Page 7 of 36 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 358

Thread: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

  1. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    The Buffet Rule is an f'ing Joke !!

    It would amount to less than 1/2 of one-percent of the increased debt over the next 10 years.
    The Buffett tax would raise $47 billion from 2012 through 2022 if imposed on taxpayers earning more than $1 million, or $500,000 for married individuals filing separately, according to a March memo from the Joint Committee on Taxation, a nonpartisan body that estimates tax changes for lawmakers.

    Critics note that the additional revenue would do little to tame the $1.2 trillion federal budget deficit that is forecast for this fiscal year, which ends on Sept. 30. Proponents say every little bit helps and the bigger issue is fairness.

    Q+A: The 'Buffett Rule,' a minimum tax on the rich | Reuters
    $47 billion over 10 years. That's if it did not stifle investment in the US. We are looking at $10 trillion in increasing debt over those 10 years.

    The Buffet Rule is liberal stupidity. Liberal nonsense to get all the little libbies panties-in-a-wad. It amounts to less than 0.5% of the projected increase in the debt over the next 10 years. Just more class warfare ignorance for the liberals.

    This is pathetic.

  2. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    07-11-14 @ 06:21 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,025

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    IMO we should go to a VAT. It's a proven system that eliminates most of the problems in our tax code.
    I might be persuaded on a VAT. But, you would have to educate me on exactly how you plan to deal with the price corruption that could easily take place on the production and distribution side of the Value (or Magnitude) of the VAT itself, before I'd be willing to vote for it. I make more money than I know what to do with. So, my interest is in fairness. I can (and so should you) clearly see the stage being set for inflation. But, the input of inflation in the overall economy, could be blunted be a higher overall "per capita wealth index as a percentage of overall GDP" (if I may be so bold as to create yet another economic indicator). Take me to skool on how you appropriately deal with the "value added" variable and you might have the beginnings of a deal.

  3. #63
    Professor
    Tettsuo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 07:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,321

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Here's a simple question... if Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush Jr all increased the budget deficit following the Conservative ideals of cutting taxes, cutting the social net and regulations, why do Conservatives believe that NOW if they cut taxes, cut the social net and regulations it'll magically balance the budget?
    A man without fear is a fool, a man that succumbs to his fear is a coward and a brave man acknowledges fear yet presses on.
    http://soulinblackandwhite.blogspot.com/

  4. #64
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    07-11-14 @ 06:21 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,025

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Tettsuo View Post
    Here's a simple question... if Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush Jr all increased the budget deficit following the Conservative ideals of cutting taxes, cutting the social net and regulations, why do Conservatives believe that NOW if they cut taxes, cut the social net and regulations it'll magically balance the budget?
    They don't really believe that, Tettsuo. But, let's be clear about whom we give the honor to for being setting our nation's fiscal policies. All Money Bills originate in the House. It is the Congress (typically) who is charged with that responsibility by way of Constitutional norms. When you look at all the critical money bills that have hurt this country, you will find that both Republicans and Democrats have ink on their hands. You will also find that some of the best legislation, also had bi-partisan support in both the House and the Senate, making the job of the President, so much easier. I think President Obama, said it best when he recently stated that not even Ronald Reagan, would make it through the GOP selection process (speaking to the extreme views that now dominate almost all Conservative dialog about which way to take the country).

  5. #65
    Professor
    Tettsuo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 07:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,321

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by PW4000 View Post
    They don't really believe that, Tettsuo. But, let's be clear about whom we give the honor to for being setting our nation's fiscal policies. All Money Bills originate in the House. It is the Congress (typically) who is charged with that responsibility by way of Constitutional norms. When you look at all the critical money bills that have hurt this country, you will find that both Republicans and Democrats have ink on their hands. You will also find that some of the best legislation, also had bi-partisan support in both the House and the Senate, making the job of the President, so much easier. I think President Obama, said it best when he recently stated that not even Ronald Reagan, would make it through the GOP selection process (speaking to the extreme views that now dominate almost all Conservative dialog about which way to take the country).
    My point is very simple. They want to blame Obama for everything, yet when we look and see which side has done the most harm to the budget (if going only by presidents) it's Conservatives/Republicans touting the exact same ideas. So either it's not the president's fault or it is. You can't have it both ways.
    A man without fear is a fool, a man that succumbs to his fear is a coward and a brave man acknowledges fear yet presses on.
    http://soulinblackandwhite.blogspot.com/

