Buffett rule

[Guest]

This is the latest political gimmick...

..."A tax-the-rich proposal named after Warren Buffett has little chance of passing this year, but that hasn't stopped the debate over what impact it would have.

Some economists are skeptical that a 30 percent minimum tax on people with million-dollar incomes — known as the "Buffett rule" — would do much to reduce the deficit or boost the economy. But the Obama administration says the proposal is necessary to make the tax code more equitable."

..."he Buffett rule would apply to wealthy people, but not all wealthy people. Instead, it would affect the tiny number of taxpayers — some of the nation's wealthiest — who make most of their money from investments.

Rob Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, says the proposed rule would not affect many of the people we think of as "very rich."

"For high income people who get a lot of their income from wage and salaries — the George Clooneys of the world, LeBron James, the CEOs — those people would not see an effect from the Buffett tax, because they're already paying tax rates above 30 percent," Williams says."

..."But, he says, wealthy people who get their money from assets like stocks and bonds would feel the pain."

...""If you tax millionaires that are investing in, for example, municipal bonds, and they're enjoying the tax benefit of that interest, you could see a whole rash of investors moving away from buying bonds of our state and local governments," Ablin says."

The KEY above is the movement AWAY from municipal bonds and the buying of bonds of LOCAL government.


""If this tax were to go into effect Jan. 1 of next year," McBride says, "the stock market in December would not look pretty."

Over the longer term, McBride says, the law would do even more damage to the economy. Because people would have to pay more taxes on the profits they make, they would have less incentive to invest, he says."

Would The Buffett Rule Help The U.S. Economy? : NPR (http://www.npr.org/2012/04/11/150406660/what-would-the-buffett-rule-mean-for-the-u-s-economy)

Anything to pander and instead of actually helping the economy

[Guest]

The Obama campaign for 2012 is directed towards stupid people. It is directed toward people who feed off the government. It is directed toward people who believe that the rich are holding them down. Obama is pulling every class envy trick that he can't. He has nothing else that he can run on.

The reason we have so many conservatives in the villages is because most stupid people never acquire the resources to get here.

Just my opinion.

[Guest]

The Obama campaign for 2012 is directed towards stupid people. It is directed toward people who feed off the government. It is directed toward people who believe that the rich are holding them down. Obama is pulling every class envy trick that he can't. He has nothing else that he can run on.

The reason we have so many conservatives in the villages is because most stupid people never acquire the resources to get here.

Just my opinion.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion...even if it is ludicrous and ignorant. :mad:

[Guest]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion...even if it is ludicrous and ignorant. :mad:

Despite your crude and personal attack on CMANN, you are correct..everyone is entitled to their opinion, but would love to hear how you can love what he is preaching and there is a story tonight about the President using almost the same words in speeches a YEAR APART. These are not ceremonial speeches but speeches on the BUDGET. While I know you will never read it, I leave you the link ...

Obama speeches ‘exactly same’ a year apart (http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/obama-speeches-exactly-same-a-year-apart/)

Before you feel compelled to tell me that the source is RNC, it is STILL A FACTUAL statement...being noticed now around the world. And our media remains silent.

I have never posted conspiracy theories and doubt if I ever will , but I just wonder how anyone can still support this man despite the mounting evidence of his inexperience and incompetence.

If you are ok, with political games being played with the countries finances, so be it..you are right in that you have a right to your opinion, but I will stop there instead of personally attacking you

[Guest]

I'm a retired 65 year old that pays taxes....federal,state,sales and others.My federal tax rate is 28% and each year I pay at that rate. I have no real deductions so I use the short format 28%. If this President or any president wants millionaires to pay at 30% I am all for it. I do not care how they earn their money leg al or illegal. I want them to pay their fair share. Is this too much to ask? I don't care if itmeans nothing to the federal deficit,all I want is that they pay their fair share. And while we are at it how about all those job creating companies paying something,anything,a little some taxes.

[Guest]

I'm a retired 65 year old that pays taxes....federal,state,sales and others.My federal tax rate is 28% and each year I pay at that rate. I have no real deductions so I use the short format 28%. If this President or any president wants millionaires to pay at 30% I am all for it. I do not care how they earn their money leg al or illegal. I want them to pay their fair share. Is this too much to ask? I don't care if itmeans nothing to the federal deficit,all I want is that they pay their fair share. And while we are at it how about all those job creating companies paying something,anything,a little some taxes.

