Charlie Rose

amwsf  03/30/2012 07:54 AM Report

Charlie,

Whenever someone tells you, "The U.S. will be like Greece," or some variant thereof, RUN!!! These people are liars, grossly — often willfully — misinformed or shockingly uninformed. Your viewers do not deserve having these liars and fools foisted on them, no matter whether or not YOU are interested in what they have to say.

I could go on and on about the reasons the U.S. will never be like Greece. But here's the major ones.

1) The U.S. could "print" its way out of its deficit. Or ... the U.S. can print its currency, Greece can't print Euros, and therefore can't get its printing presses rolling to pay off its debt. Yes, that would lead to high inflation. But, frankly, that would be better the alternative: defaulting on debt.

2) Greece is paying astromical interest payments on its debt. In February 2012, before the massive write-down on Greek debt, Greece was paying 177.37% on its two year government bonds. I can't find what they are currently paying on the debt the Greek government recently incurred, or on the bonds that were downgraded, but, at a minimum, it's probably in the high double-digits, if not the triple digits.

As a result of the interest rates it must pay on its debt, that debt is unsustainable. There will be more bailout, more debt downgrades to avoid a default. Thse rest of Europe will keep on paying because the collapse of the Euro would result in economic chaos in Europe. But Greece's debt and the high intests rates it must pay eliminate any possibility of economic growth, and Greece will be a a severe Depression for years to come

By contrast, debt on U.S. Treasuries is in the low single digits.

3) Greece got itself into its mess by politicians buying off the unions and workers with super-generous salaries and pension plans, and the Greek political parties "buy votes" by giving patronage jobs to their supporters, who are then turned out to campaign for their political patrons. That is the heart of the corruption in Greek politics, and Greece could easily lay off 30% of its workers and still have an efficient government. But Greek politicians are more than aware that they would lose a huge majority of their supporters by doing so. Look for a resurgence of the Communist Pary and various Anarchist parties to win big time in the upcoming elections.

U.S. politicians do not owe their jobs to people to whom they doled out government jobs and generous salaries and pension plans. The heart of political corruption in the U.S. is that politicians have been bought off by large corportions, financial institutions, and super-millionaires and billionaires. As Senator Dick Durbin [D-Illinois] admitted two years ago, "The banks own this place [the Senate]!

4) Tax-avoidance is part of Greece's culture, denying the government a reliable source of revenue. The rich avoid paying their tax obligations as if taxes were the bubonic plague. As a result, the rest of the population also avoid paying taxes because of resentment to the shanigans of the rich — and because tax non-compliance is a national sport.

In contrast, the U.S. has a relatively high rate of tax compliance, which assures a decent revenue stream.

Charlie here's ANOTHER problem I had with your show tonight.

Charlie, please tell me why rich old white men are telling American workers they must "sacrifice," and you continue to allow these rich old white men to spout this drivel on your show?

The bottom of the 99% of American workers have already sacrificed a whole lot during the past decade with stagnant wages while the super-rich enjoyed HUGE increases in THEIR incomes.

And why should ANY blue collar worker have to work past age 65, now or 40 years from now? By age 65, most blue-collar and low-income workers are used up and most can no longer PHYSICALLY perform their jobs anywhere ner their peak performance level — and most blue-collar and low-income workers past 55 who lose their jobs rarely can get ANY job. But rich old while men, who will NEVER be dependent on Social Security or Medicare, insist that the 99% most "sacrifice" in terms of lower Social Security and Medicare benefits while they will NEVER agree to ANY comparable sacrifices.

There was a good reason why the Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles Commission was nick-named "The Catfood Commission:" both are rich old white CONSERVATIVES who would have the elderly eating catfood if they got their way.

Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles should NEVER be given a place at your table again. They are fools who spout non-sense: the deficit is NOT the U.S.' major problem in the short- or medium term: jobs and economic growth are the U.S.' major problems. Yes, the deficit is a long-term problem, and must be addressed, primarily by allowing Bush's tax cuts to expire, developing a truly progressive tax code with the super-rich paying at much as 50% on all income over [say] $5 million, developing a long-term, corruption-free plan to repair our rotting infrastructure [which will have the added benefit of creating jobs and higher tax revenues] and cutting the defense and intelligence budgets by 25%. We are paying more, in dollars adjusted for inflation, for defense than we were paying at the height of the Cold War and the Vietnam war. Both these wars are over, we have no major "enemies, and the "terrorists" have no standing armies, sophisticated weapons or weapons systems, and they don;t have even a row boat to their name. Our defense budget MUST be adjusted accordingly.

And one more thing: within the next week, you need to give one show over to Paul Krugman and another to Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky. Paul Krugman would be a good counterweight to the economic drivel spouted by Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles tonight. And Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky could discuss real alternatives to Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles drivel about effective ways to cut the budget and defict and increase revenues.

Charlie, do you even KNOW that the Progressive Caucus in the House, of which Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky is perhaps the most articulate and informed member on the budget, offers an alterntive budget every year? It's ALWAYS totally ignored by the mainstream media, and always voted down. But for Fiscal Year 2011, they actually offered a budget that would balance the budget within five years.

You can read a Summary of their FY 2012 budget here:

http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=81&sectiontree=5,81

And you can read the details of their budget here:

http://grijalva.house.gov/uploads/Executive%20Summary%20FINAL.pdf

Their ideas deserve a fair airing.

AND ... a final thought:

You need some diversity at your table: How about a LOT more appearances of Paul Krugman and Robert Reich on economic issues?

You should also consider having on some of Salon.com's political columnists and analysts to discuss the 2012 election — for "balance" AND for lucidity and clarity.

Andrew Leonard of Salon.com would also be an excellent source for discussion and analyses of economic issues.

And you should consider bringing on Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com on a regular basis to discuss national security issues: he's incredibly well informed and extremely articulate, and one of the most-read and one of the most-respected bloggers on the internet. (He also is regularly published in The Guardian and in the New York Times "Room for Debate" blog, and makes regular appearances on MSNBC and has appeared on ABC's "This Week.") In addition, he would be an excellent guest to discuss the Iran "threat" and a counterweight to the current warmongering, subtle and otherwise, of most of your guests and of the "typewriter brigade," most of whom have actively avoided serving in the military any of the wars they so ardently supported and support.

Charlie, your viewers deserve MUCH more than the tired rehashes of your "friends." Get on some fresh blood. And frankly, yes, truth DOES have a "liberal bias."

And all of the above also goes for your work on CBS's morning news program.

futurevisionaries  04/22/2011 02:56 PM Report

Dear sir,

Can you help or know of people or companies that can help?

I need to save global FUTURE brands for and by the global people and countries.

My name is Kent G Anderson .

I see where 12 years of my life's work and ideas can help all people in all countries. My goal is to share the global Brand FUTURE... Future is design like a country and people's ideas are the global product. For more information about me and global people FUTURE google Kent G Anderson. My web page is www.futurevisionaries.com .

FUTURE sm/tm

925 N Griffin

Bismarck,ND

58501

USA

milmntec@btinet.net

matthewjharris  04/20/2011 09:34 PM Report

I think it's time to check in with these guys again since Congress and the President didn't seem to be listening several months ago.

doodah  11/23/2010 09:28 AM Report

@don0,

I get exactly what you're saying, but I believe the historical stupidity of democrat philosophy gives a platform for the true evil intentions of republican politicians to play their wicked little games. Jimmy Carter started the idea that people should be allowed to buy houses they can't afford. Which prompted the widdling away at the Glass-Stieglitz regulations put in place to ensure RESPONSIBILITY in the financial (ECONOMY) arena. The accumulation of such a perfect storm of greed and stupidity came to a head approx. a decade ago. And then it was off to the races, for those in the know. The Democrats are stupid; and the Republicans are evil. It turned into a contest of which party could be more stupid or conniving. But that's the car that drove us unsuspecting working Americans off the cliff. So the choices are stupidity or evil.

