The Buffett Rule

[Chris]

End welfare for the wealthy.

Pass the Buffett Rule.

Why should the idle rich, who don't work, pay taxes at a lower rate than people who do work?

The lower rate the "rich" pay is on monies made from investments.
The money they spent on those investments was, originally, what was left after paying their income taxes.
They have paid the higher rates, the medium rates, AND the lower rates.
They "worked" to get to where they're at.

Contrary to popular belief the majority of "rich" people weren't just given their money. They didn't inherit it. They didn't win the lottery.
They....get this, Chris.....they EARNED it.
They made good life choices and worked hard.

You would reward hard work and ingenuity by forcing them to hand over 90% of their earned wealth.

Hell, these other countries with socialized medicine that Goose referred to only tax 40-45 percent of income to support their programs.

Jealousy
Envy
Class Warfare
Divisiveness

Re-distribution
period

Why should the idle rich, who DON'T WORK, pay taxes at a lower rate than people who DO WORK?

 

[DaGoose]

End welfare for the wealthy.

Pass the Buffett Rule.

Why should the idle rich, who don't work, pay taxes at a lower rate than people who do work?

The lower rate the "rich" pay is on monies made from investments.
The money they spent on those investments was, originally, what was left after paying their income taxes.
They have paid the higher rates, the medium rates, AND the lower rates.
They "worked" to get to where they're at.

Contrary to popular belief the majority of "rich" people weren't just given their money. They didn't inherit it. They didn't win the lottery.
They....get this, Chris.....they EARNED it.
They made good life choices and worked hard.

You would reward hard work and ingenuity by forcing them to hand over 90% of their earned wealth.

Hell, these other countries with socialized medicine that Goose referred to only tax 40-45 percent of income to support their programs.

Jealousy
Envy
Class Warfare
Divisiveness

Re-distribution
period

The top tax rate was MORE than 90% when Eisenhower was in office (he was a Republican, you know).

 

[francoHFW]

We pay as much or more in all taxes as they do (except for our rich) and get crap back.

 

[hortysir]

End welfare for the wealthy.

Pass the Buffett Rule.

Why should the idle rich, who don't work, pay taxes at a lower rate than people who do work?

The lower rate the "rich" pay is on monies made from investments.
The money they spent on those investments was, originally, what was left after paying their income taxes.
They have paid the higher rates, the medium rates, AND the lower rates.
They "worked" to get to where they're at.

Contrary to popular belief the majority of "rich" people weren't just given their money. They didn't inherit it. They didn't win the lottery.
They....get this, Chris.....they EARNED it.
They made good life choices and worked hard.

You would reward hard work and ingenuity by forcing them to hand over 90% of their earned wealth.

Hell, these other countries with socialized medicine that Goose referred to only tax 40-45 percent of income to support their programs.

Jealousy
Envy
Class Warfare
Divisiveness

Re-distribution
period

Why should the idle rich, who DON'T WORK, pay taxes at a lower rate than people who DO WORK?

They HAVE worked, numbskull.
They busted ass to get where they are. Not to support your parroting ass.

 

[hortysir]

End welfare for the wealthy.

Pass the Buffett Rule.

Why should the idle rich, who don't work, pay taxes at a lower rate than people who do work?

The lower rate the "rich" pay is on monies made from investments.
The money they spent on those investments was, originally, what was left after paying their income taxes.
They have paid the higher rates, the medium rates, AND the lower rates.
They "worked" to get to where they're at.

Contrary to popular belief the majority of "rich" people weren't just given their money. They didn't inherit it. They didn't win the lottery.
They....get this, Chris.....they EARNED it.
They made good life choices and worked hard.

You would reward hard work and ingenuity by forcing them to hand over 90% of their earned wealth.

Hell, these other countries with socialized medicine that Goose referred to only tax 40-45 percent of income to support their programs.

Jealousy
Envy
Class Warfare
Divisiveness

Re-distribution
period

The top tax rate was MORE than 90% when Eisenhower was in office (he was a Republican, you know).

Tax&Spend, big and bigger government Republican, hunh?

He was unaffiliated during the previous election.
He only ran as a (R) to beat Taft because Taft wanted to stop the New deal government over-reach. Eisenhower was all for it.....rvrn expanded some of it.

