Why does Warren Buffet want higher taxes?

[Toro]

Read this. It is a much better explanation by someone who knows something about Buffett as opposed to some political columnist.

Are you disputing the assertion that he actually makes money off of the government policies that he advocates?

No, but your article implies that this is the primary reason for his support of higher taxes. Anyone who knows Buffett knows that he has supported higher taxes for the wealthy for decades regardless of government policy. That's why when I see articles by people who don't know anything about him, I just

 

[asterism]

Eh? Warren Buffett made the largest donation to charity in history a few years ago (30 Billion dollars).

What part of his "ideology" does he not live by?

He says the government needs more money and should collect higher taxes. He chooses otherwise with his own money. Why is that?

Do you not see the ridiculousness of this argument?

No. I think we should all give more to charity. Ergo, I donate. I think we should all pay taxes due from us according to current law. Ergo, I hire accountants and bookkeepers to tally the totals and remit my fair share.

Buffet thinks people should pay more to the government. He should set the example and put his money where his mouth is (as he has done for charity).

 

[asterism]

bullshit. If there were a real correlation between low taxes on the wealthy and job creation we'd have seen as much during the era of bush tax cuts FOR the wealthy.

Um....Hate to break it to you old bean....The unemployment number during the bush years was give-or-take 5%....Statistically full employment.

Try again.

But there was no net gain of American jobs during his eight years.

Gotta link for this one?

 

[editec]

It's called patriotism

Warren understands what apparently many here do not.

A nation with huge class inequities both in wealth and power dooms itself to becoming a third world nation.

But of course that IS the agenda of some of the players in this debate, isn't it?

These people don't hate governments (they love some kinds of government), they hate anything tht remotely smacks of a democractic republican form of government.

The easiest way to destroy that kind of government is to destroy its middle class.

 

[Toro]

bullshit. If there were a real correlation between low taxes on the wealthy and job creation we'd have seen as much during the era of bush tax cuts FOR the wealthy.

Um....Hate to break it to you old bean....The unemployment number during the bush years was give-or-take 5%....Statistically full employment.

Try again.

About 40% of the jobs created during that time were related to the housing bubble. Without the housing bubble, unemployment would have been much higher. Even with the housing bubble, the rate of job creation was the slowest during any recovery since WWII.

 

[Bfgrn]

He believes that if there must be sacrifice, then the Rich should have a share of that sacrifice.

common sense.

As long as you stop trying to define rich as any income over 200k I am with ya.

How Tax Brackets Work -- $250,001 Income Pays Five Cents More Tax

Here is how it really works. What happens is that the first $250K is taxed just like it has been, but anything that is made over $250K -- and only the amount over $250K -- is then taxed at the higher rate. The tax on the amount below $250K is not changed.

Example: Suppose the tax increase is 5% on income over $250K. This means that a person who reports income of $250K plus one dollar will be taxed an additional 5 cents. FIVE CENTS!

Yes, that's right, if it is 5% they are talking about then it means a 5 cent tax increase on people who make $250,001.

Let me repeat that. If you make $250,001, and they raise taxes 5% on people who make over $250K, then you will have to pay 5 cents more. Five cents. F.I.V.E. C.E.N.T.S. That is what people are so upset about. 5 cents.

If it is 5% a person making $260K might pay an additional $500. That's right, the proposed tax increase is approx. $42 a month on people making $260K, or making $21,600 a month. Forty-four dollars out of twenty-one thousand. THIS is what all the right-wingers are screaming about. THIS is what all the Ayn Rand cultists are threatening to stop working over. THAT is how tax brackets work.

 

[Bfgrn]

Um....Hate to break it to you old bean....The unemployment number during the bush years was give-or-take 5%....Statistically full employment.

Try again.

But there was no net gain of American jobs during his eight years.

Gotta link for this one?

Aughts were a lost decade for U.S. economy, workers

For most of the past 70 years, the U.S. economy has grown at a steady clip, generating perpetually higher incomes and wealth for American households. But since 2000, the story is starkly different.

The past decade was the worst for the U.S. economy in modern times, a sharp reversal from a long period of prosperity that is leading economists and policymakers to fundamentally rethink the underpinnings of the nation's growth.

It was, according to a wide range of data, a lost decade for American workers. The decade began in a moment of triumphalism -- there was a current of thought among economists in 1999 that recessions were a thing of the past. By the end, there were two, bookends to a debt-driven expansion that was neither robust nor sustainable.

There has been zero net job creation since December 1999. No previous decade going back to the 1940s had job growth of less than 20 percent. Economic output rose at its slowest rate of any decade since the 1930s as well.

Middle-income households made less in 2008, when adjusted for inflation, than they did in 1999 -- and the number is sure to have declined further during a difficult 2009. The Aughts were the first decade of falling median incomes since figures were first compiled in the 1960s.

 

[Claudette]

He says the government needs more money and should collect higher taxes. He chooses otherwise with his own money. Why is that?

Do you not see the ridiculousness of this argument?

No. I think we should all give more to charity. Ergo, I donate. I think we should all pay taxes due from us according to current law. Ergo, I hire accountants and bookkeepers to tally the totals and remit my fair share.

Buffet thinks people should pay more to the government. He should set the example and put his money where his mouth is (as he has done for charity).

I agree. If Warren and other uber rich feel they don't pay enough in taxes then I'm sure the Govt will be more than willing to take any and all that they wish to donate.

