Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-26-2012, 10:55 AM   #1
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
Warren Buffett: Hike tax on $500K earners

Warren Buffett: Hike tax on $500K earners - Bobby Cervantes - POLITICO.com
QuoteQuote:
“I support President Obama’s proposal to eliminate the Bush tax cuts for high-income taxpayers. However, I prefer a cutoff point somewhat above $250,000 — maybe $500,000 or so,” Buffett, who has endorsed Obama, wrote in The Times.
He also suggested a minimum 30 percent tax on income between $1 million and $10 million, and a 35 percent tax on amount above that.
“A plain and simple rule like that will block the efforts of lobbyists, lawyers and contribution-hungry legislators to keep the ultrarich paying rates well below those incurred by people with income just a tiny fraction of ours,” Buffett wrote.

Read more: Warren Buffett: Hike tax on $500K earners - Bobby Cervantes - POLITICO.com

11-26-2012, 11:50 AM   #2
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,056
Why Warren Buffett Is Right About Raising Taxes on the Rich | Daily Ticker - Yahoo! Finance
has a nifty little twist:
QuoteQuote:
Buffett says, as he has before, that modestly higher taxes would not cause him to work any less hard. He points out that, even in the 1960s and 1970s, eras with truly high taxes, these taxes did not stop him and his clients from pursuing investment opportunities. Lastly, he notes that, given the vast sums of money that the richest Americans have banked in the past decade, they will have plenty of money to invest even if taxes rise modestly.

And then Buffett lays out a series of proposals that are eminently reasonable.

First, he only calls for raising taxes on Americans earning more than $500,000 a year, not the $250,000 that President Obama is focused on. Families who earn $250,000 and live in major cities justifiably point out that this salary does not leave them feeling "rich." So, raising the definition of rich would go a long way toward making these tax hikes more palatable.

Next, he calls for a minimum 30% tax on Americans making $1 million to $10 million or more, regardless of how this income is generated. One of the most egregious elements of the tax code is that some of America's highest earners pay much lower tax rates than average earners, because they generate their income from capital gains or dividends or have figured out how to shelter it by taking advantage of various loopholes. This tax would ensure that most income is treated the same way.

No, these new taxes won't completely fix our debt and deficit problems. But they will help. And they will also encourage entrepreneurs, investors, and senior managers to keep their money in their investments and companies, rather than taking it out and spending it. This should have a positive impact on future economic growth, and with it, jobs.
For Buffet's NYT Op-ed:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/opinion/buffett-a-minimum-tax-for-the-wealthy.html
11-26-2012, 07:54 PM   #3
Senior Member
graphicgr8s's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 229
Actions still speak louder than words. How large of a check did Buffet and Obama stroke to the IRS?

Zip?

They are full of worthless dung.
11-26-2012, 10:28 PM - 1 Like   #4
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 6,242
People like Buffett are not the ones who bear the largest burden though. Steve Jobs tool a $1.00 a year salary, but he received millions in compensation from Apple in other ways. The really rich can defer compensation and collect other forms of compensation. The people who end up paying are those just under 500K who are not rich enough to avoid the taxes, but even then they will structure compensation to their advantage. A lot of people in this income level are self-employed and can structure a world of tax exemptions through their company as well and pay themselves just under the limit.

This reminds me of the luxury tax placed on yachts back in the 1990's.
"Starting in 1991, Washington levied a 10 percent tax on cars valued above $30,000, boats above $100,000, jewelry and furs above $10,000 and private planes above $250,000. Democrats like Ted Kennedy and then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell crowed publicly about how the rich would finally be paying their fair share and privately about convincing President George H.W. Bush to renounce his 'no new taxes' pledge," the newspaper said in an editorial.

"But it wasn't long before even those die-hard class warriors noticed they'd badly missed their mark. The taxes took in $97 million less in their first year than had been projected — for the simple reason that people were buying a lot fewer of these goods. Boat building, a key industry in Messrs. Mitchell and Kennedy's home states of Maine and Massachusetts, was particularly hard hit. Yacht retailers reported a 77 percent drop in sales that year, while boat builders estimated layoffs at 25,000. With bipartisan support, all but the car tax was repealed in 1993, and in 1996 Congress voted to phase that out too. January 1 was disappearance day.


Buffett may say that rich people wont alter their habits to avoid taxes, but Buffett has been proven wrong by history on many occasions.

Buffett is also promoting Jamie Dimon (JP Morgan) as the next Sec. of the Treasury to replace "tax fraud" Timmy G. The only advice that Buffett gives that I listen to is how to profit from government regulations. He is the undisputed master.


Last edited by Winder; 11-27-2012 at 06:57 AM.
11-27-2012, 07:29 AM   #5
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,056
QuoteOriginally posted by graphicgr8s Quote
Actions still speak louder than words. How large of a check did Buffet and Obama stroke to the IRS?

Zip?

They are full of worthless dung.
By that logic, how much have you & others of similar opinion refused to pay in taxes, as representing the confiscatory portion?

Zip?

