hardened against any idea of shame. Populism has taken a back seat long enough. Its been kept from trickling down for so long that the middle class is being tossed out onto the street. Freedom for these people is nothing but their first line of defense for holding the American worker hostage. Not unlike Privateers of old, they have no country save a philosophy of expedience -- purely carpetbagging scoundrels. Business isn't hiring because its holding out for a climate where their extortion will find a well lubricated path. Politics has become the business of business. And they've finally subverted our Supreme Court.

What kind of environment is it when managers siphon off what might have been earned by their subordinates as an incentive bonus? And don't tell them to lift themselves up because that would be nothing but a cheap musical chairs tactic. And another thing: Is Newt Gingrich the lowest and most classless cheap mud slinger in this country? Taking advantage of all the mutated minds that have been cultivated over the years? The most pathetic of opportunists who has no clue about what Obama is trying to do yet feels the need to be heard in spite of his ignorance. Leave us. IS THERE NO SHAME?? Not if they can get away with ignoring it.

NeilMacCallister  08/03/2010 03:26 PM Report

doodah, ..I disagree with what Mr. Rubenstein advised regarding the "too small stimulus package", and the need now for a "second stimulus".

That can NOT be a truthful analysis, as it does not address the "back-page" fact that Congress has not yet spent all of that FIRST "stimulus package"! (..Don't they have over half of that money still sitting in their desk-drawers?)

***

Also, I feel quite insulted when he here re-publishes that destructive current propaganda that "Half of Americans pay no taxes."

Balderdash!

When that "rich person" whose house I am painting comes to have less money in his or her wallet, my own wages are equally reduced!

And when there are fewer "rich people" who can afford a house repair, each new job now has many more workers showing up to clamor for it! ..Once again, worker-wages are reduced.

Now I don't mind the struggle of business competition, ..but just stop telling me that I don't "suffer too" when the government takes more money out of circulation by raising taxes on anybody who still has 10 bucks in their wallet!

doodah  08/03/2010 08:26 AM Report

Interesting to note, that Rubenstein was a member of the Carter Administration (an adviser on domestic issues (it says in Wikidpedia), and he started his Capitalist adventures in 1987 (well within the Reagan inspired recovery). ..I just think it an unusual, uh, resume? path? just the 'extremity' of opposites whatever.

Perhaps, Chuck, could touch on that, the next time he has ole' Ruby over?.

Peace out :)

NeilMacCallister  08/02/2010 06:54 PM Report

Why do we lazily sit back and ask for “tax increases”? ..What does that mean anyway?

Do you want to raise the “tax rate”? ..or the “tax revenue”? (Those are NOT the same!)

I presume you are hoping for an increase in the “collected tax revenues”.

Are we sure we know how to do that? (..raise rate? ..or lower rate?)

Even if we did know how to get more money into the hands of the people now sitting in Congress, ..are we sure that we want to?

***

The national goal should be a vibrant economy: Lots of investments, lots of jobs, lots of profits, ..and lots of reinvestments of working capitals, ..and new opportunities for the workforce.

A vibrant economy is a returned-to climb of GNP!

All tax collection does is take investment opportunity from the hands of people who have generated money, and gives it to government people who may have never been responsible for producing a penny of profit in their life!

***

Instead of raising tax rates on investors’ black-ink capital gains, ..why don’t we raise the tax rates of the Congressmen and womens’ above-average retirement accounts, subsidized luxury suites, off-shore villas and yachts, and cadilllac healthcare plans?

Those expenditures generate NOTHING of equal value for that public investment!

Why don’t we tax government for the money it spends on itself???

..and ask it to quit looting the public money to support its friends and campaign contributors who are running the failing red-ink pseudo-businesses which have been allowed to call themselves “financial houses” and “car companies”.

REMant  08/02/2010 02:25 PM Report

I agreed with much of this, and the increase in the higher tax brackets. The argument that the rich spend more of their income is false, they save it, which is not bad in itself, but we need to reduce our debt, not spend, and in large measure because it accrued to the wealthy unfairly as a result of unjustifiable credit creation. In a "business downturn" it is discovered that a supernumerary population has been sustained by this kind of inflation, and that it cannot be sustained any longer due to a failure to be actually productive, thus it cannot be said that there is simply excess capacity and it is clear that something in the way of investment, probably in both plant and labor, will be necessary to increase productivity, otherwise diminution of wealth will proceed and be entirely justified. I do not agree therefore with the idea that we simply needed more govt spending. The Fed did plenty to encourage us to add to our indebtedness. Cos will invest when there's a prospect of return, and I don't think that will happen until we at least stop adding to the debt, attempting to keep wages up when they need to be at a level with those places that are growing. That is why they ARE growing. The financial sector can improve just fine by investing there, which is I'm sure most of them are doing. In a larger sense our entire mode of economic organization is intended to be philanthropic, because it is designed to replace naked power with a system of rewards. I might ask, tho, if we have such a great society, why is it that we are so far down on the list of corrupt countries? (http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2009/cpi_2009_table) BTW, the business community did everything Hoover and FDR asked that was in anyway sensible, and even some like the NRA that were nonsensical. If you would like a recap of that, take a look at John T. Flynn's The Roosevelt Myth (http://mises.org/books/rooseveltmyth.pdf) You will find there as well a rundown of that family's influence peddling, which makes today's miscreants look like rank amateurs. If he works like he talks, I'd think he'd be dead in a week, and I have no idea what that has to do with anyone's immune system.