And now the politicians want to continue the game, because they think the people who elected them are stupid.

don0  11/22/2010 07:01 PM Report

Ol' man Simpson just can't resist the swipes and condescension disguised as folksy popularism, can he? And Charlie, you just eat it up like candy-as-Christmas-stocking-stuffers. His overall take on the "cause" of these massive deficits - earmarks, and that easy strawman, pork-barrel appropriating. Bowles tried, sotto voce, to get the point in that earmarks are not exactly "big ticket," but it got swept under the "bonhomie" rug that is alwyas rolled out at.this table.TONIGHT, never mind the lumps.

I've watched that slippy son-of-bitch Simpson dance around on Judiciary and do his "aw-shucks, Lem" jujitsu on many an occasion, for the cameras.

Bottom line here: oh, yes, all this is all so Dire and Important and Serious, but these two old geezers don't have ANY skin in the game, and they crow about it. They've got their retirement, their goldplated Federal pensions and their roladexes filled from decades of being in all the right places at all the right times with all the right people, so really, they don't even have in the game their current jobs, like Krugman does.

Sure, they can sit there all pious and bipartisan and do the Simpson low-key sneer at the "elected politicians" but those elected politians are the ones who have to make the rubber meet the road on this, and it will not be pretty. Every "big ticket" item Simpson likes to tick off (boy, you know these capitalist-fascists by their absolute devotion to the short list they can tick off on their fingers) is part of the safety net for the "rest of us" - the 95% of America who puts the rubber on the road every god-damned day, the food on the table and the piddling little paycheck in the bank every two weeks. We're the ones who've been effed by this economy and political thugs like Simpson's party since the days of the Robber Barons, and now we're invited to bend over once again, because the rich don't want to see their automatic piggy bank fillers get clogged up with anything messy like the human costs.

Bowles' little leitmotiv about how "the markets won't like it if we max out the credit cards" sounds some sour notes in the ears of anyone who has listened to the clusterfuck music "the markets" just played for us at the end of the last (let us pray to God it is) Bush administration. But undergirded by Simpson's asso profundo (oh, I'm sorry, was that a typo, Senator Simpson? too bad you can't see my shitty little half-smile here) counterpoint recitativ, "what do ya love? 'cause it can all be taken away from ya in a heartbeat if you don't let us bleed you dry on the back end of your life like we body-checked you on the front side" - it becomes a subtle threat duet with a hint of blackmail, rather like sitting down with Don Corleone to "negotiate" protection pricing.

Meanwhile, back down in the real world, we are waiting, Mr. Boehner - where are the jobs?

TuffsNotEnuff  11/20/2010 09:58 AM Report

This interview gets interesting.

The press and wonk-site coverage have focused on the barebones Option 1 items. Bowles and Simpson go immediately to the proposals of Option 2, which is the Wyden-Gregg reform system.

WG starts with the $30,000/$15,000 Standard Deduction and then scoops out virtually all of the tax-avoidance loop holes. Congressional obeisance to the wealthy and very wealthy over the past 30 years is erased wholesale.

Bush tax cuts ??? They're gone 100%.

FX effects ? Well, there's no reason to see another $600-billion vig from Benny-the-Bee.

Which curtain you wanna take ??? What's Wayne Brady hinting here ? BTW: Option 1 Barebones is a whole different world from Option 2 Go Back To Eisenhower.

Great hour of teevee.

mfatah281  11/19/2010 01:24 AM Report

Those Bush Tax cuts were a "horrible mistake," but I hate to call it that since the word "mistake" relays a sense of accident or an unintentional act. I give a damn about the security of the U.S. first and foremost and let me just say that the Bush/Cheney administration has done more harm to our union than any Taliban/Al-Qaeda factions could have ever dreamed of causing! We need to fix this and quickly.

Ovais  11/18/2010 10:40 PM Report

Re: Last week they offered a sweeping plan to cut more than $3.8 trillion over the next decade.

And how does that compare to simply letting ALL the Bush tax cuts expire?

ANSWER

ABOUT THE SAME !

How come this fact is almost never reported?

Perhaps becuse it raises the question "How big a price have do we to pay for having elected Bush/Cheny ?"

