People are writing my house asking if she's paid us yet, Warren—explain to them how she's rumored as expending all her energies these days lying in efforts to force Harper to get our welfare cut off so she can say we have no food and have her lackeys in government apprehend my son and groom him into a male prostitute. Explain to them how it's not working because we are resourceful people and there's always food in the house and all my energy goes into making sure the kids are alright.
What kind of a world would you have us live in where anything and everything is OK so long as someone is sexually compliant with you, Melinda?! Explain this "logic". You're more fiscally responsible? Explain the math you used to calculate the benefits of this system. You accuse _others_ of being unqualified to do business! Who did you think would sustain it once you alienated and depleted all "economic sectors"?
As some psychiatrist friends of mine just pointed out, where is all Melinda's "concerns" for what goes on in Anderson's house given the reports of violence in the media about men beating her while she's holding her babies, young kids drowning at her parties, her disheveled appearance and obvious drug addiction, etc…?! What about the sexual violence she commits against men and rumors she has relations with young boys? These are not "concerns,"?!
If I'm off base, then please accept my apology but if any of what I am told is true, then God help Melinda!!! All I know is what's been done to my family can't be an accident of fate because we've done nothing to deserve any of it. If being good is all it takes, then to Hell with this woman!
The idea that she can suppress the advancement of gentle women and mothers into society is toxic! I am hearing rumors that she travels with an actor because Bill is cooped up in a trailer all day surrounded by screen after screen of all the people she has on watch 24/7—all of them feeling as violated as we do. He complains to anyone who will listen that he's held captive and she beats him if he objects to the arrangement!
Sure, use prostitutes and make your money off porn if you can't get laid because you have no social skills but you have no right to force it on people under threat of imprisonment, torture and death. She claims she doesn't need Bill—that she made all his money but she doesn't sleep with him, she doesn't care for him—she used him to marry up and she uses him to legitimize her name but she's not his wife by any reasonable definition.
This notion of merit based on superior effort she feigns is substantiated by the illusion of accomplishment one has by jet-setting all over the globe on makeshift "meetings' that are nothing more than excuses to bed expensive companions in hotel rooms—we're not seeing that this amounts to more effort than 7-day weeks @ 15-hour shifts on the computer devising this cheap slave-driver's itinerary and corporate strategy for no pay.
Warren, the idea of someone so promiscuous; someone with so much innocent blood on her hands—the blood of every walk of life, age group, race— having the audacity to so much as think of nit-picking other people's characters is nothing less than obscene. All of this rides on obfuscation; which is a fancy way of saying LIES. It might make her money but sooner or later she'll get dragged off that high horse and held accountable.
I think, Warren, you men need to explain to Melinda that it's illegal to use child protection services as a means to enforce your economic agenda. My family has been placed under inhuman stress in what evidently amounts to a government-controlled hostage situation because of bribes and blackmail to local officials. My son's health and well-being were adversely affected by Melinda's messed up notion of child-rearing and only a monster could be so insensitive. She needs to learn to take, "NO!".
Melinda's the one who screwed her way into a job, Warren—you know we've struggled for 30 years while she lives high off the hog on compensation she owes me for spreading my IP liberally all over the media. I already said I'm not interested in this lifestyle, if you thought you had the path of least resistance then I'm sorry for you. Bill shouldn't have to live in fear because she wants to spread the joy…
This is why Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, T. Boon Pickens, and many other billionaires donate millions upon millions of dollars to non profits and other charity services. People see men as greedy, but these men maid their way through self interest. Instead of seeing theses men relying on greed for their success think seeing their success through trust and self-interest for knowledge success and personal freedom. It is within Warrens Buffets's self-Interest to give his money to good things=AMERICA!
His taxable income is insignificant compared to the income he generates through his company. If he really wanted to be taxed more than his current investment in Berkshire would be a tenth of its current size.
He's only bragging that he pays less when the truth is if he wanted to "invest" in federal bureaucracies the government would without a doubt accept his money.
@davitodude It couldn't have anything to do with the other Forbes 400 and multimillionaires who are not willing to do the same? It couldn't have anything to do with fairness? With a 1.5tril deficit, his entire wealth would hardly make a dent.
He forgets to mention that the "rich" include everyone except himself and his billionaire oligarch friends, whose respective fortunes are safely harbored in corporations and tax-exempt 501's.
There is a difference between capital gains and regular income tax rate. Capital gain tax is lower, know why? Because unlike income when you work and get paid, you make an investment you can actually lose everything. Ask people who bought Lehman and Enron stocks. The lower tax rate is simply an incentive to get people to take risk and invest.
Ok, his tax rate is lower. What's the problem? Is there something illegal I'm missing. More to the point, will Buffett giving up money he'd use for investment, charity or job creation be good? Can you create long-term prosperity by taking from one group and giving to another?
We're no longer an aspirational society. Once we all dreamed of working hard, making lots of money and enjoying ourselves. That's long gone.
@smb123211 He just published his income tax today. His tax rate is 17%. He made 69 Million last year. My tax rate is something in excess of 40% and I am not rich.
@reinharv If you're paying 40% then fire your accountant! The highest tax rate is 35% even if you're one of Obama's billionaires (folks making over $200K - lol). If Buffett wants to pay more he can do so without blabbing about it.
More to the point, how does taking money from successful folks create long-term prosperity? And unless you think D.C. has a history as a wise steward of our money, how does giving more lead to better conditions?
I love how you (assuming you are a Republican) Republicans have been peddling the same damn ideas for the past century and you guys still get away with it! Your ideas never work!
Whenever there has been a tax cut, America has suffered.
This tax cuts hits people in FINANCE sector. What you fail to realize is, finance actualyl has LITTLE to do with our GDP unlike the last few decades.
Neither, because, unlike you, I actually understand how the tax system works. So tell me, how will you tax their corporate incomes which represent the bulks of their earnings? How will you tax their foreign-domiciled corporations? How will you collect estate taxes on the billions they "donate" to tax-exempt 501's?
You won't. At best, you can tax them on the relatively miniscule amounts they "cash out" as personal income. He knows this; that's why he can say "tax me." It's BS.
@slobhinav Considering recent history, it's hard to imagine anyone promoting central planning. The elements of gov't programs are: inefficiency, mismanagement, refusal to adjust to new conditions, decisions based on politics not data and bankruptcy. Why would anyone want that crew telling us where to build a dam?
When DC gets involved in specifics it starts picking winners & losers (Solyndra) based on influence. Gov't money is best when directed toward general (not specific) research.
There is risk, but most of the risk pays off. Solyndra is another example of the risk. Look at the 95% of companies that are doing well under the same grant solyndra got and you will see.
Not to mention that large wealth disparities cause life expectancy and other measures of quality of life for ALL income groups to go down (except maybe the top .0001%). GDP has no correlation with those in developed nations. (watch: Richard Wilkinson: How economic inequality harms societies).
Very long term plans (100 years or longer) are something a governments have a large advantage in carrying out because they are not individuals- they last longer than people.
@Romansteel13 There's an awful lot of projection going on there. You're incredibly cocky about what you believe when you're just a moron who is making ridiculous claims about my mindset all because I want a more progressive tax rate than the one currently in place. There's no one here with a more bloated sense of self confidence than you. You haven't made any coherent arguments all you've done is throw ad hominem attacks.
I'm gonna have the last word. Before I completely ignore you.
You have the mentality of the loser who will never amount to anything in his life, so your plan is effectively stealing from the Rich, because you will never become Rich. Typical Obamabot. I'm not even from the US.
We laugh at you, moronic Americans.
Anyway, Lebron James, Lupe Fiasco, and Weezer are on your favorited videos.
Now I know what demographic and IQ level you fall in.
@Romansteel13 LOL at how desperate you are to dig up dirt on me that you scroll through my favorites to pick out a few videos that I favorited months and months ago. I have hundreds of favorited videos and some of them are LeBron, Lupe, and Weezer videos, wow you totally owned me! You should really kill yourself if you think that is some kind of amazing insult of my intelligence. Meanwhile you're a fucking retard who feels the need to lie on the internet about being worth $2 million.
@Romansteel13 But hey, at least you have the mindset of a rich person! You pretend to be one on the internet after all. If mindset is all it took to be rich and successful you wouldn't be some basement dwelling invalid.
@grasd2 You DO care because for weeks you've been telling me he DOES **pay less** than his secretary which means you DIDN'T do your homework. And now that you realize you are wrong, you are trying to change the focus of your argument.
Rich people don´t pay their fair share?? According to OECD, the top 10% earners in America pay a share of 45% compared with 28% in France, 31% in Germany, 27% in Sweden, etc. OK, let´s admit that US government revenues as a share of GDP are lower than in other western countries. Then liberals should defend tax hikes for consumers, the middle class, businesses... not only for the wealthy.
@jimmydriveway You want to throw out the Warren Buffett stuff as misleading? Fine, all of my points still stand. They don't revolve around the notion that Buffett pays less taxes than his secretary. All of my comments have been commentary on the ridiculous amount of income inequality in this country, the fact that tax rates on the top bracket need to go up, etc.
@grasd2 Your points still stand? I don't recall you ever making a valid point. So the ONLY reason you want taxes on the top rate to go up is to some how punish the wealthy which again is at the root of a Marxist society. Before you spout off anymore stupid shit, go read the Communist Manifesto. YOU are what's wrong with this country. If you want more money, go and get it. Create something. The notion that everyone needs to be near equal is fucking disturbing. Get your balls out of your purse.
@jimmydriveway The reason I want taxes to go up on the rich is to create more revenue, in a civilized society you tax the people who can most afford to pay the taxes. A progressive tax rate isn't a fast track to communism, talk about a slippery slope argument right there. Playing the communism card is a sign that you are desperate and you realize your arguments are falling apart.
@grasd2 And again, the rich, with our current tax system ARE taxed the most because they can most afford it. What you want is already in place. The problem is that you and other progressives don't know when to stop. You seem to even be ok with a 90% rate on the rich. Really? You really believe it's ok to confiscate 90% of every dollar that person earns just because they are rich? Why don't we just apply the tax law equal like we apply every other law in this country, without discriminating.
@grasd2 So we know that you don't believe there is any wasteful spending and that only revenue will solve our problem which to me is alarming. You might want to visit dirtyspendingsecrets, cagw, and maybe read the latest on Solyndra. Again, if you taxed every person making more than $10 million a year 100%, you would yield about $186 billion. It wouldn't make a dent and then you would have destroyed those producers and would no longer be able to tax them.
@grasd2 Taxing every person making more than $10 million would not even make a dent. The fact that you are ok with the current rate of spending is alarming and is what's wrong with this country. It has only gotten worse over the last century, in general, not better. Sure, there have been brief period of surplus, but no military. You really need to do some research on wasteful spending. We have enough revenue already. The problem is that it's wasted and the overhead to manage it is inefficient.
So now you say it's revenue, but when I look up two comments I see that you typed, "all of my comments have been commentary on the ridiculous amount of income inequality in this country". So I've learned that you lie, you say things without backing them up with facts, and when cornered you change your argument. Here is what you should have said, "I don't know if Buffet pays less than his secretary, but I don't like that rich people have all of the money and some of it should be taken away".
Ha ha... you are so dumb. My argument is falling apart.... ahh, yeah right buddy, keep telling yourself that. Please read the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx. "Plank 2" A heavy progressive or graduated tax system. What we have in this country is Soft Tyranny. It's never going to look like the U.S.S.R. circa 1974. Rather, we are slowly killing the standard of living for ALL Americans while giving more control and personal property to our giant bloated government. And you bought into it. Moron.
