Obama intensifies push for ‘Buffett Rule’

[CRUE CAB]

When are people going to wise up and realize that a flat % tax is the only fair way to tax a society.

[Luigi Daniele]

Originally Posted by Mickey Finn

Just type in any of the states mentioned, or Boeing for that matter, and labor. You'll be on your way.

I must admit I was shocked to learn that Warren Buffett was a capitalist. () Is that what you guys refer to as an Ad hominem?

When I said I was in favor of the "Buffett Rule." I should have said, I was in favor of increasing the tax burden on the wealthiest americans. Then putting that money to good use. Looking after the elderly, the poor, and the handicapped. Little things like that.

ATB

1.The top 1% pay 70+% of the taxes. 85,000 people pay 93% of all federal taxes. Just not fair.

2. Raising taxes on dividends means taxing money twice (the money invested was already taxed). Heck lets tax it 10 times.

It's stealing. Period.

Go to a national sales tax and no income tax.

[LisaA]

Originally Posted by CRUE CAB

When are people going to wise up and realize that a flat % tax is the only fair way to tax a society.

Devil is in the details. Flat tax of what...income? if so what kind of income? Consumption? If so is everything subject to tax or are there exceptions? I love the concept of a flat consumption based tax FWIW.

Lisa

[Mickey Finn]

Originally Posted by CRUE CAB

When are people going to wise up and realize that a flat % tax is the only fair way to tax a society.

That whole FAIR thing doesn't fly around here. Apparently the founding fathers forgot to write it down. They probably thought it went without saying.

ATB

[Mickey Finn]

Originally Posted by Luigi Daniele

1.The top 1% pay 70+% of the taxes. 85,000 people pay 93% of all federal taxes. Just not fair.

2. Raising taxes on dividends means taxing money twice (the money invested was already taxed). Heck lets tax it 10 times.

It's stealing. Period.

Go to a national sales tax and no income tax.

Luigi, I don't really care how much they've payed. When I see them sporting wool. It's time to shear them.

[Orogeny]

Originally Posted by Mickey Finn

You may not have spent enough time researching the subject.

Is racism a one way street?

Really, you can answer. Its ok.

Peace

Tim

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by Mickey Finn

That whole FAIR thing doesn't fly around here. Apparently the founding fathers forgot to write it down. They probably thought it went without saying.

ATB

As pointed out elsewhere (was it earlier on this thread?), there is a difference between fairness and justice. What do you want? Fairness? Or justice?

[CRUE CAB]

Originally Posted by Suudy

As pointed out elsewhere (was it earlier on this thread?), there is a difference between fairness and justice. What do you want? Fairness? Or justice?

Fariness, this is not about justice.
Why should my % be higher if I make 100K then someone making 40K?
Maybe I work harder, maybe I have a specific talent that the 40K does not have.
I should be punished for that?

[CRUE CAB]

Originally Posted by LisaA

Devil is in the details. Flat tax of what...income? if so what kind of income? Consumption? If so is everything subject to tax or are there exceptions? I love the concept of a flat consumption based tax FWIW.

Lisa

If you want an "income tax" have it at say 10% of what is stated as earned income.
If you want a "sales or consumption tax" make that the same nation wide.
Now if you can prove your state needs extra money, go to court and present your case.
We could have tax courts set up just for that, and it would be much cheaper than to have a string of lawyers a mile long trying to fight the tax laws that are on the books now.

[tqualey]

Hi, Mickey Finn,

I think you are on to something that you could probably patent and become wealthy...! While many have heard of 'Fantasy Football" and "Fantasy Baseball" - I do not think that that anyone prior to today has what I think you have launched here: "Fantasy Economics".

For a current update on just where we stand - check out this link: http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ While China is our biggest creditor, they are not the only country holding US I.O.U's. With $16.6 Trillion in debt you would think that we were living beyond our means... or something. The so-called 'wealthy' simply do not have the money to simply pay off this debt in taxes... so we need to look other places - and two come to mind: reduce spending while increasing revenue... unless, of course you are playing 'Fantasy Economis' where the apparent object of the game is deny any problem that can not be directly attribute to the 'wealthy'. Your response below seems to neatly summarize that position.