  6. #66
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by PW4000 View Post
    I might be persuaded on a VAT. But, you would have to educate me on exactly how you plan to deal with the price corruption that could easily take place on the production and distribution side of the Value (or Magnitude) of the VAT itself, before I'd be willing to vote for it. I make more money than I know what to do with. So, my interest is in fairness. I can (and so should you) clearly see the stage being set for inflation. But, the input of inflation in the overall economy, could be blunted be a higher overall "per capita wealth index as a percentage of overall GDP" (if I may be so bold as to create yet another economic indicator). Take me to skool on how you appropriately deal with the "value added" variable and you might have the beginnings of a deal.
    I'm not sure what potential you see for corruption. I think the VAT is one of the hardest taxes to fudge because it's applied at each stage of production, from raw product to retail sale. If you're not familiar with it, here's an example of how it works:

    Farmer sells his wheat to distributor, who pays a tax on the sale. Distributor sells the wheat to miller, who pays a tax on the sale. But the distributor gets a credit for the tax he already paid. The miller sells his flower to the baker who pays a tax on the sale, while the miller gets a credit for the tax he already paid and for the tax the distributor paid. The baker sells his bread to the grocer, who pays a tax on the sale, while the baker gets a credit for the tax he already paid, the tax the miller paid, and the tax the distributor paid. The grocer sells the bread to the consumer, who pays a tax on the sale, while the grocer gets a credit for all the previously paid taxes.

    So in the end, the consumer ends up paying the tax, but unlike a traditional sales tax, if the final seller manages to avoid the tax (say he engages in barter), most of the tax will already have been collected. The only tax that's actually avoided is the tax on the grocer's markup.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  7. #67
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    The Buffet Rule is an f'ing Joke !!

    It would amount to less than 1/2 of one-percent of the increased debt over the next 10 years.


    $47 billion over 10 years. That's if it did not stifle investment in the US. We are looking at $10 trillion in increasing debt over those 10 years.

    The Buffet Rule is liberal stupidity. Liberal nonsense to get all the little libbies panties-in-a-wad. It amounts to less than 0.5% of the projected increase in the debt over the next 10 years. Just more class warfare ignorance for the liberals.

    This is pathetic.
    You know what they say: $50 billion here, $50 billion there -- soon you're talking about real money.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  8. #68
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:34 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,888

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    The Buffet Rule is an f'ing Joke !!

    It would amount to less than 1/2 of one-percent of the increased debt over the next 10 years.


    $47 billion over 10 years. That's if it did not stifle investment in the US. We are looking at $10 trillion in increasing debt over those 10 years.

    The Buffet Rule is liberal stupidity. Liberal nonsense to get all the little libbies panties-in-a-wad. It amounts to less than 0.5% of the projected increase in the debt over the next 10 years. Just more class warfare ignorance for the liberals.

    This is pathetic.
    Makes you wonder how much revenue would be raised if we had a minimum tax % for everyone.

  9. #69
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Read more @: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Dear god why!? Its common ****ing sense. When we are at a time when we have deficits that need to be closed and we need to make investments to strengthen our economy why cant a simple thing like this pass!?
    [/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]


    40 billion over ten years is hardly a dent in the deficit. the "buffet rule" (buffet btw is suing the IRS for paying too much taxes), is an emotional class warfare tactic.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  10. #70
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Senate fails to advance Buffett rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    The Buffet Rule is an f'ing Joke !!

    It would amount to less than 1/2 of one-percent of the increased debt over the next 10 years.
    I thought Cons always said "It all adds up". I guess that was only for Social Programs, not taxes.

Page 7 of 36 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •