john stossel's lying again

[linazelle]

saying outsourcing helps the middle class, by lowering prices...

saying that farming subsidies are wrong


and on and on....

gas prices AREN't the highest when you take inflation into account...

there's no such thing as urban sprawl...

showing "politicians" advocating public education but putting their kids in private schools---seems he can only dig up a decade old pic of Chelsea at Sidwell Friends school :eyes:



The TV's on and I hear him in the background....He is a whore of the highest order.

[Bob3]

1. How much do you think he's being paid by * to say this?

Just wondering.

[blurp]

18. He's being saying this for ages. He's a true believer.

[ebayfool]

32. Their other write-for-hires were true believers too. Didn't stop 'em ...

from taking the money, though.

[Clark2008]

41. This is true.

I read his book last summer.
It was sickening - he only believed it once he got rich, you know.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

2. Gee, it's that Liberal Media again.

:eyes:

[tuvor]

3. Hey, John Stossel: Give me a break!

(Said in your best nasally, condescending tone.)

[Maat]

8. LOL!

That's a good one.

[autorank]

60. "Doctor D" David Schultz gave him a break

Stossel interviewed this massive pro wrestler and challenged him by saying pro wrestling was fake (what a genius). Schultz took exception to this remark and bitch slapped Stossel a couple of times. Stossel whined to Baba Wawa on the next show that his ears were ringing and he had a lot of headaches.

Well, you stupid "moran," you don't mouth off to a pro wrestler when you're standing right next to them.

I think this incident long ago accounts for the brain damaged reporting this guy does.

[LibInternationalist]

4. well, that depends what you call the "middle class"

it does seem to be shrinking pretty fast

[Cobalt Violet]

5. It can't help a middle class that doesn't exist anymore.

Give me a break Stossel. Wonder how much his Bu$hCo. check is for?

[Darkhawk32]

6. He said... "Look at the big picture with job growth"...

They show the job growth over the last 12 years and how good it has been.

I'm like.. "Hey SCHMUCK! The first 8 of those years were with Clinton's economic plan!"

[jab105]

7. Hmmm...haven't seen a LIBERAL get this kind of opportunity

ON A PRIME-TIME SHOW lately...

oh, never mind...

[RBHam]

9. He's breathing?

Must be lying...

[blonndee]

10. Yeah that's why every single member of my farming family has had to sell

their farms for pennies on the dollar they've put into their work. Farmers make *so* much money, and especially those that suck on the govmint tit!

My granddad worked his ass off farming his whole life. My 80-year old grandmother has now put most of the land in CRP. Otherwise, she'd have lost everything they worked their whole lives to sustain and maintain. She's the only member of my family who voted Dem. The rest are so frickin selfish they haven't seen the effects of the RW agenda (they've been poor their whole lives) and so haven't seen the results firsthand.

They and the rest of my family falls into the inscrutable category that Frank looked at in "What's Wrong with Kansas?"

Idiots.

*Edited for stupid spelling mistakes*

[blurp]

19. Wait, don't most of the subsidies go to corp farms?

It seems the family farmer would have it even tougher if a corp were getting government funding through subsidies.

[blonndee]

28. Possibly, but the only complaining I've heard is from people referring to

the "subsidies" poor farmers and ranchers like my grandmother get, which is really pennies. I admit I don't know alot about other situations, including what corp. farms receive. But RWers around here are concerned with ANYONE getting ANYTHING from the govt.

[no name no slogan]

35. Too true-- farmers get sh!t, while agribusiness gets $$ up the wazoo

IMHO THAT's the real crime of the "farm crisis": while family farmers jsut scrape by, year to year, even with subsidies, big agribusiness gets the lions' share of the so-called "help" the farm programs provide.

My wife's parents are family farmers, and only survived the 80s by organizing their fellow farmers. Every year, most family farmers mortgage this year's crop for enough $$ to operate one more year. For every penny a family farmer gets, corporate agribusiness and the factory farms get a nickel. No wonder they can't compete.

Not to mention that these subsidies make food in this country artificially cheap-- oftentimes, chearper than what it costs to produce it. If we were to eliminate farm subsidies as Stossel and the "true believers" at the Cato Institute want, food prices would soar through the roof. They would double, at a MINIMUM.