PART I: Lost in all the debate about whether or not to extend the Bush tax cuts is the issue of what tax cuts and tax increases really accomplish.
The main, if not only, economic point of those pushing higher taxes on upper income Americans is that we need to pay down the deficit. The simple assumption is that higher taxes will yield higher revenues for the government, and with those higher revenues the government can attack
PART III: He writes:During the eight years of the Clinton Administration the Federal government collected a total of $5.66 trill $ in indiv income taxes. During the eight years of the Bush Administration the Federal government collected approximately $7.45 trillion dollars in individual income taxes. The rich - that is, the top 1% of taxpayers - not only forked over a trillion dollars more to Uncle Sam under Bush than under Clinton, their share of the income tax burden increased from 33% to 38%
PART IV: Frezza adds that not only has the burden risen on the rich, but they are actually paying a higher blended tax rate under the Bush cuts:
During the eight years of the Clinton Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended rate of 20.6%. During the eight years of the Bush Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended tax rate of 21.3%. Yes, the actual tax rate that matters when you fill out the bottom line of your tax return went up for the rich under George Bush.
PART IV: Frezza adds that not only has the burden risen on the rich, but they are actually paying a higher blended tax rate under the Bush cuts:During the eight years of the Clinton Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended rate of 20.6%. During the eight years of the Bush Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended tax rate of 21.3%. Yes, the actual tax rate that matters when you fill out the bottom line of your tax return went up for the rich under George Bush.
PART VI: from 48.0% in 1981 to 57.2 %in 1988. The top 1% saw their share of the income tax bill climb even more dramatically, from 17.6% in 1981 to 27.5% in 1988.Even President Kennedy agreed w/the concept of lower rates often meaning more rev. He said:"Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the 1hand, & the avoidance of large Fed deficits on other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by
PART IV: Frezza adds that not only has the burden risen on the rich, but they are actually paying a higher blended tax rate under the Bush cuts:
During the eight years of the Clinton Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended rate of 20.6%. During the eight years of the Bush Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended tax rate of 21.3%. Yes, the actual tax rate that matters when you fill out the bottom line of your tax return went up for the rich under George Bush.
PART IV: Frezza adds that not only has the burden risen on the rich, but they are actually paying a higher blended tax rate under the Bush cuts: During the eight years of the Clinton Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended rate of 20.6%. During the eight years of the Bush Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended tax rate of 21.3%.Yes, the actual tax rate that matters when you fill out the bottom line of your tax return went up for the rich under Bush.
PART V: In other words, Frezza argues that the IRS' own data indicates these lower top-end rates have resulted in both higher revenues and higher real tax contributions from the wealthy.
Despite the counterintuitive nature of the argument, historical data seems to agree with Frezza. As the conservative Heritage Foundation notes about the Reagan tax cuts:
The share of income taxes paid by the top 10 percent of earners jumped significantly, climbing
PART VII restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits… In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now."
Some states may be finding this out first hand. Remember that Maryland raised taxes on
PART VIII millionaires in 2008 and tax revenues fell in 2009.
Yes, there are easy ways for critics to discount this concept. JFK cut taxes from 91% to 'only' 77% back in 1963. Bracket creep may be capturing more families as income levels rise with inflation. Revenues in states like Maryland that fell may not be due to higher taxes, but simply the recession and fewer capital gains. I'm sure there are more I'm missing.
PART XI That said Frezza's point & IRS data shouldn't be discounted.Many financial planners &tax experts we have spoken w/recently say they R swamped w/clients looking for more tax efficient strategies ahead of expected hike in rates.Capital is,after all, smart &goes where its cost is lower.Though only time will tell, those making the 'logical' assumption higher tax rates will lead to more $ for Treasury may be making a dangerous assumption indeed. W/taxes, few things R often logical or linear.
Either Buffet has something up his sleeve or he's crazy. Why else would a person pay millions for tax shelters and then complain that he isn't taxed enough? Maybe he sees that a flat or fair tax would leave everyone except tax attorneys wealthier in the long run ... including him. Or maybe he's gone nutz and doesn't know that he can just send a check to Uncle Sam any time.
Warren Buffett is a smart man but he thinks the average American taxpayer is stupid and he must be right if they believe this crap about he wants to pay higher taxes. If he did it would be very simple. He could pay himself a salary and then it would be taxed as income tax and not capital gains. Of course Obama Lover Tom would never ask that question? He could also have some of his companies pay the taxes they owe.
Will this country wake up in time because time is running out. FAST
i heard he paid 6.9 million dollars in taxes last year.....ever if he paid 40 million, and other uber-rich paid that much, the federal gov't would still run deficits....time to cut spending! ..... but also any levelheaded person would admit the rich should pay it's fair share.....i'm not sure i believe him that his tax rate is lower than his employees ... anyone know the U.S. tax rate codes? don't they have a progressive rate system...not a flat rate nor a regressive rate, but a progressive??
Wait a minute here. He says the average tax rate for his office was 32.9% then mentions a litany of blue collar jobs. To have an effective tax rate of 32.9% (the AVERAGE, not the max) he claims you'd have be making somewhere in the north of $200K a year using the current marginal rates even assuming you took NO deductions on your taxes. If you took any deductions you probably would need to be making upwards of $300K a year. Does this guy have any janitor jobs open? I'm not too proud!
First of all, he's full of shit. Secondly, the IRS has a vehicle for those who want to pay additional taxes, why doesn't he? Thirdly, why does he write off his charity donations? But MOST importantly, the money an individual earns is PERSONAL PROPERTY which is a cornerstone of this country. We did not get where we are today based on a socialist economy, rather a capitalist economy. Idiot.
@jimmydriveway although I agree that the money an individual earns is personal property, recognize that we got to where we are based off of criminality. this country was built on organized crime, human slave trade and thievery. and a progressive tax structure doesn't make you a socialist economy. what people are really striving for is a social democracy. i wish people would stop using the term "socialist" out of context!!! geeeez.
@chericewicker I will recognize that historically, Capitalism is the only economy that can vanquish grinding poverty. The overwhelming success of this country is based on a Free Market economy. Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Einstein, Pasture, Salk, Bell. A progressive tax rate is a COMPONENT of a socialized economy. Please stay away from my personal property. I wish people would stop thinking that the government is the cure for everything. Have a spine, be the captain of your own ship.
@chericewicker Buffetts effective tax rate is about 45% - It is utterly embarrassing that people fall for these kind of politics. If the top 5% of earners pay most of the taxes and the bottom 50% pay ZERO taxes, how much more fair do you want it to be? The crux of Marxism is class warfare... this is the exact same thing. What is happening to our country? How about this... "Hey bottom 50%, pitch in YOUR fair share. $20, $50, $100.... SOMETHING, just contribute".
@jimmydriveway Buffett's effective tax rate isn't any where near 45%. What's utterly embarrassing is that you can pull that number out of your ass and expect people to believe it.
@grasd2 You obviously don't understand the corporate tax rate, capital gains tax, or investment income. His comment was based strictly on capital gains tax. It's effect was tremendous because it played on your emotions and most Americans deal only with income tax. Being emotional about an issue doesn't change the facts. Even the liberal main stream media is pushing back on this one.
@grasd2 NYC Mayor Bloomberg: “The Buffett thing is just theatrics. If Warren Buffett made his money from ordinary income rather than capital gains, his tax rate would be a lot higher than his secretary’s,” he said. “I think it’s not fair to say that wealthy people don’t pay their fair share. They pay a much higher percentage of their income, they have a higher rate than people who make less,” - another liberal Obama supporter pushing back against this idiotic claim.
@jimmydriveway And the bottom not having enough money to pay income taxes doesn't indicate Marxism, quite the opposite, it indicates that we're in a terrible economic situation that has done a complete number on the middle and lower classes in this country and has barely touched the rich in comparison and after 30 years of policies made to increase income inequality, too much money has floated to the top and stayed up there.
@grasd2 Nice reading comprehension, I never said that. I said the crux of Marxism is class warfare, read the Communist Manifesto. The Bourgeois and the Prolatariat. Question: If you make $25k and rasie taxes only on the person making $250k and above, how does that increase your income? It does nothing for you at all. Especially if you have no effective tax liability. You can't pay any less than zero. Equal men are not free. Free men are not equal.
@grasd2 Here's Ted Turners take...hardly a conservative: “Nobody likes to pay more taxes,” Turner said. “At least, except Warren Buffett likes to pay more taxes, he’s the only one,” he clarified. “Do you think he should?” the interviewer asked him. “Well, he thinks so. He can always write a check to the government; just send them the money,” he said, smiling slightly. -End- Buffet doesn't want to pay more taxes, he wants to advance a political agenda. Class warfare keeps Dems in power. Wake up.
@jimmydriveway Why is it so certain that Buffett is trying to advance a political agenda? He's 80 years old nearing the end of his life, he has all of the money in the world, he doesn't have a negative stake in whether taxes go up a few percentage points, he'll be rich as shit either way. He's the perfect example of someone who can look at the tax system objectively and admit what is wrong without personal interest affecting his views too much.
@grasd2 That is one of the most ridiculous arguments I've ever heard. If I have a political agenda, for example, preserving the 2nd amendment, my views aren't going to change because I'm 80. Regardless, it has escaped you that his statement was false. Answer this: If 50% of Americans are paying 0 income taxes, how are they paying more than the rich? I simply cannot wrap my head around how retarded you are.
@jimmydriveway He probably doesn't have a political agenda because there's no point in him having one you moron do I have to spell it out for you again? He's set for life, his life is about to be over. He can tell the truth about taxes and look at it objectively because it doesn't really affect him, either way he's going to be incredibly rich and about to die in the next several years. You call me retarded when it's just a case of you having terrible reading comprehension.
@jimmydriveway I never said the Americans paying no taxes are paying more than the rich. I"m talking about members of the working middle class pay more taxes than rich people who take advantage of the tax loopholes, Buffett for example.
@grasd2 Oh dear God. Warren Buffet does NOT pay less than his secretary. He omitted other streams of revenue which in turn played on your eagerness to believe him. Please visit the U.S. Treasury or any reputable tax statistic website. Again, even the left is pushing back against this saying it was going a little too far. As for loopholes, yes... close them all! BTW... no one forces Buffet to itemize. You can't seem to get that into your statist government loving head can you?
@jimmydriveway Why is it so certain that Buffett is trying to advance a political agenda? He's 80 years old nearing the end of his life, he has all of the money in the world, he doesn't have a negative stake in whether taxes go up a few percentage points, he'll be rich as shit either way. He's the perfect example of someone who can look at the tax system objectively and admit what is wrong without personal interest affecting his views too much.
@jimmydriveway You sound like a parrot for the rich corporatists. The income class that is the only one who is making gains in this terrible economy isn't the victim of class warfare. The class that has profited from corporate socialism in terms of bailouts isn't the victim of class warfare. The CEOs whose pay has risen at massive levels while middle class wages have been stagnant aren't the victims of class warfare. YOU wake up.
@grasd2 It's hard to follow you. The argument is about tax rates, not wages. It's typical of a liberal to change the subject when they are presented with an argument that can't be broken. I'm against all bailouts whether they are for an individual mortgage or GM. Failure should not be rewarded with mine, and my childrens tax dollars. This includes TARP under Bush. Horrible mistake.
@jimmydriveway That comment is in response to you saying that the rich are being the victims of class warfare. I listed reasons why they aren't and why it's actually the other way around. I know you're having trouble following me, I'm sure you have trouble following everyone.