 

[Chris]

The lower rate the "rich" pay is on monies made from investments.
The money they spent on those investments was, originally, what was left after paying their income taxes.
They have paid the higher rates, the medium rates, AND the lower rates.
They "worked" to get to where they're at.

Contrary to popular belief the majority of "rich" people weren't just given their money. They didn't inherit it. They didn't win the lottery.
They....get this, Chris.....they EARNED it.
They made good life choices and worked hard.

You would reward hard work and ingenuity by forcing them to hand over 90% of their earned wealth.

Hell, these other countries with socialized medicine that Goose referred to only tax 40-45 percent of income to support their programs.

Jealousy
Envy
Class Warfare
Divisiveness

Re-distribution
period

Why should the idle rich, who DON'T WORK, pay taxes at a lower rate than people who DO WORK?

They HAVE worked, numbskull.
They busted ass to get where they are. Not to support your parroting ass.

No, they looted American companies and shipped their jobs overseas.

At least in Romney's case....

 

[Chris]

Which is more important, that American children get an education, that our people get healthcare, that the roads and bridges get fixed, that advanced materials research be done, that the our military be supplied with the best equipment, that old people are taken care of, that the our debt be paid down, that food and water be safe, that our environment be clean, or that a billionaire buys a new yacht?

 

[Skull Pilot]

End welfare for the wealthy.

Pass the Buffett Rule.

Why should the idle rich, who don't work, pay taxes at a lower rate than people who do work?

only you would want to listen to a guy who owes the government a billion dollars in back taxes and who scams the tax code by only paying himself a 100K a year salary for running a multi-billion dollar company.

 

[midcan5]

Was there ever a time when morality ruled over greed? I'm not in the 1% but I made lots and paid lots with no complaints, after all it is America that makes this possible. No one creates wealth outside of society, and outside of a strong government of law, so the rich should pay their share which is not theirs to keep as they did not create it out of thin air.

"On moral grounds, then, we could argue for a flat income tax of 90 percent to return that wealth to its real owners. In the United States, even a flat tax of 70 percent would support all governmental programs (about half the total tax) and allow payment, with the remainder, of a patrimony of about $8,000 per annum per inhabitant, or $25,000 for a family of three. This would generously leave with the original recipients of the income about three times what, according to my rough guess, they had earned."UBI and the Flat Tax



"What is a human life worth? You may not want to put a price tag on a it. But if we really had to, most of us would agree that the value of a human life would be in the millions. Consistent with the foundations of our democracy and our frequently professed belief in the inherent dignity of human beings, we would also agree that all humans are created equal, at least to the extent of denying that differences of sex, ethnicity, nationality and place of residence change the value of a human life." What Should a Billionaire Give – and What Should You?, by Peter Singer

Fuck you and your anti-freedom redistribution schemes...

Go sing kumbaya and wait to watch the prancing unicorns in the utopia paradise area in front of a speeding bus

Is it any wonder conservatism also known (sometimes) as libertarianism is such a failure? When all the problems in the world are solved by saying 'freedom.' Life is so easy for the wingnuts who live in this fantasy-land. And they accuse others of being dreamers!

Pollution - solution = freedom
energy - solution = freedom
war - solution = freedom
crumbling infrastructure - solution = freedom
massive debt - solution = freedom

Naivety thy name is republican conservative libertarian, aka wingnut.

"The most fundamental problem with libertarianism is very simple: freedom, though a good thing, is simply not the only good thing in life. Simple physical security, which even a prisoner can possess, is not freedom, but one cannot live without it. Prosperity is connected to freedom, in that it makes us free to consume, but it is not the same thing, in that one can be rich but as unfree as a Victorian tycoon's wife. A family is in fact one of the least free things imaginable, as the emotional satisfactions of it derive from relations that we are either born into without choice or, once they are chosen, entail obligations that we cannot walk away from with ease or justice. But security, prosperity, and family are in fact the bulk of happiness for most real people and the principal issues that concern governments." Robert Locke The American Conservative -- Marxism of the Right

 

[California Girl]

So would YOU agree with the wealthy renouncing their citizenship and moving out of the country over a few percentage points in taxes?

Who said anything about renouncing anyone's citizenship? Citizenship has jack shit to do with it.