If you read, it is NOT ALL millionaires...primarily those who invest in bonds...you know the bonds that finance our cities and states and such.

I totally understand what you say, TOTALLY..I agree and everyone wants the tax code fixed but this solves not one thing..NOTHING and will make those who are going to have to pay for it to switch investments and if you read the article, if this were to be passed this year (and it will not and the President knows it) the impact (NEGATIVE) on the stock market would be terrible as the investors will take their money out of any investment that might fall into this tax.

That is why I refer to it as just a political trick. That bothers me a lot.

BUT I understand your feeling...I want equal also, but this is a political move strictly !

[Guest]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion...even if it is ludicrous and ignorant. :mad:

see what I mean?

[Guest]

waynet, you must realize that the money in investments has already been taxed when earned originally! the low tax rate on investments is what keeps people investing and our economy healthy...this is not a good idea and will not pass, but is being used to sound good to those who don't fully understand the difference between earned income and investment income.
as for mr buffet, i believe he already is fighting owing millions in back taxes, so he is a fine one to stand up for this!

[Guest]

It's been said that Buffett's secretary earns between $200,000 - $500,000 per year. If that's the case, wouldn't she also have a lot of investment income by now? What is she doing with all of that money? She should have at least a million dollars invested in stocks by now.

If anything, this subject should be used as encouragement for people to save and invest rather than encouragement to punish savers and investors.

Wealthy people don't have all of their money in their pockets. Their millions & billions are at work in the economy; and it's for the betterment of the economy. It's the capital that makes capitalism work.

[Guest]

This is another AMT! When institued in the '70s the AMT was only supposed to affect 5-10 people, now practically everyone falls under it, or at least has to do the AMT calculations to prove that they don't. Not indexed for inflation. What was high income them is normal now due to inflation.

Do you want your investments, money you are living on in retirement, do be wiped out?

I thought FL had no State Income Tax? But FL shows up on lists of states to choose for State form on TurboTax.

[Guest]

I want them to pay their fair share. Is this too much to ask?

Not at all, how about the almost half that basically don't pay anything? When are they going to start paying their fair share?

[Guest]

And the beat goes on and folks still defend this stuff...this from Jim Vandehei who runs POLITICO on the Buffet rule !

VANDEHEI: It's 1% of what you need to get, to actually take care of the deficit. And there's a big danger for President Obama in that they've become so insanely political in an insanely political culture. Almost everything they do now is either, is targeted at a specific sub-set of voters that they want to win. Everything's going to be about Hispanics and women."
"


"http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/04/12/politicos_vandehei_buffett_rule_is_total_gimmickry .html

"INSANELY POLITICAL" yep

And they dont seem to care if it is at the taxpayers expense, WHICH IT IS, nor do they care that they are playing these games and using all of us.

[Guest]

DK,please stay on topic. We are not talking about the poor here. And,by the wat,to say they pay no taxes is a lie pure and simple.

[Guest]

I was responding to a direct quote you made and also to that of your master regarding people paying their fair share.

Regarding taxes, I was referring to federal taxes, same thing we're talking about here.

Millions don't pay any federal taxes and in fact actually get more back in a refund than they pay especially if they have kids.

How about all those freeloaders?

The only lie here is your ideology. Your blind faith to Obama, big government and their willingness to steal other peoples money is disgusting.

Liberals love to hand out candy as long as its not theirs.

[Guest]

dklassen - Yeah, all those freeloaders paying sales taxes, excise taxes, phone taxes, meals taxes, social security taxes, medicare taxes.

It's easy to make 'the poor' look like freeloaders when you concentrate on the taxes they don't pay - like scolding someone who walks for not paying the gas tax.

Yes, 'the rich' are paying most of the income taxes - BUT they are paying a smaller percentage of their income in those taxes than they have in decades.

[Guest]

Again, we're talking about federal taxes.

I personally know a family that's a perfect example.

He was unemployed for most of last year, on unemployment, food stamps and Medicaid for their three kids.