@grasd2 Can you point out where I said the rich were "victims". The only person who is a victim is you. You have traded your spine, your heart, and your sense of logic for a "false" sense of security. It must be a miserable existence being jealous of rich people and waiting for the Federal Government to solve all of societies ills. Republicans or Democrats, it doesn't matter. Congress does not have your best interest in mind. BTW... I'm a middle class guy with 3 jobs.
@jimmydriveway I'm not jealous of rich people I'm just asking for them to help pitch in when all of the deficit reduction policies are being put on the backs of the elderly and the non rich. The middle and lower class already got creamed much more during the recession than the people at the top, and then they've been asked to take on the full load of the debt reduction. I'm not a spineless government moocher, I have a job, I take no hand outs, I'm just asking for a reasonable tax policy.
@grasd2 I'm done talking to you until you go doe some homework. I honestly think you have a learning disability. Again, the top 10% pay 70% of the taxes, the bottom 50% pay no taxes. Can I ask you where you are getting your data from? I don't want blogs or editorials.
@grasd2 You sound like a good little commie, so eager not to give up YOUR private property, but somebody elses which equates to theft by force. What a pussy... so much for rugged individualism. Well, at least I still have it.
@jimmydriveway Have fun with your "rugged individualism" you white trash idiot, that's working out so well. What a nice life you have working 3 jobs pulling in a shitty salary and white knighting for the rich.
@grasd2 White trash? A little racist huh? Nice. 1st job is a pretty decent salary, 2nd two jobs keep my kids in private school and have helped me build up a nice little deposit on a piece of land I'm going to buy up in the mountains so that I can build a little ranch and hunt right out back. So, it's a lot of hard work, but it's worth it. After I have that I'll sorted out I'll roll back to one job. It's what people like me when they want something. We work hard for it and don't expect hand outs.
@jimmydriveway I thought you were done bro? The white trash comment got to you huh? I'm white myself so I'm not saying it as an anti-white thing. But man your rugged individualism sounds awesome, what a life. I"ll take my 40 hour work week and 70K salary over that. I'll keep suggesting for rich people to take on a large load of the tax burden because they try to do the same to people like me. It works both ways, you have to fight back. Not take it in the ass like a "rugged individualist".
@grasd2 I wouldn't say the comment got to me, rather it was revealing about your character. I don't give a shit what color you are. None of my business and it's irrelevant. Another emotional leak by you. I don't begrudge you for what you make and how many hours you work. That's your business. BTW... u are in luck, the rich do pay most of the taxes, so you can relax now. You seem like the kind of guy that would call in sick if you were a little tired or had the sniffles. I worked my 40! Pussy.
@jimmydriveway No, I can handle my 40 just fine, because it's a reasonable and human amount of hours. But I like how the you've been convinced that working like a rat is American and is a positive part of your character. This is how they get the Americans who can find a job to work the most hours in the world with the least amount of vacation. All they need to do is assign positive character qualities to being overworked, and people like you just fall right for it.
@grasd2 I'm an I.T. Engineer who owns two small side businesses. I've always advanced and taken jobs from guys like you because I'm just as efficient as you, yet I produce more than you. Like anything else in life, someone who is willing to pay me and you the same will pick me because I produce more. "They" don't over work me. This isn't China. I have choices. I'm a leader and creating my own destiny while you punch out at 5pm on the dot like a pussy. Nobody "owes" me anything. I go and get it.
@grasd2 Now we are really getting to the core of it. It's not good enough that you are happy working a 40 hr week for decent pay, but you are actually insulting me for wanting to work harder to better my lot in life and the lives of my children. Don't you realize how completely backwards and un-American that is? You actually think working harder for yourself is wrong and the someone else should be footing the bill. We have to be near the end of the Republic if people like you continue to breed.
@jimmydriveway You think being a braindead worker ant is American. There hasn't been so many people working more than 8 hour days since the 1890s. This isn't American, this is just another system in place like it was 100 years ago where bosses have convinced idiots that working harder and longer than them for way less pay is the American thing to do. If everyone who breeds was like you we would have never advanced past the lifestyle Americans had at the beginning of the industrial revolution.
@grasd2 8 hours a day? HA HA. Because of Presidents like FDR and Johnson, you have been convinced that you are owed an 8 hour day. What would you do if you had to survive on your own? You would die. I don't count the hours, I work until it's done. Do you think Ford, Edison, Wright Bros, etc. worked 8 hours a day? Talk to any small business owner... most of them work 10-12 hours a day, 6-7 days a week. Speaking of week, you are weak. The dependency on the government by you is disgusting. Pussy.
@jimmydriveway A guy who is more efficient in his production with a 40 hour work than someone like you who works 60-70 a week or whatever you work, has infinitely more reasons to breed. You're easily replaceable, there's a lot of dopes nowadays with a worker's ant mentality who will not question the system in place one bit. Or question if he is getting screwed over. And they don't move the world forward one bit, all they do is extend the status quo.
@grasd2 I have to move on. I can't discuss this based on emotion. You have been brain washed and there is no hope for you. You are about 1 of 3 people that believes Buffett and the reason being is that it makes you "feel good". God Bless America.
@jimmydriveway I'm not arguing based on emotion. Meanwhile you're the one acting like an increase in revenue is communist, it shows you have no idea of the historical tax rates in this country and the tax rates in other developed countries, you just shout commie. That's the definition of being an emotional idiot.
Criminal Plutocrat Buffett makes billions from the treasury and investing in companies the Federal State promises him they will bail out.
He will not be affected by an Income Theft Rate increase on actually productive entrepreneurs and his insurance companies will profit from an increased Estate/Death Theft Rate.
To support this he deceivingly leaves out the 40% Corporate Theft Rate and only mentions the 15% CG Theft Rate on top of that Corporate Theft Rate, like a good criminal plutocrat.
As son of two janitors who made less than 35k a year. Fast forward 20 years later, my net worth is worth around 2 million dollars, which according to you, is 'rich'. The Rich already do carry all tax brackets. Even if you gave the top 20% a 15 percent tax cut, they still pay thousands of times more than all the other income brackets combined. By the Way, Buffett earns a 100 thousand a year in dividend income. False argument.
@Romansteel13 Of course the rich carry the brackets right now, all of the money is at the top. Highest income inequality since right before the stock market collapsed in 1929. They've gotten tax cuts for decades and when the money allots to the top as a result, that means they're paying too much? No, it's a sign that they need to pay more. A reasonable tax policy would be for them to not continue paying the lowest tax rate they have in 70-80 years.
Like the dumb student you are, you completely missed my point.
Even if you raised the tax rate on the rich by 90% which they do in some communist countries like Venezuela. America is still 13 trillion dollars in debt.
What do you not understand?
Are you that moronic?
The combined wealth of the Forbes 400 is somewhere around 1-2 trillion dollars.
America is 15 trillion dollars in debt and rising at 6 million dollars per minute.
@Romansteel13 Increasing the taxes on the top income rate doesn't mean the government confiscating the entire net worth of the members of the Forbes 400. I could see why you're confused though. Anyway I'm a dumb student, well what are you then? An uneducated retard who lies on the internet about being worth $2 million.
@grasd2 Lupe Fiasco- Ghetto Story ccspence8 - 144,118 views 0:13 LEBRON JAMES IS GAY-GAY DANCE Xmartinra... - 192,777 view You're in no position in calling people retards. You live with your parents, you are a loser who has never made a dime. Enough said. You are a dumb student, who thinks he knows everything about the tax code, when he knows nothing You don't throw money at a degenerate gambler and expect him to pay you back.
@grasd2 Lol, you can't beat my argument so like the insecure fool you are. You call me a retard. Bahahahahaha. Talk about grasping at straws. You're losing the argument here, kid. Taxing the Rich doesn't fix anything. Even if you stole all the wealth of the Rich, America is still in 13 trillion dollars in debt. What can you not compute? Are you that moronic? You can't beat my immaculate argument, so you resort to ad hominem. Typical mind of an ignoramus. Socrates was right.
@Romansteel13 LMFAO net worth of $2million?? Troll you are a fucking joke, seriously I've never seen a more pathetic liar than you. God you're so useless its hilarious XD
@grasd2 I looked again... I never said that. We are ALL victims of class warfare when the government does this. Taxing the rich 100% will NOT make a dent in the debt or deficit and will NOT add to your bottom line. All it will do is transfer capitol to a centralized government, which is a socialist economy, and out of the private sector. It will DISCOURAGE the rich from entering the market, employing more people, etc. And not only that, the government will WASTE this money as well.
@jimmydriveway You're listing myths that really aren't based on fact. The super rich had no problem entering the market and providing jobs 60 years ago when they paid 90% tax rates. And transferring capitol to the government isn't socialist, it's part of a civilized society. I guess you consider every country in the world outside of anarchist dirt poor African countries to be socialist economies.
@grasd2 Buffett sells insurance products through Berkshire Hathaway. Insurance products do well when tax rates go up, there is a conflict of interest there yet does Obama provide this info? He has become the Primary Crony Capitalist in the Obama Admin. From what I understand, he still owes a Billion Dollars to the Gov, why hasn’t he paid? U can check this out of course. The amusing thing is to watch Gov continue w/it's constant waste & somehow think taking in more revs will change anything.
@jimmydriveway Why are you telling me to wake up when you're so clearly going against your own interests to white knight for a group of people who couldn't give a piss about you. If tax rates on the rich don't go up that revenue is going to have to come from somewhere, higher taxes on you instead. Or no new revenue but cuts to programs that help everyday Americans or the elderly.
@grasd2 Revenue is not the problem, spending is. If you took every last penny from every individual making more than $10 million per year, you would only reduce the nation’s deficit by 12 percent and the debt by 2 percent. The revenue gained would only be about $186 billion per year. Again, it's an arguement based on emotion, not math. What programs stand to be cut if we don't raise taxes on the rich? Please cite cite your sources and provide specifics.
@jimmydriveway They're going to the cracks in the couch to try to cut things that could be paid for by taxing the rich a few more percentage points. social services, disaster relief, etc.. It's both a revenue and spending problem. Revenue as a percentage of GDP is the lowest since 1968.
@grasd2 Please go research the $16 muffins the DOJ just bought. Or the expense of Pelosi's airplane use. Or the $500 MILLION dollar loan to Solyndra. WASTE NOT WANT NOT. We should try to get by on as little revenue as possible from the tax payer. That leaves MORE money in your pocket to spur the economy. It doesn't matter how much you give the government, they spend it. You are incredible. Not to mention how much this crowds out charity. Defense to entitlements... SLASH IT!
@jimmydriveway More money in the private sector doesn't in itself spur the economy. Unemployment has gone up massively after ten years of the Bush tax cuts. The economy was booming after Clinton raised taxes, the economy was booming 50-60 years ago when taxes were in upwards of 90%. There's just no correlation in this nation's history with lowing taxes then experiencing economic boom.
