NYTIMES: Warren Buffett - 'Stop Coddling the Super-Rich'

[AsburySkinsFan]

He's complaining about the mega-rich (his words) not being taxed enough. If he thinks that people of his wealth aren't paying enough, then he should be willing to put his own money where his mouth is. He'd have a lot more credibility if he'd put the money out there up front instead of begging the government to coerce him to do what he says is right.

He is willing to out his money where his mouth is and that's why he wrote the piece, but him cutting a check by himself won't change a thing and you know it which is why you suggest that what you say is a reasonable request when in reality it's absurd and you know it. For he and others like him to pay their FAIR share his taxes should have been upwards of 19 million dollars, but as long as it is the rich who are putting officials into office we're going to continue getting screwed and the worst part is that the rich don't even have to defend their tax breaks because they have convinced you to do it for them....BRILLIANT!

[ABQCOWBOY]

So we have to make massive cuts to the social safety net and hope that the Republicans and the Tea Party will agree to taxes? Sorry but thats ridiculous the GOP has not compromised on anything.

Real cuts need to be made but a lot of those cuts need to come from our bloated defense spending, something you have neglected to mention.

IMO, yes, you do. If you want to have any measure of success in passing a higher tax rate, I think you do. You may think it's ridiculous and that's fine but tell me, how successful have you been at passing tax increases thus far? You had a super majority and you could not get it passed. Continue to work in the same way as before and believe that it will produce a different result if you wish but I don't see that as a successful path to accomplish what you want.

As far as defense cuts, why would I mention them? In January, they cut 100 Billion. In this last agreement, they will now cut 350 Billion followed by another 600 Billion, all of it from DoD Budget. I don't really think there is much more to say there.

[jpyaks3]

Even adjusting for inflation, spending per capita has continued to rise. That takes out both inflation and populaiton growth. Increased spending is NOT a "fact of life". Just because you want to spend more than you did last year doesn't mean you can afford to do it.

No but as population grows you need to expand services and infrastructure and guess what that costs money. Do you really think its possible to return to spending levels of the 1800's?

Also you didn't address my second point, we aren't talking about spending we are talking about increasing revenues.

[zoony]

It is absolutely AMAZING to me how gullible and ignorant the right has become. They can be given ANY ISSUE, no matter how blatantly, ridiculously hypocritical and shameful, and bite it hook, line, and sinker. There isn't so much as a glimmer of a thought put into their positions. It's whatever the talking heads tell them, that's what they go with. Seriously, read this thread. Soundbites and talking points all absolutely destroyed by data and facts. Do they care? No. It just encourages them.

Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity tell them the debt is a concern, and now that's all we hear. Debt, debt, debt, spending, spending, spending. :blahblah: Not a PEEP out of the right the entire time Bush and Cheney are dropping suitcases full of cash over the middle east... nothing. Not a peep. Happy to do it even. They loved spending trillions to build schools and provide healthcare to Iraqis. LOVED IT. Couldn't get enough of it. Kept voting for it. Kept encouraging it. Kept blogging about it, kept broadcasting about it.

Hypocrites and intellectual frauds. Every last one of you.

.....

[jpyaks3]

IMO, yes, you do. If you want to have any measure of success in passing a higher tax rate, I think you do. You may think it's ridiculous and that's fine but tell me, how successful have you been at passing tax increases thus far? You had a super majority and you could not get it passed. Continue to work in the same way as before and believe that it will produce a different result if you wish but I don't see that as a successful path to accomplish what you want.

As far as defense cuts, why would I mention them? In January, they cut 100 Billion. In this last agreement, they will now cut 350 Billion followed by another 600 Billion, all of it from DoD Budget. I don't really think there is much more to say there.

Can you show me one piece of evidence that the Democrats should trust the GOP to do anything? Yes the Democrats haven't been able to pass higher tax rates but gutting the social safety nets and hoping that the Republicans actually do something is insane, they have shown time and time again that under no circumstances would they raise taxes on the top 1% willingly.

Have you looked at the defense budget lately? There is a ton to cut there.

Tell me you can't cut from this

It is absurd to think that we cant slash our defense budget to a relatively normal level.

[ABQCOWBOY]

No but as population grows you need to expand services and infrastructure and guess what that costs money. Do you really think its possible to return to spending levels of the 1800's?

Also you didn't address my second point, we aren't talking about spending we are talking about increasing revenues.

You can increase revenue to the point where you get 100% of all the wealth from everybody in this country that makes over a million dollars and it still would not solve the problem. The problem is not a revenue shortage problem. The problem is a debt to income problem. We have to cut spending in conjunction with raising revenues but in order to do that, we have to consider how best to do it while putting people back to work and growing the economy. A big job and one that will take both parties all in to fix. If your not willing to offer something in return, you will never get a buy in from the other side and we are doomed to fail. This isn't hard. That's what is so maddening about it.