But, you will probably wind up in some serious competition - there has already been the launch of "Fantasy Government" - where soaking all taxpayers and pretending that there is no end to the money supply (as long as the presses at the Treasury Department keep on cranking out Ben Franklins!) is the rule. The current players demonstrating their ability at playing this game will soon be revealing some of their secrets to success - the GSA is testifying before Congress ... unless, of course they take the 5th Amendment position which is a one-turn only 'wild card'.

Seriously, your expressed view of totaly taxation on the wealthy "...sprout wool, shear it" shows a posssible knowledge deficit on how our economy really works. But, don't believe me - just show me which successful W-2 wage earner has actually hired other people! Honest. The issue is jobs - and that means hiring people to produce either a good or a service. The only folks who do this are entrepreneurs. Are you willing to risk your money to produce a good or service ("Fantasy Economics"?) in the hope of making more money but with the possibility of losing all that you put in (and even more if you took out a loan to fund your dream). What are you going to do? Stay with W-2 income or really do something for this economy of ours

It was previously pointed out that Buffett, while very wealthy, owes the largest amount of money to the US Government then anyone else in the form of taxes that he has failed to pay. Warren Buffett is about as closer to being the 'Wiz of Oz' than any one else - he truly is all smoke and mirrors. His proclaimed desire to have the wealthy pay more in taxes is just talk - he really should sit down and write a check and just pay what he owes. And, if truth be known, even if Buffett did not owe a penny in back taxes - and he still thought that the rich should pay more in taxes - nothing would have stopped him for sitting down and writing the US Treasury a check and doing just that. But, NO - he is into hype, deception...and hypocracy

Put your shearing scissors back up - you run the risk of killing the sheep you want to attack. Remember the story about the 'Golden Goose'...here is an interesting economic variation on that tale: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion...j4Wbkc71JdOA0O

God bless

Originally Posted by Mickey Finn

Luigi, I don't really care how much they've payed. When I see them sporting wool. It's time to shear them.

[CRUE CAB]

Originally Posted by Mickey Finn

Luigi, I don't really care how much they've payed. When I see them sporting wool. It's time to shear them.

So a person that earns a good living by working a legitimate job, needs to get cut down to size?

[Ridgerunner]

Originally Posted by Mickey Finn

Just type in any of the states mentioned, or Boeing for that matter, and labor. You'll be on your way.

I must admit I was shocked to learn that Warren Buffett was a capitalist. () Is that what you guys refer to as an Ad hominem?

When I said I was in favor of the "Buffett Rule." I should have said, I was in favor of increasing the tax burden on the wealthiest americans. Then putting that money to good use. Looking after the elderly, the poor, and the handicapped. Little things like that.

ATB

Point 1: No good. You are the one saying the conservatives have done terrible things to labor. The burden is on you, not on those whom you address. Point them out specifically, and demonstrate that conservatives did whatever they did and that those things were harmful to labor in a measurable way. If you fail to do it, your proposition fails.

Point 2: Of course Buffett is a capitalist, of the "crony capitalist" subgenre. Nobody said he wasn't, and everybody knows he is. The question raised is his credibility as a person who has the public good foremost in his mind in his public actions. Are his proposals to be taken at face value, or has he something else in mind? Do we trust "crony capitalists" or do we not?

Point 3: Since the "Buffett Rule" won't do any of the things you said, (even Obama admits it) perhaps you might research and explain to us why, exactly, the administration which you admire has done absolutely nothing for the elderly, the poor or the handicapped, particularly back in 2009 and early 2010 when they could have done anything they wanted. On the contrary, this administration proposes cutting $500 billion out of Medicare and has massively expanded those eligible for Medicaid making it even harder for the truly needy to access the limited "Medicaid slots" providers have. In addition, it has shifted reimbursement from "chronic care" to "well care". Of course, the handicapped and many of the poor are disproportionately represented among those needing "chronic care".

In looking at the candidates and parties, one ought not go by "conventional wisdoms", but by actions and the realities they bring about.

[Mickey Finn]

Originally Posted by CRUE CAB

So a person that earns a good living by working a legitimate job, needs to get cut down to size?

No sir. The guy or girl making a good living is not what we are talking about. We are talking about the upper earners who through years of manipulation of our political system. Pay a lower percent then that guy or girl making a decent living.

Remember, it doesn't hurt to shear a sheep. Skinning them, is another matter.

