Why Republicans Hate the Buffett Rule.

[Bill Cravener]

http://vodpod.com/watch/15455880-why-republicans-hate-the-buffett-rule

What is the Buffett Rule?

[September 17th] "President Obama on Monday will call for a new minimum tax rate for individuals making more than $1 million a year to ensure that they pay at least the same percentage of their earnings as middle-income taxpayers, according to administration officials.... Mr. Obama, in a bit of political salesmanship, will call his proposal the Buffett Rule, in a reference to Warren E. Buffett, the billionaire investor who has complained repeatedly that the richest Americans generally pay a smaller share of their income in federal taxes than do middle-income workers, because investment gains are taxed at a lower rate than wages."

[hutch--]

Bill,

I am hoping that Obama's JOBS legislation gets up and going as it will address the greatest damage being done to ordinary Americans, the loss of income, self respect, family and a future that comes from being unemployed for long periods. I know the loonies will fight it tooth and nail with changes to the tax laws so that the very rich pay at least some tax but it is the right decision for the right reason that will help to restore the living standards of so many Americans that have done it tough for the last few years.

Buffett is an interesting person, someone who is both rich and honest and seems to be far more supportive of the real America than the greedy bastards who are still trying to rip the guts out of the US to line their pockets.

I just watched a documentary on Enron and all of the scams they got away with for years and thought FARK, this is how the damage was done in the first place.

[Bill Cravener]

Steve,

Yep, I think you are correct ENRON was the start of our fall, that and our damn wars. It has always puzzled me that monies earned that are not labored for such as money from investment gains are taxed far less then monies earned thru hard labor. It doesn't make sense. Warren Buffett who is worth some 44 billion is a good guy who has given away to charities some 10 billion and that's not counting whatever he gives away this year. He is a great and giving American in my book. :thumbu

[Tedd]

What's the tax deduction on 10 billion?

[Bill Cravener]

What would it matter when you're worth some 44 billion???

[Tedd]

Well, in order for the tax deduction system to be appealing, it must be at least equal to that amount - otherwise where's the encouragement?

So yeah, who cares about an extra 10 billion tax write off ::)

[Astro]

I find these billionaires positions to be a bit odd. It is very easy for them to say "give half your wealth away". Half of $2 Billion is still $1 Billion and the interest they earn on that each year is many times more than most earn in a lifetime. Whilst I congratulate them for their generosity, they are still loaded. Bill Gates could give away 99% of his wealth and still be very rich.

[asmGhost]

I find these billionaires positions to be a bit odd. It is very easy for them to say "give half your wealth away". Half of $2 Billion is still $1 Billion and the interest they earn on that each year is many times more than most earn in a lifetime. Whilst I congratulate them for their generosity, they are still loaded. Bill Gates could give away 99% of his wealth and still be very rich.

Then again who's stopping them from giving half away to the government?
There are provisions in the tax code to allow anyone who wishes to pay as much of their income above and beyond what they owe, the IRS won't turn it down.
Warren, Moore, Pelosi, Reid,Soros ...even Obama can write a check any time they wish.
It's all liberal smoke and mirrors, hasn't changed in decades.

[Magnum]

When I was in a Catholic High School, a teacher told me,

"If some makes $500,000 or more, they can pay nothing in taxes.

That is not right by any fair standard.

[Astro]

To not pay ANY taxes would surely be blatent tax evasion? I don't think even they can find a way to do that legally.

[dedndave]

here in the us, many rich people pay little (if any) taxes and it's all perfectly legal
of course, they have to make appropriate donations and other similar "investments"
when they make such donations, they get influence in return
quite often, that influence makes them a profit somewhere along the line

[xanatose]

How about this:

- Tax investment at the same rate as income.
- Instead of taxing companies inside the USA. Why not tax companies that bring goods from outside the USA and have a zero tax for companies that does all their business inside the USA.

That way the company inside the USA will have the competitive advantage, instead of the company that makes their goods in China.

[hutch--]

The problem with that is it is classed as protectionism and produces retaliations from other countries that are being squeezed. The real action is for the US to effectively lower the exchange rate for the US dollar to make imports more expensive and exports more attractive. This will put many Americans back to work when the exchange rate is not driving their jobs overseas. We have similar problems here in OZ, mining is booming but it has driven the exchange rate up and it impacts on the rest of the economy.