A Quote by Geraldo Rivera

Rich people who own mansions on the beach shouldn't get federal subsidies. If you want to stay there, take the risk — © Geraldo Rivera
Rich people who own mansions on the beach shouldn't get federal subsidies. If you want to stay there, take the risk
Rich people who own mansions on the beach shouldn't get federal subsidies. If you want to stay there, take the risk.
Basically if you study entrepreneurs, there is a misnomer: People think that entrepreneurs take risk, and they get rewarded because they take risk. In reality entrepreneurs do everything they can to minimize risk. They are not interested in taking risk. They want free lunches and they go after free lunches.
The entire federal budget for landslide research is $3.5 million a year - far less than the property value lost on a single day when 17 mansions slid down a hill in 2005 in Laguna Beach, Calif.
Becoming rich isn't as much about getting rich financially as about whom you become, in character and mind, to get rich. I want to share a secret with you that few people know: the fastest way to get rich and stay rich is to work on developing you! The idea is to grow yourself into a successful person. Again, your outer world is merely a reflection of your inner world. You are the root; your results are the fruits.
Giving subsidies is a two-edged sword. Once you give it, it's very hard to take away subsidies. There's a political cost to taking away subsidies.
Now, for some of you it doesn't matter. You were born rich and you're going to stay rich. But here's my advice to the rest of you: Take dead aim on the rich boys. Get them in the crosshairs and take them down. Just remember, they can buy anything but they can't buy backbone. Don't let them forget it. Thank you.
However imperfectly, subsidies for the poor do actually reduce hunger, ease suffering and create opportunity, while subsidies for the rich result in more private jets and yachts. Would we rather subsidize opportunity or yachts? Which kind of subsidies deserve more scrutiny?
The public subsidies provided to miners, loggers, and ranchers are as extravagant and as harmful to the public interest as the subsidies that the Federal Reserve and Treasury provide to the 'banks too big to fail.'
If Federal Reserve loans are subsidies, it doesn't show up in the federal budget.
I think when ordinary working people come home, turn on the TV and see a gala of a bunch of people at, you know, a rich gala all subsidized by taxpayers claiming their subsidies aren't high enough, when they know those subsidies have actually gone up - I'm not sure that's something that resonates with ordinary people.
We believe the Senate language provides for federal subsidies for abortions. Plus there's a language in there where you have to pay one dollar per month, every enrollee, to pay for a fund for reproductive rights which include abortion. And that's totally against federal law. So we are saying take that out.
We believe the Senate language provides for federal subsidies for abortions. Plus theres a language in there where you have to pay one dollar per month, every enrollee, to pay for a fund for reproductive rights which include abortion. And thats totally against federal law. So we are saying take that out.
The risk of working with people you don't respect; the risk of working for a company whose values are incosistent with your own; the risk of compromising what's important; the risk of doing something that fails to express-or even contradicts--who you are. And then there is the most dangerous risk of all--the risk of spending your life not doing what you want on the bet that you can buy yourself the freedom to do it later.
We're in the business not so much of being contrarians deliberately, but rather we like to take perceived risk instead of actual risk. And what I mean by that is that you get paid for taking a risk that people think is risky, you particularly don't get paid for taking actual risk.
Someday I want to be rich. Some people get so rich they lose all respect for humanity. That's how rich I want to be.
Net result [of the Dept. of Agriculture's Payment in Kind - PIK - program]: total farm income, now expected to be around $25 billion, this fiscal year, will exceed total federal subsidies by only a couple of billion. You could argue that those fellows out there on the fruited plain are in effect working for the federal government and that, therefore, the U.S. now has socialized agriculture under the Reagan Administration. Rich, eh?
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!