[Bang]

So, the "crisis" never goes away, it just changes names. WWI, depression, WWII, cold war, recession, WoT, recession/depression. There's always an excuse to increase spending because there's always a new "crisis" to spend the money on. Thanks for clearing that up..

Amazing how you can minimize things like World war 1, World War 2, the Cold War, and the current War on Terror with a couple of "quotation marks"

Makes you look like you haven't got a "clue".

~Bang

[ABQCOWBOY]

It is absolutely AMAZING to me how gullible and ignorant the right has become. They can be given ANY ISSUE, no matter how blatantly, ridiculously hypocritical and shameful, and bite it hook, line, and sinker. There isn't so much as a glimmer of a thought put into their positions. It's whatever the talking heads tell them, that's what they go with. Seriously, read this thread. Soundbites and talking points all absolutely destroyed by data and facts. Do they care? No. It just encourages them.

Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity tell them the debt is a concern, and now that's all we hear. Debt, debt, debt, spending, spending, spending. :blahblah: Not a PEEP out of the right the entire time Bush and Cheney are dropping suitcases full of cash over the middle east... nothing. Not a peep. Happy to do it even. They loved spending trillions to build schools and provide healthcare to Iraqis. LOVED IT. Couldn't get enough of it. Kept voting for it. Kept encouraging it. Kept blogging about it, kept broadcasting about it.

Hypocrites and intellectual frauds. Every last one of you.

.....

Thanks.

[Henry]

So, the "crisis" never goes away, it just changes names. WWI, depression, WWII, cold war, recession, WoT, recession/depression. There's always an excuse to increase spending because there's always a new "crisis" to spend the money on. Thanks for clearing that up.

During WWII government spending was about 43 percent of our GDP. Since WWII, government spending has equalled about 18 percent of our GDP, give or take a few points. In the 80s it went up to about 22 percent and then dropped back down in the late 90s. Around 2005 it started going up again and in 2009 it ballooned to 25 percent. In 2010 it was 23 percent.

So in terms of what we bring in, spending does actually go up and down, and it hasn't steadily risen any more than it drops. The problem right now is that the Bush tax cuts dropped our receipts from 20% in 2000 to 16% in 2004. Now we are at 15%. Had our receipts merely stayed at 20% we'd have had a surplus every year from 2001 until 2005, and we'd certainly have been able to afford a stimulus without it breaking our backs, as it's doing now.

I have no problem bringing spending down. 25% of our GDP is too high. That's the highest we've been since WWII. But over the past 70 years our spending has been pretty steady. If it were 'one crisis after another' it would just keep on going up, but it hasn't. It ballooned once and then stabilized for half a century. It's starting to balloon again and we need it to stabilize it, no question, but I think you are overstating your point.

[armstrong001]

Amen to that!!!! How any one can defend this current system is beyond me. The middle class pay twice as much in taxes as the rich and they are the one's who cannot afford it.

Their income tax rate may be higher than the long term capital gains tax (which anyone can have the pleasure of paying), but they certainly aren't paying more in taxes than the rich, let alone twice as much.

[jpyaks3]

You can increase revenue to the point where you get 100% of all the wealth from everybody in this country that makes over a million dollars and it still would not solve the problem. The problem is not a revenue shortage problem. The problem is a debt to income problem. We have to cut spending in conjunction with raising revenues but in order to do that, we have to consider how best to do it while putting people back to work and growing the economy. A big job and one that will take both parties all in to fix. If your not willing to offer something in return, you will never get a buy in from the other side and we are doomed to fail. This isn't hard. That's what is so maddening about it.

The Democrats have already offered quite a bit in the way of cuts, most of which does nothing but hurts our long term future. The fact of the matter is we spend a ton of money on defense and our tax rates for the ultra wealthy are ridiculously low, lowest in history in fact. Both need to be addressed. Yes we can tighten up the social safety net but the fact is that taxes need to be raised to a point where the upper classes are doing their fair share and defense spending needs to be cut, stopping the wars would also bring in a hell of a lot of money too. But yes cuts and adjustments need to be made to the social safety net but those can be done through reforming our terribly inefficient healthcare system. The fact is though there has been no compromise from the right on any of this. None. Now the Democrats aren't much better because in the end Obama seems to have the same goals as the GOP shredding the safety net for the benefit of corporate America and the rich but at least they aren't so blatant about it.

What is absolutely ridiculous is the Republicans attacks on programs like USAID, Institute of Peace and Educational programs that are a drop in the bucket compared to entitlement and defense spending but give benefits that far outweigh the costs.

[AsburySkinsFan]

You can increase revenue to the point where you get 100% of all the wealth from everybody in this country that makes over a million dollars and it still would not solve the problem.

Show me a single person who suggested otherwise....otherwise stop boxing with shadows.

