Alan Simpson Just Asked Me to Leave Rich People Alone

[davidswanson]

Version that includes video clips here:
http://warisacrime.org/content/alan-simpson-just-asked-me-leave-rich-people-alone

I'm feeling pretty guilty. I hadn't known I was causing billionaires so much suffering. The former co-chair of President Obama's deficit (a.k.a. catfood) commission just asked me during a public event to stop going after rich people. Then he came up to me after the event to make sure I'd gotten the point. He seemed truly worried about it.

This was a panel discussion at the University of Virginia. The panelists were Simpson, David Walker (former U.S. comptroller, former partner and global managing director of Arthur Andersen, and longtime deficit hysteric), moderator Larry Sabato, and odd-man-out Dean Baker (co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research). I say odd-man-out about Baker because Sabato introduced the panelists as all agreeing about things that only Sabato, Simpson, and Walker seemed to agree on (and I'm including the audience when I say that). Sabato declared the national debt the biggest crisis of our lifetimes and claimed that "no foreign country can ever do to us what we're doing to ourselves" by going into debt.

"I love him dearly," said Sabato of Alan Simpson during an elaborate and very personal introduction. Walker and Baker got dry readings of written bios. The first four questions went to Simpson. And Simpson went straight after Social Security and Medicare. He said the word "defense" twice in passing, but literally just said the word as part of a list of areas to be addressed. Sabato then went to Baker for a couple of questions, then to Walker. And then Sabato asked Simpson to address what Walker had said. And this sequence was repeated, through which each of Baker's very persuasive refutations of what the other panelists had said was never replied to by the other panelists.

Here's a video clip of Dean Baker's first comments, in which he explains (in 4 minutes 22 seconds) why we should not be worried about Social Security, why an actual health coverage system would eliminate the deficit, why fixing the deficit won't fix the economy, but why devaluing the dollar might help.

Here's another clip of Baker, in which (in under 7 minutes) he explains that the collapse of the economy is a big cause of the deficit, a healthy economy could eliminate the deficit, we could save $270 billion per year by making prescription drugs generic, and free-market health vouchers that allowed people the choice of buying into the health coverage of Canada, Germany, Costa Rica, or anywhere else would increase our life spans and put $15,000 savings per year in each person's pocket. The voice at the end pretending Baker had talked about a completely different topic is Larry Sabato's.

When it was time for audience participation, I complimented Baker on the healthcare solution and proposed we try to buy into Vermont's plan if Washington lets it get away with creating one. Then I asked basically this:

"We could cut three-quarters of our military and still have the biggest one in the world. We have a war that two-thirds of the country wants ended. Up through the Korean War we used to increase taxes on rich people and corporations, not cut them, to pay for wars. Why is it inconceivable that anything be done about this, and why is it not even talked about?"

Baker responded, basically agreeing with me. Walker, too, agreed with me, said he favored cutting "defense" and also objected to the unconstitutionality of undeclared wars launched by presidents. Simpson too said he agreed and wanted the military cut. And it's true that cutting it was part of his proposal to the president. But then Simpson stressed a particular part of the military that he would like to cut, namely . . . wait for it . . . healthcare for soldiers. Here's that bit. Listen at the end for Sabato's punditry and refusal to ever be mistaken.

There were more questions from the audience, but Simpson addressed himself to me when he explained what was wrong with taxing wealthy people. We have to get away from talking about the rich versus the poor, he said. For one thing, when you talk about who's responsible for something, the commission you're working on can't come to any agreement. The Iraq Study Group, for example, had to set aside who was to blame in order to propose what should be done. (Of course, most of us don't spend our lives serving on bipartisan commissions, and taxing the rich is as forward looking a concept as any other; blaming the rich was a straw man Simpson created.)

Simpson had a second argument for leaving the poor suffering rich alone. We could confiscate all the wealth of everyone with over $1 million, he claimed, and only pay for running the government for a single year. Now, first of all, that's an outrageous lie, but it's also another straw man. Taxing the rich progressively and heavily year after year, as the United States used to do when it had a prosperous economy is quite different from confiscating everything. And doing so wouldn't have to pay for the entire government in order to pay for part of it.