Hey Asty. Where are you located in Central Florida??

I'm in Melbourne.

 

[Shogun]

bullshit. If there were a real correlation between low taxes on the wealthy and job creation we'd have seen as much during the era of bush tax cuts FOR the wealthy.

Um....Hate to break it to you old bean....The unemployment number during the bush years was give-or-take 5%....Statistically full employment.

Try again.

...and yet we STILL see those Bush era tax cuts working well to maintain employment rates...




fool.

 

[Full-Auto]

bullshit. If there were a real correlation between low taxes on the wealthy and job creation we'd have seen as much during the era of bush tax cuts FOR the wealthy.

Um....Hate to break it to you old bean....The unemployment number during the bush years was give-or-take 5%....Statistically full employment.

Try again.

But there was no net gain of American jobs during his eight years.

Lying once again. Not surprising though, its what the left does.

 

[Shogun]

bullshit. If there were a real correlation between low taxes on the wealthy and job creation we'd have seen as much during the era of bush tax cuts FOR the wealthy.

We did, you just missed it.

By the way, the Bush tax cuts went to everyone who pays federal income taxes, not just the wealthy.

I've been here the whole time and, except for the afterglow of the internet boom of the late 90s, we haven't seen a goddamn thing which indicates that Bush's tax cuts created jobs.

by all means, provide some evidence if you have any.

 

[Shogun]

bullshit. If there were a real correlation between low taxes on the wealthy and job creation we'd have seen as much during the era of bush tax cuts FOR the wealthy.

Um....Hate to break it to you old bean....The unemployment number during the bush years was give-or-take 5%....Statistically full employment.

Try again.

When Bush left office the unemployment rate was 7.8% and skyrocketing upward as the country was bleeding hundreds of thousands of jobs a month.

Try again.

Indeed. But, some stupid sons of bitches will never admit reality if it means having to admit something about Bush era tax cuts.

 

[Shogun]

Um....Hate to break it to you old bean....The unemployment number during the bush years was give-or-take 5%....Statistically full employment.

Try again.

When Bush left office the unemployment rate was 7.8% and skyrocketing upward as the country was bleeding hundreds of thousands of jobs a month.

Try again.

Luckily the huge Obama stimulus only wasted $800 billion and kept unemployment from rising above 8%.

the recession COULD have been worse. I guess, with a bandage, you'll never really know how deadly a hemorrhage could have been. I guess you can always blame blood for flowing though.

 

[Shogun]

Um....Hate to break it to you old bean....The unemployment number during the bush years was give-or-take 5%....Statistically full employment.

Try again.

But there was no net gain of American jobs during his eight years.

Lying once again. Not surprising though, its what the left does.

provide your evidence, butterfly.

 

[editec]

The BIG LIE technique continue to prove an effective way of duping the easily dupable, I see.

Did lowering taxes create new jobs?

Not in this nation it didn't.

Will raising taxes create new jobs?

Again, not in this nation it won't.

You see what is going on here is that partisans frame statements as questions knowing that by doing so they can cloud the REAL issues at hand.

This is a propaganda 101 technique.

 

[Bfgrn]

Um....Hate to break it to you old bean....The unemployment number during the bush years was give-or-take 5%....Statistically full employment.

Try again.

But there was no net gain of American jobs during his eight years.

Lying once again. Not surprising though, its what the left does.

Do you have a reading problem, a comprehension problem or and honesty problem?

 

[Oddball]

bullshit. If there were a real correlation between low taxes on the wealthy and job creation we'd have seen as much during the era of bush tax cuts FOR the wealthy.

Um....Hate to break it to you old bean....The unemployment number during the bush years was give-or-take 5%....Statistically full employment.

Try again.

When Bush left office the unemployment rate was 7.8% and skyrocketing upward as the country was bleeding hundreds of thousands of jobs a month.

Try again.

That was because of the housing crash, not from any tax policy.

 

[Full-Auto]

Um....Hate to break it to you old bean....The unemployment number during the bush years was give-or-take 5%....Statistically full employment.

Try again.

When Bush left office the unemployment rate was 7.8% and skyrocketing upward as the country was bleeding hundreds of thousands of jobs a month.

Try again.

Indeed. But, some stupid sons of bitches will never admit reality if it means having to admit something about Bush era tax cuts.

The Bush tax cuts was never promoted at the time enacted as job producing, it was giving back from a greedy government. Also democrats didnt want to give it back they wanted to spend it.

Glad we could clear that up for you.

 

[Oddball]

Um....Hate to break it to you old bean....The unemployment number during the bush years was give-or-take 5%....Statistically full employment.

Try again.

When Bush left office the unemployment rate was 7.8% and skyrocketing upward as the country was bleeding hundreds of thousands of jobs a month.

Try again.

Indeed. But, some stupid sons of bitches will never admit reality if it means having to admit something about Bush era tax cuts.

The tax rates didn't cause the housing crash, fool.

 

[Shogun]

When Bush left office the unemployment rate was 7.8% and skyrocketing upward as the country was bleeding hundreds of thousands of jobs a month.

Try again.

Indeed. But, some stupid sons of bitches will never admit reality if it means having to admit something about Bush era tax cuts.

The tax rates didn't cause the housing crash, fool.

Point out where anyone suggested that tax rates caused the housing crash, you fucking idiot.




nice strawman attempt, I guess.