@grasd2 I have an idea of what to cut... make all Federal workers salaries competitive with their counterpart in the private sector. On average, government salaries pay 2x. That is fraudulent!
grasd2 Whats so hard to understand the fact that more rev will do nothing;he's just campaigning.If a man lays bleedg,do ukeep transfusing blood or do u repair wound? All of this extra cash just means more over payments as w/unemployment(paid over $19Bill too much);$105 Bill in duplicative spendg; chks to illegals, prisoners & dead people,etc constant waste, what good is it to steal more $ when they have no managerial skills not to waste?The Rich should choose whom to donate so less gets wasted
@grasd2 ... Although I am not rich, it is against my interests to see a Gov grow in size to the point that they waste even more than they are wasting now. All of these great ideas for perhaps good intentions end up in utter waste; the private sector always outperforms Gov run things because the 'bad' will always go out of bus., whereas the Gov just takes more; never learns from their mistakes.. As Gov grows, so will the waste; I'd rather let the rich decide what to do w/their own $
@grasd2 ... Although I am not rich, it is against my interests to see a Gov grow in size to the point that they waste even more than they are wasting now. All of these great ideas for perhaps good intentions end up in utter waste; the private sector always outperforms Gov run things because the 'bad' will always go out of bus., whereas the Gov just takes more; never learns from their mistakes.. As Gov grows, so will the waste; I'd rather let the rich decide what to do w/their own $
@WingThaiJ I'm not about growing the government either, I"m for increased revenue to spend on infrastructure and to cut spending overseas on wars. The rich have infinitely less reasons to serve the best interest of the people, it's all about what makes them profit. Meanwhile a government can be forced to work for it's people, just as long as the people hold it accountable. This worked in the middle part of the 20th century, it can work again, no need to just completely scrap government.
@jimmydriveway And here you are trying to create sympathy for a group of people who are paying the lowest in taxes in 80 years while making outstanding gains when everyone else is struggling. It makes you an illogical self defeating moron.
@grasd2 We are all paying lower taxes, historically speaking, which is a good thing. It provides people with money to buy goods and services, which creates jobs. This whole argument is based on Buffetts lie. We have a progressive tax system. On "income", he pays a higher rate than someone making $25k. He has multiple sources of revenue, one of those being capital gains which is about 15% which is lower than the 17% paid by his secretary on her paycheck. If he drew a salary, he'd get wallopped.
@grasd2 Assoc Press fact checks report: CBO 10% of households w/highest incomes pay more than ½ of all fed taxes,pay more than 70% of Fed Income Taxes.Assoc press relates in 2009, 1470 households filed tax returns w/incomes above $1mill, yet paid no Fed Income Tax, that’s less than 1% of nearly 237000 returns w/incomes above $1 mill.Obama is focusing all his energy on about 1500Americans who aren't paying fair share.Once they start payg, does any1 think the deficit probs will be taken care of?
@chericewicker People like you inspire me to speak. We have a Democratic Republic. This country started heading south at the inception of the Progressive movement in the early 1900's. Fortunately, America was re-educated last voting cycle and realized Obama was speeding up the process of soft tyranny. Can you cite your sources indicating that "people are really striving for a social democracy"? If you don't think liberals want a socialist economy, you don't read enough.
@chericewicker People like you inspire me to speak. We have a Democratic Republic. This country started heading south at the inception of the Progressive movement in the early 1900's. Fortunately, America was re-educated last voting cycle and realized Obama was speeding up the process of soft tyranny. Can you cite your sources indicating that "people are really striving for a social democracy"? If you don't think liberals want a socialist economy, you don't read enough.
I plugged some numbers into the tax rate calculator on the Smart Money web site. According to this calculator, a single person with a total income of $1,000,000 and a taxable income of $1,000,000 has an effective tax rate of 32.7%. A couple who filed married filed jointly with a total income of $1,400,000 and a taxable income of $1,400,000 would have an effective tax rate of 32.85%. How is it that Mr. Buffett’s employees are paying on average a 32.9% tax rate? Am I missing something?
He is an invesor he pays capital gains tax on his investments! He does not work as an hourly employee! it is amazing how this is twisted to look like he is in the same boat but not paying his share! capital gains tax is totally different than income tax! Idiocy runs rampant!
@Conservative43 thank you. i've been asking that question. i live in Canada, and our rich pay alot more than the poor, but even inthe U.S. where my family live i've always thought that you guys have a progressive tax rate, not a regressive nor flat rate. not too sure about your rates, or about property taxes, luxury taxes or tax shelters , ira's, 401k .... like i said i live in Canada, but it doesn't make any sense that the wealthy pay a lower tax rate. thx for "KEEPING THEM HONEST" .
WELL, WARREN, WHY THE HELL DON"T YOU DONATE THEN and PAY MORE TAXES. Meanwhile the rest of the wealthy will just transfer their wealth out of the nation or shut down productiviity to stay under the limit. We should have a flat tax of 10% no matter how rich we are. And congress should get fired if they can't budget under that.
wow I thought the problem was big spending politicians who want no accountability and needed voted out of office. And how about enforcing laws on the books against "out of control" corporations? No, I see trial lawyers, aarp, donors writing laws and getting political postiion$ to line their own pockets under this "hope and change" scam regime, burgeoning corruption. The sock puppetry strawman arguments here are legion.
Buffet is not trying to make things more fair, He's attempting to insure that no one is able to compete with him.
He could send billions extra to the IRS at any time. He doesn't because he doesn't want to . In fact, he doesn't have to write off his losses to reduce his taxable income like he did to get the "`17 percent" but he did , cus he wants to keep his own money
Buffets attack is on is less successful competition, not himself
Buffet paid 17 percent this year BECAUSE of his LOSSES , which he chose to write off. Yes his losses, his sec didn't have those LOSSES
His new campaign to raise taxes on people making a milion or more is to kill off his cometition......yes to stop anyone from attempting to compete with the billionaires. , who because they've already made their billions and wont be retaxed on those billions.
Buffets aim to to damage all his competition and put himself as the only gamester in town.
@qpwillie And that is an ignorant, snotty remark that has nothing to do with the issue. Of course he can, and he does his share by giving away his entire fortune to charity. But what he wants is real change in the system so that everyone in his position i forced to pay their share the same way as everyone in more modest situations are. It is always cruel with high taxation on income since that punishes the middle class, whilst those earning on capital get away easy. No space for others to grow.
Yeah, they only pay about 50% to 55% in the various taxes. Maybe they should just pay it all. That would run the government for about 20 days. Of course that depends on how much the dictator decides to spend in the future. You know that guy who regularly bypasses our system of checks and balances - that's a dictator, by definition.
The problem is not taxes and it's not those evil job providers, it's about spending.
Raising taxes during a recession is just plain stupid. According to the IRS, 8,274 people earn $10 Million a year or more. If they taxed them for 100% of their income, they would get $240 Billion. That would run the government for about 24 days.
Now for you brilliant leftists who can't comprehend even the the slightest complexity, I didn't say anybody WANTED to tax them 100%. The point is, anything less than 100% would be even less effective.
Very distorted. Raising the INCOME tax rate won' touch Buffet or Gates. They make capgains & divs, like your retired granny. Some CEOs get stock options. The people harmed by top tax rate are people earning high salaries.
Actually he pays 35% on his dividends through the company, you can add that to the 17.7% he claims. There's no law preventing him from donating money to the federal government.
@KenMacMillan - Listened to it... a ridiculous video. They claim he pays more because the company pays taxes... because apparently they can't also apply to the secretary?! Whilst dividends as income is very normal and pays at an income tax level for that individual. It's no debunking any myths, just making random claims that are pretty silly.
Should he be donating the the federal government? I never knew the government was a charity... that's the point, if it was, it wouldn't get nearly as much income. There are many many rich, him on his own would make very little difference, it is only as a unit that tax could greatly be increased.
@Bloodhood3 He has no right to complain about not giving the government enough money when he can voluntarily give as much as he wants. They could take 100% of all rich people's money and still not have enough to cover one year's worth of spending. The problem is government spending, not rich people.
@KenMacMillan Buffett must have given and promised more money to charity than any other man alive... it's as if him and Bill Gates are having a competition of who can give away the most. He's not saying he should give money to the government, he's saying everyone who's millionaires, billionaires should not be giving less than those who are not. It's logical, your argument is not.
@Bloodhood3 The fact that he goes out of his way to give the government as little as possible proves that he doesn't mean what he's saying. If he really felt that the rich should pay more taxes then he would pay more taxes.
@KenMacMillan I'm not sure you understand how taxes work. I made a mistake on my taxes once for $50 extra and they sent it back to me. The gov doesn't take donations. He could send them extra money I guess, but the way the government works, if they caught the error (and if they can catch my $50 dollar mistake, you can bet they would notice something significant) they don't keep that money.
@hippie1427 Hippie... it's you that doesn't understand. If you over pay on your return, yes, the government will return it. There is a separate vehicle (I don't mean car... think process) to donate to the U.S. Treasury. Go to Google and type, "donating - pay.gov".
People are writing my house asking if she's paid us yet, Warren—explain to them how she's rumored as expending all her energies these days lying in efforts to force Harper to get our welfare cut off so she can say we have no food and have her lackeys in government apprehend my son and groom him into a male prostitute. Explain to them how it's not working because we are resourceful people and there's always food in the house and all my energy goes into making sure the kids are alright.
laughlane 15 hours ago
What kind of a world would you have us live in where anything and everything is OK so long as someone is sexually compliant with you, Melinda?! Explain this "logic". You're more fiscally responsible? Explain the math you used to calculate the benefits of this system. You accuse _others_ of being unqualified to do business! Who did you think would sustain it once you alienated and depleted all "economic sectors"?
laughlane 15 hours ago
As some psychiatrist friends of mine just pointed out, where is all Melinda's "concerns" for what goes on in Anderson's house given the reports of violence in the media about men beating her while she's holding her babies, young kids drowning at her parties, her disheveled appearance and obvious drug addiction, etc…?! What about the sexual violence she commits against men and rumors she has relations with young boys? These are not "concerns,"?!
laughlane 16 hours ago
If I'm off base, then please accept my apology but if any of what I am told is true, then God help Melinda!!! All I know is what's been done to my family can't be an accident of fate because we've done nothing to deserve any of it. If being good is all it takes, then to Hell with this woman!
laughlane 19 hours ago
The idea that she can suppress the advancement of gentle women and mothers into society is toxic! I am hearing rumors that she travels with an actor because Bill is cooped up in a trailer all day surrounded by screen after screen of all the people she has on watch 24/7—all of them feeling as violated as we do. He complains to anyone who will listen that he's held captive and she beats him if he objects to the arrangement!
laughlane 20 hours ago
Sure, use prostitutes and make your money off porn if you can't get laid because you have no social skills but you have no right to force it on people under threat of imprisonment, torture and death. She claims she doesn't need Bill—that she made all his money but she doesn't sleep with him, she doesn't care for him—she used him to marry up and she uses him to legitimize her name but she's not his wife by any reasonable definition.
laughlane 20 hours ago
This notion of merit based on superior effort she feigns is substantiated by the illusion of accomplishment one has by jet-setting all over the globe on makeshift "meetings' that are nothing more than excuses to bed expensive companions in hotel rooms—we're not seeing that this amounts to more effort than 7-day weeks @ 15-hour shifts on the computer devising this cheap slave-driver's itinerary and corporate strategy for no pay.
laughlane 20 hours ago
Warren, the idea of someone so promiscuous; someone with so much innocent blood on her hands—the blood of every walk of life, age group, race— having the audacity to so much as think of nit-picking other people's characters is nothing less than obscene. All of this rides on obfuscation; which is a fancy way of saying LIES. It might make her money but sooner or later she'll get dragged off that high horse and held accountable.
laughlane 20 hours ago
I think, Warren, you men need to explain to Melinda that it's illegal to use child protection services as a means to enforce your economic agenda. My family has been placed under inhuman stress in what evidently amounts to a government-controlled hostage situation because of bribes and blackmail to local officials. My son's health and well-being were adversely affected by Melinda's messed up notion of child-rearing and only a monster could be so insensitive. She needs to learn to take, "NO!".
laughlane 20 hours ago
Melinda's the one who screwed her way into a job, Warren—you know we've struggled for 30 years while she lives high off the hog on compensation she owes me for spreading my IP liberally all over the media. I already said I'm not interested in this lifestyle, if you thought you had the path of least resistance then I'm sorry for you. Bill shouldn't have to live in fear because she wants to spread the joy…
laughlane 1 day ago
I'm sure Warren would agree they're the ones that take care of us so it's only smart to care if they're comfortable.
laughlane 2 days ago
warren, instead of giving your money to non-profits, pay a dividend and we will pay taxes on it,
JazzKeyboardist1 2 days ago
This is why Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, T. Boon Pickens, and many other billionaires donate millions upon millions of dollars to non profits and other charity services. People see men as greedy, but these men maid their way through self interest. Instead of seeing theses men relying on greed for their success think seeing their success through trust and self-interest for knowledge success and personal freedom. It is within Warrens Buffets's self-Interest to give his money to good things=AMERICA!
