David Siegel, the founder and CEO of real estate company Westgate Resorts, is a true piece of work. The billionaire real estate mogul sent a letter to employees that threatened to fire many of his employees if Obama is reelected and told them to consider that when they voted in November. The letter informed his workers that “What does threaten your job however, is another 4 years of the same Presidential administration.” Forbes has pictures of the struggling Joe Six Pack in his gilded throne and equally gilded wife.
In the letter, Siegel expressed desperate frustration with his pitiless existence as a hard-working businessman:
Now, the economy is falling apart and people like me who made all the right decisions and invested in themselves are being forced to bail out all the people who didn’t. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed 42 years of my life for. Yes, business ownership has its benefits, but the price I’ve paid is steep and not without wounds.
The suffering experienced by Siegel and his wife has led them to create a humble home that has attracted international expressions of condemnation. The house modeled on Versailles is two acres with nine kitchens and 90,000 square feet — bigger than a 747 airplane hangar. The home’s mahogany doors and windows alone cost $4 million. By the way, this ABC interview captures Siegel’s craven lifestyle and relationship with his wife, who he insists does not give him any “strength.”
The thought of Siegel penning this heart-felt and desperate letter at the kitchen table of one of the nine kitchens in the mansion is truly heart-breaking.
Here is the letter:
To All My Valued Employees,
As most of you know our company, Westgate Resorts, has continued to succeed in spite of a very dismal economy. There is no question that the economy has changed for the worse and we have not seen any improvement over the past four years. In spite of all of the challenges we have faced, the good news is this: The economy doesn’t currently pose a threat to your job. What does threaten your job however, is another 4 years of the same Presidential administration. Of course, as your employer, I can’t tell you whom to vote for, and I certainly wouldn’t interfere with your right to vote for whomever you choose. In fact, I encourage you to vote for whomever you think will serve your interests the best. […]
Now, the economy is falling apart and people like me who made all the right decisions and invested in themselves are being forced to bail out all the people who didn’t. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed 42 years of my life for. Yes, business ownership has its benefits, but the price I’ve paid is steep and not without wounds. Unfortunately, the costs of running a business have gotten out of control, and let me tell you why: We are being taxed to death and the government thinks we don’t pay enough. We pay state taxes, federal taxes, property taxes, sales and use taxes, payroll taxes, workers compensation taxes and unemployment taxes. I even have to hire an entire department to manage all these taxes. The question I have is this: Who is really stimulating the economy? Is it the Government that wants to take money from those who have earned it and give it to those who have not, or is it people like me who built a company out of his garage and directly employs over 7000 people and hosts over 3 million people per year with a great vacation?
Obviously, our present government believes that taking my money is the right economic stimulus for this country. The fact is, if I deducted 50% of your paycheck you’d quit and you wouldn’t work here. I mean, why should you? Who wants to get rewarded only 50% of their hard work? Well, that’s what happens to me. […]
Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate business, not kill it. However, the power brokers in Washington believe redistributing wealth is the essential driver of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth and this is the type of change they want.
So where am I going with all this? It’s quite simple. If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, as our current President plans, I will have no choice but to reduce the size of this company. Rather than grow this company I will be forced to cut back. This means fewer jobs, less benefits and certainly less opportunity for everyone.
So, when you make your decision to vote, ask yourself, which candidate understands the economics of business ownership and who doesn’t? Whose policies will endanger your job? Answer those questions and you should know who might be the one capable of protecting and saving your job. While the media wants to tell you to believe the “1 percenters” are bad, I’m telling you they are not. They create most of the jobs. If you lose your job, it won’t be at the hands of the “1%”; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country.
You see, I can no longer support a system that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, so will your opportunities. If that happens, you can find me in the Caribbean sitting on the beach, under a palm tree, retired, and with no employees to worry about.
Signed, your boss,
Who will watch over caring men like Siegel? I ask you.
Of course, Siegel gave the world’s least helpful story for Romney since it parallels the no infamous comments at a fundraiser:
Siegel’s letter has been a wake up call for many. So where am I going with all this? It’s quite simple. If a candidate from either of the two monopoly parties is elected, I will have no choice but to reduce the size of this blog. Rather than grow this blog I will be forced to cut back. Since our budget and staff is zero, this will be even more severe in terms of cuts than Siegel’s plan. So, when you make your decision to vote, ask yourself, how will this affect Jonathan?
Thank you for your time.
56 thoughts on “Billionaire Mogul Tells Workers To Vote Their Conscience . . . But He May Fire Them If Obama Is Reelected”
I have been surfing on-line greater than 3 hours lately, yet I never found any attention-grabbing article like yours. Itˇs pretty value sufficient for me. Personally, if all website owners and bloggers made just right content material as you probably did, the internet will likely be a lot more helpful than ever before.