[SkinsHokieFan]

It is simple mathematics that the spending side of the equation will produce more results (i.e I believe the top 1 percent have total assets of 1.3 trillion dollars, thats assets, not income)

I have been jumping all over my Republican friends for 2 years now, create a millionaire bracket, raise cap gains (lower cap gains=dangerous bubbles) and lower taxes on the true job creators (not big corporations but people who make 250k to 1 million that are just starting to take rists and create businesses) and you'll start to see results.

Along with that, corporate liscencing and business liscencing procedures need to move beyond the state level and to the national level. It is absurd that I as a business owner have to pay 1,100 dollars a year to 3 different states/districts (DC, MD, VA) along with various jurisdictions in between (Fairfax, Montgomery, Loudon, Prince William) to operate a contracting business, which consistantly creates jobs.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Their income tax rate may be higher than the long term capital gains tax (which anyone can have the pleasure of paying), but they certainly aren't paying more in taxes than the rich, let alone twice as much.

Whatever makes you sleep better at night, their tax rate is HALF of a multi-billionaire....half......don't talk about fairness in taxes while defending that outrage. What's more is that a billionaire like Buffet isn't affected nearly as much by paying 33% as compared to someone making $40k per year.

[ABQCOWBOY]

Can you show me one piece of evidence that the Democrats should trust the GOP to do anything? Yes the Democrats haven't been able to pass higher tax rates but gutting the social safety nets and hoping that the Republicans actually do something is insane, they have shown time and time again that under no circumstances would they raise taxes on the top 1% willingly.

Have you looked at the defense budget lately? There is a ton to cut there.

Tell me you can't cut from this

It is absurd to think that we cant slash our defense budget to a relatively normal level.

What are normal levels? The GOP is not different then the Democrats are. O'Neill promised spending cuts at a rate of three dollars for every one dollar spent to President Reagan. That has never materialized. Neither party is any more trustworthy then the other. The DoD has been cut almost a Trillion dollars between cuts in this years defense budget and the cuts passed in this last Ceiling Increase. No cuts in entitlements at all. You can't expect the Right to agree to tax increases if it's a one sided affair. Why would they? They could not begin to sell it to their own party. The middle is going to support a tax increase, IMO, but only if it is for debt reduction. They will not support a tax increase to increase entitlements. If you make them do that, they will side with the GOP and it will snow ball against the left.

This is my honest viewpoint of the matter.

---------- Post added August-15th-2011 at 12:44 PM ----------

Show me a single person who suggested otherwise....otherwise stop boxing with shadows.

I see you are, as usual, adding a great deal to the discussion. Keep up the good work.

---------- Post added August-15th-2011 at 12:45 PM ----------

The Democrats have already offered quite a bit in the way of cuts, most of which does nothing but hurts our long term future. The fact of the matter is we spend a ton of money on defense and our tax rates for the ultra wealthy are ridiculously low, lowest in history in fact. Both need to be addressed. Yes we can tighten up the social safety net but the fact is that taxes need to be raised to a point where the upper classes are doing their fair share and defense spending needs to be cut, stopping the wars would also bring in a hell of a lot of money too. But yes cuts and adjustments need to be made to the social safety net but those can be done through reforming our terribly inefficient healthcare system. The fact is though there has been no compromise from the right on any of this. None. Now the Democrats aren't much better because in the end Obama seems to have the same goals as the GOP shredding the safety net for the benefit of corporate America and the rich but at least they aren't so blatant about it.

What is absolutely ridiculous is the Republicans attacks on programs like USAID, Institute of Peace and Educational programs that are a drop in the bucket compared to entitlement and defense spending but give benefits that far outweigh the costs.

Where are these cuts that have been offered?

[armstrong001]

He is willing to out his money where his mouth is and that's why he wrote the piece, but him cutting a check by himself won't change a thing and you know it which is why you suggest that what you say is a reasonable request when in reality it's absurd and you know it. For he and others like him to pay their FAIR share his taxes should have been upwards of 19 million dollars, but as long as it is the rich who are putting officials into office we're going to continue getting screwed and the worst part is that the rich don't even have to defend their tax breaks because they have convinced you to do it for them....BRILLIANT!

Who exactly is getting screwed? Do you believe your taxes are too high, and that the rich should pay more of your taxes, or that they should just be paying more and you'd be ok with yours staying the same?

The only rate that's low is the long-term capital gains rate which means their money has been invested for over a year. And given the market acting the way it has, I don't understand why you would think the government deserves more of a cut out of something they had no risk in.

---------- Post added August-15th-2011 at 12:54 PM ----------

Whatever makes you sleep better at night, their tax rate is HALF of a multi-billionaire....half......don't talk about fairness in taxes while defending that outrage. What's more is that a billionaire like Buffet isn't affected nearly as much by paying 33% as compared to someone making $40k per year.

