• 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!

Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Owes Taxes Going Back To 2002 [edited]

VanceMack said:
Dood...this just isnt even a question. If a preacher or politician spoke out against homosexuality and/or pornography, all the while engaging in homosexual acts and usiong pornography you are the FIRST person on this board that would trip over themselves to call him out, regardless of the legality of the acts. You know it, so do I. defending his hypocrisy is goofy at best, self serving and dishonest at least.
Click to expand...

That is a poor comparison at best.

The preacher argues that homosexuality is bad while engaging in it.

The Buffet argues that tax loopholes can be taken advantage of while they exist but that they shouldn't exist, and then he takes advantage of them while they exist.
 
1Perry said:
There are no loopholes concerning his arguement. His arguement is simple. Capital Gains are taxed at a lower rate than regular income and that should be changed. That is not a loophole, it's policy. It's the way it's designed.
Click to expand...

Provide me a link with Buffet's own words that shows that this is his argument.
 
VanceMack said:
Dood...this just isnt even a question. If a preacher or politician spoke out against homosexuality and/or pornography, all the while engaging in homosexual acts and usiong pornography you are the FIRST person on this board that would trip over themselves to call him out, regardless of the legality of the acts. You know it, so do I. defending his hypocrisy is goofy at best, self serving and dishonest at least.
Click to expand...
If someone who was anti-tax got caught doing the same thing the same people would have torches and pitchforks ready, but because they have a wealthy person saying "take more of mine" and they can hold it up as an example of "being correct" about raising taxes. No way they'll let that dirtbag go down alone, he's too good of a prop.
 
Last edited:
CriticalThought said:
That is a poor comparison at best.
Click to expand...
No it's spot on, he is talking about someone wanting to take something away from people while using it himself. That's actually a perfect comparison.

The preacher argues that homosexuality is bad while engaging in it.
Click to expand...
And what do you think Buffett is doing? Playing Hopscotch?

The Buffet argues that tax loopholes can be taken advantage of while they exist but that they shouldn't exist, and then he takes advantage of them while they exist.
Click to expand...
And if he's that butthurt about it he doesn't have to use the loopholes. See how that works?
 
CriticalThought said:
That is a poor comparison at best.

The preacher argues that homosexuality is bad while engaging in it.

The Buffet argues that tax loopholes can be taken advantage of while they exist but that they shouldn't exist, and then he takes advantage of them while they exist.
Click to expand...
Buffet argues it is bad while engaging in it. Awesome. You simply CANT be honest about any of this. Thats some dogged and determined situational ethics you got there my friend.
 
CriticalThought said:
Provide me a link with Buffet's own words that shows that this is his argument.
Click to expand...

What else could he be arguing? He has almost no ordinary income so that can't be the problem. Ordinary income is taxed on a progressive basis so which tax is too low for Buffett?
 
CriticalThought said:
Provide me a link with Buffet's own words that shows that this is his argument.
Click to expand...

Buffett: "Well, the precise program which will -- I don't know what their program will be. My program would be on the very high incomes that are taxed very low. Not just high incomes. Somebody making $50 million a year playing baseball, his taxes won't change. Make $50 million a year appearing on television, his income won't change. But, if they make a lot of money and they pay a very low tax rate, like me, it would be changed by a minimum tax that would only bring them up to what the other people pay."


Warren is good at being careful with what he says. So he says that with his ideas those making $50 million a year playing baseball would not pay any more in taxes. Is this Obama's plan? No.

Now people like him would see higher taxes under his ideas. He doesn't make much more than $50 million. What is the difference? Capital Gains vs regular income.

Warren Buffett Does Not Endorse "Buffett Rule" | RealClearPolitics
 
1Perry said:
Buffett: "Well, the precise program which will -- I don't know what their program will be. My program would be on the very high incomes that are taxed very low. Not just high incomes. Somebody making $50 million a year playing baseball, his taxes won't change. Make $50 million a year appearing on television, his income won't change. But, if they make a lot of money and they pay a very low tax rate, like me, it would be changed by a minimum tax that would only bring them up to what the other people pay."