Baker didn't pick up on the topic of taxing the wealthy, but he did respond to Simpson's request never to ask who was responsible for anything. Here's what Baker said, followed by Sabato objecting (joking, ha ha) that he depends on a lack of accountability. Following Sabato are Simpson's closing remarks in which he repeats that we must not blame the rich or anyone else, although it would be a good idea to blame poor people who bought four houses with no money down. I'm reminded of the case against the estate tax that was costing so many poor families their farms, specifically of the fact that not a single such family could be found in the country to represent the horrible trend. How many people do you know who went out and bought four houses with no money down? And even if you can find one, do you think he or she qualifies for blame while all members of government are off the hook? Simpson concludes be stressing that government cannot provide people with anything they might want. Watch the clip:

After the event, Simpson came up to me, shook my hand and blathered some more nonsense along the same lines. I asked if he could tell me how much wealth everyone with over a million dollars had, and he began ranting about how I needed to stop blaming people. I asked my friend next to me if he'd heard me blame anyone. I asked Simpson if we couldn't forget blaming people, look forward, and still end the wars, cut the military, and tax the rich. He replied as if he were Michelle Bachmann staring into the wrong camera. He was having a conversation with someone who wasn't there, certainly not with me. He wanted the rich to be left alone and he wanted me to leave them alone. Finally, he wanted me to go out and vote for people who would do what I wanted rather than just hanging around like some kind of slacker who goes to panels rather than spending every waking moment voting.

"Anonymous blogging," Simpson had remarked earlier in the evening, "is cutting America to shreds." I've signed my name to this, Senator.

Version that includes video clips here:
http://warisacrime.org/content/alan-simpson-just-asked-me-leave-rich-people-alone

[defendandprotect]

1. Alan Simpson is one of the lowest thugs the GOP ever had --

What we need is for Simpson and the rich to leave the poor and middle class alone!!

Leave Social Security and Medicare alone!!

Elites have long had their eyes on the pot of gold that is Social Security!!

[indepat]

25. Simpson's appointment to the Catfood Commission is most curious indeed

:patriot:

[Enthusiast]

37. It was no accident. nt

[indepat]

42. Surely everyone knew Simpson's politics, his agenda, and his plan

for social security and it wasn't pretty. :patriot:

[HowHasItComeToThis]

2. HE HAS ALWAYS BEEN A THUG

[slipslidingaway]

3. Thanks knr n/t

[slipslidingaway]

4. Baker - " If we fix our HC system, we don't have this huge deficit problem ..."

from the first video.

:thumbsup:

[bertman]

5. The fact that President Obama appointed Simpson to be co-chair of the

Deficit Reduction/Catfood Commission is so outrageous and uncalled for that it is criminal. Thank you for standing up to that slimy bastard Simpson.

RECOMMEND.

[WillyT]

6. K & R !!!

:kick:

[bengalherder]

7. Leave rich people alone!

You might make them feel as if their ill-gotten gains were....well, ill-gotten or something. We should be grovelling and begging them all not to 'go Galt' on us undeserving rabble.

[emsimon33]

8. k&r

[DCKit]

9. Kickety. nt

[ornotna]

10. The poor dear

[Zorra]

11. Nice work, bro. Anonymous blogging is cutting conservatives to shreds. nt

[gratuitous]

12. At long last, Mr. Swanson, have you no shame?

I can't believe that you think taxing Charlie Sheen and Paris Hilton an additional and unconscionable three cents on every dollar they "earn" above $250,000 per year would do anything for anyone! Why don't you just toss them in the ovens at Auschwitz while you're at it? You hoi polloi have simply got to learn to tighten your belts. Sure, worker productivity has gone steadily up for the last 30 years while real wages adjusted for inflation have actually dropped. But all that wealth created by labor has to go somewhere, and we can't just be handing it out willy-nilly; no, it must go to the wealthy, or it will be even worse than an anonymous blog post!