Swathmore: The Yale Law Journal you cite is not applicable to Siegel’s email to his employees because his employees were not subjected to a “captive audience” workplace meeting environment.
idealists707: Consider what the good professor says in one of his latest blog posts, to wit: “Such efforts [to restrict speech] focus not on the right to speak but on the possible reaction to speech — a fundamental change in the treatment of free speech in the West. The much-misconstrued statement of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes that free speech does not give you the right to shout fire in a crowded theater is now being used to curtail speech that might provoke a violence-prone minority. Our entire society is being treated as a crowded theater, and talking about whole subjects is now akin to shouting “fire!””
I hope Siegel gets a speedy and just trial.
What was the max? Only one year? Not twenty?
The scale of penalties needs looking over.
Love your argumenation techniques.
If at first you do not succeed, then repaat endlessly.
Challenge the applicability, no proof that you are right is needed. Just YOUR statement that is is a fact is sufficient
Shall I suspect that you early accepted the docrines from above, including virgin birth, etc.?
Try shouting “Fire!” the next time you go to the cinema.
18 USC § 594 – Intimidation of voters (see above) is not by any stretch even remotely applicable to the letter written by David Siegel and Siegel’s free speech rights, nor is that case about shouting fire in a crowded theatre. You people just don’t like Siegel’s message and it appears to me that many of you have a double standard when it comes to upholding First Amendment rights — you favor free speech when you like the message and condemn free speech when you don’t like the message.
“David Siegel has his free speech rights too.”
Ah yes, that mythical First Amendment which guarantees the freedom from criticism.
Also, not all speech is legal: see Gene.
“David Siegel has his free speech rights too.”
This is just priceless! “Stick ’em up,” must be free speech too, entitling you to one free bag of the bank’s money. Sign me up!
“David Siegel has his free speech rights too.”
You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater or incite violence. That’s illegal. So is intimidating voters. David Siegel should be charged and tried. The law reads (as of January 3, 2012):
18 USC § 594 – Intimidation of voters
Whoever intimidates, threatens, coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, at any election held solely or in part for the purpose of electing such candidate, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 720; Pub. L. 91–405, title II, §204(d)(5), Sept. 22, 1970, 84 Stat. 853; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, §330016(1)(H), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §§61, 61g (Aug. 2, 1939, 11:50 a.m. E.S.T., ch. 410, §§1, 8, 53 Stat. 1147, 1148).
This section consolidates sections 61 and 61g of title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., with changes in phraseology only.
1994—Pub. L. 103–322 substituted “fined under this title” for “fined not more than $1,000”.
1970—Pub. L. 91–405 substituted “Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner” for “Delegates or Commissioners from the Territories and possessions”.
Effective Date of 1970 Amendment
Amendment by Pub. L. 91–405 effective Sept. 22, 1970, see section 206(b) of Pub. L. 91–405, set out as an Effective Date note under section 25a of Title 2, The Congress.
Freedom of speech for Siegel.
You betcha. And we are thus more imprssed by what his money says.
What piece of Bush do you think he bought?
And what piece of Romney (and Obama?) has he bought?
FYI. Russ Baker’s Bush book gave a nice rundown on paybacks in my laat-night’s reading.
Bushie did not get as freshman (fresh he was) congressman to be Nixon’s VP running mate. But his pop Prescott, owned part of Nixon’s launching and had stuff to call in.
So when Poppy loses his second bid for the Senate, he thinks now I’ll get mine from Nixon, who won in ’68.
(OT. Nixon lost to JFK in ’60, and the race for Cal gov in ’62. He six years later is the real comeback kid.)
Wow. Was Poppy Bush disillusioned. Finally made ambassador to NYC, sorry to Nixons east coast owners, sorry solely for his ability to spy on Nixon enemies, sorry to the UN, where he said to a query: “Give me ten days and I will know all I need to know about foreign policy”. (Add numerous jokes about Saudi here.)
It is a never-ending story. Can only recommend it. The most entertaining way to lose your political and “democracy saved me”—cherry.
“Telling or forcefully suggesting how yr employees should vote is the exact way to create problems among your workers and reduce productivity .” Mark Cuban
David Siegel has his free speech rights too.
David Siegel: ‘I Didn’t Try To Intimidate’ Employees With Anti-Obama Email
Yeah. I’m going to have to call bullshit on that one, Dave.
This man, like Romney and Ryan, are disgraces and I will never stay in a Westgate resort again if this is true.
You guys got a contract? I thought that you just gave him your souls againat a verbal agreement.
“Also the signing in blood was rather messy.”
Was there a smell of sulphur?
Thats’s showbiz, or is it politics. Ask the Bushes.
Comments are closed.