QED
11-27-2012, 11:54 AM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 794
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
People like Buffett are not the ones who bear the largest burden though. Steve Jobs tool a $1.00 a year salary, but he received millions in compensation from Apple in other ways. The really rich can defer compensation and collect other forms of compensation. The people who end up paying are those just under 500K who are not rich enough to avoid the taxes, but even then they will structure compensation to their advantage. A lot of people in this income level are self-employed and can structure a world of tax exemptions through their company as well and pay themselves just under the limit.

This reminds me of the luxury tax placed on yachts back in the 1990's.
"Starting in 1991, Washington levied a 10 percent tax on cars valued above $30,000, boats above $100,000, jewelry and furs above $10,000 and private planes above $250,000. Democrats like Ted Kennedy and then-Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell crowed publicly about how the rich would finally be paying their fair share and privately about convincing President George H.W. Bush to renounce his 'no new taxes' pledge," the newspaper said in an editorial.

"But it wasn't long before even those die-hard class warriors noticed they'd badly missed their mark. The taxes took in $97 million less in their first year than had been projected — for the simple reason that people were buying a lot fewer of these goods. Boat building, a key industry in Messrs. Mitchell and Kennedy's home states of Maine and Massachusetts, was particularly hard hit. Yacht retailers reported a 77 percent drop in sales that year, while boat builders estimated layoffs at 25,000. With bipartisan support, all but the car tax was repealed in 1993, and in 1996 Congress voted to phase that out too. January 1 was disappearance day.


Buffett may say that rich people wont alter their habits to avoid taxes, but Buffett has been proven wrong by history on many occasions.

Buffett is also promoting Jamie Dimon (JP Morgan) as the next Sec. of the Treasury to replace "tax fraud" Timmy G. The only advice that Buffett gives that I listen to is how to profit from government regulations. He is the undisputed master.
The only amazing part is they couldn't see it coming. You have to love John Kerry though. Docking his little boat in another state to avoid the taxes.

QuoteQuote:
Sen. John Kerry, who has repeatedly voted to raise taxes while in Congress, dodged a whopping six-figure state tax bill on his new multimillion-dollar yacht by mooring her in Newport, R.I.
Isabel - Kerry’s luxe, 76-foot New Zealand-built Friendship sloop with an Edwardian-style, glossy varnished teak interior, two VIP main cabins and a pilothouse fitted with a wet bar and cold wine storage - was designed by Rhode Island boat designer Ted Fontaine.
But instead of berthing the vessel in Nantucket, where the senator summers with the missus, Teresa Heinz, Isabel’s hailing port is listed as “Newport” on her stern.
Nesster, although no one likes paying taxes most sane people realize that it is necessary. I don't mind paying my share at all. And if things remain equal I don't mind paying more. If legal things remain the same it just means me, my workers, and my company made more money. So in that regard I have no problem paying them. I don't like the fact that for a regular salary the more I make the more the government confiscates as a percentage.
When costs get to a certain point I'll shut down US operations, fire everybody and manufacture offshore. So Obama can claim another 150-200 people on unemployment and food stamps.

BTW the thing we have a problem with is not the collection of taxes so much but the foolish, wasteful spending.

Last edited by JohnInIndy; 11-27-2012 at 12:01 PM.
11-27-2012, 01:52 PM   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Tom S.'s Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: S.E. Michigan
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,290
QuoteOriginally posted by graphicgr8s Quote
Actions still speak louder than words. How large of a check did Buffet and Obama stroke to the IRS?

Zip?

They are full of worthless dung.
Obama's tax records are public and I'm willing to bet he paid a whole lot more than you.
11-27-2012, 04:13 PM   #8
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnInIndy Quote

Nesster, although no one likes paying taxes most sane people realize that it is necessary.
Really?????? maniacal..

side note:
QuoteQuote:
Fifteen years ago, FREE MONEY suggested the elimination of FICA. Three years ago I posted (with input from Warren Mosler and Randall Wray) “Ten Reasons to Eliminate FICA.”
FICA is the most damaging tax in American history. It punishes the middle and lower income classes (the “99%”), while leaving upper income classes (the “1%”) virtually untouched. It punishes salaried people while leaving all other types of income unscathed.
For many in the middle and lower income classes, FICA is the largest tax they pay – larger even than those income taxes that are much in discussion today. No tax does more than FICA to widen the gap between the richest and the rest.
So it should come no surprise that the Democrats and the Republicans seem to favor increasing FICA, since both parties receive so much funding from the upper 1%.
http://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com/2012/11/27/the-fica-disgrace/

QuoteQuote:
Bottom line: FICA is 100% bad for the economy. Before the U.S. became Monetarily Sovereign in 1971, FICA did fund Social Security. Today, FICA no longer pays for Social Security. FICA does not pay for Medicare. FICA does not pay for anything. You might as well shove your money into a garbage bag and burn it.

All FICA does is take money from the pockets of middle and lower income class consumers and from businesses (which take it from employees). More than a trillion dollars was paid for FICA this year. That’s a trillion dollars removed from the economy, lost forever. Think of what this economy could do with an extra $1 trillion.
If FICA were $0, that would not reduce by even one cent, the federal government’s ability to pay all Social Security benefits and to provide free Medicare to every man, woman and child in America. The collection of FICA is the 2nd biggest tax disgrace in America.
The biggest? Obama and the Democrats – the great supporters of the 99% – justify FICA by telling you the *BIG LIE.
[*The BIG LIE is a statement that U.S. federal taxes pay for U.S. spending. In a Monetarily Sovereign government, taxes pay for nothing.