17jjskater 1 month ago 2
His taxable income is insignificant compared to the income he generates through his company. If he really wanted to be taxed more than his current investment in Berkshire would be a tenth of its current size.
He's only bragging that he pays less when the truth is if he wanted to "invest" in federal bureaucracies the government would without a doubt accept his money.
davitodude 2 months ago
@davitodude It couldn't have anything to do with the other Forbes 400 and multimillionaires who are not willing to do the same? It couldn't have anything to do with fairness? With a 1.5tril deficit, his entire wealth would hardly make a dent.
Codylupardus 1 month ago
@davitodude 1.3*
Codylupardus 1 month ago
Worry not, Herman Cain's 999 plan will save the day ! XD What a moron!
deeppurple28 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
He forgets to mention that the "rich" include everyone except himself and his billionaire oligarch friends, whose respective fortunes are safely harbored in corporations and tax-exempt 501's.
Romansteel13 3 months ago
There is a difference between capital gains and regular income tax rate. Capital gain tax is lower, know why? Because unlike income when you work and get paid, you make an investment you can actually lose everything. Ask people who bought Lehman and Enron stocks. The lower tax rate is simply an incentive to get people to take risk and invest.
DocK36 3 months ago
Ok, his tax rate is lower. What's the problem? Is there something illegal I'm missing. More to the point, will Buffett giving up money he'd use for investment, charity or job creation be good? Can you create long-term prosperity by taking from one group and giving to another?
We're no longer an aspirational society. Once we all dreamed of working hard, making lots of money and enjoying ourselves. That's long gone.
smb123211 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@smb123211 You have been brainwashed.
drsteevo 3 months ago
@smb123211 He just published his income tax today. His tax rate is 17%. He made 69 Million last year. My tax rate is something in excess of 40% and I am not rich.
reinharv 3 months ago
@reinharv If you're paying 40% then fire your accountant! The highest tax rate is 35% even if you're one of Obama's billionaires (folks making over $200K - lol). If Buffett wants to pay more he can do so without blabbing about it.
More to the point, how does taking money from successful folks create long-term prosperity? And unless you think D.C. has a history as a wise steward of our money, how does giving more lead to better conditions?
smb123211 3 months ago
@smb123211
It's no point talking to you fools.
Under Buffets plan, my household would probably be hit with some sort of tax too (we make over 350k I am sure).
This is not about " If Buffett wants to pay more he can do so without blabbing about it"
This is NOT ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL!! YOU IDIOT.
This is about the PEOPLE. If you're going to be that selfish, I don't know what kind of fool you are.
It doesn't make sense that a poorer person pays less tax, just doesn't.
slobhinav 3 months ago
@smb123211
It doesn't take an Einstein to realize that (and he would've agreed with Buffet).
You are talking very philosophically. And that is a major flaw in your argument. Let me throw some facts into your ass of a mouth.
1950, 1940, 1995, early 1920's.
Those are dates of American prosperity, read up the tax codes of those days. They were very high.
late 1920's to early 1930's, 1960's-1990, 2000's. Low tax rates, deficit increases.
slobhinav 3 months ago
@slobhinav
"It doesn't take an Einstein to realize that (and he would've agreed with Buffet)."
Argumentum Ad verecundiam, go google it. Chances are you don't know what it means.
You are guilty of a logical fallacy.
Einstein was an adherent to Socialism Lite.
He would had hated Buffett, considering the man is worth north of 65 billion dollars.
You are a moron sir, and the only way to cure your illogical ways is via lobotomy.
Romansteel13 3 months ago
@smb123211
I love how you (assuming you are a Republican) Republicans have been peddling the same damn ideas for the past century and you guys still get away with it! Your ideas never work!
Whenever there has been a tax cut, America has suffered.
This tax cuts hits people in FINANCE sector. What you fail to realize is, finance actualyl has LITTLE to do with our GDP unlike the last few decades.
And btw. The rich didn't get rich by spending.
I can use my family for example.
slobhinav 3 months ago
@slobhinav
Neither, because, unlike you, I actually understand how the tax system works. So tell me, how will you tax their corporate incomes which represent the bulks of their earnings? How will you tax their foreign-domiciled corporations? How will you collect estate taxes on the billions they "donate" to tax-exempt 501's?
You won't. At best, you can tax them on the relatively miniscule amounts they "cash out" as personal income. He knows this; that's why he can say "tax me." It's BS.
Romansteel13 3 months ago
@smb123211
nvm, that takes too long.
But you said "how does taking money from successful folks create long-term prosperity".
I say, roads, bridges, dams, power plants, scientific research, education, health care, engineering grants.
I just don't get your types. WITHOUT federal subsidies, the private sector CANNOT in many circumstances act.
Investing capital on their part is too damn risky. That is why these higher taxes are needed, for those ^ programs.
slobhinav 3 months ago
@slobhinav Considering recent history, it's hard to imagine anyone promoting central planning. The elements of gov't programs are: inefficiency, mismanagement, refusal to adjust to new conditions, decisions based on politics not data and bankruptcy. Why would anyone want that crew telling us where to build a dam?
When DC gets involved in specifics it starts picking winners & losers (Solyndra) based on influence. Gov't money is best when directed toward general (not specific) research.
smb123211 3 months ago
@slobhinav
There is risk, but most of the risk pays off. Solyndra is another example of the risk. Look at the 95% of companies that are doing well under the same grant solyndra got and you will see.
slobhinav 3 months ago
Not to mention that large wealth disparities cause life expectancy and other measures of quality of life for ALL income groups to go down (except maybe the top .0001%). GDP has no correlation with those in developed nations. (watch: Richard Wilkinson: How economic inequality harms societies).
Very long term plans (100 years or longer) are something a governments have a large advantage in carrying out because they are not individuals- they last longer than people.
Codylupardus 1 month ago
@grasd2
"I clearly have done the research as I'm spouting facts to back my arguments up."
LOL.
My professor once said to me, long before you were born.
The more confident a person is, the more Ignorant they are.
He was right, and so was Charles Darwin.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."
You have sour grapes, you will never become Rich, so you hate Rich people.
Go read Aesops' Fable, The Fox and the Grapes.
Romansteel13 3 months ago
@Romansteel13 There's an awful lot of projection going on there. You're incredibly cocky about what you believe when you're just a moron who is making ridiculous claims about my mindset all because I want a more progressive tax rate than the one currently in place. There's no one here with a more bloated sense of self confidence than you. You haven't made any coherent arguments all you've done is throw ad hominem attacks.
grasd2 3 months ago
@grasd2
I'm gonna have the last word. Before I completely ignore you.
You have the mentality of the loser who will never amount to anything in his life, so your plan is effectively stealing from the Rich, because you will never become Rich. Typical Obamabot. I'm not even from the US.
We laugh at you, moronic Americans.
Anyway, Lebron James, Lupe Fiasco, and Weezer are on your favorited videos.
Now I know what demographic and IQ level you fall in.
Romansteel13 3 months ago
@Romansteel13 LOL at how desperate you are to dig up dirt on me that you scroll through my favorites to pick out a few videos that I favorited months and months ago. I have hundreds of favorited videos and some of them are LeBron, Lupe, and Weezer videos, wow you totally owned me! You should really kill yourself if you think that is some kind of amazing insult of my intelligence. Meanwhile you're a fucking retard who feels the need to lie on the internet about being worth $2 million.
grasd2 3 months ago
@Romansteel13 But hey, at least you have the mindset of a rich person! You pretend to be one on the internet after all. If mindset is all it took to be rich and successful you wouldn't be some basement dwelling invalid.
grasd2 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@grasd2 You DO care because for weeks you've been telling me he DOES **pay less** than his secretary which means you DIDN'T do your homework. And now that you realize you are wrong, you are trying to change the focus of your argument.
jimmydriveway 3 months ago
Comment removed
jimmydriveway 3 months ago
Rich people don´t pay their fair share?? According to OECD, the top 10% earners in America pay a share of 45% compared with 28% in France, 31% in Germany, 27% in Sweden, etc. OK, let´s admit that US government revenues as a share of GDP are lower than in other western countries. Then liberals should defend tax hikes for consumers, the middle class, businesses... not only for the wealthy.
xaviqaz 4 months ago
@xaviqaz You do realize that the top 10% hold about 75% of the country's wealth right?
Alakrit 4 months ago
@grasd2 I think we are down to three people who believe this now... Buffett, Obama, and you.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway You want to throw out the Warren Buffett stuff as misleading? Fine, all of my points still stand. They don't revolve around the notion that Buffett pays less taxes than his secretary. All of my comments have been commentary on the ridiculous amount of income inequality in this country, the fact that tax rates on the top bracket need to go up, etc.
grasd2 4 months ago 2
@grasd2 Your points still stand? I don't recall you ever making a valid point. So the ONLY reason you want taxes on the top rate to go up is to some how punish the wealthy which again is at the root of a Marxist society. Before you spout off anymore stupid shit, go read the Communist Manifesto. YOU are what's wrong with this country. If you want more money, go and get it. Create something. The notion that everyone needs to be near equal is fucking disturbing. Get your balls out of your purse.
jimmydriveway 3 months ago
@jimmydriveway The reason I want taxes to go up on the rich is to create more revenue, in a civilized society you tax the people who can most afford to pay the taxes. A progressive tax rate isn't a fast track to communism, talk about a slippery slope argument right there. Playing the communism card is a sign that you are desperate and you realize your arguments are falling apart.
grasd2 3 months ago
@grasd2 And again, the rich, with our current tax system ARE taxed the most because they can most afford it. What you want is already in place. The problem is that you and other progressives don't know when to stop. You seem to even be ok with a 90% rate on the rich. Really? You really believe it's ok to confiscate 90% of every dollar that person earns just because they are rich? Why don't we just apply the tax law equal like we apply every other law in this country, without discriminating.
jimmydriveway 3 months ago
@grasd2 So we know that you don't believe there is any wasteful spending and that only revenue will solve our problem which to me is alarming. You might want to visit dirtyspendingsecrets, cagw, and maybe read the latest on Solyndra. Again, if you taxed every person making more than $10 million a year 100%, you would yield about $186 billion. It wouldn't make a dent and then you would have destroyed those producers and would no longer be able to tax them.
jimmydriveway 3 months ago
@grasd2 Taxing every person making more than $10 million would not even make a dent. The fact that you are ok with the current rate of spending is alarming and is what's wrong with this country. It has only gotten worse over the last century, in general, not better. Sure, there have been brief period of surplus, but no military. You really need to do some research on wasteful spending. We have enough revenue already. The problem is that it's wasted and the overhead to manage it is inefficient.
jimmydriveway 3 months ago
So now you say it's revenue, but when I look up two comments I see that you typed, "all of my comments have been commentary on the ridiculous amount of income inequality in this country". So I've learned that you lie, you say things without backing them up with facts, and when cornered you change your argument. Here is what you should have said, "I don't know if Buffet pays less than his secretary, but I don't like that rich people have all of the money and some of it should be taken away".
jimmydriveway 3 months ago
Ha ha... you are so dumb. My argument is falling apart.... ahh, yeah right buddy, keep telling yourself that. Please read the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx. "Plank 2" A heavy progressive or graduated tax system. What we have in this country is Soft Tyranny. It's never going to look like the U.S.S.R. circa 1974. Rather, we are slowly killing the standard of living for ALL Americans while giving more control and personal property to our giant bloated government. And you bought into it. Moron.
jimmydriveway 3 months ago
What about all those taxes corporations pay on your behalf?
tadaa11 4 months ago
I am all for a flat tax. Everyone can pay the same rate. That would be more fair than the progressive tax system we have now.
vtxphantom 4 months ago
PART I: Lost in all the debate about whether or not to extend the Bush tax cuts is the issue of what tax cuts and tax increases really accomplish.