Is there anyone out there who can "handle the truth?"

robdverity  11/18/2010 08:23 PM Report

Grownups are scarce in the USA and moreso in Congress. Enacting the crucial req's will take more maturity than currently extant. Any solutions need to start with cleaning up the financial system to make anything workable. If not they'll corrupt any proposal.

Most any injustice in the world can be traced back to the egregious greed of US bankers and banking; from preemptive wars-for-profit, to subprime loans and the associated devious financial instruments (CDOs, CDSs, purloined ratings from Std & Poors, Moodys et al, yadda, yadda), and drug cartel money laundering (Mexico, Japan et al).

Our country is capsizing largely because of our financial institutions. Our venal system's for sale to the highest bidder. Like the Romans, the Mayans the Khmer we will not prevail as well. But the financial too-clever-by-half wise-guys will go down in their gold-trimmed yachts nonetheless.

Until our culture decides that their values of idolizing wealth regardless of how acquired is vacuous - and even suicidal - we are in the toilet. Until big bank CEOs and particularly the rating agency heads are ensconced with Bernie Madoff, we're doomed for a moral hazard - again and again.

winter  11/18/2010 06:47 PM Report

Magic Johnson during a photo shoot with NBA stars told Larry Bird, who was sitting next to MJ, "don't get too close to Michael or its a foul". Funny how that applies whenever the wealthy are threatened with increasing their contribution to the collective social good in the form of tax burden. The only thing thats trickled down has been the top tax bracket for decades and who has to make up the difference? Tighten yer belt cause they're comin fer yer

shorts next.

JohnGelles  11/18/2010 11:14 AM Report

Dear Doodah,

Lehman Brothers, bankers for more than a century, DID RUN OUT OF MONEY.

Only America can never run out of money. We printed, lent, guaranteed and gave money away to the OTHER banks and insurers who MIGHT HAVE RUN OUT OF MONEY -- Lehman style -- to try to remove toxic assets from THEIR books.

We can print TOO MUCH MONEY -- not run out of it. If we do, and cannot produce the things that money must buy in volume enough to rescue our OVER-PRINTING, we will have to reduce the surplus by taxation or REVALUATION -- which would require all money owned by people and organizations to be EXCHANGED for a NEW US DOLLAR. You might have to turn in 2 dollars to receive ONE NEW DOLLAR. Other nations now sitting pretty have had to do that after WW II.

It's usually painless and can be made certainly painless. The associated pain is already there (as shortages of many necessities) and it goes away as the shortages go away. PRODUCTION is key to recovery from an inflation.

Presently, the world and ourselves are fighting DEFLATION not inflation.

Doodah -- your concern for democracy is appreciated. We must guard it every day. We must guard against inflation, deflation, and ignorance of democracy -- political democracy AND economic democracy.

European social democracy has greater economic democracy than we do. We have greater political democracy. Both societies need both forms of democracy.

You know it's political democracy when you can make fun of your government and are free to go and do anything that does not disturb the peace (roughly speaking).

You know it's economic democracy when you can work and be paid fairly, along with everyone else, the way we can in the best of economic times. These times should never end-- it never makes sense for government to refuse to maintain them with investments in prosperity markets fail to deliver.

Ovais  11/18/2010 11:11 AM Report

Re: Last week they offered a sweeping plan to cut more than $3.8 trillion over the next decade.

And how does that compare to simply letting the ALL the Bush tax cuts expire?

Later on, they talk about the doom and gloom, and the near impossible task of getting back on track! Soemthing does not add up here?

doodah  11/18/2010 07:34 AM Report

"The system never runs out of MONEY." - JohnGelles

Correction John, "The BANKERS, never run out of money" - because they never stop stealing it, in all forms and fashion. They and the multi-millionaires-'managers' club HAVE more money then they know what to do with and they want to keep it that way until there's nothing left for them to buy, own, control, or steal. The world is their oyster (the emerging middle-class under authoritarian rule makes for a tidy supply). They can use the American middle-class to police and guard their stock-pile. It's good training for the future police-state of America (there will be so many, they'll be a dime a dozen).

