• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

The Trump Administration rants about ABC News And NBC, Says They Should Lose FCC Licenses

Mediafrog+ said:
If you are only getting 3% return on your investments you need to overhaul your portfolio or fire your financial advisor.💸💰💵🔥🔥🔥
Click to expand...
First, I am talking about yield without distribution of capital gains or withdrawals.-.

You can get more than around 3%, but it is taxable. If you balance between taxable and non-taxable investments, and are looking for at least inflation-matching capital gains, you are not going to get better than around 3% after taxes.
 
Larry said:
And by that rate of return, if you have $12 million invested you would receive about $360,000/year in investment income, in addition to whatever other income you have. I’d say $12 million in assets makes a person “rich”
Click to expand...
That income is taxable. If you are in states like IL, NJ, NY, MA, CA, etc., you have considerable state taxes along with about the highest IRS rate.

When I was full-time employed, living in CA, about 54% of my earnings went to state and federal taxes as well as Social Security contributions. When I went "self employed" I made more, but I had to pay all of the Social Security payments, both for "employee" and "employer". So I was at about 60% of my income going to the government... not even including real estate tax, sales tax, the enormous CA vehicle tax, etc.
 
ted chittenden said:
Unless I'm interpreting the quote wrong, I believe the "holy martyr" in this case to be Charlie Kirk and not Donald Trump. I mean Trump ain't dead yet...
Click to expand...
Valid clarification. The poster did not specify, so I likely mistook the reference. My statement is equally valid for either person.
 
davideduardo said:
Just as a clarification, $12 million today is not "rich".
Click to expand...

Here's how Motley Fool defines "rich."

www.fool.com

How Much Money Does It Take to Be 'Rich'? Here's What the Numbers Say

No single number can tell you how wealthy you are, but net worth comes close. Find out the net worth of the wealthiest Americans and how to calculate yours.
www.fool.com www.fool.com

Americans in the 75th to 89.9th percentile by net worth had an average net worth of $1.1 million as of 2022, according to the Federal Reserve. Americans in the top 10% had an average net worth of $7.8 million.
Click to expand...

So under this definition, Charlie Kirk is rich. So am I! Haha.
 
davideduardo said:
Just as a clarification, $12 million today is not "rich". Kirk reportedly got some money for private (corporate meetings, etc) presentations, just like most celebrities do.

... who won an election where the person who I assume reflects your views lost.
Click to expand...
Gaslight away si–
ted chittenden said:
Unless I'm interpreting the quote wrong, I believe the "holy martyr" in this case to be Charlie Kirk and not Donald Trump. I mean Trump ain't dead yet...
Click to expand...
Referring to the fact that if we mention him on line we're being threatened with being snitched on, reported to our employers, shamed online and put in a database for lifetime banishment. WE have Congresspeople demanding all Social Media sites remove all "celebrating murder" (criticism of) this person who is defacto not legally allowed to be criticized. Sounds like Revelation-,mark of the beast, the authors had to add up the numbers of his name to 666 (to designate Nero)
Bots are crawling all over looking for mentions of him. People are being encouraged to snitch and send screenshots of their friends' posts by Government officials AND MY OWN SENATOR.
But nothing to see here. Nothing at all.
 
davideduardo said:
First, I am talking about yield without distribution of capital gains or withdrawals.-.

You can get more than around 3%, but it is taxable. If you balance between taxable and non-taxable investments, and are looking for at least inflation-matching capital gains, you are not going to get better than around 3% after taxes.
Click to expand...
JUST STOP! THAT'S NOT REMOTELY WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. Play this "are you going to believe Donald J. Trump or your lying eyes?" somewhere else, even if you are a mod. I got a thread pulled for talking about what was actually Fox News content and we're pricing tea in China (DON'T ANSWER THAT)_
 
Mediafrog+ said:
If you are only getting 3% return on your investments you need to overhaul your portfolio or fire your financial advisor.💸💰💵🔥🔥🔥
Click to expand...

That depends on if the 3% is the average return of the market. If the average return is lower, then you're doing well; if the average return is higher, then you're doing not so well. Also, keep in mind when dealing with stocks, how large the reward you get will depend on how great a risk you take with the greater reward given to those who take the greater risk--if that reward surfaces.
 