Just got a three grand refund on their 2011 taxes. Not only did they pay ZERO in federal taxes, they actually got a free check back along with free food and free healthcare for the year... and probably this year as well. Although he's working now they still get to keep the free food and healthcare.

For all the libs, here is a simple concept when talking about confiscating more of what other people have.

IT'S NOT YOUR MONEY!!!!

The government NEVER does with less, only we do. The government doesn't need more money, they need to spend LESS!

Stop the thievery.

[Guest]

DK why is this a liberal problem? I guess you think conservatives do not want taxes levied. Maybe your right. Lets just tax the poor,they dont pay enough anyhow. Oh yea and the middle class or what is left of us,tax us too. But the rich and big business no,no,no. They pay enough according to you. Thats where you and I disagree. I do not think they pay enough.

[Guest]

Some people don't pay anything and continue to just take take take. Everyone else pays too much. How about getting rid of the IRS and everyone pays a flat tax with no deductions or loopholes?

It totally is a liberal thing. Take more from those who have and redistribute to those who have not. Great way to get votes a?

You don't think the rich pay their far share? Well that's just sour grapes in my book. How about you keep what you earn and I keep what I earn?

So if you look at the basic premis of all this, tell me friend, how much of what I earn belongs to you and why?

[Guest]

Maybe old Herman had the right idea 9 9 9 to everyone . Just think of the money that would be saved without the IRS . How many people do they employ.

[Guest]

Ever heard the left in government support a flat tax?

[Guest]

Let me break it down in simple terms for those on the left.

I'd really like to hear an answer.

So let's take out the middle man which of course is the government.

A guy is a muli-millionaire, plenty of money, big house and beautiful cars.

Another guy a few miles across town is dirt poor and barly making it. His car is a wreck and may even loose his house.

How much of what the millionaire earns belongs to the guy across town and why?

I'd really like an answer from you lefties. How much and why?

[Guest]

dklassen - Yeah, all those freeloaders paying sales taxes, excise taxes, phone taxes, meals taxes, social security taxes, medicare taxes.

It's easy to make 'the poor' look like freeloaders when you concentrate on the taxes they don't pay - like scolding someone who walks for not paying the gas tax.

Yes, 'the rich' are paying most of the income taxes - BUT they are paying a smaller percentage of their income in those taxes than they have in decades.

Please explain how the Buffet rule, which the President is traveling the country touting, will help anyone.

Please explain why not looking at Ryans budget (on which I have a TON of questions and negative thoughts) to see if there is anything there to cut, WHICH BY THE WAY, BOTH parties feel has to be done !

[Guest]

I'm a retired 65 year old that pays taxes....federal,state,sales and others.My federal tax rate is 28% and each year I pay at that rate. I have no real deductions so I use the short format 28%. If this President or any president wants millionaires to pay at 30% I am all for it. I do not care how they earn their money leg al or illegal. I want them to pay their fair share. Is this too much to ask? I don't care if itmeans nothing to the federal deficit,all I want is that they pay their fair share. And while we are at it how about all those job creating companies paying something,anything,a little some taxes.

THIS, based on what you posted, should really make you "happy"...

"President Obama chose not to subject himself to his own proposed Buffett Rule, paying only a 20.5 percent federal tax rate instead of the 30 percent rate called for under the proposal he has been talking about all week.

The Buffett rule would apply to those making $1 million, and Obama did not quite make $1 million last year – he clocked in at $789,674. But he made enough to be considered comparably rich to those making a million, and still paid a rate ten points below the threshold he is proposing.

What’s more, he paid a lower rate than Vice President Biden, who made less than half what Obama did. Biden paid a 23.2 percent rate on $379,035 in income.

Some of the difference is due to deductions for charitable contributions – the Obamas contributed substantially more last year than the Bidens."

Obama Fails to Apply the Buffett Rule to Himself | The Blog on Obama: White House Dossier (http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/04/13/obama-fails-apply-buffett-rule/)

Buffit rule is NOT going to level the field. We need total tax reform, for sure, but to travel the country an make this a grand saviour is misleading and wrong.

[Guest]

People keep some on purpose, confusing marginal and total income tax rate. The 28% tax rate is only on the portion of income above a fixed amount. Some income is taxfree, then a portion at a higher rate, and so forth.

