• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Christie: Buffett Should ‘Write a Check and Shut Up’

Don't forget about natural gas. We have more natural gas than we know what to do with.

We haven't even mentioned coal. We have at least a hundred year's worth of coal just waiting to be mined.

You are right that it would take a couple years for everything to gear up, but we have a lot of rigs sitting idle right now that could get to work. If we deregulated American energy, though, it would easily create hundreds of thousands of jobs. Everyone would get rich.

The "get-rich quick through deregulation" movement has outlived its usefulness 10 years ago, particularly in the energy arena. The BP oil spill was caused in part by regulatory insufficiency. Loosening restrictions on certain goods is fine and dandy, but energy is a utility. Increasing a utility's susceptibility to price shocks does nothing good.

Natural gas is already fairly deregulated. 21 States and the District of Columbia have legislation or that allow Natural Gas Choice Programs -- programs that allow you to buy from someone other than a utility company. Large businesses have had that option for several years now.

And none of what you're talking about addresses the root problem of a long-term sustainable answer to growing energy demand.
 
Last edited:
what is funny is watching lefties lap up the crap Buffett squeezes out thinking he spews this nonsense because he CARES about the poor

Buffett wants dems to win elections because Dems make him more money.

How do dems make him more money, but nobody else more money? How exactly does that work?
 
How do dems make him more money, but nobody else more money? How exactly does that work?

Given that Berkshire's holdings (e.g. IBM, Wallmart, Kraft Foods, Proctor & Gamble, DirecTV, Coca Cola) represent the economy as a whole, Turtledude is clearly arguing that Democrats are better for business than Republicans. Hard to argue with that.
 
The "get-rich quick through deregulation" movement has outlived its usefulness 10 years ago, particularly in the energy arena. The BP oil spill was caused in part by regulatory insufficiency. Loosening restrictions on certain goods is fine and dandy, but energy is a utility. Increasing a utility's susceptibility to price shocks does nothing good.

Natural gas is already fairly deregulated. 21 States and the District of Columbia have legislation or that allow Natural Gas Choice Programs -- programs that allow you to buy from someone other than a utility company. Large businesses have had that option for several years now.

And none of what you're talking about addresses the root problem of a long-term sustainable answer to growing energy demand.

I'm all for green energy. I don't think we should clamp down on everything else while we wait for it.

The kind of deregulation I'm talking about is on the drilling side, not so much from the utilities. There are a ton of regulations that make it hard to extract natural gas and oil in this country, most of it is due to environmental concerns.

I'm all for protecting the environment, but I think putting people to work is more important.
 
You are right that it would take a couple years for everything to gear up, but we have a lot of rigs sitting idle right now that could get to work. If we deregulated American energy, though, it would easily create hundreds of thousands of jobs. Everyone would get rich.

Hundreds of thousand of jobs, perhaps, but who would take them? Experienced oil and gas workers are at full employment. Not everyone, or even many are ready to pack up a head to the Arctic, Wyoming, or North Dakota to find work.
 
Last edited:
Interestingly, I could make the exact same argument about trying to raise the taxes of the poor and middle class vs. the moderately wealthy. But in that case you would argue that it's invalid to look at how taxes impact people's lives, right? All that matters is we should all pay the same percentage. :roll:

we should have a system that does not reward politicians with votes by them telling the masses that tax hikes on OTHERS will pay for the goodies the masses want
 
uhm, FAIL..... can't really say anymore on your post here.

My post used the exact same logic that yours did. By extension you just admitted that your post was a big pile of crap. Pay attention next time and you could have seen this coming.
 
Perhaps you can tell all of us just when you will be honest enough to do just that? Tell us when you are going to compared he apples earned by Buffett with the apples earned by his secretary?

And please, not just cherry picking (or would that be apple picking?) one of the bushels - lets compare ALL of the content of the damn bushels that both have earned.

Its not class envy that is the problem - its intellectual fraud committed by the far right wing libertarians in their crusade to suck up to the rich.



Capitol gains taxes is tax on money you already earned and have been taxed and now want to invest. now if you want to argue that it should be taxed across the board and a higher rate, I would believe you not to be jealous of those who have done better with thier lives than you. Since you like to lie about me and infer I am a far right winger (something I shredded ad nauseum with you), I would have to respond to your asinine little quip and remind you.....