Warren is good at being careful with what he says. So he says that with his ideas those making $50 million a year playing baseball would not pay any more in taxes. Is this Obama's plan? No.

Now people like him would see higher taxes under his ideas. He doesn't make much more than $50 million. What is the difference? Capital Gains vs regular income.

Warren Buffett Does Not Endorse "Buffett Rule" | RealClearPolitics
Click to expand...

That is a highly misleading headline, since he states he does support the Buffett rule in the interview. What he does not support is another proposal altogether.

Edit: and you get major credit for actually discussing what Buffett is talking about instead of being afraid to like most of those in this thread.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
That is a highly misleading headline, since he states he does support the Buffett rule in the interview. What he does not support is another proposal altogether.
Click to expand...

I can't see that.

CNBC: "Are you happy that the way it is being described. Is the program that the White House has presented a million dollars and over your program? "

Buffett: "Well, the precise program which will -- I don't know what their program will be.

It would be hard to say that he supported something that he states he doesn't even know what's in it.

Edit: and you get major credit for actually discussing what Buffett is talking about instead of being afraid to like most of those in this thread.
Click to expand...

It's easy to do when you agree with him. :mrgreen:

I made the arguement that capital gains should be taxed the same as regular income before Buffett did (publicly at least).
 
Buffett is playing by the rules as they are now established, while advocating they be changed in the interest of fairness

this is not unlike a(n American League) baseball manager who opposes the designated hitter batting for the pitcher but who still uses a designated hitter. if he batted his pitcher it would disadvantage his team. but to be sure, if the rule were changed, he would delight in putting his pitcher in the batting order instead

Judge Learned Hand has a classic quote about paying one's taxes. a quote which is germane to this discussion:
Any one may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes.
Click to expand...

this is true from someone loaded, like Buffett, and someone who is not, such as me
i personally would want the mortgage deduction eliminated from the tax rules. doesn't mean i would refuse to take that deduction while the rule still allows it. my playing by the rules does not make me a hypocrite. and neither is Buffett. he is a wise citizen who is offering sage tax policy advice to his nation
 
1Perry said:
I can't see that.

CNBC: "Are you happy that the way it is being described. Is the program that the White House has presented a million dollars and over your program? "

Buffett: "Well, the precise program which will -- I don't know what their program will be.

It would be hard to say that he supported something that he states he doesn't even know what's in it.



It's easy to do when you agree with him. :mrgreen:

I made the arguement that capital gains should be taxed the same as regular income before Buffett did (publicly at least).
Click to expand...

The program with the Buffett rule is similar to an AMT. It only effects those with a low effective tax rate which he does support.
 
Redress said:
The program with the Buffett rule is similar to an AMT. It only effects those with a low effective tax rate which he does support.
Click to expand...

He's speaking about those whose main income comes from capital gains. I haven't seen his speak specifically how making them more equal would be accomplished. He alludes to something like a AMT but I have no idea how that would pertain to C.G.'s. Make them the same and his complaint goes away.
 
Last edited:
1Perry said:
He's speaking about those whose main income comes from capital gains. I haven't seen his speak specifically how making them more equal would be accomplished. He alludes to something like a AMT but I have no idea how that would pertain to C.G.'s. Make them the same and his complaint goes away.
Click to expand...

The White House proposal is an AMT.
 
conservativeguy said:
What else could he be arguing? He has almost no ordinary income so that can't be the problem. Ordinary income is taxed on a progressive basis so which tax is too low for Buffett?
Click to expand...

He's an Obama slurper pure and simple. He wants democrats to win national elections and figures kissing Obama's ass and supporting Obama's class warfare will help get his party elected
 
TurtleDude said:
He's an Obama slurper pure and simple. He wants democrats to win national elections and figures kissing Obama's ass and supporting Obama's class warfare will help get his party elected
Click to expand...