People don't pay the 28% on all their income just the portion at the high bracket. Their actual tax rate is much lower, because that compares the tax paid/AGI. It is double speak..

Also, a smokescreen is saying that the poor, even though they pay no income taxes pay other taxes. Apples and Oranges. Compare the same tax. We are in danger as a Nation when more than 50% pay no income tax and will therefore vote for tax increases on the minority..

[Guest]

Darryl,

How much of the millionaire's wealth belongs to the dirt-poor person with the bad car and the house in foreclosure? None, of course. No one says it does.

How much tax should the millionaire pay vs the dirt-poor person? Chances are the dirt-poor person pays no income tax. If the millionaire has invested his money correctly with the advice of a tax counselor, he probably pays a very low percentage in income tax.

How much does the middle-class person with a job that pays $75,000 pay in income tax? Probably around 25%.

The Buffet Rule is trying to have the tax code be more equitable for the millionaires and the middle-class.

[Guest]

People keep some on purpose, confusing marginal and total income tax rate. The 28% tax rate is only on the portion of income above a fixed amount. Some income is taxfree, then a portion at a higher rate, and so forth.

People don't pay the 28% on all their income just the portion at the high bracket. Their actual tax rate is much lower, because that compares the tax paid/AGI. It is double speak..

Also, a smokescreen is saying that the poor, even though they pay no income taxes pay other taxes. Apples and Oranges. Compare the same tax. We are in danger as a Nation when more than 50% pay no income tax and will therefore vote for tax increases on the minority..

Love it when someone who knows about this stuff, especially the financial aspect, makes a post.

I believe it was in 2009 when the Committee on Joint Taxation said that 30% of households actually MADE MONEY on the tax system...MADE MONEY !!

This is because the US uses the tax code to actually distribute funds, with credits, etc.

I think, and THINK is the operative word, that we need wholesale tax reform and why we have not been addressing it for years is beyond me.

Please come back on your opinion on this.
-
And the Buffet rule does absolutey zero to attack the problem. It is a political ploy.....it does not even address any EARNED INCOME at all...CEO'S pay is not involved..sports stars, movie stars...not touched....ONLY the investors who mainly invest in the bonds that help cities, etc. It will not touch any financial problem we have and should it ever pass, AND the President KNOWS it will not yet he travels talking about, the market will suffer as those involved will simply move their funds. Economists on both sides of the aisle agree that this is a foolish attempt at politics.

[Guest]

A small gem from an article...

"Supporters of the rule have acknowledged that the projected revenue from the “Buffett Rule,” which the Democratic-led Senate is expected to vote down, is “not even a meaningful small amount.”

Obama Family Tax Shelter | Washington Free Beacon (http://freebeacon.com/obama-family-tax-shelter/)

I suppose those of you who are on here favoring it better get to your fellow Dems quickly before they officially vote it down

[Guest]

The Democratic Senate better read this poll before voting. Americans favor the Buffet Rule by a wide margin.


Americans Favor (http://www.gallup.com/poll/153887/Americans-Favor-Buffett-Rule.aspx?utm_source=tagrss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=syndication)

[Guest]

I am so glad somebody brought up the polls on this issue...

"Obama’s prioritization is no mystery: The populist Buffett Rule polls well. This explains its inclusion in countless presidential speeches and statements. White House reporters, tiring of the theme, have proposed a Jimmy Buffett Rule (three-drink minimum) and a Buffet Rule (Newt Gingrich would be an obvious candidate). "

This man is absolutely bonkers over anything that might get votes...the country does not seem to matter...


"Three years into his presidency, Obama has not introduced a plan for comprehensive tax reform — arguably the most important vehicle for fixing the nation’s finances and boosting long-term economic growth. His opponents haven’t done much better, but that doesn’t excuse the president’s failures: appointing the Simpson-Bowles commission and then disregarding its findings, offering a plan for business tax reform only, and issuing a series of platitudes. The Buffett Rule, rather than overhauling the tax code, would simply add another layer."

Rebuffing Obama’s ‘Buffett Rule’ - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/rebuffing-obamas-buffett-rule/2012/04/11/gIQA7m4HBT_story.html)

AND those in the senate who do not poll well, KNOW the real facts of the bill and what effect it will have !!!