People in this country have no idea how much their food really costs to produce. If they did, they'd respect family farmers a hell of a lot more than they do.

BTW blonndee-- welcome to DU! Glad to see others here with an ag background who KNOW what family farming is all about! :hi: :toast:

[blonndee]

48. Thanks for the welcome and the info.

I reread my post, and maybe the "selfish" comment doesn't really describe the members of my family who have suffered. I think "ignorant" would be a better term, and I mean that in the kindest way possible, although I can't abide them and their fundamentalism.

It's really strange..they've had to sell their farm and ranch land and yet they somehow DON'T put any responsibility on the govt. They just think that's the way farming is, they love their president, and continue scraping and struggling, eating beans and cornbread, glad they don't have to answer the phone calls from the bank anymore.

(By the way, growing up, I was a poor kid who ATE those beans and cornbread because we couldn't afford to buy any more groceries when we were farming.)

They classify people like my grandmother (different side of the family) who put some of their land in CRP as "welfare recipients," who, of course, they consider lazy and taking charity. These people would NEVER have thought of "organizing" anything. They consider such things to be liberal, evil, harmful union tactics. Not that they actually KNOW anything about this. Like I said, "What's Wrong With Kansas?"

[DELUSIONAL]

11. of course he is -- his lips are moving.

and he sure could be one of the "journalists" being paid to propagandize the bush white house line.

[NYC]

12. Lowering prices so unemployed people can afford to buy?

Is that the plan?

Outsourcing means people lose jobs. People without jobs don't care that the prices have been lowered; they can no longer afford the products.

[linazelle]

17. Then they show ONE woman who got a better job...

as if she represents the masses. How people buy this shit is beyond me.

[LiberallyInclined]

66. did you here him at the end of that segment...?

he quickly and quietly mentioned that the woman's husband and many of her outsourced co-workers are still out of work.
and i'm willing to bet that the husband's lost job paid more than the wife's.

[blurp]

22. Outsourcing means more production overall and an INCREASE in jobs.

Of course, that's GLOBAL job growth and GLOBAL production. The net in a particular country might be negative.

[linazelle]

23. Well we know that ours is the particular country where jobs are being lost

which is why it's not good for America. But you know that.

[blurp]

26. Depends. Does reducing global poverty help America? I think so.

[AG78]

34. That it does

When do we start?

[blurp]

39. Outsourcing delivers more money to the global poor than any charity

We've already started.

I don't just mean computer programming, btw or help desks.

The employment of foreign workers to produce products for America has been one of the greatest transfers of money from a rich country to poor countries all over the world.

If making Nikes in China means gets Americans to give money to an otherwise poor peasant, I say that's just fine.

[high density]

51. You're being sarcastic...

... Right?

Outsourcing is all about raising corporate profits at the cost of decent American jobs. You think it's a good thing that we're creating poor people here in America so that an Indian can have a $2000/yr. call center job? No thanks. We've got to worry about taking care of our own people first before the Indians and the Chinese.

[linazelle]

53. Good point...blurp seems to have an "agenda" n/t

[blurp]

54. No sarcasm here.

You think it's a good thing that we're creating poor people here in America so that an Indian can have a $2000/yr

Nope.

Think about what happens to the savings.

People get the same products at a lower price. What do they do with the extra money? This extra money creates more demand creating more jobs.

We've got to worry about taking care of our own people first before the Indians and the Chinese.

Oh great. Nationalism plus socialism. It's been tried before. It wasn't pretty.

[high density]

62. It would be hard to care about cheap prices...

...if my job was shipped over to India and I had no money to buy the cheap crap with anyway. I'd say this probably hasn't happened to you given that you think that providing jobs to people is a "socialist" endeavor and that outsourcing is some awesome redistribution of wealth.

[NYC]

27. Your unemployment may vary?

As in "your mileage may vary"?

[Clark2008]

43. Again, where is the Henry Ford model?

And I don't mean the Model T.

Henry Ford, yes, a true-blue, dyed-in-the-wool capitalist DID understand one thing: if you don't pay your workers enough to afford your product, what good is it?

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

13. I can't stand John Stossel!

He always ranting about stupid shit. What makes him the expert on everything anyhow?

