Impoverished Man Threatens to Fire All 7,000+ Employees if Obama is Re-elected

I'll Fire You if Obama is Re-Elected

Hamilton Nolan of Gawker notes:

Shortly after we posted this letter, we found out, thanks to multiple readers, that it bore suspicious resemblances to a popular chain letter that was circulated just before the 2008 elections. Well, we just got off the phone with David Siegel, who told us the letter below is real, and that it was sent out to all of his employees yesterday. "I did use the letter that had circulated before as a guideline, but I changed it [to fit my circumstances]," he told us. "It speaks the truth and it gives [employees] something to think about when they go to the polls." He also said that its threats of possible layoffs are real, based on his assessment of the political and economic climate. He added that he "hasn't had any negative feedback" on the letter.​

Thus prefaced:

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.

However, let me share a few facts that might help you decide what is in your best interest.The current administration and members of the press have perpetuated an environment that casts employers against employees. They want you to believe that we live in a class system where the rich get richer, the poor get poorer. They label us the "1%" and imply that we are somehow immune to the challenges that face our country. This could not be further from the truth. Sure, you may have heard about the big home that I'm building. I'm sure many people think that I live a privileged life. However, what you don't see or hear is the true story behind any success that I have achieved ....​

Siegel goes on to recount his hard life and lament that he works so much harder than any of his employees. And he cries about how the sagging economy has hurt him:

Even to this day, every dime I earn goes back into this company. Over the past four years I have had to stop building my dream house, cut back on all of my expenses, and take my kids out of private schools simply to keep this company strong and to keep you employed.​

That dream house? It's a 90,000 square foot mansion called "Versailles". One wonders where he got the dimes for that, since "every dime I earn goes back into this company".

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.​

You know, I don't think even the Occupy movement is demanding that everyone is entitled to this:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

​

Yeah, that's a lot of dimes.

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,

David Siegel​

Last month, Susan Berfield reported for Bloomberg Businessweek on a new documentary about Siegel, who made all his dimes working to become "the biggest private time-share developer in the country":

"I'm not bragging, I'm just stating the fact: I personally got George W. Bush elected," Siegel told me during two days of interviews. "I'm not proud of it. I feel like I'm responsible for all the problems in the world." By that he meant, mostly, the then-deteriorating situation in Iraq.

Here's Siegel's account of how he swung the election in Bush's favor: "Whenever I saw a negative article about [Al] Gore, I put it in with the paychecks of my 8,000 employees. I had my managers do a survey on every employee. If they liked Bush, we made them register to vote. But not if they liked Gore. The week before [the election] we made 80,000 phone calls through my call center—they were robo-calls. On Election Day, we made sure everyone who was voting for Bush got to the polls. I didn't know he would win by 527 votes. Afterward, we did a survey among the employees to find out who voted who wouldn't have otherwise. One thousand of them said so."​

The estimated cost of "Versailles" is about a billion dimes. The irony is almost sickening when one stops to consider a guy who suddenly realized he couldn't afford his $100 million dream house complaining about "people like me who made all the right decisions ... being forced to bail out all the people who didn't".

Siegel also has an odd outlook on his company:

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 ....

.... 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.​

So, the company's payroll taxes are taken out of his paycheck? Uh, Dave? Dude, like you said, the company employs over seven thousand people. What company that size doesn't have an accounting department?

Or maybe he's talking about the payroll taxes for however many domestic employees he has.

But this, apparently, is what it takes to get Republicans elected: I can't tell you how to vote. You should vote for whoever will serve your interests best. Oh, and by the way, if the wrong guy wins, you're fired.

"They label us the '1%'", he laments. Well, to be honest, he sounds like a caricature of the one percent.

Poor Dave. We need to elect Mitt Romney in order to stop the horrendous injustice this unfairly beleaguered, hard-working American who puts every dime he earns (except, of course, for the billion dimes he wanted to spend on a house) back into the company. And, you know, to save his employees. After all, their pay comes out of his paycheck, and it's strictly because of his generosity. He could have made all that money without them.
____________________

Notes:

Nolan, Hamilton. "The CEO Who Built Himself America's Largest House Just Threatened to Fire His Employees if Obama's Elected". Gawker. October 9, 2012. Gawker.com. October 10, 2012. http://gawker.com/5950189/the-ceo-w...tened-to-fire-his-employees-if-obamas-elected

Berfield, Susan. "Why Time-Share King David Siegel Thinks He Got Bush Elected". Bloomberg Businessweek August 3, 2012. Businessweek.com. October 10, 2012. http://www.businessweek.com/article...are-king-david-siegel-thinks-he-got-w-elected

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Aren't there laws against this behavior? If he were telling them that having sex with him would guarantee their jobs it would be considered sexual harassment. Why not political harassment. Something this unethical must cross some legal lines somewhere. Where is an ambitious lawyer when you need one?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Quaking in his wingtips?