I'm glad we had this little chat. I hope you learned something.

[davidswanson]

14. I'm really sorry

really

[The Doctor.]

17. Yes... that bastard....

:blush:

*snicker-snicker*

[ThomCat]

13. Simpson is wealthy, he is well bribed by the wealthy,

he works for the wealthy to represent the needs and goals of the wealthy, so he has internalized the rhetoric, the claims, the rationalizations, and the excuses of the wealthy.

It is an hermetically sealed bubble he's in.

The interests and concerns of poor people couldn't find their way inside that bubble with blow-torches and dynamite.

[JackBeck]

15. Preach.

I can't help but think of the old-school chant "Shame! Shame! Shame!" as I read what you wrote.

[moondust]

16. He's protecting the High Priests of Capitalism.

From the clinging, scruffy masses. That's his job as an old soldier in the army of greed. :smoke:

[bobbolink]

47. Maybe not, but I'd like to give it a try.

Where is the extra stash of blowtorches and dynamite kept?

:evilgrin:

[shanti]

53. doesn't even have the decency to look him in the eye

he's old, he got his, you ain't getting none, fuck y'all. that's his message, basically. :eyes: he's a POS.

[mntleo2]

18. How does it feeeel, Mr Rich Man?

In 1996 when Welfare DEFormed was passed, it was after the trashing of low income people who became the face for the myth of the Welfare Queen who never existed.

Listen to the entire name of this bill written by Robert Rector, Heritage Foundation Fellow:
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act

As if the poor were *not" "responsible" and they did not "work". That law in essence says that the "only" contribution to communities is saying, "do you want fries with that?" "Work" is not raising the next generation to take care of us and run our infrastructure for the future of our country, it is not giving to your neighbors, volunteering in your schools, participating in your community betterment, all that is codified into law as "doing nothing". The *only* thing you can do that is "responsible" is use your body to further enrich the rich guy, THAT is "doing something" for your community.

Let me define poverty in this country: Many people believe poverty is a "choice" thanks to idiots like Rector. No.

Poverty is an institution and it is based on racism, classism sexism (including LGBT), and ageism. This insitituion is one that benefits all classes above in many ways. The labor of the poor makes things cheaper for the upper classes so they can spend less and save their money. Like that cheap gardener who sweats their life blood while mowing the lawn for a song or the WalMart Greeter who is locked in at night and forced to work for free while not making enough to pay the rent,or the daycare worker who would never dream of healthcare even though she is exposed to sick kids every day and has no sick leave to tend to her own or her family's illnesses.

The reason Robert Rector wrote that bill is an interesting story. One time he had met with some low income welfare moms at a DC community meeting who were calling for change. They were low income women who had fled their communities in Virginia and had come to DC to get college educations. Where they had come from they had little hope of making enough to feed their families. After centuries of living under the oppression that came out of the slave labor of their ancestors, the largest dream they were allowed there was working in the Big House as a maid. As many were doing all over the country, these women left their communities and went to college to (gasp) make a livable wage and actually provide enough for their families.

Rector was incensed that these uppity women were "using the System" to better themselves. He had no problem with his own friends sitting around their private pools collecting their tax free dividends, but a low income single mom using a fraction of that to EDUCATE herself????? Teh NERVE! So he ran home and penned the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunities Act. After all his pool sitting friends needed MAIDS not educators, they needed gardeners not architects, they want nannies to take care of their kids so they don't have to themselves, they did not want African American psychologists to analyze their kids when they display detachment disorders later in life.

The poor are fodder for blame for all the societal woes, they are stereotyped into being drug addicts, alcoholics, child abusers ~ all things that are just prevalent in the upper classes as well, they are just hidden. However the punishment for all these things are far more prevalent for the poor and the Prison Industrial Complex is growing in leaps and bounds while using their prisoners as slave labor to further the blame.