The main, if not only, economic point of those pushing higher taxes on upper income Americans is that we need to pay down the deficit. The simple assumption is that higher taxes will yield higher revenues for the government, and with those higher revenues the government can attack
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
@WingThaiJ
PART II our massive debts.Bill Frezza says this higher rates equals higher revenues assumption may be the great flaw in the higher tax argument.
The venture capitalist makes an interesting argument that the lower tax rates of the Bush tax cuts increased revenues for the government.
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
PART III: He writes:During the eight years of the Clinton Administration the Federal government collected a total of $5.66 trill $ in indiv income taxes. During the eight years of the Bush Administration the Federal government collected approximately $7.45 trillion dollars in individual income taxes. The rich - that is, the top 1% of taxpayers - not only forked over a trillion dollars more to Uncle Sam under Bush than under Clinton, their share of the income tax burden increased from 33% to 38%
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
PART IV: Frezza adds that not only has the burden risen on the rich, but they are actually paying a higher blended tax rate under the Bush cuts:
During the eight years of the Clinton Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended rate of 20.6%. During the eight years of the Bush Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended tax rate of 21.3%. Yes, the actual tax rate that matters when you fill out the bottom line of your tax return went up for the rich under George Bush.
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
PART IV: Frezza adds that not only has the burden risen on the rich, but they are actually paying a higher blended tax rate under the Bush cuts:During the eight years of the Clinton Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended rate of 20.6%. During the eight years of the Bush Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended tax rate of 21.3%. Yes, the actual tax rate that matters when you fill out the bottom line of your tax return went up for the rich under George Bush.
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
PART VI: from 48.0% in 1981 to 57.2 %in 1988. The top 1% saw their share of the income tax bill climb even more dramatically, from 17.6% in 1981 to 27.5% in 1988.Even President Kennedy agreed w/the concept of lower rates often meaning more rev. He said:"Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the 1hand, & the avoidance of large Fed deficits on other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PART IV: Frezza adds that not only has the burden risen on the rich, but they are actually paying a higher blended tax rate under the Bush cuts:
During the eight years of the Clinton Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended rate of 20.6%. During the eight years of the Bush Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended tax rate of 21.3%. Yes, the actual tax rate that matters when you fill out the bottom line of your tax return went up for the rich under George Bush.
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
PART IV: Frezza adds that not only has the burden risen on the rich, but they are actually paying a higher blended tax rate under the Bush cuts: During the eight years of the Clinton Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended rate of 20.6%. During the eight years of the Bush Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended tax rate of 21.3%.Yes, the actual tax rate that matters when you fill out the bottom line of your tax return went up for the rich under Bush.
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
PART V: In other words, Frezza argues that the IRS' own data indicates these lower top-end rates have resulted in both higher revenues and higher real tax contributions from the wealthy.
Despite the counterintuitive nature of the argument, historical data seems to agree with Frezza. As the conservative Heritage Foundation notes about the Reagan tax cuts:
The share of income taxes paid by the top 10 percent of earners jumped significantly, climbing
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
PART VII restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits… In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now."
Some states may be finding this out first hand. Remember that Maryland raised taxes on
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
PART VIII millionaires in 2008 and tax revenues fell in 2009.
Yes, there are easy ways for critics to discount this concept. JFK cut taxes from 91% to 'only' 77% back in 1963. Bracket creep may be capturing more families as income levels rise with inflation. Revenues in states like Maryland that fell may not be due to higher taxes, but simply the recession and fewer capital gains. I'm sure there are more I'm missing.
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
PART XI That said Frezza's point & IRS data shouldn't be discounted.Many financial planners &tax experts we have spoken w/recently say they R swamped w/clients looking for more tax efficient strategies ahead of expected hike in rates.Capital is,after all, smart &goes where its cost is lower.Though only time will tell, those making the 'logical' assumption higher tax rates will lead to more $ for Treasury may be making a dangerous assumption indeed. W/taxes, few things R often logical or linear.
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
Either Buffet has something up his sleeve or he's crazy. Why else would a person pay millions for tax shelters and then complain that he isn't taxed enough? Maybe he sees that a flat or fair tax would leave everyone except tax attorneys wealthier in the long run ... including him. Or maybe he's gone nutz and doesn't know that he can just send a check to Uncle Sam any time.
BErectus 4 months ago
warren buffet?..........goerge costanza?..........seinfield show? "a secretary cannot make more than her boss"!
rw5791 4 months ago
Warren Buffett is a smart man but he thinks the average American taxpayer is stupid and he must be right if they believe this crap about he wants to pay higher taxes. If he did it would be very simple. He could pay himself a salary and then it would be taxed as income tax and not capital gains. Of course Obama Lover Tom would never ask that question? He could also have some of his companies pay the taxes they owe.
Will this country wake up in time because time is running out. FAST
utraceman 4 months ago
i heard he paid 6.9 million dollars in taxes last year.....ever if he paid 40 million, and other uber-rich paid that much, the federal gov't would still run deficits....time to cut spending! ..... but also any levelheaded person would admit the rich should pay it's fair share.....i'm not sure i believe him that his tax rate is lower than his employees ... anyone know the U.S. tax rate codes? don't they have a progressive rate system...not a flat rate nor a regressive rate, but a progressive??
quincee33 4 months ago
@quincee33 Check this to be sure, but I understand he still owes the Gov $ 1 Bill
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
Wait a minute here. He says the average tax rate for his office was 32.9% then mentions a litany of blue collar jobs. To have an effective tax rate of 32.9% (the AVERAGE, not the max) he claims you'd have be making somewhere in the north of $200K a year using the current marginal rates even assuming you took NO deductions on your taxes. If you took any deductions you probably would need to be making upwards of $300K a year. Does this guy have any janitor jobs open? I'm not too proud!
jfuex 4 months ago 2
First of all, he's full of shit. Secondly, the IRS has a vehicle for those who want to pay additional taxes, why doesn't he? Thirdly, why does he write off his charity donations? But MOST importantly, the money an individual earns is PERSONAL PROPERTY which is a cornerstone of this country. We did not get where we are today based on a socialist economy, rather a capitalist economy. Idiot.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway although I agree that the money an individual earns is personal property, recognize that we got to where we are based off of criminality. this country was built on organized crime, human slave trade and thievery. and a progressive tax structure doesn't make you a socialist economy. what people are really striving for is a social democracy. i wish people would stop using the term "socialist" out of context!!! geeeez.
chericewicker 4 months ago
@chericewicker I will recognize that historically, Capitalism is the only economy that can vanquish grinding poverty. The overwhelming success of this country is based on a Free Market economy. Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Einstein, Pasture, Salk, Bell. A progressive tax rate is a COMPONENT of a socialized economy. Please stay away from my personal property. I wish people would stop thinking that the government is the cure for everything. Have a spine, be the captain of your own ship.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@chericewicker Buffetts effective tax rate is about 45% - It is utterly embarrassing that people fall for these kind of politics. If the top 5% of earners pay most of the taxes and the bottom 50% pay ZERO taxes, how much more fair do you want it to be? The crux of Marxism is class warfare... this is the exact same thing. What is happening to our country? How about this... "Hey bottom 50%, pitch in YOUR fair share. $20, $50, $100.... SOMETHING, just contribute".
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway Buffett's effective tax rate isn't any where near 45%. What's utterly embarrassing is that you can pull that number out of your ass and expect people to believe it.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 You obviously don't understand the corporate tax rate, capital gains tax, or investment income. His comment was based strictly on capital gains tax. It's effect was tremendous because it played on your emotions and most Americans deal only with income tax. Being emotional about an issue doesn't change the facts. Even the liberal main stream media is pushing back on this one.
forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2011/08/15/warren-buffetts-very-strange-tax-argument/
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@grasd2 Here is another source. I don't pull things out of my ass.
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903999904576466541882356616.html?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_opinion
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@grasd2 NYC Mayor Bloomberg: “The Buffett thing is just theatrics. If Warren Buffett made his money from ordinary income rather than capital gains, his tax rate would be a lot higher than his secretary’s,” he said. “I think it’s not fair to say that wealthy people don’t pay their fair share. They pay a much higher percentage of their income, they have a higher rate than people who make less,” - another liberal Obama supporter pushing back against this idiotic claim.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway And the bottom not having enough money to pay income taxes doesn't indicate Marxism, quite the opposite, it indicates that we're in a terrible economic situation that has done a complete number on the middle and lower classes in this country and has barely touched the rich in comparison and after 30 years of policies made to increase income inequality, too much money has floated to the top and stayed up there.
grasd2 4 months ago 2
@grasd2 Nice reading comprehension, I never said that. I said the crux of Marxism is class warfare, read the Communist Manifesto. The Bourgeois and the Prolatariat. Question: If you make $25k and rasie taxes only on the person making $250k and above, how does that increase your income? It does nothing for you at all. Especially if you have no effective tax liability. You can't pay any less than zero. Equal men are not free. Free men are not equal.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@grasd2 Here's Ted Turners take...hardly a conservative: “Nobody likes to pay more taxes,” Turner said. “At least, except Warren Buffett likes to pay more taxes, he’s the only one,” he clarified. “Do you think he should?” the interviewer asked him. “Well, he thinks so. He can always write a check to the government; just send them the money,” he said, smiling slightly. -End- Buffet doesn't want to pay more taxes, he wants to advance a political agenda. Class warfare keeps Dems in power. Wake up.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway Why is it so certain that Buffett is trying to advance a political agenda? He's 80 years old nearing the end of his life, he has all of the money in the world, he doesn't have a negative stake in whether taxes go up a few percentage points, he'll be rich as shit either way. He's the perfect example of someone who can look at the tax system objectively and admit what is wrong without personal interest affecting his views too much.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 That is one of the most ridiculous arguments I've ever heard. If I have a political agenda, for example, preserving the 2nd amendment, my views aren't going to change because I'm 80. Regardless, it has escaped you that his statement was false. Answer this: If 50% of Americans are paying 0 income taxes, how are they paying more than the rich? I simply cannot wrap my head around how retarded you are.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway He probably doesn't have a political agenda because there's no point in him having one you moron do I have to spell it out for you again? He's set for life, his life is about to be over. He can tell the truth about taxes and look at it objectively because it doesn't really affect him, either way he's going to be incredibly rich and about to die in the next several years. You call me retarded when it's just a case of you having terrible reading comprehension.
grasd2 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway I never said the Americans paying no taxes are paying more than the rich. I"m talking about members of the working middle class pay more taxes than rich people who take advantage of the tax loopholes, Buffett for example.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 Oh dear God. Warren Buffet does NOT pay less than his secretary. He omitted other streams of revenue which in turn played on your eagerness to believe him. Please visit the U.S. Treasury or any reputable tax statistic website. Again, even the left is pushing back against this saying it was going a little too far. As for loopholes, yes... close them all! BTW... no one forces Buffet to itemize. You can't seem to get that into your statist government loving head can you?
