Obama intensifies push for ‘Buffett Rule’

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jerry_Miah
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jerry_Miah

Guest
bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/04/09/obama-intensifies-push-for-buffett-rule/NgLW6M4XHdesyOVCRoOh7K/story.html
A week before a Senate vote, the Obama campaign ramped up its advocacy Monday of the “Buffett Rule,’’ which would impose a minimum effective tax rate of 30 percent on the wealthiest Americans.
Click to expand...
It is named after Warren Buffett, who discovered his secretary payed a higher percentage in taxes than he did. This top tax rate would still be much lower than it was even under most of Reagan’s presidency.
 
Jerry_Miah said:
bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/04/09/obama-intensifies-push-for-buffett-rule/NgLW6M4XHdesyOVCRoOh7K/story.html

It is named after Warren Buffett, who discovered his secretary payed a higher percentage in taxes than he did. This top tax rate would still be much lower than it was even under most of Reagan’s presidency.
Click to expand...
The Buffet rule is a joke.
“**The Stupid Rule’ **”
Click to expand...
The Buffett rule, amongst economists, could also be called the stupid rule,” said Kevin Hassett, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington group that supports free enterprise. “It’s basically just a back-door way to hike taxes on capital.”
Click to expand...
Under current law, capital gains and dividends are taxed at a top rate of 15 percent while wages and other ordinary income are taxed at as much as 35 percent. A new 3.8 percent tax on unearned income of the top taxpayers takes effect in 2013.
Click to expand...
In naming their proposal, Democrats invoke billionaire investor Warren Buffett, who maintains he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary does, largely because of the preferential tax treatment given to capital gains and dividends.
Click to expand...
bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-10/top-earners-pay-higher-tax-rate-than-others-without-buffett-rule.html

By the way, Warren Buffett’s secretary makes roughly a half million a year and maintains three houses… Just like all average secretaries…
 
Jerry_Miah said:
bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/04/09/obama-intensifies-push-for-buffett-rule/NgLW6M4XHdesyOVCRoOh7K/story.html

It is named after Warren Buffett, who discovered his secretary payed a higher percentage in taxes than he did. This top tax rate would still be much lower than it was even under most of Reagan’s presidency.
Click to expand...
Warren Buffett’s Secretary Likely Makes Between $200,000 And $500,000/Year

forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2012/01/25/warren-buffetts-secretary-likely-makes-between-200000-and-500000year
 
I think the Buffett Rule is a gimmick, it only applies to 94,500 people.

Associated press: “A bill designed to enact President Barack Obama’s plan for a “Buffett rule” tax on the wealthy would rake in just $31 billion over the next 11 years, according to an estimate by Congress’ official tax analysts obtained by The Associated Press. That figure would be a drop in the bucket of the over $7 trillion in federal budget deficits projected during that period. It is also minuscule compared to the many hundreds of billions it would cost to repeal the alternative minimum tax, which Obama’s budget last month said he would replace with the Buffett rule tax.”

Americans for Tax Reform says: “To put that in context, that is less than one-tenth of one percent of all tax revenues that CBO expects the federal government to collect over that time period, and this assumes (wrongly) that no one would change their behavior as a result of the tax.”

A poll by centrist Democrat group Third way found 80% of people were more likely to support a candidate who focused economic growth, 15% on a candidate who emphasized income inequality. 51% of Independents favored candidate making argument based on economic growth, 43% candidate focused on income inequality:

thirdway.org/publications/511

The Buffet rule isn’t going to change greatly change income inequality, all it is a gimmick so Barack Obama does not have to discuss the non existent Democrat budget, no comprehensive tax reform, no entitlement reform.
 
Excellent. Those who profit the most from the Capitalist system have the obligation to pay into that system.
 
Jerry_Miah said:
Not to butt in but under Reagan the top tax rate was 50% for most of his term. If it was good enough for Reagan…
Click to expand...
The wealthy pay a larger percentage of the income tax than they did under Reagan…or Clinton. The tax rate isn’t the whole story. Personally, I’m okay with all of the Bush tax cuts being reversed, but I know liberals wouldn’t be happy with that.
 
ringil said:
You don’t want to let go of your “hard earned” money eh?

The sweat off your brow and all that. . .
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? Like many Americans, I’m a net recipient of tax income.
 
The line the president is preaching is disengenuous at best. Buffett pays taxes on capital gains (on which he has already paid income taxes.). His secretary pays taxes on her income. Our dear leader thinks the American people are so uninformed (stupid) that we do not know the different. And then there is the matter of the earned income tax credit, where 49% of our citizens who do not pay income taxes get a rebate. Now I ask you, is that fair?
 
mary_bobo said:
The line the president is preaching is disengenuous at best. Buffett pays taxes on capital gains (on which he has already paid income taxes.). His secretary pays taxes on her income. Our dear leader thinks the American people are so uninformed (stupid) that we do not know the different. And then there is the matter of the earned income tax credit, where 49% of our citizens who do not pay income taxes get a rebate. Now I ask you, is that fair?
Click to expand...
Exactly. It sickens me, when I see my fellow net receivers complaining that others aren’t paying their “fair share.” It’s just envy and greed - nothing less.
 
ringil said:
You don’t want to let go of your “hard earned” money eh?

The sweat off your brow and all that. . .
Click to expand...
I am not in a high income bracket, so it’s not that I want to hold on to anything, but I am still curious as to how much is enough, or how much is fair, for a rich person to pay?

For example, say someone’s income is $1,000,000/year.

Say he pays 28% to the federal government, and 12% to his state government, and then he also pays lots of sales tax, including higher luxury taxes on some items, and he also pays property tax… all those equaling up to another 50% of his income. So of the million he made, he gets to keep only half. Do you think he has paid enough in taxes?
 
mary_bobo said:
The line the president is preaching is disengenuous at best. Buffett pays taxes on capital gains (on which he has already paid income taxes.). His secretary pays taxes on her income. Our dear leader thinks the American people are so uninformed (stupid) that we do not know the different. And then there is the matter of the earned income tax credit, where 49% of our citizens who do not pay income taxes get a rebate. Now I ask you, is that fair?
Click to expand...
Ditto:thumbsup:
 
St_Francis said:
Say he pays 28% to the federal government, and 12% to his state government…
Click to expand...
If he pays 12% to the state government, he should move here. I believe our top income tax rate is less than 6%. 😃

I personally think that there should be some other way of distributing money to people, other than giving them refunds of taxes they haven’t had to pay, which seems misleading.

But I pay taxes myself, although I am extremely unlikely to fall into anyone’s list of “the wealthiest Americans” this week. I am waiting for the day when the media and/or the President (is there a difference?) decides that anyone who makes enough money to pay any taxes is now one of “the wealthiest Americans” and makes enough to pay more taxes.

Economic ruin shortly to follow.

–Jen

P.S. If I could make the kind of money Warren Buffet’s secretary makes, I’d be happy to pay whatever taxes she pays. I wouldn’t complain that someone else was paying a smaller percentage (not that she complained either, it was just Buffet showboating). However, I’m pretty sure that if Mr. Buffet feels strongly about it, the IRS would be happy to accept a voluntary contribution from him… Mr. Buffet?.. Mr. Buffet?.. Bueller?..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top