At that time when Welfare DEFormed was passed, the poor paid the highest proportion of their income in taxes than in any other class. At that time the low wage worker was not paid any better than they are today as far as a livable wage. At that time the cost of food, housing, medical care and transportation took just as much from the little they had. At that time corporations paid less than 8% of the revenue, and the rich, while having to pay more than they do now, made a far less sacrifice to pay taxes, enjoying enough left over to more than suffice for their pleasure and never having to worry about the necessities. In 1996, over 60% of the revenue was paid by wage earners (73% of which were low wage workers), 30% paid by small businesses.

Today is it no different as a matter of fact inflation and taxation has only taken more from meager incomes that are suffering further. While the poor pay for the roads, court system, community commons, the rich who use these things at a far greater proportion, pay little or nothing.

When this Welfare DEFormed was passed, few in the classes above low income people cared because, well, that law they mistakenly thought, did not apply to them. Obviously they did not read their Constitution closely enough because anyone with any knowledge of that document knows laws are *not* passed for a particular class. Activists like me tried to warn the middle class, "you are next", but we were booed off the stage. The economy was booming and they fell for the myth that anyone one who was poor was out of "choice". The cry of the poor about what was happening to them fell on dear ears ~ as a matter of fact it was called "class warfare" every time the institution of poverty was so much as mentioned.

That is until the middle class began to fall down to the ranks of the poor. To their horror they too began to be treated, blamed, and considered "lazy" because they were poor. I cannot tell you how many time I hear from them, "I did all the right things. I worked hard. I paid my taxes. I obeyed the law. I was in the PTA, I took care of my family. I went to church. I was a good neighbor..."

These were all the things many poor tried to say as well. While I would never wish poverty on my worst enemy, I would say that the falling down of the middle class was a windfall for the poor because when the middle class began to join their ranks and get the same treatment THEN it becomes a crisis. In a sad way I would say, "The more the merrier ..." Because we are now seeing more people who are speaking up ...and because they are middle class ~ or were ~ they have the sympathy and power to capture the ears of media and policy makers in a way the poor could never dream.

The most important part of all this is getting back to Welfare DEFormed. Because that whole movement was brought on by disgruntled rich people who knew that if anyone looked closely enough they would see the coming bubbles that enriched them and the dog and pony show it was. I can tell you the poor saw it. But with all those experts we heard then, those rich people, their paid scholars, politicians and others ridiculing and drowning out the cries that the time would come when we would see a dying empire, a broken economy, illegal wars that again enriched the elite and caused death to those below them, and a time when it would become obvious that rest of us had sold us a bill of goods, well that would never happen.

I am glad the middle class is waking up to the truth about who to blame for our country's woes and it the poor. It is not class war, it is the damn truth, it is ALL because of the rich who use the rest of us as their galley slaves and then blame us to call attention away from what is their responsibility as people whop have been enriched and enjoyed their privileges at everyone else's expense.

So Senator Simpson, people like me are on our knees thanking God for people like David Swanson continue to point out the obvious. I suspect you are worried about the coming torches and pitchforks storming those gated communities that WILL happen unless you begin to pay your fair share. You know, it is about the Personal Responsibility you seem so concerned about with others. And it is about the Work Opportunities your friends have sent overseas and then got tax breaks for doing it.

It is about who the REAL Welfare Queens are, and Sir is not us. We have given our fair share and your friends' turn is next. As someone who has seen the needless and harsh punishment of millions simply for being poor as I have suffered under your friends' illusions about what we are and what we have done and how worthless we are compared to your friends'idle, elitist, un-American, and selfish pastimes, and I have to ask:

HOW DOES IT FEEEEEL?

Cat in Seattle

[999998th word]

21. Thank you

[MedleyMisty]

50. Preach it

K & R and a tip of the hat and a hug of the heart to you.

[shanti]

55. yeah!