Last edited by jeffkrol; 11-27-2012 at 04:42 PM.
11-27-2012, 09:50 PM   #9
Senior Member
graphicgr8s's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 229
QuoteOriginally posted by Tom S. Quote
Obama's tax records are public and I'm willing to bet he paid a whole lot more than you.
I will assume of course that you fully realize he also MADE more than me. He also got back more than I did.
And Mitt paid millions more than Obama. What exactly is your point? Did you have one?
11-27-2012, 09:58 PM   #10
Senior Member
graphicgr8s's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 229
QuoteOriginally posted by Nesster Quote
By that logic, how much have you & others of similar opinion refused to pay in taxes, as representing the confiscatory portion?

Zip?

QED
I pay fully that which I am required to pay by law. I also take every exemption I can. I give as much to my church as I possibly can to reduce my tax burden. I may not have the money but neither does the government get to confiscate it.

By refusing to pay what the government requires I could possibly (probably) wind up in jail unlike Tim Tax Cheat Geitner and Rangel. All those who claim to want to pay more can freely do so. Without going to jail I might add. So your logic is fully illogical since the consequences of my actions lead to jail while the consequences of paying more lead to nothing but a thinner wallet.
11-28-2012, 05:48 AM   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Tom S.'s Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: S.E. Michigan
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,290
QuoteOriginally posted by graphicgr8s Quote
I pay fully that which I am required to pay by law. I also take every exemption I can. I give as much to my church as I possibly can to reduce my tax burden. I may not have the money but neither does the government get to confiscate it.

By refusing to pay what the government requires I could possibly (probably) wind up in jail unlike Tim Tax Cheat Geitner and Rangel. All those who claim to want to pay more can freely do so. Without going to jail I might add. So your logic is fully illogical since the consequences of my actions lead to jail while the consequences of paying more lead to nothing but a thinner wallet.
So are you saying that Obama and Buffet don't pay what is required by law?

at any rate, it's highly doubful you would end up in jail. If you're in jail, the government doesn't get their money. Very few tax cheats end up doing time.

That aside, what is your point?
11-28-2012, 06:47 AM   #12
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,056
QuoteOriginally posted by Tom S. Quote
That aside, what is your point?
Quite simply: those agitating for increased taxes are hypocrites if they do not voluntarily pay more taxes than they legally owe. Those agitating for reducing taxes are not hypocritical if they don't refuse to pay what they consider exessive and confiscatory, because doing so lands them in jail.
11-28-2012, 07:44 AM   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 19,141
QuoteOriginally posted by Tom S. Quote
So are you saying that Obama and Buffet don't pay what is required by law?

at any rate, it's highly doubful you would end up in jail. If you're in jail, the government doesn't get their money. Very few tax cheats end up doing time.

That aside, what is your point?
Is the issue not whether or not wealthy Democrats use tax shelters and all avenues available to avoid taxes, when they are constantly harping on the government raising taxes on "the wealthy." The reality is that the Kennedys and others have done a great job at hiding money away from taxation and will continue to do so, even if taxes are raised on those making more than 250,000.
11-28-2012, 09:55 AM   #14
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Tom S.'s Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: S.E. Michigan
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,290
QuoteOriginally posted by Nesster Quote
Quite simply: those agitating for increased taxes are hypocrites if they do not voluntarily pay more taxes than they legally owe. Those agitating for reducing taxes are not hypocritical if they don't refuse to pay what they consider exessive and confiscatory, because doing so lands them in jail.
You are making two assumptions here and you know what they say about assuming. First off is answering for another person. How can you know that is what graphicgr8s meant? Second is the assumption that just because someone doesn't voluntarily pay more taxes means they are against higher taxation. I don't like taxes and take all the deductions I'm allowed, yet every time a renewal comes up for things like our library, police and fire, parks, or schools, I vote in favor of them.
11-28-2012, 11:14 AM   #15
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,056
QuoteOriginally posted by graphicgr8s Quote
Actions still speak louder than words. How large of a check did Buffet and Obama stroke to the IRS?

Zip?

They are full of worthless dung.
LOL, Tom, OK so I assume. However what other assumption should one make based on this original post?
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
buffett, earners, hike, income, million, percent, tax, warren
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How much more would you pay with Obama's tax hike? Nesster General Talk 58 07-29-2012 07:57 PM
Warren Buffett Promises to Pay Off the National Debt–If Republicans Help stevewig General Talk 6 02-15-2012 10:00 AM
Gingrich: His 15% Flat Tax Matches Romney’s Effective Tax Rate jogiba General Talk 9 01-20-2012 11:38 AM
Warren Buffett Tells Congress To Raise Taxes On Wealthy jogiba General Talk 4 10-24-2011 08:19 AM
*istDL blank 500k files problem rbowen47 Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 10-17-2011 08:05 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:39 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top