Y2kTheNewOldies said:
Sinclair moves the Charlie Kirk Special to Youtube via the National Desk Youtube Page and not with its initial plans to pre-empt Jimmy Kimmel via its ABC Affiliates they manage.
Click to expand...

Their affiliate rep pointed out to them that they would be in violation of their agreement. They'd still be liable to air the spots.
 
gr8oldies said:
And liberal people. Look up that blood-curdling screech from Miller last Friday. Yes, he called for naming the Democratic Party a terrorist organization, all of us need fined, bankrupted and some of us jailed under RICO for "criminal acivities" (like organizing a protest). ON FOX NEWS SO THIS IS ABOUT THE CONTENT OF MEDIA
Click to expand...
I've been considering re registering as something else as a result.

Mediafrog+ said:
If you are only getting 3% return on your investments you need to overhaul your portfolio or fire your financial advisor.💸💰💵🔥🔥🔥
Click to expand...
3% isn't too bad. I think I'm averaging somewhere around that, which isn't bad, but there's still some room for improvement.

c
 
www.yahoo.com

President Trump Slams ‘Late Night’s Seth Meyers: “100% Anti-Trump, Which Is Probably Illegal”

President Donald Trump is back shouting at the late-night television hosts. This time, his focus was on Seth Meyers, host of NBC’s Late Night, suggesting that Meyers making fun of the President is “probably illegal”. The issue seems to stem from a recent A Closer Look segment, where Meyers...
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com

Here we go and we need to wait on how Chairman Carr goes on this one. Yes its speech the President does not want to hear but what happens to Seth Meyers, and Comcast owned NBC affiliates like KNBC and WNBC at the FCC level is yet to be seen here. We seen similar situations when Jimmy Kimmel and Disney had to face the FCC over segments that the President does not want to hear.

President Trump also seems to think that Late Night with Seth Meyers is filmed live, which, of course it is not.

“Seth Meyers of NBC may be the least talented person to “perform” live in the history of television. In fact, he may be the WORST to perform, live or otherwise. I watched his show the other night for the first time in years,” he wrote on TruthSocial. “In it he talked endlessly about electric catapults on aircraft carriers which I complain about as not being as good as much less expensive steam catapults. On and on he went, a truly deranged lunatic. Why does NBC waste its time and money on a guy like this??? – NO TALENT, NO RATINGS, 100% ANTI TRUMP, WHICH IS PROBABLY ILLEGAL!!!
Click to expand...
 
The process of revoking a license requires the commission of a crime. Asking a question isn't a crime. It may be an inconvenience. But it's not a crime.

As we've often said, there is no basis for revoking a broadcast license over an inconvenient question. Even this FCC understands that.

These are just the rants of an aging entitled elitist who needs to be sedated and given warm milk.
 
TheBigA said:
The process of revoking a license requires the commission of a crime. Asking a question isn't a crime. It may be an inconvenience. But it's not a crime.

As we've often said, there is no basis for revoking a broadcast license over an inconvenient question. Even this FCC understands that.

These are just the rants of an aging entitled elitist who needs to be sedated and given warm milk.
Click to expand...
With the current administration, "process" is a speed bump. Legally, they can't just completely shutter federal agencies like the Department of Education, but they're doing it anyway by executive order/fiat.

The aging entitled elitist who needs sedation and warm milk might be dismissed if he didn't have a cadre of Cabinet-level sycophants who race each other to jump up and implement Dear Leader's missives. In a sane world, the President couldn't revoke NBC's licenses over a late night host making fun of him, but we're no longer in a sane world.
 
Deus Ex Machiato said:
In a sane world, the President couldn't revoke NBC's licenses over a late night host making fun of him, but we're no longer in a sane world.
Click to expand...

There is another media world that exists outside of any federal regulation. The people at the broadcast networks know this, and they've been investing in those unregulated areas. So even if the government somehow gerrymanders FCC regulations, there are other platforms that at least for now fall outside their purview.
 
TheBigA said:
There is another media world that exists outside of any federal regulation. The people at the broadcast networks know this, and they've been investing in those unregulated areas. So even if the government somehow gerrymanders FCC regulations, there are other platforms that at least for now fall outside their purview.
Click to expand...
I'm sure that loophole will be fixed at some point.

We got close a few years ago when Section 230 almost got repealed.

c
 


Back
Top Bottom