99% of millionaires will pay a higher tax rate than the middle class

So is this supposed to be an argument for why that minority of millionaires should keep their loophole(s)?

Not at all. loopholes for EVERYBODY should go away.

This is simply explaining that even without the Buffet Rule, the vast majority of millionaires pay a higher tax rate than the middle class, and Obama has been selling it by saying the rich pay a lower rate. Most of them don't.

I've never heard Obama claim that 'the rich' pay a lower rate. I've only heard him claim that the rich who pay a lower rate pay a lower rate.
 
NO IT IS PROOF THAT OBAMA IS A LYING SACK.. OF CRAP!
Seriously THE FACTS from the IRS are:
1) 86 million tax returns in 2008 paid 14% of their TAXABLE income in TAXES PAID!
2) 4.3 million returns paid: 26.1% of their taxable income in taxes!
3) These 4.3 million returns PAID an average of $123,477
4) The 86 million returns paid an average of $5,736
5) THE 4.3 million PAID 2,152% MORE then the 86 million average return!

View attachment 18354

That's irrelevant. The Buffett rule isn't aimed at anyone who's already paying a high rate.
from the OP article...

The Tax Policy Center did an analysis of the Paying a Fair Share Act of 2012. Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the center who spent 22 years at the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, wrote that even without the Buffett Rule, only about 4,000 of those with $1-million-and-above incomes will pay less than the 15 percent effective federal tax rate that middle-income households will pay in fiscal year 2015.

Is a law that affect 4,000 people really going to help 'income inequality' in this country? Or affect the deficit?

No.

Is a law that affects 4,000 people really "dividing the country"?
 
That's irrelevant. The Buffett rule isn't aimed at anyone who's already paying a high rate.
from the OP article...

The Tax Policy Center did an analysis of the Paying a Fair Share Act of 2012. Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the center who spent 22 years at the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, wrote that even without the Buffett Rule, only about 4,000 of those with $1-million-and-above incomes will pay less than the 15 percent effective federal tax rate that middle-income households will pay in fiscal year 2015.

Is a law that affect 4,000 people really going to help 'income inequality' in this country? Or affect the deficit?

No.

Is a law that affects 4,000 people really "dividing the country"?

Thats part of the democrats class warfare. Get froggy and we will demonstrate the division.
 
That's irrelevant. The Buffett rule isn't aimed at anyone who's already paying a high rate.
from the OP article...

The Tax Policy Center did an analysis of the Paying a Fair Share Act of 2012. Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the center who spent 22 years at the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, wrote that even without the Buffett Rule, only about 4,000 of those with $1-million-and-above incomes will pay less than the 15 percent effective federal tax rate that middle-income households will pay in fiscal year 2015.

Is a law that affect 4,000 people really going to help 'income inequality' in this country? Or affect the deficit?

No.

So how many people would closing this loophole have to effect before you'd acknowledge that it was the right thing to do?

And why is the number of people relevant?
The Buffet Rule doesn't close a loophole, dipstick.

And if you bothered to actually READ any of the posts you respond to, such as my post #17, you'd know how I feel about loopholes in general.

The number of people is relevant because Obama sold the Buffet Rule as a way to help pay off the deficit... it doesn't. 4,000 people cannot pay off, or even make a tiny ding in, the deficit.

You're looking more stupid than usual.
 
99% of millionaires will pay a higher tax rate than the middle class


Well how about that. !00% of the middle class will not make a million dollars a year.

What does that tell you?
That Mitt Romney is (already) telegraphing an interest in "relocating" the Middle Class, from real-estate that should be in the hands of those more-qualified to evaluate said real-estate's.....

 
That's irrelevant. The Buffett rule isn't aimed at anyone who's already paying a high rate.
from the OP article...

The Tax Policy Center did an analysis of the Paying a Fair Share Act of 2012. Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the center who spent 22 years at the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, wrote that even without the Buffett Rule, only about 4,000 of those with $1-million-and-above incomes will pay less than the 15 percent effective federal tax rate that middle-income households will pay in fiscal year 2015.

Is a law that affect 4,000 people really going to help 'income inequality' in this country? Or affect the deficit?

No.

Is a law that affects 4,000 people really "dividing the country"?

yes.
 
The saddest thing about the "Buffet Rule" (besides the rampant hypocrisy) is that it will actually add to the deficit.
Blog: Buffett Rule would add nearly $800 billion to deficit over the next 10 years


First, the measure would raise less than $5 billion a year (the CBO scored it even less at $3.2 billion). But Democrats in the senate want to use the Buffett rule to replace the Alternative Minimum Tax for middle class taxpayers. This would add significantly to the deficit.

Wall Street Journal:

The case for the Buffett tax keeps eroding. When President Obama announced the idea, he said it would help "stabilize our debt and deficits over the next decade." Then came the inconvenient revelation that the new 30% millionaire's tax would raise only $46.7 billion over 10 years, and would leave about 99.5% of the deficit intact in 2013. It was a far cry from "stabilizing the debt."

Now we learn that the Buffett tax the Senate is expected to vote on early next week will make the deficit worse. That's because both Mr. Obama and Senate Democrats have made it clear that their new "fairness" tax is to offset the revenue loss from another provision related to the Alternative Minimum Tax.
This farce is unraveling before our eyes.....
:popcorn:
 
So is this supposed to be an argument for why that minority of millionaires should keep their loophole(s)?

Not at all. loopholes for EVERYBODY should go away.

This is simply explaining that even without the Buffet Rule, the vast majority of millionaires pay a higher tax rate than the middle class, and Obama has been selling it by saying the rich pay a lower rate. Most of them don't.

I've never heard Obama claim that 'the rich' pay a lower rate. I've only heard him claim that the rich who pay a lower rate pay a lower rate.
This is known as the "CLINTON DEFENSE". Parse words, obfuscate, divert, Lie.

clintonlie.jpg


What is, is? Are we ever really alone? :lol:
 
So is this supposed to be an argument for why that minority of millionaires should keep their loophole(s)?

NO IT IS PROOF THAT OBAMA IS A LYING SACK.. OF CRAP!
Seriously THE FACTS from the IRS are:
1) 86 million tax returns in 2008 paid 14% of their TAXABLE income in TAXES PAID!
2) 4.3 million returns paid: 26.1% of their taxable income in taxes!
3) These 4.3 million returns PAID an average of $123,477
4) The 86 million returns paid an average of $5,736
5) THE 4.3 million PAID 2,152% MORE then the 86 million average return!

View attachment 18354

That's irrelevant. The Buffett rule isn't aimed at anyone who's already paying a high rate.

SO why is it called "Buffett Rule"???
Definition of "Rule" is : a usually valid generalization (2) : a generally prevailing quality, state, or mode "

Using your point then just using the term "Rule" is wrong!
And yet Obama is continuing the LIE that the wealthy pays less!

Aren't you getting tired of having to bend reality, bend the truth to meet Obama's totally absent standards of truth telling?
I mean you guys admit it is an exception! So what purpose is all of this other then appealing to the lowest intelligence level? You really like to associate with that kind of mentality?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top