It's bordering on Nazi-ism.

JohnGelles  11/18/2010 06:21 AM Report

The annual deficit and cumulative federal debt are part of a money system that BOTH Obama and Ryan fully misunderstand.

The system never runs out of MONEY.

The money is created by the central and subordinate banks against central bank policy and borrowers collateral (or prospects) that is acceptable to subordinate banks.

Never running out of money, the debt can never be a problem.

The only problem can be our loss of resources and skills if we outsource work to Asia (and elsewhere) and lose so much of our productive manufacturing skills that we are compelled to import necessities and have no exports with which to pay for them in FOREIGN money.

Most of our comments here seem to understand the above. Many do not. Ryan does NOT. Obama does NOT. Rose does NOT.

Ryan, Obama and Rose need to be FIRED. They talk nothing but nonsense. And Bowles and Simpson are as far from common sensical as is possible to be.

We must reclaim our manufacturing heritage and advantages.

We must obey Warren Buffet and demand IMPORT CERTIFICATES for every import. These cannot be issued except to match EXPORTS.

http://www.ustaxreform.us/ntw-ic.htm

..... ..... The above link will show the IMPORT CERTIFICATE solution YOU must know by heart. (It links in the title to the original as well.)

There is no excuse for unemployment today. We have the money and the unmet critical tasks to be done. We need Obama to lead or be replaced as our candidate in 2012.

JohnGelles  11/18/2010 06:10 AM Report

The crazy idea that debt and deficit is always no good was proved false after WW II when our federal debt to GNP ratio was like twice what it is today.

The debt is denominated in our own fiat money. We have no appreciable debt in FOREIGN MONEY. If we do not re-employ our manufacturing teams of capital and labor we will go under and become a banana oligarchy.

Ryan is an idiot. He is a dangerous idiot. Rose and Obama are not much better. Obama has the power to bomb the world to hell. But he has not got the guts to team up with Bernanke and put every American to work who wants a good job. When the history of this era is written, the idiocy of so many will be explained. It started with the 80th Congress that passed Taft Hartley and began to diminish the bargaining power of workers that capital has since destroyed (except for the last 12 percent of us).

The wages of the middle class and the minimum wage must be raised until we regain our senses. Simultaneously, we must protect small business to do the trillions of jobs that socialism leaves undone. Lastly, we do not need to tax the rich for one cent of their productive capital. Big business and many of the super rich need all their money to finance the likes of General Electric and General Motors to do jobs under government contract and to supply market demand.

The money to guarantee a very rich middle class with the best of all they deserve, as well as full support of all who want into the middle class from their current circumstance, is sitting in Bernanke's central bank which we the people established and control by our law. We must stop voting for the likes of Ryan and others who do not get behind the workers and their families and recognize who dies to defend this nation and who works to supply it.

JohnGelles  11/18/2010 06:08 AM Report

http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11292#comment_76431

The above link is to comments on the Rose-Ryan show the other day.

These two bozos from the Debt Commission know less than a thimble full of useful knowledge on production, consumption, governance, work or business. They are the problem not the solution.

Ryan and the Debt Commission are overlapping shows. So I will copy here some of my comment there.

AntonGrambihler  11/17/2010 11:39 PM Report

The first step to balancing the United States Budget is the addition of Citizen Amendment 12 – Balanced Budget

Congress shall not appropriate more money for the next Fiscal year than was collected in the previous Fiscal year unless approved on a yearly basis by a three-fourths vote of need in both houses of Congress. The collected money shall not include Social Security taxes or any other pension.

AntonioFR  11/17/2010 11:07 PM Report

Thanks again Mr. Rose. Your show reminds us always that television can be stimulating.

Tonight's show also showed that behind the zealotry in the air waves there is an intelligent country with bright and hard working people.

tankersmom  11/17/2010 09:36 PM Report

Dear Mr. Rose. Please pass this on to Mr. Bowles and Senator Simpson. I was able to watch your discussion with them and I'm struck that they they're not addressing a huge opportunity to reduce the deficit. Namely, close the tax loopholes that allow large corporations like Google and Microsoft, etc. to avoid paying fair taxes. This goes back on both sides of the aisle in Congress for passing these loopholes in the first place for their cronies and campaign contributors. I'd like to write to both gentlemen directly, but I don't have email addresses for them or know how to reach them. If anyone has that info, please share.