Damn, it's no wonder you guys (the left) are in such a spin. You clearly do not understand very much about how one practices tax efficiency, or changing one's residence.

I live in the UK, I pay UK taxes - I did not renounce my US citizenship. I also file in the US - because I have to. And, because of the way I CHOOSE to set up my finances, I pay US income tax - but I could very easily change that and not be liable. I choose not to - because I am a patriot.

That has nothing to do with people moving out of the country to avoid their tax obligations on money held in offshore accounts or paying a higher capital gains tax.

First of all, you're paying income tax, not capital gains tax. You can live in the UK all you want, as long as you're a US citizen and earning income, you pay income tax either to the UK or to the US.

Second, if you were earning capital gains income you'd pay capital gains tax to the US no matter where you lived.

The only way to avoid paying US taxes is to stop being a US citizen. So, yes, citizenship has everything to do with it.

A few rich people may leave the country here or there but a mass exodus? No. Because the Buffett Rule is calling for capital gains tax to be raised to 30% over time. Income tax for the wealthy is already higher than that.

My point, for the slow kids, is that it is bullshit to suggest that people have to 'renounce' their citizenship. It is quite straightforward to 'relieve' yourself of the burden of paying tax in your 'home' country.

They don't even need to 'leave' the country... they just swap their primary residence to a country with more suitable tax arrangements. That is exactly WHY the Government does not go after the wealthy too hard.... because it will cost them more than it gets them.

All this smoke and mirrors is just deflections.

 

[The Rabbi]

Which is more important, that American children get an education, that our people get healthcare, that the roads and bridges get fixed, that advanced materials research be done, that the our military be supplied with the best equipment, that old people are taken care of, that the our debt be paid down, that food and water be safe, that our environment be clean, or that a billionaire buys a new yacht?

It is more important that billionaires (like John and Theresa Kerry) be able to buy new yachts. Because if you put in policies that make that impossible then none of the other crap you're spewing could happen.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Senate Democrats To Push 'Buffett Rule' Bill This Week

aka, The Fair Share Rule.

Brace yourselves. All you 1% here are gonna hate this.

It would require people who make more than $1 million to pay a 30 percent effective tax rate. Tax loopholes now allow some of the wealthiest Americans to pay lower tax rates than people in the middle class.

Don't worry. The pubs will filibuster it because, as we all know, they are owned by the 1%.

My father already pays 30% of his income in federal income taxes. He's too busy actually working for his money, though, so he doesn't have time to lobby members of Congress to write the tax code so that his particular kind of income is subjected to lower tax rates.

EDIT:
The capital gains tax, BTW, is not a "loophole" - its effect is completely intentional. The wealthiest among us - who, in most all cases, happen to derive the majority of their income from passive business activities such as equity ownership - had the law written so that their income would be subjected to lower rates than the incomes of the "lower upper class" - the folks that aren't uber-rich, but make bank and work their asses off to do it.


Its basically a fight between the uber-rich blue bloods and the now wealthy children of lower and middle class people. The blue bloods don't want to pay taxes on their investment incomes, so they shift the burden onto the hard working upper class. They do this in other areas, as well. In any business firm you walk into, if the owners and top level mangers are rich, inevitably you'll find the ones who came from humble beginnings are the workhorses while those at the firm who were born into wealth slack off and pass the work load onto the former. The latter get by on who they know and contribute less than the former than get by on their work, ambition, and creativity.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Senate Democrats To Push 'Buffett Rule' Bill This Week

aka, The Fair Share Rule.

Brace yourselves. All you 1% here are gonna hate this.

It would require people who make more than $1 million to pay a 30 percent effective tax rate. Tax loopholes now allow some of the wealthiest Americans to pay lower tax rates than people in the middle class.

Don't worry. The pubs will filibuster it because, as we all know, they are owned by the 1%.

My father already pays 30% of his income in federal income taxes. He's too busy actually working for his money, though, so he doesn't have time to lobby members of Congress to write the tax code so that his particular kind of income is subjected to lower tax rates.

Highly doubtful unless of course he is making over 5 million a year that is

Do you know his adjusted gross income?
Do you know all his deductions?
Do you know exactly what is tax burden was and if he got a refund or not.