If their rate is half of a billionaire, isnt that good? And a single person making $40k per year is paying just over $4k per year, or just over 10%. Married filing jointly is paying $2300, just under 6%. How is this not fair?

If you risk your money for over a year and make a ton of profit, I certainly will sleep well knowing that you didn't have to give a larger portion of it to the government unless you decided it would be more fair to do so.

[Henry]

It is absolutely AMAZING to me how gullible and ignorant the right has become. They can be given ANY ISSUE, no matter how blatantly, ridiculously hypocritical and shameful, and bite it hook, line, and sinker. There isn't so much as a glimmer of a thought put into their positions. It's whatever the talking heads tell them, that's what they go with. Seriously, read this thread. Soundbites and talking points all absolutely destroyed by data and facts. Do they care? No. It just encourages them.

What's funny is that the more I look at what we've been spending versus what we've been bringing in, the more I realize how much the low tax rate has been killing us lately. I wouldn't have realized it without this thread inspiring me to do the research and see for myself.

[Dan T.]

He is free to send as much of his money to the Federal Government as he wants. Nobody at the IRS is going to stop him.

Please, Mr. Buffett, lead by example instead of words. Send in a check for 80% of your money if you feel the government is owed that much.

He's complaining about the mega-rich (his words) not being taxed enough. If he thinks that people of his wealth aren't paying enough, then he should be willing to put his own money where his mouth is. He'd have a lot more credibility if he'd put the money out there up front instead of begging the government to coerce him to do what he says is right.

As someone else pointed out, Warren Buffet has arranged to give most of his wealth to charity. So he has already "put his money where his mouth is."

[armstrong001]

Amazing how you can minimize things like World war 1, World War 2, the Cold War, and the current War on Terror with a couple of "quotation marks"

Makes you look like you haven't got a "clue".

~Bang

I certainly don't minimize them. But perhaps you've noticed that when one crisis ends, another begins which justifies additional spending? There's never a point where our government says "You know what? We don't need to keep spending all this money. The crisis is gone. Lets get rid of some of these programs that aren't necessary anymore." The hardest thing to kill is a government program.

[GibbsFactor]

We need to fix the economy before the Government does anything outside of raising taxes on the well off. $250K married should qualify.

[Jumbo]

What's funny is that the more I look at what we've been spending versus what we've been bringing in, the more I realize how much the low tax rate has been killing us lately. I wouldn't have realized it without this thread inspiring me to do the research and see for myself.

The repercussions of Bush 2 lowering the taxes for the wealthy, and related moves prior or since, were basically as devasating to the economy (and provide precious little reward ala "trickle down" or "jobs" bs--what a crock) as the over-spending. But the feckless blinded arrogant no-compromise right (which is everything zoony said and worse, however broadly generalized and unfair to the five or six conservatives in the nation that aren't as described :pfft:), gives little attention to, or outright deny, that aspect of our woes. They just beat their little jingoistic myopic thought-drums like good little cognitive-zombies. They truly do need more brains.

And I don't think much of most of you lefties, neither! :pfft:

[The 12th Commandment]

So, the "crisis" never goes away, it just changes names. WWI, depression, WWII, cold war, recession, WoT, recession/depression. There's always an excuse to increase spending because there's always a new "crisis" to spend the money on. Thanks for clearing that up.

---------- Post added August-15th-2011 at 12:10 PM ----------

Arguing that it's ok to increase spending because the Republicans did it is ridiculous, especially since I'm not happy with the Republicans either.

But that's the kind of military/corporate spending you like, isn't it?

[armstrong001]

As someone else pointed out, Warren Buffet has arranged to give most of his wealth to charity. So he has already "put his money where his mouth is."

Super. I am happy to see that Buffett and Gates have decided to do what they want to do with their own money and not let the government determine where that money will go. Except, of course, for the inheritance tax...

---------- Post added August-15th-2011 at 01:13 PM ----------

But that's the kind of military/corporate spending you like, isn't it?

When have I said that?

[Bang]

I certainly don't minimize them. But perhaps you've noticed that when one crisis ends, another begins which justifies additional spending? There's never a point where our government says "You know what? We don't need to keep spending all this money. The crisis is gone. Lets get rid of some of these programs that aren't necessary anymore." The hardest thing to kill is a government program.

Perhaps you've noticed that you absolutely DO minimize them.

You are either implying that the awful evil gub'mint is creating crises like WW1 WW2 Cold War and WoT... or you're saying "Have you ever noticed how unstable the world was over the last century, and how much we had to expend to keep ourselves free from real evil that threatened and continues to threaten the earth?"

Which one of those is it?

Which of those crises could we have avoided?

~Bang

[The 12th Commandment]

When have I said that?

I'll take that to mean you're an equal opportunity budget slasher. I have a little more respect for that than a pick and chooser.