The Buffet Rule

[Dante]

A perfect example of what a disingenuous liar Obama is.

 

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/04/11/morning-bell-buffett-rule-101/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell

[IDBillzFan]

He's not a liar. You just aren't able to understand what he's trying to communicate.

 

It would make more sense if you were a moderate independent.

[Doc]

He's a perfect match with Buffett, who is fighting with the IRS over $1B in back taxes he owes. I can't wait to see the look on Barry's face when he mentioned the "Buffett Rule" and Romney whips that one out, as well as asking him why it wasn't passed in his first 2 years in office.

[DC Tom]

...as well as asking him why it wasn't passed in his first 2 years in office.

 

"Because of the failed policies of the Bush administration."

 

 

In fact, I predict, right here and now, that that's the central theme of Obama's reelection campaign.

[Nanker]

"Because of the failed policies of the Bush administration."

 

 

In fact, I predict, right here and now, that that's the central theme of Obama's reelection campaign.

 

You mean he won't make the strong dollar, our thriving economy, lessening tensions in the Mid East, and strengthening the military key points?

[IDBillzFan]

In fact, I predict, right here and now, that that's the central theme of Obama's reelection campaign.

I would have been inclined to not agree with this, until I saw their response to the GSA spending. That was, to me, SO batschitt crazy that I would not be surprised if you were 100% in your prediction.

Edited April 11, 2012 by LABillzFan

[DC Tom]

You mean he won't make the strong dollar, our thriving economy, lessening tensions in the Mid East, and strengthening the military key points?

 

Sure they will. They'll just phrase it as "We'd have all that...if not for the failed policies of the Bush administration."

[3rdnlng]

Stuart Varney just said that Buffet's salary is $100,000 a year. All the rest is presumably in Capital Gains. Pretty easy to see why he would pay less percentage wise than his secretary who is a 1% in her own right, at $250,000 a year.

[B-Large]

Fariness- I like fairness when it comes to taxation, I think it makes alot of sense, but you have to get over these hurdles before you can talk about that very subject.

 

1. Most Americans pay no net taxes- some people get more money back than they ever had withheld. I don't care if people pay $1 in taxes, at least they pay something.

 

2. Rich people use the tax laws the Government brews up to reduce taxes, legally (I don't this offshore acocunts are legal). The Government, in the ultimate in power grab and manipulation use the tax code to promote what they believe to be desirable behavior. If they truly want fairness, you insitute a flat tax, on all income, at set rates for each group. You can't design all sorts of tax goodies and expect fairness... it is the complete opposite of a fair tax system

 

Tax advatages tend to bebenfit people with economic smarts and people who own assets. But you have to ask yourself, do you me puchasing more property, keeping it clean and making money to invest further, or me just to put money in my saving account so that it is fair.

 

Life isn't fair. That tax code benefits those who know how to use it. Its sad, but true.

[Doc]

"Because of the failed policies of the Bush administration."

 

 

In fact, I predict, right here and now, that that's the central theme of Obama's reelection campaign.

No doubt. He's got nothing else.

[John Adams]

"The rich should pay more because it's only fair."

 

My question is that what should the poor give back for getting the free money so that we maintain the fairness standard.

[Doc]

"The rich should pay more because it's only fair."

 

My question is that what should the poor give back for getting the free money so that we maintain the fairness standard.

Nothing. They should have their needs paid-for, so they can pay for their wants. It's only fair.

[IDBillzFan]

Life isn't fair. That tax code benefits those who know how to use it. Its sad, but true.

The tax codes benefit those who create them.

 

One of the areas I wish I had more knowledge about was how money earned outside the country is apparently brutally taxed when it is brought back in. Consequently, much money stays out of the country. It would seem to me, on the surface, that allowing companies to bring in that money back here at a severely reduced rate for a brief period of time would do wonders for our economy.

 

Like I said..."on the surface." It could well be a horrible idea. But what you can't do is complain about all the money sitting offshore and not come up with a way to bring it back if you genuinely believe it will spur on the economy.

[Jim in Anchorage]

"Because of the failed policies of the Bush administration."

 

 

In fact, I predict, right here and now, that that's the central theme of Obama's reelection campaign.

Christ did you have a 3 year nap? It's now "Republicans [AKA obstructionists] blocked my policy's". NONE of Anything is BO's fault.

[B-Large]

The tax codes benefit those who create them.

 

One of the areas I wish I had more knowledge about was how money earned outside the country is apparently brutally taxed when it is brought back in. Consequently, much money stays out of the country. It would seem to me, on the surface, that allowing companies to bring in that money back here at a severely reduced rate for a brief period of time would do wonders for our economy.

 

Like I said..."on the surface." It could well be a horrible idea. But what you can't do is complain about all the money sitting offshore and not come up with a way to bring it back if you genuinely believe it will spur on the economy.