[Hoping4Change]

14. As a Canuck I worked for US companies that outsourced jobs

here, such as MSN, AT&T, Qwest and several cable companies. These companies paid us a lot less than they paid their US workforce and thats not even factoring in the low Can $ otr the savings they realized by not having to foot healthcare. Anyway talked to ANY US customer who said they paid less for their service! Sure the companies made heaps of money but those savings were never passed on to the consumer. I would like someone to demand for Hier Stoessel to provide one iota of evidence that consumers are paying less as a result of outsourcing.

[SoCalDem]

15. He's a LIBERTARIAN..

Always has been.. But mostly, he's just the Disco version of Andy Rooney.

His type slays me.. They are all for "going it alone" without the gubbmint's help, UNTIL they have a calamity befall them, and then their faces are pressed fully into the trough..

[Sandpiper]

30. Libertarian my foot

Stossel started his career as a consumer advocate, but later discovered that being a corporate advocate pays better.

The guy's a complete bought and paid for shill.

[FormerDittoHead]

70. Another big corp neocon disquised under the illusive "libertarian" label

It's so easy being a libertarian, you never have to be held responsible for standing for anything!

This is why, prior to Rush Limbaugh, most talk radio hosts were also "libertarians".

Everytime I've seen a "libertarian" speak up here, the issue has ALWAYS changed into "they're not THAT kind of libertarian..."

I remember one message CASUALLY listing like 11-12 different "kinds" of libertarian, comprising a matrix of a possible 768 types (sarcastic statistic), none of whom want to take responsiblity for what "other" libertarians expouse. This is all in the face of the fact that SOMEHOW they manage to have ONE libertarian party...

So what the hell does it mean when you call yourself a libertarian?

Until you're able to defend what another libertarian (any one) says, not much.

[Sandpiper]

16. Link to FAIR article on the numerous lies of John Stossel

Give Us a Break

The world according to John Stossel

By Peter Hart

<snip>

While there is a long and honorable tradition of U.S. journalists with definite points of view who hoped that their reporting would have a political impact--from Thomas Paine to Ida Tarbell to I.F. Stone--what distinguishes Stossel is his willingness to warp reality to fit his ideological preconceptions. His reports, notable for their one-sided sourcing and rejection of inconvenient facts, are frequently marred assertions from Stossel and his favored guests that are misleading or factually incorrect.

Stossel's errors are often so obvious that one wonders how they could have ended up on the air.

<snip>

http://www.fair.org/extra/0303/stossel-break.html

[FormerDittoHead]

71. Excellent link..

Too bad the people at Fox News and their viewers don't "expose" HIS bias and gaffs, calling for his resignation.

Liberal bias?

Fair and balanced?

[MisterP]

20. oh, Mr. "the only difference with organic food is that it's grown in

manure and yes I lied completely and shamelessly about this and many other things but I'm always on TV"

[Jacobin]

21. Stossel is such a dickhead

His self righteous little rants are so idiotic.

[MattBaggins]

24. And in other news the sun set again today

wow John Stossel lying who'd a thunk it

[Zomby Woof]

25. It's easy to tell when he's lying

His lips move.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

29. The best part about him.......

....is he looks like he's high on glue while spouting off the garbage he babbles.

[xray s]

31. Cheap labor does not equal cheap prices

Stossel is indeed lying.

Cheap labor costs increase corporate profits, period. They will charge whatever the market will bear for their products.

If they can get $100 for a pair of Nikes they will charge $100, regardless if they are paying some 12 year old in China 1 cent per pair to make them or someone in the US $2 per pair to make them.

If they can get $3500 for a 54" HDTV they will charge $3500, regardless if they are paying some woman in China working a 14 hour day at 65 cents an hour or an American making $15 per hour.

The only reason they search the world for the cheapest labor, the least restrictive labor laws and the most lenient environmental regulations is to maximize their profits.

Pricing has absolutely nothing to do with that decision. Anyone who thinks it does is a damn fool.

[blurp]

37. Several glaring errors in your logic.

First, you assume that there is no competition between corporations. This may be true in some areas, but not most. A corporation charging too high a price will see their customers going elsewhere.

And what about big profits in an industry creating competitors? The bigger the possible profit, the more likely other companies will spring up to compete.

Pricing has absolutely nothing to do with that decision. Anyone who thinks it does is a damn fool.

Bah.