Ignoring his OWN appointed commitee was serious,and again, this was one thing I "thought" I would like just like the health care debate but he turned his back on BOTH for politics only.

[Guest]

Darryl,
How much of the millionaire's wealth belongs to the dirt-poor person with the bad car and the house in foreclosure? None, of course. No one says it does.

You totally miss the point. No one says it does? Of course they do, including you.

It takes a massive amount of errorgance and dishonesty to deem what another person earns is too much or too little and then presume to redistribute it how they see fit in the name of fairness. IT'S NOT YOURS!

That's the problem with liberals, they think the government owns the money first and they are the arbitrators of fairness and all that is good. They are nothing but crooks, republicans and democrats.

I'll say it again, the government NEVER does with less, they want more and more and more and you happily support them... the crooks.

[Guest]

" Darryl,
How much of the millionaire's wealth belongs to the dirt-poor person with the bad car and the house in foreclosure? None, of course. No one says it does."
_____________________________________________
Darryl wrote:
"You totally miss the point. No one says it does? Of course they do, including you.

It takes a massive amount of errorgance and dishonesty to deem what another person earns is too much or too little and then presume to redistribute it how they see fit in the name of fairness. IT'S NOT YOURS!

That's the problem with liberals, they think the government owns the money first and they are the arbitrators of fairness and all that is good. They are nothing but crooks, republicans and democrats."

_________________________________________________

How much clearer could I have been when I stated that none of the millionaire's money belongs to the dirt-poor person? I said NONE OF THE MILLIONAIRE'S MONEY BELONGS TO THE DIRT-POOR PERSON!! Why do you insist that I say it does? I am not for any idea of redistributing money and no one in the Obama Administration is for that, either. You are too hung up on a 2007 Joe The Plumber commercial that was a fabrication.

[Guest]

I am not for any idea of redistributing money and no one in the Obama Administration is for that, either.

I have a bridge for sale, anyone interested?

[Guest]

MY QUESTION WOULD BE...

Then, why the BUFFET RULE...it does not do ANYTHING..NOTHING for the country and that is confirmed by economists on both sides, to the point it is now a joke and almost all know that...it touches the most limited amount of the rich that he is out to take money from since it is not based on their regular income..it does NOTHING for the economy except it WILL pull down the market in a very severe way as investors move their investments OUT...it WILL reduce the amount of money available for cities, etc as most of the money that will be taxed is in muni's

WHY THEN DO WE NEED THIS ???????????

Why, as with the health care bill, did the President not do what he SAID HE WOULD DO...he said he would come up with a panel to study and he did...he has ignored TOTALLY all that they said, WHICH WOULD HAVE IN FACT REFORMED THE TAX SYSTEM....as in the health care bill he just talked.

So now, he needs to have something to tout and I suppose this is the best he can do.

EXPLAIN AGAIN what this bill does for this country ???????

[Guest]

I don't think we necessarily need this change.

[Guest]

i don't think we necessarily need this change.

yet you argue on its behalf and defend its architect !!!


I suggest you read the link I gave in the thread titles..."its a bit rough".....it is a very FAIR and accurate appraisal !!

[Guest]

Bucco,

Please go through this thread and re-read it carefully for what I have said. The only thing I said about it was "The Buffet Rule is trying to have the tax code be more equitable for the millionaires and the middle-class." If that would happen, it would be great. I doubt if that could happen so I do not see wasting energy on it.

I continue to support Pres. Obama but this one is not high on my priority list.

[Guest]

Bucco,

Please go through this thread and re-read it carefully for what I have said. The only thing I said about it was "The Buffet Rule is trying to have the tax code be more equitable for the millionaires and the middle-class." If that would happen, it would be great. I doubt if that could happen so I do not see wasting energy on it.

I continue to support Pres. Obama but this one is not high on my priority list.

BUT YOU ARE WRONG ON ITS INTENT...TOTALLY !!!

Even insiders recognize it for what it is....he KNOWS it wont pass...his own party is opposed and wonder WHY....because he is a political animal all the way....the health care bill was the same and he now has this country in such a mess...read my other thread

[Guest]

first it seems odd to me that people who WORK for there money may pay higher taxes than those who simply collect investment income.
second,enforce the laws that are on the books.
and finally before 2003 when the rates were much higher the economy of the US did not die,people did not stop investing,the rich did not stop investing retirement funds were doing just fine.

