Bloomberg Surveillance

Bloomberg Surveillance

 

I am going to be appearing on Bloomberg TV this morning with Tom Keene and Sara Eisen from 7:00 am – 8:00 am, then Bloomberg Radio after 8pm.

Subjects we are discussing:

1. Investing: How are the Earnings going?

2. Priorities: forget the damned Fiscal Cliff –  how ab out an adult conversation about national priorities?

3. Economy: What do signs of Slowing Europe, Asia mean for global recession possibilities?

4. Politics: Electoral:  In 2004, Bush beat Kerry by 3 million votes, EC 286 to 251 and claimed a mandate: ‘I earned capital in this election.

But Obama won by 3.3m votes,  and blew out his opponent 332 to 206. What does this mean for his mandate ?

5. Taxes: Regardless of the outcome of the election, your taxes are going up:

 

The live TV streams here.

 

 

Category: Media

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

6 Responses to “Media Appearance Bloomberg TV (Today 7-8am)”

  1. lrh says:

    You ask: “In 2004, Bush beat Kerry by 3 million votes, EC 286 to 251 and claimed a mandate: ‘I earned capital in this election. But Obama won by 3.3m votes, and blew out his opponent 332 to 206. What does this mean for his mandate ?

    Here’s one popular opinion from the time:

    “The opposition should not crawl into a hole or be silent about these things. A decent respect for the outcome of an election never requires free citizens to cower before a temporarily dominant majority… Begin with the facts: A 51-48 percent victory is not a mandate.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26834-2004Nov4.html

  2. rd says:

    To have an adult conversation, you need to have adults in the room.

    We elect politicians to the office, so an adult conversation would be too much to expect of them, particularly if, as recent headlines suggest, they are still as ruled by hormones as the average teenager.

  3. Bill Wilson says:

    There’s reason to be pessimistic about a budget deal. It’s not in the interest of many of our elected officials to compromise. Many Republicans have signed the no-tax pledge, and many Democrats have told their constituents that they will never cut Social Security or Medicare.

    If you are a Republican who can’t raise taxes, or a democrat who can’t cut entitlements, it’s probably in your personal interest to “go over the fiscal cliff.” All you have to do is point the finger at someone else, rather than admit to your constituency that you made a decision.

    It kind of reminds me of the vote to “authorize force” against Iraq. You can be for something, and against it at the same time.

  4. gman says:

    “5. Taxes: Regardless of the outcome of the election, your taxes are going up:”

    Expect middle and upper middle WAGE EARNERS to fall for the ole..”we will lower your rates by a couple of %..eliminate ALL of your deductions..trust us..you will save..”

    “Meanwhile let’s eliminate taxes on capital gains, interest, carried interest, and dividends”…you know where oligarchs make all of their money.

    As a ’1% WAGE EARNER” with MANY deductions in a high state and local tax area and already facing an effective tax burden of 3x that of the Romney, Koch, and Adelson..It looks like I may be the big loser AGAIN even with the Obama victory!

  5. rd says:

    gman:

    As an upper middle-income earner living in NYS, the AMT already eliminates or reduces some of my deductions.

    However, it does open up an interesting possibility:

    We simply make capital gains and dividends part of the income that is subject to the AMT while inflation adjusting the AMT standard deduction on a permanent basis. That would increase the progressive nature of the tax system while not changing the tax rates since not taxing capital gains and dividends now with AMT is essentially just another big loophole like treating perfomance fees as carried interest.

  6. gman says:

    rd,

    That is interesting..but I won’t hold my breath. I fully expect the frown shape of US tax incidence to increase its severity.

    http://i1182.photobucket.com/albums/x458/miliberal1/Income/EffectiveIncomeTaxRate.jpg