The demand for a product is limited by price and reducing the price can often increase demand and increase profits. The desire for higher profits may mean companies do better if the lower prices.

Compare selling one HDTV for $100,000 versus 100 for $3,000. Which makes you more money?

[bvar22]

44. Thankyou. You just PROVED xray s point:

Manufacturing costs and labor costs really don't make a difference in the final price.

All about PROFIT, baby!

[tsuki]

50. And golden parachutes. You know, we are all about minimum

wage in this country, but what about maximum wage. I really am beginning to see the Japanese wisdom of marrying the maximum wage a CEO of a publicly trade company to the average wage of the worker. Especially now that Bush wants to speculate with payroll taxes of American Workers.

[xray s]

45. Prices are set by supply and demand, the product life cycle and marketing

The only possible situation where labor would be a factor affecting price would be a labor intensive commodity product.

Otherwise, labor is an input cost affecting profits, but doesn't affect the pricing decision for a product.

That is why you can have cheap 20" TV's (mature market, flooded with products) and $3500 HDTV's (developing market, demand exceeds supply), even though they are paying the same poverty wage to the people putting them together in China.

The market gets whatever the market will bear. The cost of labor is an input cost affecting profits. It is not a factor that affects pricing. If you think so, you have never sat in a marketing pricing meeting at a corporation.

[blurp]

52. I think you contradict yourself

You say

Prices are set by supply and demand, the product life cycle and marketing.

and

The cost of labor is an input cost affecting profits. It is not a factor that affects pricing.

Yet the cost of labor is a factor in determining the supply curve, no?

If you think so, you have never sat in a marketing pricing meeting at a corporation.

Think macroeconomically.

[linazelle]

55. Macroeconomic theory is one thing, the reality of global economics

is another. At this point, Americans are suffering because we have a trade deficit created by greedy corporations. The benefits that should be gained by outsourcing are not being realized when people are paid 65 cents an hour--they don't have money to buy American goods, or anybody else's goods for that matter. The reality is, global outsourcing is creating spreading poverty equally--not economic progress. It's flattening our economy to match the economy of the people who produce our goods.

[blurp]

56. Then why do they bother working at all?

The benefits that should be gained by outsourcing are not being realized when people are paid 65 cents an hour--they don't have money to buy American goods, or anybody else's goods for that matter.

So they just keep collecting this change in a piggy bank?

What's the point of working if you can't buy anything with the money?

[linazelle]

58. What "change" areyou referring to? They make ends meet, like the

unemployed people struggle to do in America. They don't have disposable income or discretionary income.

[MADem]

68. Gee, I always thought

...that prices were set by a bunch of fat bastards getting together secretly in contravention of anti-monopoly laws and deciding on a "range" for their products. They compete, sure, but NOT REALLY. Then some asshole from China makes the same product with prison labor at two cents an hour, and dumps the product on the US market, and only THEN the price is adjusted....and the companies move their production to China.

But hey, I'm no economist!

[Clark2008]

46. If there is no middle class, the $100,000 will make you more money

because no one but the new rich - who won't buy cheap - will purchase the product.
So you'd sell more of the $100,000.
The people who once would have bought the $3,000 are using that dough to pay for home repairs - if they have it - since their once $15 a hour job now only pays $9.

[LostInAnomie]

47. That might be true for smaller cost items but not luxury items.

Luxury items have a vested interest in keeping their prices artificially inflated. If they truly competed for the lowest price 54" TV's could cost about 5 bucks each.

Non-luxury items tend to have an inelastic price range because their are other competitors who can cheaply make competing items.

Big ticket items like a big screen TV have an elastic price range because people who are actually willing to fork out the money are willing to pay more for the prestige of owning one. There is no necessity to owning one. Also the price of actually producing one is far to prohibitive for almost any upstart business.

You also have to figure in informal agreements between competing producers.

[Dark]

33. Yea, it helps if your job hasn't already BEEN outsourced. n/t

[Haymare22]

36. Guess Stossel

hasnt been to front range Colorado in a while. Hell, no urban SPRAAAAAAWL HERE!
No urban spraaaaaawl but lots of HEAT ISLAND EFFECT, wonder why?

This guy is like Geraldo; once he seemed interesting now just another nice looking mouth-piece.....and of course he's blaming Clinton again!