Thanks.

CarolJ  11/17/2010 08:23 PM Report

I agree with jcadams have Krugman and Stiglitz together for part one and a part 2. Thanks JC I thought I was off kliter

about the Peterson Foundation People.

jcadams  11/17/2010 05:27 PM Report

It wasn't fair to give an entire hour to Erskine Bowls and former Republican Sen. Alan Simpson. Simpson has made it clear of his lack of respect for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. (He apparently wants to reduce it and or privatize it.) But worse is the fact that Bowles is on the board of Morgan Stanley and made a reported $335,000 in income from that relationship last year. These facts make neither man a disinterested party on the debt issue. Or people who will be fair to middle-class.

To make your show a fair vehicle please have on two respected economists --- Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz to cover the subject from a different perspective. And give them an entire hour just like you gave the above gentleman.

Also in the past 10 days you had on two people with close ties to the Peterson Foundation which has effectively declared war on Social Security. And they may have an agenda to privatize it.

I watch your show almost every night. And I expect more from you.

charlizecourriers  11/17/2010 04:06 PM Report

If what these gentlemen say is true, then the Obama health care reforms(sic) are belly up. Didn't the NYTimes report that Obamacare requires massive cuts in Medicare, in order to be revenue neutral? Perhaps Mr. Rose could discuss the cost of his several heart surgeries, their actual cost, and how it was financed. I quess the question is: shouldn't those who make more then pay more for the actual procedures, not simply the insurance pool costs? Means testing for the wealthy shouldn't be the same for the middle class or impoverished! Means testing is coming for all government entitlements, but it doesn't sound like these fellows can admit it.

mdliegey  11/17/2010 02:09 PM Report

This show concerning our country's deficit was right on. Difficult decisions must be made and our elected officials must listen and act now.

anne4444  11/17/2010 01:10 PM Report

We do have a lot of smart brains here. That is why they make this country great.

Thank you for sharing.

REMant  11/17/2010 12:15 PM Report

As I've said several times, if you want to reduce govt debt, you have to tackle all debt at the same time and that means reining in banks and credit across the board. It means shutting down the China-mortgage pipe line, so that wealth is generated by work, not inflation. That will take care of most of the problems with wealth disparity. Social democracy or welfare capitalism make about as much sense as multiculturalism. I agree that we can't continue the tax cuts, but taxes should be heavier on the wealthy to counter the effect of the Fed's inflationary policies. But, I agree with what sounded basically like a flat-rate income tax scheme. However a LOT of money can be saved by just allowing overpriced assets and equities to deflate, which will bring prices generally into line with the ability to pay, which is, as I think these two believe, the real desideratum.

For the record, I certainly wouldn't believe anything out of Ezra or CBS News. Besides being an ideologue, Ezra goes off half-cocked, and, leaving aside CBS's own biases, the questions asked make for a much larger error than any in statistics. There certainly are a lot of ppl, like Pelosi and Krugman and probably some Republicans as well, who haven't gotten the message, or who see tackling the deficit as part of the larger issue of the economy. You could say from this discussion that even Messrs Bowles and Simpson believe the latter, and if forced to make a choice might choose economy and jobs even though they believe cutting the deficit is essential to that end. I would, too. IMHO it is a rather poor poll: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/11/politics/main7045964.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody.

It is a relative certainly, in any case, that the change in the Congress was not motivated by the desire to spend more money. In this vein, Steven Pearlstein's Post column today was as bad as last Friday's was good, attempting to paint all Republicans as grasping misers and resurrecting the 19th c "gold bug" line that led to the formation of the Fed and the income tax, and most of our subsequent budget and economic problems. I'm sure we will see more of this, and also an attempt by Dems such as Schumer to pry Bush-Reagan Republicans away from Tea Partiers.