Talk:Peter G. Peterson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Intro[edit]

The last line in the bio [“The group advocates for reductions in federal deficits and debt, through redirection of Social Security funds and cuts in federal entitlement programs.”] is not supported by the source[1]and none of the supporting footnotes provide any evidence either.

According to official statements, the Peterson Foundation never actually advocates for specific solutions, but instead just professes that all options must remain on the table to reduce the deficit. [2][3][4]

I think the line from the group’s Wikipedia Page is sufficient if those here agree [“focuses on fiscal-sustainability issues related to federal deficits, entitlement programs, and tax policies“][5]

Mikka86 (talk) 16:28, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/05/29/why-i-m-giving-away-1-billion.html
  2. ^ (http://www.pgpf.org/Issues/Fiscal-Outlook/2011/06/QA-with-Peter-Peterson.aspx
  3. ^ http://www.pgpf.org/Issues/Fiscal-Outlook/2011/09/09192011_Statement_on_Obama_Deficit_Reduction_Proposal.aspx
  4. ^ (http://www.pgpf.org/Issues/Fiscal-Outlook/2011/08/08242011_Statement_on_CBO_Outlook.aspx
  5. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Peter_G._Peterson_Foundation

Kellogg?[edit]

Can you really get an undergraduate education at Kellogg? I thought Kellogg was just a graduate school.

Sakhalinrf 21:01, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grandson[edit]

His grandson is making a fool out of himself on a reality show, NYC Prep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.106.64 (talk) 04:21, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy section[edit]

Shouldn't his conflicts of interest and other dealings be pointed out? The article is nothing but praise. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:21, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are significant conflicts of interest to report, and arguably in connection to these, there are also patent distortions and misleading characterizations being promoted in a fear-mongering fashion by his foundation's ads. As an investment banker, he has extensive connections to parties on Wall Street that stand to receive (control of) trillions of dollars (for their gambling casino, I do not think it too extreme to call it) if Social Security is privatized into individual investment accounts. His foundation's ads urgently suggest that something must be done to Social Security and Medicare virtually immediately to save the US from a debt-fueled financial collapse. In fact, these programs cannot honestly even be represented as debt, as people typically understand that term, at all: The funds from which they are administered are multitrillion-dollar surpluses, which can only be construed as "debt" because by law, they must as a matter of good stewardship be invested into the single safest investment in the world, US Treasury securities (which are by definition "debt" in a clearly very different sense from the ordinary sense of monies owed to outside interests, such as foreign governments or banks; they are "debt" in the very special sense in which bonds and other securities are called debt, and in fact represent surplus monies that are owed by one part of the US government to another part of that same US government. Nevertheless, this terminological ambiguity is exploited on a regular basis, including by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, to exaggerate by several trillion dollars the figure alarmingly cited as the dangerously burgeoning US National Debt).

If no changes are made at all, these programs will still be fully funded till about 2032; but even modest adjustments, such as lifting the arbitrary cap on FICA withholding for high earners, would extend these programs' solvency for decades more. (Factoring in other common-sense measures – besides cutting benefits, or wildly restructuring Social Security into manifestly less-stable investment accounts that would greatly enrich Wall Street – would in similar fashion extend solvency, and even possibly enable expansion of these programs. Of course, all such actions, by increasing the Surplus, will technically also increase the figure that can be misleadingly cited as the National Debt; but there would be no reason to treat this large surplus as some sort of threat to economic stability, when in fact it would be quite the opposite: an enormous stabilizing influence, as saved monies so often tend to be. The Social Security and Medicare trust fund is very much like the biblical story of grain being brought into Egypt's storehouses: they preserve prosperity in times of famine.)

Without acknowledging the sleight of hand Peterson and his foundation engage in, this article is nothing but a puff piece, not to mention a disservice to millions of people.

--IfYouDoIfYouDon't (talk) 21:34, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Amen. The Peter Peterson piece appears patently partisan. How do we flag it as needing re-work? Bwh031451 (talk) 07:56, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Peter G. Peterson/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Facing Up -- How to rescue the Economy from crushing Debt & Restore the American Dream

By Peter G. Peterson

SIMON & SCHUSTER Rockefeller Center 1230 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10020


Copyright © 1993 by Peter G. Peterson

Seems important!

Multiplewedge (talk) 23:39, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 23:39, 19 June 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 02:43, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Peter George Peterson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:36, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peter_G._Peterson&oldid=1208371745"