The vast majority of filers pay less than 15% on their AGI in income taxes.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Senate Democrats To Push 'Buffett Rule' Bill This Week

aka, The Fair Share Rule.

Brace yourselves. All you 1% here are gonna hate this.



Don't worry. The pubs will filibuster it because, as we all know, they are owned by the 1%.

My father already pays 30% of his income in federal income taxes. He's too busy actually working for his money, though, so he doesn't have time to lobby members of Congress to write the tax code so that his particular kind of income is subjected to lower tax rates.

Highly doubtful unless of course he is making over 5 million a year that is

Wouldn't surprise me. I know its north of 1 million.

Do you know his adjusted gross income?
Do you know all his deductions?
Do you know exactly what is tax burden was and if he got a refund or not.

The vast majority of filers pay less than 15% on their AGI in income taxes.

He's not the vast majority of filers.

He doesn't get deductions or exemptions. Not sure but I think he might be subject to AMT.
He probably makes in one year what his working class father made in his lifetime, and neither has ever voted Republican.

 

[Skull Pilot]

My father already pays 30% of his income in federal income taxes. He's too busy actually working for his money, though, so he doesn't have time to lobby members of Congress to write the tax code so that his particular kind of income is subjected to lower tax rates.

Highly doubtful unless of course he is making over 5 million a year that is

Wouldn't surprise me. I know its north of 1 million.

Do you know his adjusted gross income?
Do you know all his deductions?
Do you know exactly what is tax burden was and if he got a refund or not.

The vast majority of filers pay less than 15% on their AGI in income taxes.

He's not the vast majority of filers.

He doesn't get deductions or exemptions. Not sure but I think he might be subject to AMT.
He probably makes in one year what his working class father made in his lifetime, and neither has ever voted Republican.

In 2009 the average for a person making a million a year was
25.3%

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Highly doubtful unless of course he is making over 5 million a year that is

Wouldn't surprise me. I know its north of 1 million.

Do you know his adjusted gross income?
Do you know all his deductions?
Do you know exactly what is tax burden was and if he got a refund or not.

The vast majority of filers pay less than 15% on their AGI in income taxes.

He's not the vast majority of filers.

He doesn't get deductions or exemptions. Not sure but I think he might be subject to AMT.
He probably makes in one year what his working class father made in his lifetime, and neither has ever voted Republican.

In 2009 the average for a person making a million a year was
25.3%

In 2011 an earned income of 1,000,000 married jointly was taxed at a rate of 31.99%.

You can find it here: Tax Brackets (Federal Income Tax Rates) 2000 through 2011 and 2012

of course - that's earned income - capital gains income is taxed at far less - which is why some folks making 1 mil pay quite a bit less than that.

That's sort of the point.

 

[hortysir]

Which is more important, that American children get an education, that our people get healthcare, that the roads and bridges get fixed, that advanced materials research be done, that the our military be supplied with the best equipment, that old people are taken care of, that the our debt be paid down, that food and water be safe, that our environment be clean, or that a billionaire buys a new yacht?

What has the Omamessiah done to accomplish any of this?

 

[sfcalifornia]

End welfare for the wealthy.

Pass the Buffett Rule.

Why should the idle rich, who don't work, pay taxes at a lower rate than people who do work?

The lower rate the "rich" pay is on monies made from investments.
The money they spent on those investments was, originally, what was left after paying their income taxes.
They have paid the higher rates, the medium rates, AND the lower rates.
They "worked" to get to where they're at.

Contrary to popular belief the majority of "rich" people weren't just given their money. They didn't inherit it. They didn't win the lottery.
They....get this, Chris.....they EARNED it.
They made good life choices and worked hard.

You would reward hard work and ingenuity by forcing them to hand over 90% of their earned wealth.

Hell, these other countries with socialized medicine that Goose referred to only tax 40-45 percent of income to support their programs.

Jealousy
Envy
Class Warfare
Divisiveness

Re-distribution
period

The capital gains all those poor, hard-working rich people earn is their income.

They should pay a tax rate comprable to the income tax rate.

 

[sfcalifornia]

Who said anything about renouncing anyone's citizenship? Citizenship has jack shit to do with it.