:thumbsup:

[hfojvt]

19. Simpson appears to be way off

According to Wikipedia, total household net worth is about $56 trillion, according to the website "Who rules America" the top 1% have about 35% of all the wealth. Which would give them over $19 trillion in wealth. The federal budget in 2010 only spent about $3.7 trillion.

On the other side, do people with over $1 million in wealth equal the top 1%? Well, according to the 2002 census of wealth, 8.5% of all households had a net worth of over $500,000. So I would guess that those with over $1 million in wealth are more than the top 1%, or that a person needs more than $1 million in assets to be in the top 1%.

Of course, in a practical sense, if all that wealth was confiscated, it would have to be sold before it could pay for anything, and without wealthy buyers there would be massive deflation.

Also, for 2005, the INCOME of those tax filers with AGI over $500,000 was only $1.38 trillion, which would not cover the whole federal budget. The total income of tax filers making between $25,000 and $100,000 was $3.23 trillion, but almost double the total income was divided up between 75 times as many people/households.

[Enthusiast]

38. They don't care if their proclamations

are accurate, they just want to repeat them often enough that they sink in.

And the argument is over returning the tax rate to 2000 levels. This is an increase of 4%. And that is hardly a confiscatory level.

[sabrina 1]

20. Lol, he's really worried about those poor rich people, isn't he?

Hilarious, and I know he has said that he wants to cut Veteran's benefits. He said they were heroes when they went to war, but that they're not being heroes now, in fact they are harming their country, he says, by selfishly collecting their benefits.

How come this addle-brained idiot is given so much attention? I wouldn't invite him to a discussion about putting out the garbage.

I guess once you belong to the club, it doesn't matter how senile you are.

Great post, David and very funny how upset Simpson is about the rich having to pay.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheKentuckian]

23. Simpson should be hounded to his grave and have his lies destroyed

[TBF]

24. Excellent - recommended. nt

[patrice]

26. K&RRRRRRRR~ Thanks, David! nt

[Poboy]

27. R'd

[aquart]

28. Isn't Simpson an S&L criminal?

[upi402]

29. Alan Cranston?

"Cranston was reprimanded by the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics for "improper conduct" on November 20, 1991 after Lincoln Savings head Charles Keating's companies contributed $850,000 to voter registration groups closely affiliated with the senator. Keating had wanted federal regulators to stop "hounding" his savings and loan association. Although the committee found that "no evidence was presented to the Committee that Senator Cranston ever agreed to help Mr. Keating in return for a contribution," the committee deemed Cranston's misconduct the worst among the Keating Five. Cranston decided against running for a fifth term while he battled prostate cancer."

Not sure... is this the guy you're thinking of?

[aquart]

33. Probably. Thanks.

You think you'll never forget and then, poof! All gone.

[midnight]

30. Why would Obama appoint this man to the deficit committee?

"I asked Simpson if we couldn't forget blaming people, look forward, and still end the wars, cut the military, and tax the rich. He replied as if he were Michelle Bachmann staring into the wrong camera. He was having a conversation with someone who wasn't there, certainly not with me. He wanted the rich to be left alone and he wanted me to leave them alone."

[xchrom]

31. recommend

[peace frog]

32. K / R

Thanks for attempting to educate a dunce like Simpson.

[julian09]

35. Does Simpson have military installations or Govt contractors

in his state?

[Glassunion]

34. Leave Rich People Alone!!!!

[cascadiance]

46. +1 Beat me to it!

[shanti]

56. going viral!

:)

[Enthusiast]

36. Anonymous blogging is cutting America to shreds?

Hey Simpson, I think your greed is cutting America to shreds.

They don't want blogging to be anonymous so they can retaliate against those that say things unapproved by the ruling elite. And THAT is a fucking fact.

[shanti]

57. he has no shame

n/t

[itsnotaboutu]

39. Tax the rich.....

My guess is that Alan Simpson must be in the super wealthy bracket because he objects so strongly to taxing the rich. Is he afraid he might have to pay a couple of extra pennies for his share of the burden?:cry:

Poor rich babies we are always picking on them, don't they have enough private security to protect them from the unwashed multitudes?
I feel sooo sorry for them,:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[WVRICK13]

40. I Find Politicos Who Try To Intimidate Me Amusing

The only thing that kind of action does is make me more vocal and more far reaching in my education of the public.