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@grasd2 He also makes money on insurance products which he benefits as tax rates go up.
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jimmydriveway Why is it so certain that Buffett is trying to advance a political agenda? He's 80 years old nearing the end of his life, he has all of the money in the world, he doesn't have a negative stake in whether taxes go up a few percentage points, he'll be rich as shit either way. He's the perfect example of someone who can look at the tax system objectively and admit what is wrong without personal interest affecting his views too much.
grasd2 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway You sound like a parrot for the rich corporatists. The income class that is the only one who is making gains in this terrible economy isn't the victim of class warfare. The class that has profited from corporate socialism in terms of bailouts isn't the victim of class warfare. The CEOs whose pay has risen at massive levels while middle class wages have been stagnant aren't the victims of class warfare. YOU wake up.
grasd2 4 months ago 2
@grasd2 It's hard to follow you. The argument is about tax rates, not wages. It's typical of a liberal to change the subject when they are presented with an argument that can't be broken. I'm against all bailouts whether they are for an individual mortgage or GM. Failure should not be rewarded with mine, and my childrens tax dollars. This includes TARP under Bush. Horrible mistake.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway That comment is in response to you saying that the rich are being the victims of class warfare. I listed reasons why they aren't and why it's actually the other way around. I know you're having trouble following me, I'm sure you have trouble following everyone.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 Can you point out where I said the rich were "victims". The only person who is a victim is you. You have traded your spine, your heart, and your sense of logic for a "false" sense of security. It must be a miserable existence being jealous of rich people and waiting for the Federal Government to solve all of societies ills. Republicans or Democrats, it doesn't matter. Congress does not have your best interest in mind. BTW... I'm a middle class guy with 3 jobs.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway I'm not jealous of rich people I'm just asking for them to help pitch in when all of the deficit reduction policies are being put on the backs of the elderly and the non rich. The middle and lower class already got creamed much more during the recession than the people at the top, and then they've been asked to take on the full load of the debt reduction. I'm not a spineless government moocher, I have a job, I take no hand outs, I'm just asking for a reasonable tax policy.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 I'm done talking to you until you go doe some homework. I honestly think you have a learning disability. Again, the top 10% pay 70% of the taxes, the bottom 50% pay no taxes. Can I ask you where you are getting your data from? I don't want blogs or editorials.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway Of course the top 10% pay most of the taxes they own most of the wealth in this country you halfwit.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 You sound like a good little commie, so eager not to give up YOUR private property, but somebody elses which equates to theft by force. What a pussy... so much for rugged individualism. Well, at least I still have it.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway Have fun with your "rugged individualism" you white trash idiot, that's working out so well. What a nice life you have working 3 jobs pulling in a shitty salary and white knighting for the rich.
grasd2 4 months ago 2
@grasd2 White trash? A little racist huh? Nice. 1st job is a pretty decent salary, 2nd two jobs keep my kids in private school and have helped me build up a nice little deposit on a piece of land I'm going to buy up in the mountains so that I can build a little ranch and hunt right out back. So, it's a lot of hard work, but it's worth it. After I have that I'll sorted out I'll roll back to one job. It's what people like me when they want something. We work hard for it and don't expect hand outs.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway I thought you were done bro? The white trash comment got to you huh? I'm white myself so I'm not saying it as an anti-white thing. But man your rugged individualism sounds awesome, what a life. I"ll take my 40 hour work week and 70K salary over that. I'll keep suggesting for rich people to take on a large load of the tax burden because they try to do the same to people like me. It works both ways, you have to fight back. Not take it in the ass like a "rugged individualist".
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 I wouldn't say the comment got to me, rather it was revealing about your character. I don't give a shit what color you are. None of my business and it's irrelevant. Another emotional leak by you. I don't begrudge you for what you make and how many hours you work. That's your business. BTW... u are in luck, the rich do pay most of the taxes, so you can relax now. You seem like the kind of guy that would call in sick if you were a little tired or had the sniffles. I worked my 40! Pussy.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway No, I can handle my 40 just fine, because it's a reasonable and human amount of hours. But I like how the you've been convinced that working like a rat is American and is a positive part of your character. This is how they get the Americans who can find a job to work the most hours in the world with the least amount of vacation. All they need to do is assign positive character qualities to being overworked, and people like you just fall right for it.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 I'm an I.T. Engineer who owns two small side businesses. I've always advanced and taken jobs from guys like you because I'm just as efficient as you, yet I produce more than you. Like anything else in life, someone who is willing to pay me and you the same will pick me because I produce more. "They" don't over work me. This isn't China. I have choices. I'm a leader and creating my own destiny while you punch out at 5pm on the dot like a pussy. Nobody "owes" me anything. I go and get it.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@grasd2 Now we are really getting to the core of it. It's not good enough that you are happy working a 40 hr week for decent pay, but you are actually insulting me for wanting to work harder to better my lot in life and the lives of my children. Don't you realize how completely backwards and un-American that is? You actually think working harder for yourself is wrong and the someone else should be footing the bill. We have to be near the end of the Republic if people like you continue to breed.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway You think being a braindead worker ant is American. There hasn't been so many people working more than 8 hour days since the 1890s. This isn't American, this is just another system in place like it was 100 years ago where bosses have convinced idiots that working harder and longer than them for way less pay is the American thing to do. If everyone who breeds was like you we would have never advanced past the lifestyle Americans had at the beginning of the industrial revolution.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 8 hours a day? HA HA. Because of Presidents like FDR and Johnson, you have been convinced that you are owed an 8 hour day. What would you do if you had to survive on your own? You would die. I don't count the hours, I work until it's done. Do you think Ford, Edison, Wright Bros, etc. worked 8 hours a day? Talk to any small business owner... most of them work 10-12 hours a day, 6-7 days a week. Speaking of week, you are weak. The dependency on the government by you is disgusting. Pussy.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway A guy who is more efficient in his production with a 40 hour work than someone like you who works 60-70 a week or whatever you work, has infinitely more reasons to breed. You're easily replaceable, there's a lot of dopes nowadays with a worker's ant mentality who will not question the system in place one bit. Or question if he is getting screwed over. And they don't move the world forward one bit, all they do is extend the status quo.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 I have to move on. I can't discuss this based on emotion. You have been brain washed and there is no hope for you. You are about 1 of 3 people that believes Buffett and the reason being is that it makes you "feel good". God Bless America.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway I'm not arguing based on emotion. Meanwhile you're the one acting like an increase in revenue is communist, it shows you have no idea of the historical tax rates in this country and the tax rates in other developed countries, you just shout commie. That's the definition of being an emotional idiot.
grasd2 4 months ago
Criminal Plutocrat Buffett makes billions from the treasury and investing in companies the Federal State promises him they will bail out.
He will not be affected by an Income Theft Rate increase on actually productive entrepreneurs and his insurance companies will profit from an increased Estate/Death Theft Rate.
To support this he deceivingly leaves out the 40% Corporate Theft Rate and only mentions the 15% CG Theft Rate on top of that Corporate Theft Rate, like a good criminal plutocrat.
qwertypoiu4321 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@qwertypoiu4321
This man hit the nail on the coffin.
"Criminal Plutocrat Buffett makes billions from the treasury and investing in companies the Federal State promises him they will bail out."
Romansteel13 4 months ago
@grasd2
"I'm just asking for a reasonable tax policy."
Hilarious.
As son of two janitors who made less than 35k a year. Fast forward 20 years later, my net worth is worth around 2 million dollars, which according to you, is 'rich'. The Rich already do carry all tax brackets. Even if you gave the top 20% a 15 percent tax cut, they still pay thousands of times more than all the other income brackets combined. By the Way, Buffett earns a 100 thousand a year in dividend income. False argument.
Romansteel13 4 months ago
@Romansteel13 Of course the rich carry the brackets right now, all of the money is at the top. Highest income inequality since right before the stock market collapsed in 1929. They've gotten tax cuts for decades and when the money allots to the top as a result, that means they're paying too much? No, it's a sign that they need to pay more. A reasonable tax policy would be for them to not continue paying the lowest tax rate they have in 70-80 years.
grasd2 4 months ago 2
@grasd2
Like the dumb student you are, you completely missed my point.
Even if you raised the tax rate on the rich by 90% which they do in some communist countries like Venezuela. America is still 13 trillion dollars in debt.
What do you not understand?
Are you that moronic?
The combined wealth of the Forbes 400 is somewhere around 1-2 trillion dollars.
America is 15 trillion dollars in debt and rising at 6 million dollars per minute.
Do the math moron.
Romansteel13 3 months ago
@Romansteel13 Increasing the taxes on the top income rate doesn't mean the government confiscating the entire net worth of the members of the Forbes 400. I could see why you're confused though. Anyway I'm a dumb student, well what are you then? An uneducated retard who lies on the internet about being worth $2 million.
grasd2 3 months ago
morrowindfan75 3 months ago
Romansteel13 3 months ago
@Romansteel13 LMFAO net worth of $2million?? Troll you are a fucking joke, seriously I've never seen a more pathetic liar than you. God you're so useless its hilarious XD
tryandlisten 3 months ago
@grasd2 I looked again... I never said that. We are ALL victims of class warfare when the government does this. Taxing the rich 100% will NOT make a dent in the debt or deficit and will NOT add to your bottom line. All it will do is transfer capitol to a centralized government, which is a socialist economy, and out of the private sector. It will DISCOURAGE the rich from entering the market, employing more people, etc. And not only that, the government will WASTE this money as well.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway You're listing myths that really aren't based on fact. The super rich had no problem entering the market and providing jobs 60 years ago when they paid 90% tax rates. And transferring capitol to the government isn't socialist, it's part of a civilized society. I guess you consider every country in the world outside of anarchist dirt poor African countries to be socialist economies.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 Buffett sells insurance products through Berkshire Hathaway. Insurance products do well when tax rates go up, there is a conflict of interest there yet does Obama provide this info? He has become the Primary Crony Capitalist in the Obama Admin. From what I understand, he still owes a Billion Dollars to the Gov, why hasn’t he paid? U can check this out of course. The amusing thing is to watch Gov continue w/it's constant waste & somehow think taking in more revs will change anything.
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway Why are you telling me to wake up when you're so clearly going against your own interests to white knight for a group of people who couldn't give a piss about you. If tax rates on the rich don't go up that revenue is going to have to come from somewhere, higher taxes on you instead. Or no new revenue but cuts to programs that help everyday Americans or the elderly.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 Revenue is not the problem, spending is. If you took every last penny from every individual making more than $10 million per year, you would only reduce the nation’s deficit by 12 percent and the debt by 2 percent. The revenue gained would only be about $186 billion per year. Again, it's an arguement based on emotion, not math. What programs stand to be cut if we don't raise taxes on the rich? Please cite cite your sources and provide specifics.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway They're going to the cracks in the couch to try to cut things that could be paid for by taxing the rich a few more percentage points. social services, disaster relief, etc.. It's both a revenue and spending problem. Revenue as a percentage of GDP is the lowest since 1968.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 Please go research the $16 muffins the DOJ just bought. Or the expense of Pelosi's airplane use. Or the $500 MILLION dollar loan to Solyndra. WASTE NOT WANT NOT. We should try to get by on as little revenue as possible from the tax payer. That leaves MORE money in your pocket to spur the economy. It doesn't matter how much you give the government, they spend it. You are incredible. Not to mention how much this crowds out charity. Defense to entitlements... SLASH IT!