Damn, it's no wonder you guys (the left) are in such a spin. You clearly do not understand very much about how one practices tax efficiency, or changing one's residence.

I live in the UK, I pay UK taxes - I did not renounce my US citizenship. I also file in the US - because I have to. And, because of the way I CHOOSE to set up my finances, I pay US income tax - but I could very easily change that and not be liable. I choose not to - because I am a patriot.

That has nothing to do with people moving out of the country to avoid their tax obligations on money held in offshore accounts or paying a higher capital gains tax.

First of all, you're paying income tax, not capital gains tax. You can live in the UK all you want, as long as you're a US citizen and earning income, you pay income tax either to the UK or to the US.

Second, if you were earning capital gains income you'd pay capital gains tax to the US no matter where you lived.

The only way to avoid paying US taxes is to stop being a US citizen. So, yes, citizenship has everything to do with it.

A few rich people may leave the country here or there but a mass exodus? No. Because the Buffett Rule is calling for capital gains tax to be raised to 30% over time. Income tax for the wealthy is already higher than that.

My point, for the slow kids, is that it is bullshit to suggest that people have to 'renounce' their citizenship. It is quite straightforward to 'relieve' yourself of the burden of paying tax in your 'home' country.

They don't even need to 'leave' the country... they just swap their primary residence to a country with more suitable tax arrangements. That is exactly WHY the Government does not go after the wealthy too hard.... because it will cost them more than it gets them.

All this smoke and mirrors is just deflections.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You will pay tax on your income no matter where you live in the world as long as you're a US citizen.

The only way to 'relieve' yourself of paying tax in the US is by paying tax in the UK and deducting that amount from the amount you would owe in the US by taking the Foreign Tax Credit.

Even then, if the tax rate in the UK is lower than the tax rate in the US, you will still have to pay the difference to the US. If the rate in the UK is higher than the rate in the US, there is a limit to the Tax Credit you can claim each year but you can carry over that excess amount and take the remainder of the credit the following year for up to 5 years.

Regardless of what you choose to do, you're paying tax to one country or another.

You still haven't demonstrated why it would be advantageous for very wealthy people to reside in another country in order to escape their tax obligations. Residency does jack-shit to alleviate tax obligations to the US.

 

[California Girl]

That has nothing to do with people moving out of the country to avoid their tax obligations on money held in offshore accounts or paying a higher capital gains tax.

First of all, you're paying income tax, not capital gains tax. You can live in the UK all you want, as long as you're a US citizen and earning income, you pay income tax either to the UK or to the US.

Second, if you were earning capital gains income you'd pay capital gains tax to the US no matter where you lived.

The only way to avoid paying US taxes is to stop being a US citizen. So, yes, citizenship has everything to do with it.

A few rich people may leave the country here or there but a mass exodus? No. Because the Buffett Rule is calling for capital gains tax to be raised to 30% over time. Income tax for the wealthy is already higher than that.

My point, for the slow kids, is that it is bullshit to suggest that people have to 'renounce' their citizenship. It is quite straightforward to 'relieve' yourself of the burden of paying tax in your 'home' country.

They don't even need to 'leave' the country... they just swap their primary residence to a country with more suitable tax arrangements. That is exactly WHY the Government does not go after the wealthy too hard.... because it will cost them more than it gets them.

All this smoke and mirrors is just deflections.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You will pay tax on your income no matter where you live in the world as long as you're a US citizen.

The only way to 'relieve' yourself of paying tax in the US is by paying tax in the UK and deducting that amount from the amount you would owe in the US by taking the Foreign Tax Credit.

Even then, if the tax rate in the UK is lower than the tax rate in the US, you will still have to pay the difference to the US. If the rate in the UK is higher than the rate in the US, there is a limit to the Tax Credit you can claim each year but you can carry over that excess amount and take the remainder of the credit the following year for up to 5 years.

Regardless of what you choose to do, you're paying tax to one country or another.

You still haven't demonstrated why it would be advantageous for very wealthy people to reside in another country in order to escape their tax obligations. Residency does jack-shit to alleviate tax obligations to the US.

Actually, I do know exactly what I'm talking about. Which is why I didn't mention a 'mas exodus' or 'renouncing citizenship' or any other mindless bullshit.

I know how the system works. I'm directly affected by it.