ATB

[Mickey Finn]

Originally Posted by Ridgerunner

Point 1: No good. You are the one saying the conservatives have done terrible things to labor. The burden is on you, not on those whom you address. Point them out specifically, and demonstrate that conservatives did whatever they did and that those things were harmful to labor in a measurable way. If you fail to do it, your proposition fails.

Point 2: Of course Buffett is a capitalist, of the "crony capitalist" subgenre. Nobody said he wasn't, and everybody knows he is. The question raised is his credibility as a person who has the public good foremost in his mind in his public actions. Are his proposals to be taken at face value, or has he something else in mind? Do we trust "crony capitalists" or do we not?

Point 3: Since the "Buffett Rule" won't do any of the things you said, (even Obama admits it) perhaps you might research and explain to us why, exactly, the administration which you admire has done absolutely nothing for the elderly, the poor or the handicapped, particularly back in 2009 and early 2010 when they could have done anything they wanted. On the contrary, this administration proposes cutting $500 billion out of Medicare and has massively expanded those eligible for Medicaid making it even harder for the truly needy to access the limited "Medicaid slots" providers have. In addition, it has shifted reimbursement from "chronic care" to "well care". Of course, the handicapped and many of the poor are disproportionately represented among those needing "chronic care".

In looking at the candidates and parties, one ought not go by "conventional wisdoms", but by actions and the realities they bring about.

1. You'll retain the information better. If you do the research yourself.
2. Ad hominem again?
3. This paragraph runs a little long.

ATB

[Mickey Finn]

Originally Posted by tqualey

Hi, Mickey Finn,

I think you are on to something that you could probably patent and become wealthy...! While many have heard of 'Fantasy Football" and "Fantasy Baseball" - I do not think that that anyone prior to today has what I think you have launched here: "Fantasy Economics".

For a current update on just where we stand - check out this link: http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ While China is our biggest creditor, they are not the only country holding US I.O.U's. With $16.6 Trillion in debt you would think that we were living beyond our means... or something. The so-called 'wealthy' simply do not have the money to simply pay off this debt in taxes... so we need to look other places - and two come to mind: reduce spending while increasing revenue... unless, of course you are playing 'Fantasy Economis' where the apparent object of the game is deny any problem that can not be directly attribute to the 'wealthy'. Your response below seems to neatly summarize that position.

But, you will probably wind up in some serious competition - there has already been the launch of "Fantasy Government" - where soaking all taxpayers and pretending that there is no end to the money supply (as long as the presses at the Treasury Department keep on cranking out Ben Franklins!) is the rule. The current players demonstrating their ability at playing this game will soon be revealing some of their secrets to success - the GSA is testifying before Congress ... unless, of course they take the 5th Amendment position which is a one-turn only 'wild card'.

Seriously, your expressed view of totaly taxation on the wealthy "...sprout wool, shear it" shows a posssible knowledge deficit on how our economy really works. But, don't believe me - just show me which successful W-2 wage earner has actually hired other people! Honest. The issue is jobs - and that means hiring people to produce either a good or a service. The only folks who do this are entrepreneurs. Are you willing to risk your money to produce a good or service ("Fantasy Economics"?) in the hope of making more money but with the possibility of losing all that you put in (and even more if you took out a loan to fund your dream). What are you going to do? Stay with W-2 income or really do something for this economy of ours

It was previously pointed out that Buffett, while very wealthy, owes the largest amount of money to the US Government then anyone else in the form of taxes that he has failed to pay. Warren Buffett is about as closer to being the 'Wiz of Oz' than any one else - he truly is all smoke and mirrors. His proclaimed desire to have the wealthy pay more in taxes is just talk - he really should sit down and write a check and just pay what he owes. And, if truth be known, even if Buffett did not owe a penny in back taxes - and he still thought that the rich should pay more in taxes - nothing would have stopped him for sitting down and writing the US Treasury a check and doing just that. But, NO - he is into hype, deception...and hypocracy

Put your shearing scissors back up - you run the risk of killing the sheep you want to attack. Remember the story about the 'Golden Goose'...here is an interesting economic variation on that tale: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion...j4Wbkc71JdOA0O

God bless

I refuse to be wealthy. Besides, I think it's called voodoo economics if I'm not mistaken.

ATB