 

My assumption was it is taxed at the 35% corporate tax rate.... in theory if the Corporate Tax Rate was zero, you would have more jobs as factories and jobs would stay here, incomes might be higher (of the extra is just paid out to the inner circle)... but I don't know if that is true given the labor liberties of other countries...

 

Someone posed an interesting thought the other day, no here- money is deposited in Swiss banks because of the stability of their money and government. That uis probably true

[OCinBuffalo]

Fariness- I like fairness when it comes to taxation, I think it makes alot of sense, but you have to get over these hurdles before you can talk about that very subject.

 

1. Most Americans pay no net taxes- some people get more money back than they ever had withheld. I don't care if people pay $1 in taxes, at least they pay something.

 

2. Rich people use the tax laws the Government brews up to reduce taxes, legally (I don't this offshore acocunts are legal). The Government, in the ultimate in power grab and manipulation use the tax code to promote what they believe to be desirable behavior. If they truly want fairness, you insitute a flat tax, on all income, at set rates for each group. You can't design all sorts of tax goodies and expect fairness... it is the complete opposite of a fair tax system

 

Tax advatages tend to bebenfit people with economic smarts and people who own assets. But you have to ask yourself, do you me puchasing more property, keeping it clean and making money to invest further, or me just to put money in my saving account so that it is fair.

 

Life isn't fair. That tax code benefits those who know how to use it. Its sad, but true.

This why we have to resist the "rich vs poor" argument that Obama keeps trying, and failing, to make.

 

Rather we need to look at it the way it is. Focus on the problem people and leave everybody else alone. Problem people can be easily divided as follows:

1. The helpless

2. The clueless

3. The shameless

 

We need to help the helpless. These people have problems the government needs to help with, through no fault of their own. Contrary to the lies, everybody wants to help the helpless, except the shameless. More on them in a sec. Helpless does not include elderly people who give away all their assets to their kids and then go on Medicaid so they don't have to pay for their assisted/skilled care. Helpless does not include assclowns who knock up 5 different women with no way to support them, but, it does include the kids themselves. Helpless means what it says.

 

We need to make the clueless uncomfortable, and want a clue. We need to make sure that the clueless are motivated towards getting a clue. I am not saying that they have to suffer. I am saying that they need to be constantly reminded that having a clue is preferable to not having one.

 

We need to flat out punish the shameless. Look, "tax breaks for millionaires" is a tired cliche that nobody responds to. When Obama people say "we didn't message it properly", I say "yeah, because you can't stop using that cliche". If you can't tell the difference between a self-made millionaire and a trust fund baby, why should anyone pay attention to you or your message?

 

Screw jail time. The people that can afford and have the ability to abuse any government system, IRS, Medicare, VA, GSA, etc., only care about 1 thing: money. I have personal experience here: the guy who stole $20 million from my investors, and causing us great hardship as a result....didn't care about spending 3 years in jail....because he had $20 million when he got out. I guarantee he is infinitely more afraid of running into me, and what I might do to him(nah...don't think that....think "8 heads in a dufflebag", as that is more my style), than he is of doing another 3 year stretch.

 

Jail? Foolishness. Force these Wall Street people to work for the SEC for 1 year/million $ stolen/scammed, and take $2 million out of whatever they earn next. THAT is real punishment. Force them to work for the government in any capacity. That is a deterrent. Same thing goes for every other scammer. Hit them in the wallet, forget about jail.

 

That and simplify/decrease the scope of the tax code, Medicare, etc., so there aren't so many ways to scam.

Edited April 11, 2012 by OCinBuffalo

[Dante]

The tax codes benefit those who create them.

 

One of the areas I wish I had more knowledge about was how money earned outside the country is apparently brutally taxed when it is brought back in. Consequently, much money stays out of the country. It would seem to me, on the surface, that allowing companies to bring in that money back here at a severely reduced rate for a brief period of time would do wonders for our economy.

 

Like I said..."on the surface." It could well be a horrible idea. But what you can't do is complain about all the money sitting offshore and not come up with a way to bring it back if you genuinely believe it will spur on the economy.

Didn't Apple just state a while ago that it has billions out of the country and will not bring it back until the tax code is more reasonable? Going to have to look for link.

 

Ahh here it is.

 

"but according to SeekingAlpha, most of that cash is effectively trapped overseas. US$54 billion of Apple's overall $82 billion in cash is in offshore accounts, and Apple cannot repatriate that money to the States unless it wants to pay a huge 35 percent corporate tax on it.

 

If Apple attempted to bring that money into the States, right off the bat through the magic of taxes that $54 billion would transform into $35.1 billion, with the other $18.9 billion disappearing down the federal money hole. With that much cash at stake, it's no wonder that Apple hasn't been in any hurry to repatriate its huge foreign cash reserves."

 

 

http://www.tuaw.com/2012/01/11/most-of-apples-82-billion-cash-stockpile-is-trapped-overseas/

Edited April 11, 2012 by Dante