-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger
David Siegel is the founder and CEO of Westgate Resorts, a privately-held national timeshare company and resort developer. Siegel recently sent an e-mail to his 8,000 employees stating that “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.” Siegel fails to provide an explanation how an increase in his personal taxes could be offset by firing employees. If firing employees brings in more money for Siegel, then his labor force is padded with the unproductive. Otherwise, Siegel’s actions would appear to be spiteful.
Siegel’s e-mail displays his bitterness at a perceived lack of appreciation and his profound sense of entitlement. The e-mail is full of strawman arguments and devoid of critical thinking.
The economy doesn’t currently pose a threat to your job.
The economy, after four years under the Obama administration, is keeping your job safe. Is there a better argument for his employees to reelect Obama?
[members of the press] want you to believe that we live in a class system where the rich get richer, the poor get poorer.
Maybe that’s because income inequality is growing, as shown by the chart on the right. The media are simply reporting this fact.
Siegel then goes into a long spiel meant to show how much he’s under-appreciated. We see Spiegel’s bitterness when he writes:
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.
Siegel contradicts himself. At the top of the e-mail, the economy wasn’t a threat and now it’s “falling apart.” Siegel also displays his lazy thinking by simplifying a complex set of circumstances into an easily digestible us-versus-them theme. Many people, through no fault of their own, lost everything because of decisions made by the 1%. Siegel continues:
The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed 42 years of my life for.
A classic strawman argument. Siegel just makes things up out of whole cloth.
Siegel isn’t much of an economist either:
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.
No, business is stimulated by demand. As Paul Krugman observes, “Now, however, we’re seeing a much more widespread attack on demand-side economics. More than that, it’s becoming clear that many people don’t so much disagree with the idea that demand matters as find it abhorrent, incomprehensible, or both.”
You see, I can no longer support a system that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive.
More lazy thinking. Siegel sees an American divided into two disjoint classes, but that’s where his ability to analyze the situation ends. Siegel doesn’t understand, or want to understand, that the bulk of the unproductive are where they are because George W. Bush, and his policies and lax regulatory oversight, caused a worldwide recession. That’s the same George W. Bush that Siegel credits himself with putting into the White House. Is it any wonder that Siegel is not appreciated?
Seigel is advocating giving the disastrous Bush policies another chance, just so he can save a few dollars on his income tax. Greed has no shame.
H/T: Michael LaBossiere, Think Progress, Gawker, The New Republic, Kevin Drum, Think Progress.
88 thoughts on “CEO Threatens Employees’ Jobs If Obama Reelected”
Owah,Thais web site is so so good and this looking so nice.. Tryllekunstner
Firing (or Threatening to Fire) Employee Based on His Vote
I’ve recently heard some uncertainty about whether employers may fire employees based on how they voted, or threaten to fire them based on how they voted. The answer — based on my own research — is that all states have laws that ban this sort of conduct as to state elections, and the federal government has a law that bans this sort of conduct as to federal elections.
The behavior of employers who are already acting like Feudal Lords (case in point) is not about profit; it is about power. David Siegel is only an extreme example of the same kind of folks who take out full-page ads in the NY Times saying they will close up shop and fire all their employees if their candidate does not win. Yet these are the same folks, in general, who have been asking for and receiving corporate welfare, the benefits of bail-outs, and all sorts of taxpayer-paid breaks. Their employees cannot deduct busfare to get to work while they are deducting their first-class airline tickets to go have a meeting with someone about which kind of potted plants to put in the lobby. It’s a symptom of our social disease that we end up admiring people like this because we call them “winners.” All they have won is the right to an exemption from conscience. We are not, in general, wise enough to make that clear to ourselves. What a shame!
Hear, hear for TonyC and Raffig!!!
Here in Sweden we had someone with 105 percent tax.
And marginal tax could go up to 90 percent, but 10 percent in the bank is still money earned.
This i sgoing like wildfire, I hope. It should be.
Bullshitters all. Hang him up by his nuts.
What Tony C. said in response to FairlyBalanced. This idea that wealthy people are making business decision based on who becomes President is silly at best. If the demand for your product is there, you can make a profit.
Comments are closed.