Social Security does not add to the debt, if it does not add to the money supply. It is truly only a debt we owe ourselves, tho it can certainly entail serious problems if it is not paid. A system of private savings would clearly be better, but was not set up that way initially, because there would have been no way to provide for the first beneficiaries. If we increase taxes for it now, it will increase govt control, but it will not change the system into a govt savings bank.

Some places have casual Friday's; the Rose program it appears has liberal Friday's.

jimyoung  08/02/2010 11:12 AM Report

Rubenstein's views seem far more comprehensive than what I know of Grover Norquist's relentless tax cut mantra. He does not appear to be one of the powerful, but carelessly self-interested, people who produce too many unintended consequences.

How do his views on debt compare to Singapore (high debt at 113% of GDP, but they haven't borrowed to finance deficit expenditures for more than 20 years)?

Doodah's concern about a huge pool of capital slopping around the capital markets under the overall control of government (if they fully funded Social Security) makes sense, but how about investing more of that into the neglected infrastructure? Rubenstein makes the case for the benefits of private equity but points out they are sitting on $1.8 trillion that could be private stimulus, if the rules are clear and simple. Isn't that a huge pool of capital slopping around, that too often goes to areas that produce onerous unintended consequences (sub-prime mortgages, etc)? Even Herbert Hoover seemed to try to invest in infrastructure that made it possible for the most truly productive to make us all better off.

Harding and Coolidge cut taxes, and Hoover (whom FDR wanted to run in 1920)couldn't manage what he called the anarchical capitalists who prevented unintended consequences from timely and adequate management. I don't see Rubenstein as one of Hoover's anarchical capitalists.

robdverity  07/31/2010 06:49 PM Report

Didn't watch this but get the idea we would gladly throw SS under the bus in lieu of the war-for-profit machinery.

doodah  07/31/2010 11:57 AM Report

Those born in the early to mid 1960s (the caboose of the baby-boom generation) are in line to get the royal shaft of the so-called "social security". LOL. But please, do continue to sugar coat it. :)

skeptical  07/31/2010 10:04 AM Report

I was disappointed that Charlie has chosen since the beginning his independent media business has hob knobed more and more with the rich and privileged.

This was at its best shown with the Rubinstein interview.

Rubinstein droned away, hardly interrupted for a half hour.

He clearly has no compassion for anyone but Rubinstein.

Indeed, he implied the pain of our debt should be born by even those below the American middle class. Apparently he was speaking of elders and the poor.

The very idea that Social Security should be a target to return the rich to gathering their coins again is as repugant as it is disingenuous.

Social Security if funded through approximately 2040 and if changes cut benefits, this would be the same as the government defaulting on the bonds it issued when it raided the SSI accounts beginning with Lydon Johnson.

Charlie now a member of the protected and no needing his SSI, sat and said nothing.

BJonesActuary  07/31/2010 09:21 AM Report

David Rubenstein is wide of the mark in lumping the huge "unfunded liability" of Social Security in with other components of the national debt.

The rationale for funding private plans is the possibility that the sponsor may go out of business leaving benefit expectations which are not supported (a) by existing assets, because the funding program is not complete, nor (b) by future contributions, because the sponsor is no longer there to make them.

Social Security, by contrast, proceeds on the assumption that the Government will not go out of business; more precisely, that if it does, we will confront far more serious issues than Social Security.

If we were to fully fund Social Security, the end result would be a huge pool of capital slopping around the capital markets under the overall control of government. That's not my idea of heaven.

There can be situations where there is a case for heavy pre-funding. For example, that is how Norway, is applying some of the one-time bonanza from North Sea oil. Even that may prove a mixed blessing.

doodah  07/31/2010 08:10 AM Report

Part of our national security (actually a cornerstone) is 'policing' the world. No politicians (or even 'experts') will actually come out and 'call it' that. But THAT is what it is. Despite the abrasive rhetoric of 'other' countries, they 'enjoy' the piece of mind that 'our' defense provides them. Not their taxes, Our taxes, our debt, Our children's burden! Is 'expected' to fan the flames of endless foreign conflict, so the rest of the world can suck their thumbs.