[DearAbby]

38. People should write john stossel and ask how big is his slice of the

PAYOLA PIE?

[UdoKier]

40. so farm subsidies don't lower prices?

i thought they did...

[IrishBloodEngHeart]

42. farming subsidies are wrong and gas prices aren't at all time highs

because they mostly go to agri-business not family farms. I would support those that go to family farms, not agri-business

Think about, gas was $1 a gallon 20-25 years ago. Almost everything was about half the price or less 20-25 years ago than it is today.

He is full of crap on everything else you quoted.

[yankeedem]

49. When do we outsource Stossel

I mean really, couldn't an Indian "reporter" read talking points from the Cato Institute cheaper? It's not like Stossel is attractive or anything. Why is ABC paying millions for Stossel when an Indian in Mumbai could voice over the piece for maybe $100,000/year? Maybe I should suggest is to Eisner.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

57. He's been a lying greedhead libertarian brat for years

I've had no use for him since he had a feature about how poor people in the U.S. have nothing to complain because they live better than the street dwellers of Calcutta.

[MsMagnificent]

59. He's quite the cheerleader, isn't he?

Reprobates ...er sorry Republicans don't like Libertarianism just for the fact they REALLY believe in *Smaller Government'
Stossel is trying to become the cheerleader to bring these Great two parties (/sarcasm) together!

I'd like to give him a break...

[durablend]

63. He's a Republitarian!

"Best of both worlds" :puke:

[not systems]

61. farm subsidies are wrong.

They encourage over production of unhealthy low grade foods.

They encourage over utilization of chemicals.

They encourage destruction of land better left unused.

Our artificially low prices under cut farmers in the third world.

Most subsidies go into the pockets of large corporations.

[OneTwentyoNine]

64. Yeah,I agree with Stossell on that.....

Even Pillboy is against farm subsidies if you can believe that. I about fell out of my chair when I heard him say that one day.

Those subsidies were set up rightfully so to help the FAMILY farmer be able to stay on the farm and produce in the depression/dust bowl days.

Now its mega-corporations that own most of these farms and rake in millions in government hand outs.

[kskiska]

65. As Barbara Walters told him after one of his diatribes:

"In your opinion."

[jbnow]

67. A fun part of outsourcing for consumers

are instructions that come with things you put together or need instruction to use.

Maybe I am using this thread as an excuse to complain but it drives me batty. The box does not say where things are made. I needed am electric saw and bought one made specifically for a regional store.

Being,well 'an idiot' would be harsh, but very new and clumsy at doing repair work, I knew enough to read instructions well. It didn't take long to realize this might not have been made in America when it started out:

Mounting the blade turn loose the bolt with six-sided spanner, let the teeth of saw front, insert the blade between stock and clip to the end

NOTE: MUST CHECK THE TOOL SWITCH IF OPERATED SLICKLY FIRST, PRESS THE TRIGGER, AND LUSE AGAIN, IF THE TRIGGER SWITCH CAN SPRING BACK

Luse again? I am about to luse it for good.
We might get things cheaper due to outsourcing but we lose jobs and QUALITY

[Domitan]

69. Paging Dr D David Schultz

The blond guy with the afro on the upper right

The man who possessed the slap heard around the world, and aimed it at the eardrums of ABC 20/20 reporter John Stossel when Stossel dared to question the legitimacy of the world of professional Wrestling, "Dr. D" is in the house! One of Hulk Hogan's most brutal challengers during The Hulkster's first WWF championship reign, including a bloody encounter in Boston that remains legendary to this day. Schultz was well known as one of the toughest men to ever enter the sport, and often teamed with Roddy Piper during the early days of the WWF's national expansion in feuds with the likes of Jimmy Snuka and Andre the Giant. After leaving the professional wrestling world, Schultz became a trainer, teaching many stars including Tony Devito of the Ring of Honor tag team The Carnage Crew. Schultz remained outspoken against the steroid problems of the wrestling business in the early 1990s and has also worked as a bounty hunter. His appearance today marks the first time in 15 years that "Dr. D" has returned to the King of Sports in any capacity. You can meet him at FAN SLAM!
http://www.1wrestling.com/news/newsline.asp?news=16185

Hey Dr. D, time for you to have a talk with Stossel again.