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway More money in the private sector doesn't in itself spur the economy. Unemployment has gone up massively after ten years of the Bush tax cuts. The economy was booming after Clinton raised taxes, the economy was booming 50-60 years ago when taxes were in upwards of 90%. There's just no correlation in this nation's history with lowing taxes then experiencing economic boom.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 I have an idea of what to cut... make all Federal workers salaries competitive with their counterpart in the private sector. On average, government salaries pay 2x. That is fraudulent!
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
grasd2 Whats so hard to understand the fact that more rev will do nothing;he's just campaigning.If a man lays bleedg,do ukeep transfusing blood or do u repair wound? All of this extra cash just means more over payments as w/unemployment(paid over $19Bill too much);$105 Bill in duplicative spendg; chks to illegals, prisoners & dead people,etc constant waste, what good is it to steal more $ when they have no managerial skills not to waste?The Rich should choose whom to donate so less gets wasted
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
@grasd2 ... Although I am not rich, it is against my interests to see a Gov grow in size to the point that they waste even more than they are wasting now. All of these great ideas for perhaps good intentions end up in utter waste; the private sector always outperforms Gov run things because the 'bad' will always go out of bus., whereas the Gov just takes more; never learns from their mistakes.. As Gov grows, so will the waste; I'd rather let the rich decide what to do w/their own $
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
@grasd2 ... Although I am not rich, it is against my interests to see a Gov grow in size to the point that they waste even more than they are wasting now. All of these great ideas for perhaps good intentions end up in utter waste; the private sector always outperforms Gov run things because the 'bad' will always go out of bus., whereas the Gov just takes more; never learns from their mistakes.. As Gov grows, so will the waste; I'd rather let the rich decide what to do w/their own $
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
@WingThaiJ I'm not about growing the government either, I"m for increased revenue to spend on infrastructure and to cut spending overseas on wars. The rich have infinitely less reasons to serve the best interest of the people, it's all about what makes them profit. Meanwhile a government can be forced to work for it's people, just as long as the people hold it accountable. This worked in the middle part of the 20th century, it can work again, no need to just completely scrap government.
grasd2 4 months ago
@jimmydriveway And here you are trying to create sympathy for a group of people who are paying the lowest in taxes in 80 years while making outstanding gains when everyone else is struggling. It makes you an illogical self defeating moron.
grasd2 4 months ago
@grasd2 We are all paying lower taxes, historically speaking, which is a good thing. It provides people with money to buy goods and services, which creates jobs. This whole argument is based on Buffetts lie. We have a progressive tax system. On "income", he pays a higher rate than someone making $25k. He has multiple sources of revenue, one of those being capital gains which is about 15% which is lower than the 17% paid by his secretary on her paycheck. If he drew a salary, he'd get wallopped.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
@grasd2 Assoc Press fact checks report: CBO 10% of households w/highest incomes pay more than ½ of all fed taxes,pay more than 70% of Fed Income Taxes.Assoc press relates in 2009, 1470 households filed tax returns w/incomes above $1mill, yet paid no Fed Income Tax, that’s less than 1% of nearly 237000 returns w/incomes above $1 mill.Obama is focusing all his energy on about 1500Americans who aren't paying fair share.Once they start payg, does any1 think the deficit probs will be taken care of?
WingThaiJ 4 months ago
@WingThaiJ Obviously no one policy will fix the deficit since we're in such a huge hole, but it will help things out.
grasd2 4 months ago
@chericewicker People like you inspire me to speak. We have a Democratic Republic. This country started heading south at the inception of the Progressive movement in the early 1900's. Fortunately, America was re-educated last voting cycle and realized Obama was speeding up the process of soft tyranny. Can you cite your sources indicating that "people are really striving for a social democracy"? If you don't think liberals want a socialist economy, you don't read enough.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@chericewicker People like you inspire me to speak. We have a Democratic Republic. This country started heading south at the inception of the Progressive movement in the early 1900's. Fortunately, America was re-educated last voting cycle and realized Obama was speeding up the process of soft tyranny. Can you cite your sources indicating that "people are really striving for a social democracy"? If you don't think liberals want a socialist economy, you don't read enough.
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
I plugged some numbers into the tax rate calculator on the Smart Money web site. According to this calculator, a single person with a total income of $1,000,000 and a taxable income of $1,000,000 has an effective tax rate of 32.7%. A couple who filed married filed jointly with a total income of $1,400,000 and a taxable income of $1,400,000 would have an effective tax rate of 32.85%. How is it that Mr. Buffett’s employees are paying on average a 32.9% tax rate? Am I missing something?
skipbooker 4 months ago
He is an invesor he pays capital gains tax on his investments! He does not work as an hourly employee! it is amazing how this is twisted to look like he is in the same boat but not paying his share! capital gains tax is totally different than income tax! Idiocy runs rampant!
Conservative43 4 months ago
@Conservative43 thank you. i've been asking that question. i live in Canada, and our rich pay alot more than the poor, but even inthe U.S. where my family live i've always thought that you guys have a progressive tax rate, not a regressive nor flat rate. not too sure about your rates, or about property taxes, luxury taxes or tax shelters , ira's, 401k .... like i said i live in Canada, but it doesn't make any sense that the wealthy pay a lower tax rate. thx for "KEEPING THEM HONEST" .
quincee33 4 months ago
Someone making $40,000 a year pays more as a percentage of income in Social Security taxes than someone making $200,000 a year.
uastudy 5 months ago
Buffet should just send in the extra money if he wants too! Just send it in!
DUPDOGGY 5 months ago
USA! USA!
latinoheat300 5 months ago
WELL, WARREN, WHY THE HELL DON"T YOU DONATE THEN and PAY MORE TAXES. Meanwhile the rest of the wealthy will just transfer their wealth out of the nation or shut down productiviity to stay under the limit. We should have a flat tax of 10% no matter how rich we are. And congress should get fired if they can't budget under that.
Justprayfirst 5 months ago
wow I thought the problem was big spending politicians who want no accountability and needed voted out of office. And how about enforcing laws on the books against "out of control" corporations? No, I see trial lawyers, aarp, donors writing laws and getting political postiion$ to line their own pockets under this "hope and change" scam regime, burgeoning corruption. The sock puppetry strawman arguments here are legion.
vllmer 5 months ago
Buffet is not trying to make things more fair, He's attempting to insure that no one is able to compete with him.
He could send billions extra to the IRS at any time. He doesn't because he doesn't want to . In fact, he doesn't have to write off his losses to reduce his taxable income like he did to get the "`17 percent" but he did , cus he wants to keep his own money
Buffets attack is on is less successful competition, not himself
2002lees 5 months ago
Buffet paid 17 percent this year BECAUSE of his LOSSES , which he chose to write off. Yes his losses, his sec didn't have those LOSSES
His new campaign to raise taxes on people making a milion or more is to kill off his cometition......yes to stop anyone from attempting to compete with the billionaires. , who because they've already made their billions and wont be retaxed on those billions.
Buffets aim to to damage all his competition and put himself as the only gamester in town.
2002lees 5 months ago
THIS CLOWN IS A FRAUD AND A THEIF. TAX HIM MORE
TEHTYMEKITTEH1 5 months ago
Warren Buffett is allowed to give the government as much money as he wants to. There is no law against it.
qpwillie 5 months ago
@qpwillie And that is an ignorant, snotty remark that has nothing to do with the issue. Of course he can, and he does his share by giving away his entire fortune to charity. But what he wants is real change in the system so that everyone in his position i forced to pay their share the same way as everyone in more modest situations are. It is always cruel with high taxation on income since that punishes the middle class, whilst those earning on capital get away easy. No space for others to grow.
TheBushman7 5 months ago
@TheBushman7
Yeah, they only pay about 50% to 55% in the various taxes. Maybe they should just pay it all. That would run the government for about 20 days. Of course that depends on how much the dictator decides to spend in the future. You know that guy who regularly bypasses our system of checks and balances - that's a dictator, by definition.
The problem is not taxes and it's not those evil job providers, it's about spending.
qpwillie 5 months ago
@TheBushman7 How Much is Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Back-Tax Bill Exactly? About $1 Billion
mike1111qq 5 months ago
Raising taxes during a recession is just plain stupid. According to the IRS, 8,274 people earn $10 Million a year or more. If they taxed them for 100% of their income, they would get $240 Billion. That would run the government for about 24 days.
Now for you brilliant leftists who can't comprehend even the the slightest complexity, I didn't say anybody WANTED to tax them 100%. The point is, anything less than 100% would be even less effective.
qpwillie 5 months ago
Very distorted. Raising the INCOME tax rate won' touch Buffet or Gates. They make capgains & divs, like your retired granny. Some CEOs get stock options. The people harmed by top tax rate are people earning high salaries.
fraxus 6 months ago
Why would he lie?
donatord 6 months ago
Actually he pays 35% on his dividends through the company, you can add that to the 17.7% he claims. There's no law preventing him from donating money to the federal government.
KenMacMillan 6 months ago
Debunking Warren Buffett and other tax myths
/watch?v=6drf0DsnHRw
KenMacMillan 6 months ago
@KenMacMillan - Listened to it... a ridiculous video. They claim he pays more because the company pays taxes... because apparently they can't also apply to the secretary?! Whilst dividends as income is very normal and pays at an income tax level for that individual. It's no debunking any myths, just making random claims that are pretty silly.
Bloodhood3 6 months ago
Should he be donating the the federal government? I never knew the government was a charity... that's the point, if it was, it wouldn't get nearly as much income. There are many many rich, him on his own would make very little difference, it is only as a unit that tax could greatly be increased.
Bloodhood3 6 months ago
@Bloodhood3 He has no right to complain about not giving the government enough money when he can voluntarily give as much as he wants. They could take 100% of all rich people's money and still not have enough to cover one year's worth of spending. The problem is government spending, not rich people.
KenMacMillan 6 months ago
@KenMacMillan Buffett must have given and promised more money to charity than any other man alive... it's as if him and Bill Gates are having a competition of who can give away the most. He's not saying he should give money to the government, he's saying everyone who's millionaires, billionaires should not be giving less than those who are not. It's logical, your argument is not.
Bloodhood3 6 months ago
@Bloodhood3 The fact that he goes out of his way to give the government as little as possible proves that he doesn't mean what he's saying. If he really felt that the rich should pay more taxes then he would pay more taxes.
KenMacMillan 6 months ago
@KenMacMillan I'm not sure you understand how taxes work. I made a mistake on my taxes once for $50 extra and they sent it back to me. The gov doesn't take donations. He could send them extra money I guess, but the way the government works, if they caught the error (and if they can catch my $50 dollar mistake, you can bet they would notice something significant) they don't keep that money.
hippie1427 6 months ago
@hippie1427 Hippie... it's you that doesn't understand. If you over pay on your return, yes, the government will return it. There is a separate vehicle (I don't mean car... think process) to donate to the U.S. Treasury. Go to Google and type, "donating - pay.gov".
jimmydriveway 4 months ago
Comment removed
jimmydriveway 4 months ago