The Good Reverend is the rich. I suck up to no one.



:failpail:
 
My post used the exact same logic that yours did. By extension you just admitted that your post was a big pile of crap. Pay attention next time and you could have seen this coming.



It's amazing what you all have devolved to.... simply amazing. :doh
 
Why are you lowering yourself to the base level of attempting to pry personal information from a poster instead of speaking to the issues raised?



hmm, by calling Turtle the "faux rich" you are opening yourself up to comparison at best, at worst, you are engaging in the very thing you are chiding.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Let's stop discussing each other please. Stick to the topic.
 
Capitol gains taxes is tax on money you already earned and have been taxed and now want to invest.

Well, that's obviously not true. Capital gains taxes are levied on income from investments. It's not a tax on money that you've earned and *want* to invest. It's a tax on profit from investment. They don't ask if the money that was invested was earned by you or whether you invested money that was gifted to you. Let's say, for example, that you inherited $10 million dollars and invest that nut in dividend-paying stocks. Are you proposing that you should live the rest of your life on the proceeds from that investment without ever paying a penny in taxes?
 
This is exactly the type of sentiment which so divides the left and the right. Anytime a rightie says something like this you can just visualize all the other warriors of the right standing up to salute ramrod straight and saying YEAH!!!!!! Those of us on the left progressive think it is so silly and stupid because one person writing a check does not even rise to the level of a half-assed substitute for a national tax policy which works for the entire nation.

I will never understand why anyone on the right thinks one person writing a check is a solution for a nation.

Wow, and you don't think your statement is divisive? Both sides to this inane cheering and applauding and it isn't just one side that is divisive but you sure are implying it. Pretty hypocritical.
 
You guy's are acting like his argument is a personal problem, and it's not a personal problem... he is arguing a about a policy. You guys, instead of arguing policy, you attack him personally and it goes nowhere and accomplishes nothing. And if he did put his money where his mouth is (as you say), and forked over a billion to the government, would that buy your respect for him? **** no, it wouldn't, and that's exactly why he shouldn't do it.

My issue is Buffett would not be hurt all that much by a raise in income taxes, most of what he earns is passive income and thus fall under different codes and he can exploit all sorts of deductions, so he is really just playing benevolent. If was really serious about evening his and his secretary's tax rate, he'd talk about eliminating deductions. The last time the rich's effective tax rate went up was under the Reagan administration, that is when many deductions were suspended. Since then the effective tax rate has fallen in every administration since then.

He said what would make him popular with Obama, cause more class warfare, he said nothing that would really hurt him and his payback from Obama is his rail still gets to haul tons and tons of oil. Pay a little, get a lot back. Not very sincere.
 
My issue is Buffett would not be hurt all that much by a raise in income taxes, most of what he earns is passive income and thus fall under different codes and he can exploit all sorts of deductions, so he is really just playing benevolent. If was really serious about evening his and his secretary's tax rate, he'd talk about eliminating deductions. The last time the rich's effective tax rate went up was under the Reagan administration, that is when many deductions were suspended. Since then the effective tax rate has fallen in every administration since then.

He said what would make him popular with Obama, cause more class warfare, he said nothing that would really hurt him and his payback from Obama is his rail still gets to haul tons and tons of oil. Pay a little, get a lot back. Not very sincere.

Do you have any, you know, evidence to back up your claims? How much oil does BNSF Railway Co. actually haul? Of that, how much would go away as a result of the XL pipeline? What percentage of revenue does that equate to in relation to Berkshire as a whole? Doesn't the railroad haul infinintely more coal than oil? And hasn't Obama been trying to clamp down on coal plant emissions? Hasn't Buffett proposed that millionaires pay at least 30% regardless of the source of the income, and inclusive of deductions? Etc.
 
Yeah, God that would be a terrible legacy to leave behind, wouldn't it? He'd be far better off being one one those right wing nutjobs like your buddies the Waltons, building million dollar houses for themselves and devoting huge sums of money to right wing wacky causes.