[Ignis]

41. "Anonymous blogging...is cutting America to shreds."

I'm so very glad he's got his eye on the foremost problems that our nation is facing.

:wtf:

[senseandsensibility]

43. K, R, and thanks for posting.

Simpson's true colors need to exposed at every opportunity.

[Juche]

44. I lost most of my respect for him when he showed he couldn't tell life span from life expectancy

The guy doesn't seem to realize that life expectancy may have gone up 30+ years in the last 100 years, but life span has only budged 5-10 years. The fact that fewer people die under 10 doesn't change how the SS program works or is funded.

The fact that someone in charge of changing programs like medicare and SS doesn't understand something that basic is pretty disturbing.

[MedleyMisty]

51. Most of our government is incapable of complex thought

or of understanding things.

It's part of being a psychopath. Also explains the word salad and blatant hypocrisy. Oh, and the evil lack of a soul.

[Octafish]

45. Anonymous Bloggers for davidswanson.

Gee. The thought of the rich paying their way really makes Simpson go haywire.

Really hit a nerve with the idea of why we don't talk about raising taxes to pay for war. Way to go on every level, davidswanson!

[OwnedByFerrets]

48. Big K and R for posting Thanks

[sce56]

49. Oh I'm on those guys he wants to cut my health care away from!

Lets see Yes I pay $38 dollars a month for TRICARE. When I go to the hospital I do pay co pays since the local base only has a clinic anytime me or my dependents go to see an off base provider I pay $12 - $50 depending on who I see for what!

But guess what, when I joined in 1974, like countless others they wanted me to get in and stay in they offered me FREE HEALTH CARE DENTAL AND COMMISSARY EXCHANGE benefits for LIFE if I did twenty years. That was the recruiting sing song not just initial but the Reup counselors said the same thing! Do your 20 years and you will be set for your retirement. They promised it so I'm still pissed that I have to pay that monthly payment for TRICARE! Oh by the way I do not have to pay the Tricare fee I could just sit at the clinic day after day and wait for space available appointment when a scheduled appointment was a no show! I hear it is the same for dental like I have weeks of time available to sit and wait for care!
I may not be a combat veteran but there were plenty of opportunity to get me killed in 1982 during a tac-eval several bombs went off around bases in Germany planted in POV's of soldiers a evaluator for our exercise went home and got in his car (POV) and the bomb below his seat killed him! If WWIII would have broke out in that time frame, as the Reagan Bush admin kept warning us it could, my life expectancy was about 17 seconds the time it took for a SS missile to travel across the border into my SAM battery and hit us with Germ or chemical weapons as we were constantly warned would indeed happen since we were high on the targets list! My family living in Bad Hersfeld would not have been very lucky either in Govt quarters with the 3rd Amored Cav Reg. stationed there they would have been a most likely missile target too and they did not have things like chem suits and gas masks to protect them in an attack!
Yeah I feel I earned that retirement and all of those benefits they PROMISED me to keep me in the service for 20 years of my life! So how about Simpsons health care and retirement plan he got from the govt? I bet he don't have to pay anything for his care and he also gets to use the Military Treatment facilities also!

[KoKo]

52. Thanks for this info, David. Sorry you and Dean Baker had to appear with that scum...but,

if you didn't appear...who would speak up for the rest of us who have "no voice" these days.

Thank You and Dean Baker for standing up for your beliefs and those of many of the rest of us out here.

:kick:

[Duval]

54. OMG. But We Knew they/crazy, n/t

[2banon]

58. shoulda said, I'd be happy to leave you alone as soon as you stop ripping me off and return what you

stolen from the people you ripped it off from!

[Tuesday Afternoon]

59. Alan Simpson can kiss my poisoned ivy ass.n/t