Well, if the guy is willing to spend a billion dimes on a house, the ambitious lawyer is probably wondering how many ambitious lawyers the guy with that many spare dimes can hire.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Isn't it interesting that this douche of a man, turd really, does more economic good than the 99% of Americans.
Why IS that do you think?

I mean, it seems odd - doesn't it?

It's as if the entire monetary system is set up in such a way to reward douche bags like David here and punish those who save and just want a 'normal' middle class life. Well, we all know you're a sucker if you 'save'. I mean, the federal reserve is stealing your money as fast as they possible can.

Doesn't is SUCK to be TRAPPED in a monetary union with David? I mean, there is no divorce. David understands how the system works (for the rich) and has done greatly by it - it's pretty much second nature to people like David (stealing that is).

That dollar in your pocket, when David spent it, it was worth a LOT MORE value. See, that's how the system works. Not only do they have access to money, but the money they access is worth a hell of a lot more than when the peons at the bottom get there hands on it.


So, let's all go vote for Obamney and watch as America turns into a third world shit hole. AND then lets all whine it's not fair and vote for one of Obama's daughters or Bush Jr's sons. AND then let's all whine again.

 

I don't think the OP was about which political candidate is better. It seems the intent was to draw attention to the unethical practice of powerful employers intimidating their employees into voting the way they want them to.

Even if I totally sided politically with my employers candidate of choice, I'd be wanting to take him down for attempting to intimidate me or my coworkers to vote as he wanted us to. I do liken this to sexual harassment.

 

To be fair ....

Well, to be fair, I did take a crack at Romney in the last paragraph, and there is the line about what it takes to elect Republicans.

But, yeah—

—that's a wonderfully concise way of putting it.

I would also add that if one must lie about himself ("Even to this day, every dime I earn goes back into this company") and others ("... suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed 42 years of my life for") in order to politically intimidate his employees, there is most likely a problem with the underlying point. Something about the childish nature of Siegel's sleaze is striking. It's hard to figure what the guy is trying to accomplish; the backlash as this story spreads could likely build sympathy for his employees, and play to Obama's advantage. It's one thing to speak your mind, but this guy, in speaking his mind, really does seem like a caricature of the already-caricaturized "once percent".

 

seems to me this guy is the conservative/libertarian icon. fuck you do what I want or I'll screw you over. the policies that reward this guy are a product of people like you who demand policies that increase corporate poorer and strip away the ability of the little guy from protecting themselves.

 

what he is doing is actually against the law. but than again he is a rich, white, rightwinger the laws rarely apply to them.

 

No, that's actually the State.

See, this is what you don't seem to be getting. Libertarian is centered around not using force or coercion. The State OTOH is all about using force and coercion.



In a Libertarian world, those employees would (A) have work agreements/contracts and not worry what this man said (B) not be solely interested in being good little Cogs because they wouldn't have been put through 12 years of public school indoctrination telling them a Cog is what they should aim for in life and (C) as such, we'd have most Americans aiming to own businesses and thus we'd be living in a prosperous society where labor was actually in short supply and greatly VALUED! and (D) with currency competition this dipshit would NEVER have had access to that much cheap capital! NEVER!

He is the product of the Federal Reserve monetary system.
Which is why most of his shit is in the USA.

You'll find creeps like him in every single country. I know some myself. Not that rich, but yeah, they own a LOT of property - paid for by you and I via our income tax. Even the States are in on the act - bleeding your of your labor via mortgage is how they enrich themselves too. Which is why the State LOVES creeps like our friend David here.

 

your so naive.
Its adorable.

there is what people claim, there is what they actually intend to do, and than there are the actual results of their actions. these 3 things are rarely the same things. the sooner you admit that the better off you'l be. its doesn't matter how much you focus on number 1 and to a lesser extent number 2; its the third thing that the most important.

wrong still so focused on the claims and not the results. lets see B is a lie based on your own fucked upness. I have been to public school good ones and they don't indoctrinate into a cog. its the economic power you worship that pushes that. A is already in force and its illegal for him to do what he did but why let little things like facts get in the way. not to mention in a libertarian society he'd have the money to bribe the justice aperatitices because with out a strong structure such things become controlled by economic power houses whether or not the were public or private. C is just fucking stupid. business need employees. Its in possible in a functioning economy for more than half the people to own the business unless your talking about corporations being publicly traded. literally there is no intelligent being who would buy into that idea. and D has been tried and failed miserblely just like most of things you. though your just going to use the No true scotsman fallacy to defend your ideas.

um know he is a product of the greed rampant in an unregulated market. the fed has exactly jack shit to do with it.

Um what the fuck is wrong with you. no ones income tax paid for this. Your truly an ignorant bastard trying to pretend you know more than everybody else. well hate to break it to you your wrong. no ones income taxes buys anyone else property. unless its a corporation and their enmient domain but that more in lines with the libertarian agenda of pro corporate power.

so all the banks are secretly funding the government? or is it that all the private banks out there are secretly part of the government? you know you really shouldn't be so vocal about your conspercy theories. some people might think your nuts.

the state could give a fuck one way or another about people like him. it only in libertopia where state like people like this.

