READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
On Tuesday evening, 35 days before the "fiscal cliff", "Piers Morgan Tonight" welcomed experts Robert Reich and Carol Roth to the program where the two debated the statement by business magnate and investor Warren Buffett. As paraphrased by Piers Morgan, Buffett is of the opinion that "the combination of reduced spending and a few higher taxes for the wealthier people in America is the perfect answer."
"You're comparing apples to oranges," responded Roth. "The amount of tax hikes we're talking about here, Piers, are about three percent of the GDP."
"Having a three percent increase in taxes as a percentage of the GDP," continued Roth, "will throw us back into a recession."
"I don't think that's correct." argued Reich. "We have an almost record percentage of total national income going to the wealthiest one percent of Americans."
"They are paying a lower tax rate today," said Reich, "and effective tax rates that they paid in about 80 years and it will help solve the problem because that means more revenues into government. Almost everybody, everybody who has looked at this issue, common sense party people, will say that you've got to have some balance between spending cuts and tax increases, particularly on the wealthy."
Earlier in the program, chairman of the Republican National Committee, Reince Priebus emerged from "below the parapet", as described by Morgan, and talked about his thoughts on the election, saying "I think that what we can conclude is that we've got to be better, and that's something that we're committed to doing."
"I think our grassroots and our donors are all committed to doing more and doing more of a sustained operation in the years to come."
Priebus also reaffirmed that even in hindsight, Romney was still the ideal presidential pick for the GOP. "I think he would have made a great president," said Priebus. "I think most people that were polled actually thought that he would make a better president than even Barack Obama."
Watch the clips, and listen to the interviews, as "Piers Morgan Tonight" continues their coverage of emerging politics and developments on the fiscal cliff.
» Follow Piers Morgan Tonight on Twitter
> Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Instagram
Dear Piers, I have watched you for a year. After last night I refuse to watch anymore. I thought you were supposed to be non biased. You clearly have a political agenda. Your demeanor and questions were out of control.I'm sure you don't care but I hope you think about it during your next interview'. Remember it is supposed to be an interview
What is your net worth? 20+ million and are you even a USA citizen? If so, this will clearly effect you and have to pay your share for the National debt and ObamaCare.
Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's". In other words, "Rich people, pay your proper rightful Caesar y tax's"!
Robert Reich should not say I think. If he is having a civilised conversation then saying I think that such and such is the case, instead of saying that it is the case is an amiable way of inviting disagreement, of allowing others to stretch their economic legs and with practice grow in the art of conversation and that of talking of the topic, economics in this case. Saying I think is less intimidating than saying this is the situation, but when he is talking about what he in fact does know to be the case on television, when for one there is not time to let everyone give their opinion and then to right all the direction the company has taken the conversation in, in ht eend to afirm his knowledge more firmly having allowed others to practice a bit, he should take in a less hesitant way of talking so as to to stop the general public being gullied by the first propoganda expert who twists the truth. He should be firmer about economic truths.
These republican women look merely pretty or glamorous but they are really little blue stockings with an extrodinary amount of facts in their heads and are as fast and agile as all hell, they are a mass of learnt lines that they can spout out at any moment to confuse issues and they need equally tough talkers to go into exchanges with them.
He also should explain why the taxing the rich more does not effect the economy. It is useful if experts give you the facts you need when friends and relatives try to argue you down and he just stated that taxing the super rich does not reduce the economy or grow it necessarily without explaining why. As we have people like the petrol companies mounting campagns to fill the public with their particualr version of things, so that the public is full of arguements that they can use to back up republican points of veiw, those that feel the versions the loobies are paying for so much time and effort to promulgate are wrong, have to pull out all the stops to inform the public so that the public have the arguements they need to refute the petrol companies and the bankers and such.
As being a purveyor of information in interveiws is not their normal job, experts should go through all the interveiws they give and maybe that others do to, looking for ways to present their material better in the short time this sort of interveiw gives them, so as to gain practice in this feild. rose macaskie madrid.
Good job, Carol Roth! If that interview was a fight, the ref would have stepped in to stop it. Instead, Piers did. More Carol, please!
It seems to me that Washington doesn’t care much about what they average American citizen thinks should be done with the tax code, loop holes and special deductions. Perhaps many people would like to hear how Chris Christe would design a new tax code if he had a “magic wand”….(and without lobbyists influence!)
Robert Reich's rationale is fundamentally preposterous. The tax increases proposed against the wealthy serve no systemic benefit whatsoever, particularly to the middle class. It's been demonstrated that the tax increases leftists desire would fund current federal spending for just 8 days. This entire debate is absurd. If this paltry revenue increase were the salve for our nation's economic woes, then the government could print or borrow the funds to spur the growth they anticipate will improve the economy while, at the same time, preserving capital reinvestment and spending. The reason they don't do this is because they know the entire exercise is a Marxist farce. This is an intellectually, financially and morally disingenuous argument and leftists know it.
Reich was already proven miserably wrong in his economic analysis over the past four years alone. How many swings at the economic pinata do networks plan to give him?
Reich and Krugman are great fans of Keynsian stimulus, so why not go full retard? Since neither party is willing to have the grown up discussion that the system is unsustainable (9% Federal healthcare spending increases year over year means over a trillion dollars in healthcare spending in a decade). Give every taxpayer $50 K in stinulus check, then execute the rich as class enemies and take everything they have. That should set up some Schumpeter style "creative destruction" to restart the economy. After the Dark Ages, that is... But at least the GOP could do the "I told you so" dance in 2016 (assuming we're not shooting it out in the ruins of the burned out cities...)
1% across the board for everyone!
Notify me of new comments via email.