[Guest]

dk - So you want anarchy and a removal of all taxes? The way you talk, it seems like you think ANY tax is a terrible redistribution of wealth.

Odd since your avatar has a symbol of slavery. (And don't give me the "state's rights" revisionist history - read the Confederate Constitution - states were not allowed in if they weren't slave states and a state could not later outlaw slavery)

[Guest]

???

[Guest]

first it seems odd to me that people who WORK for there money may pay higher taxes than those who simply collect investment income.
second,enforce the laws that are on the books.
and finally before 2003 when the rates were much higher the economy of the US did not die,people did not stop investing,the rich did not stop investing retirement funds were doing just fine.

Work on the existing tax code...take out many loopholes...etc...etc..WHY DID HE NOT BEGIN THIS WORK WHEN HIS APPOINTED COMM CAME BACK WITH GOOD IDEAS TO START ?

Man, I have opposed this man since the beginning,but now after the healthcare deception and now this....I am livid....ALL politicians...ALL Presidents have played politics but he has this country now all ties up in knots....I think the link I gave in the thread I began called "This is rough" is so very very accurate. As much as I opposed him in the past, there were a few things I wanted to see and hear and he has changed...totally dropped the ball on this country.

[Guest]

The Democratic Senate better read this poll before voting. Americans favor the Buffet Rule by a wide margin.


Americans Favor (http://www.gallup.com/poll/153887/Americans-Favor-Buffett-Rule.aspx?utm_source=tagrss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=syndication)

It just proves that class warfare works and many Americans are stupid.

[Guest]

It just proves that class warfare works and many Americans are stupid.

And is it only the middle class and the liberals who are stupid? :(
If so, our stupidity is in the vast majority.

[Guest]

It is interesting that doing some reading today and being mindful of this exhange in this thread...

"
"Originally Posted by CMANN
It just proves that class warfare works and many Americans are stupid.

Followed by this from DALEMN
And is it only the middle class and the liberals who are stupid?
If so, our stupidity is in the vast majority."

Then I find this reference in an article concering the Buffet Plan...

"Sometimes societies become too stupid to survive. A nation that takes Barack Obama's current rhetorical flourishes seriously is certainly well advanced along that dismal path."

Maybe CMANN has something.....

But the article also says this in reply to Obama's claim that ""will help us close our deficit."

"Wow! Who knew it was that easy?

A-hem. According to the Congressional Budget Office (the same nonpartisan bean counters who project that on Obama's current spending proposals the entire U.S. economy will cease to exist in 2027) Obama's Buffett Rule will raise – stand well back – $3.2 billion per year. Or what the United States government currently borrows every 17 hours. So in 514 years it will have raised enough additional revenue to pay off the 2011 federal budget deficit. If you want to mark it on your calendar, 514 years is the year 2526. "

There is only one Warren Buffett. He is the third-wealthiest person on the planet. The first is a Mexican, and beyond the reach of the U.S. Treasury. Mr. Buffett is worth $44 billion. If he donated the entire lot to the Government of the United States, they would blow through it within four-and-a-half days. OK, so who's the fourth-richest guy? He's French. And the fifth guy's a Spaniard. No. 6 six is Larry Ellison. He's American, but that loser is only worth $36 billion. So he and Buffett between them could keep the United States Government going for a week. The next-richest American is Christy Walton of Wal-Mart, and she's barely a semi-Buffett. So her $25 billion will see you through a couple of days of the second week. There aren't a lot of other semi-Buffetts, but, if you scrounge around, you can rustle up some hemi-demi-semi-Buffetts: If you confiscate the total wealth of the Forbes 400 richest Americans it comes to $1.5 trillion, which is just a little less than the Obama budget deficit for year."

Mark Steyn: Buying ‘Buffett Rule’ makes you a fool | buffett, obama, tax - Opinion - The Orange County Register (http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/buffett-349130-obama-tax.html#)

Now if this Buffet rule was part of an overhaul of the tax codes, WHICH BY THE WAY THE PRESIDENT NAMED A PANEL WHO GAVE IDEAS AND HE IGNORED, but it is not. It stands alone as his testament to reducing the deficit