You guys crack me up!
 
we should have a system that does not reward politicians with votes by them telling the masses that tax hikes on OTHERS will pay for the goodies the masses want

Especially not on people making 375K to 1 million a year. Those poor folks are struggling mightily to make ends meet as it is! There ought to be a charity called 'Money for rich guys' that the rest of us could contribute to.
 
Capitol gains taxes is tax on money you already earned and have been taxed and now want to invest. now if you want to argue that it should be taxed across the board and a higher rate, I would believe you not to be jealous of those who have done better with thier lives than you. Since you like to lie about me and infer I am a far right winger (something I shredded ad nauseum with you), I would have to respond to your asinine little quip and remind you.....

The Good Reverend is the rich. I suck up to no one.



:failpail:

Why is it called Capital GAINS? Because the tax is on PROFITS or gains you make from an investment not on the investment money itself. I can't believe you don't know that.

No one could be jealous of your intellect.
 
Last edited:
Why is it called Capital GAINS? Because the tax is on PROFITS or gains you make from an investment not on the investment money itself. I can't believe you don't know that.

No one could be jealous of your intellect.



The Good Reverend is the 1.5-2%.... my intellect isn't the only thing folks are jealous of. :pimpdaddy:
 
Last edited:
Capitol gains taxes is tax on money you already earned and have been taxed and now want to invest. now if you want to argue that it should be taxed across the board and a higher rate, I would believe you not to be jealous of those who have done better with thier lives than you. Since you like to lie about me and infer I am a far right winger (something I shredded ad nauseum with you), I would have to respond to your asinine little quip and remind you.....

The Good Reverend is the rich. I suck up to no one.

here is a news bulletin for you: You are NOT paying capital gains taxes on money you have already pay tax upon. That is a blatant and bald-faced lie. You are only taxed on the profit you make - thus the name GAINS. One can now see how misled you have been and why you believe as you do based on a blatantly false premise.

As to you being a right winger - your thousands of posts say otherwise.

As to you shredding that label - you have made a half hearted effort to deny your own reality but you always end up doing the same things to me and many others. And it always follows the same pattern and ends the same.


1- your extremism is exposed by other posters
2- you get all huffy and issue a challenge demanding proof of your extremism
2- you then proceed to go about ignoring the material presented as a result of the challenge or offering some self serving excuse
3- you then depart from the issue being discussed and attempt to make it personal
4- you try to derail the actual discussion invoking all your self promoting self-serving hype talking about yourself as a third person cartoon character
5 - you then demand an apology when the other side will not give in to your bullying tactics or join your one many fan club
6- when you do not get your apology you declare victory, act in smug an superior manner , and hightail it outta here.
7- until it happens again where go back to point #1 in an endless loop
 
Capitol gains taxes is tax on money you already earned and have been taxed and now want to invest. now if you want to argue that it should be taxed across the board and a higher rate, I would believe you not to be jealous of those who have done better with thier lives than you. Since you like to lie about me and infer I am a far right winger (something I shredded ad nauseum with you), I would have to respond to your asinine little quip and remind you.....

The Good Reverend is the rich. I suck up to no one.




:failpail:

no, it's not. period.


:failpail:
 
The Good Reverend is the 1.5-2%.... my intellect isn't the only thing folks are jealous of. :pimpdaddy:

Rev, you are my homie and all, but you did just gaff the meaning of a capital gains tax.

LTCG taxes return on investment, with a requisite being that you made a return OF investment. The reason it is taxed at a lower rate than regular income is due to time lags in valuations and how it (taxing it low) incentives long term investment in either financial or tangible assets.
 
Rev, you are my homie and all, but you did just gaff the meaning of a capital gains tax.

LTCG taxes return on investment, with a requisite being that you made a return OF investment. The reason it is taxed at a lower rate than regular income is due to time lags in valuations and how it (taxing it low) incentives long term investment in either financial or tangible assets.



Nah I got it, I just don't spend too much time on folks who spend thier existence here insulting me. yeah it reads completley wrong, but I had no desire to fix it.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Remember folks, keep it within the rules before we have to start handing out infractions/thread bans
 
Back
Top Bottom