 

That's a pretty absurd statement! Care to explain just what the heck you are trying to say here??? Oh, and by the way, while you're at it also show some PROOF of this stupid claim.

(And here's betting you never respond to this post.)

 

Here's a fellow who knows the price of everything but the true value of nothing.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Sure, the States (well, this depends on where you live in the world) get paid tax when a home is sold. Therefor when there's a surge across all sectors in the price of homes and people are flipping them (even to the point of quitting their productive jobs as engineers to unproductively flip homes) the local county all the way up to the State gets a peace of that action on the sale in the various taxes that are levied. Not to mention all the licensing and regulation costs. So these weasels have no incentive to do the right thing. Hell, some of them own a peace of the action business wise anyway.

When the whole thing crashes they just blame the poor for getting into houses they couldn't afford and that's when the people who were your mate one day is shoveling you into the furnace the next.

At the federal level they get to pretend like the economy is doing well and that's because of their policies. WOW the federal debt is going down (while individual debt is going through the roof). Unemployment at all time lows (meanwhile the skill sets are being lost as people go into house flipping).

So, the State has a lot of incentive to support this sort of nonsense.

How's that?

 

At the end of the day, just ask yourself: Which is better FORCE or VOLUNTARISM?
Which?


Can you live with being moral?



We ran slavery nations for thousands of years. It was the norm. No one questioned it. To question slavery sounded insane. It even sounded immoral... if you can imagine that. It was only once we quit slavery we finally freed the potential locked away in humanity to progress to what we think of as the modern era.

Good things come to those that are moral - which is why we have morality in the first place.

 

Clear case of intimidation.

Fire, sue, imprison.

Thanks for the heads-up, douchebag.

 

Nope, that is pretty worthless! I live in the U.S. and those taxes you're badmouthing are pretty trivial !! And I also asked you for some PROOF which you failed to provide. What's the problem, lazy? Or just couldn't find any because there isn't any?

 

re: Michael's digression

re: Michael's digression

And, yet, you advocate "free market" policies that would empower the corporations subverting the will of the people and supporting the candidates you disdain. It is not specifically problematic to base an economy on consumerism, per se, but one of the reasons people take on so much debt is that real wages have been stagnant for decades.

The people can't spend more because they don't have the money, so they take credit. Okay, so that's a matter of personal responsibility. Of course, if people stop spending excessively, the economy falls apart. Indeed, the quasi-austerity of laying off public workers in order to get governmental books in order is one of the reasons our economic recovery hasn't been stronger. That is, the private sector is adding jobs, but that growth is hindered by reduced consumer spending.

Still, though, while you rail against government and the corruption thereof, you advocate policies that would empower employers to keep real wages stagnant, or even degrade them somewhat.

You tend to act as if you're the only smart person in the room, but the problem is that while many people see the massive three-card monte going on, and can't figure an affirmative solution, the one thing they don't want to do is follow a path that reinforces the problem.

And, to be honest, maybe if you weren't caught up in such a paradoxical loop, people wouldn't find your deranged evangelism quite so annoying. As it is, you're simply disrupting the discussion.

Please stop. I understand that your evangelism is very important to you, but it seems just a little bit rude to expect everyone else to stop their discussion of a subject in order to accommodate your ranting demands to change the subject.

 

Yeah hopefully the reason that this idiot "hasn't gotten any negative feedback about the letter from his employees" is that the legal council they retained has advised them to keep quiet while the process of suing and imprisoning him proceeds.

 

Kind of interesting that infantile behaviors and worldviews, bizarre senses of entitlement and assumptions of privilege, in the members of a ruling class,

do not, apparently, derive from having inherited their positions or otherwise obtained them by luck. The tantrums of the self made wealthy resemble in outlook those of the scions of old money war profiteers or the grandchildren of plantation owners or any other such - Marx had a point, there.

We didn't quit slavery - the federal government under Abraham Lincoln raised an army using forced taxation and drafted manpower, invaded the private property of the David Siegels of the Confederacy (whose letters concerning his election and reelection read much like those from this era's Siegels, right down to the plagiarizing of actual writers), put a gun to their heads while they burned their houses and barns and fields, confiscated their slaves and horses and machinery and stored provender, killed and imprisoned and otherwise abused their families, and destroyed whatever was left of their private wealth and property.

That's how we started out getting rid of slavery in the US. It took a hundred more years of continual taxpayer financed Federal government effort, using guns and threats and applications of force and behaviors imposed on each new decade's Siegels, to get slavery to the occasional remnants that remain now.

 

Funny thing, Obama is only proposing going back to the tax rates that existed before George Junior. And the wealthy, the economy and employment did just fine for 8+ years with those higher tax rates. Siegel obviously thinks his employees are morons because he is feeding them such a blatant line of feces. If Siegel is willing to deliberately screw up what is by his own admission a business that has “never been more profitable” by firing people (i.e. mismanage his business) just because he doesn’t like the POTUS, then Siegel is no businessman and will inevitably go out of business anyway.