It's funny how you are just completely unable to fathom how a wealthy person could think like Buffet does.
 
Deuce said:
It's funny how you are just completely unable to fathom how a wealthy person could think like Buffet does.
Click to expand...

I don't think you have the capacity to understand what I can fathom or not. I certainly understand that people that are incredibly wealthy want POWER and they think a bigger government will get them more power if they are insiders connected to the president

If Buffett really believes his bs he could

1) pay himself more salary and less unearned income so his taxes go up

2) give tons of his money to the government
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't think you have the capacity to understand what I can fathom or not. I certainly understand that people that are incredibly wealthy want POWER and they think a bigger government will get them more power if they are insiders connected to the president

If Buffett really believes his bs he could

1) pay himself more salary and less unearned income so his taxes go up

2) give tons of his money to the government
Click to expand...

deuce is correct

this basis for a change in tax policy does appear to be beyond you
 
justabubba said:
deuce is correct

this basis for a change in tax policy does appear to be beyond you
Click to expand...

another person whose history proves he is in no position to pretend to proffer what I understand

I know that the class warfare envious types want to cyber fellate Buffett for his faux altruism. But the fact remains the guy wants to buy the love of the slow witted, the ne'er do wells and the failures in order to gain more power.

Buffett wants to harm the "merely rich" in order to gain more power for the uber wealthy

Buffett pays the highest tax rates possible on LIKE income-a fact that his toadies appear not to have the intellect to understand or the honesty to admit
 
Redress said:
The program with the Buffett rule is similar to an AMT. It only effects those with a low effective tax rate which he does support.
Click to expand...

So if a man creates a great company and decides to sell it late in life for a ton of money, his capital gains taxes should skyrocket based on only one factor, he built a really valuable company. Ok, I get it ....... we should penalize the smart folks that create valuable companies. Gee, that should work out well for us. Oh yeah, and once that man dies he should surrender 55% (death tax) of what he kept from the sale, after paying the cap gain taxes that were probably 30-40%. I used 30 to 40% since that level the taxation would be sufficiently higher than what most workers pay. I am assuming the new "Buffett Tax" has to be higher than the rate paid by ordinary people......right?

What a wonderful policy....

Man sells company for $100m

Man pays cap gains tax on sale, $100m * 65% = $65m net proceeds

Man dies and estate pays estate tax, $65 * 45% = $29.25m transferred to family

Uncle Sam screws man and his family out of $70.750m .......... 70.75% redistribution of private property to welfare beggars and socialists

------------------

Wow, that is one brilliant strategy to motivate folks to risk their capital to build valuable companies that create jobs. If the way to increase the number of job creators is to raise the cost of success, why not go all-in and simply say "once you build a valuable company, it will become an asset of the State". I am telling you this, you liberals sure have a firm grasp on what it takes to improve the economy.
 
conservativeguy said:
So if a man creates a great company and decides to sell it late in life for a ton of money, his capital gains taxes should skyrocket based on only one factor, he built a really valuable company. Ok, I get it ....... we should penalize the smart folks that create valuable companies. Gee, that should work out well for us. Oh yeah, and once that man dies he should surrender 55% (death tax) of what he kept from the sale, after paying the cap gain taxes that were probably 30-40%. I used 30 to 40% since that level the taxation would be sufficiently higher than what most workers pay. I am assuming the new "Buffett Tax" has to be higher than the rate paid by ordinary people......right?

What a wonderful policy....

Man sells company for $100m

Man pays cap gains tax on sale, $100m * 65% = $65m net proceeds

Man dies and estate pays estate tax, $65 * 45% = $29.25m transferred to family

Uncle Sam screws man and his family out of $70.750m .......... 70.75% redistribution of private property to welfare beggars and socialists

------------------

Wow, that is one brilliant strategy to motivate folks to risk their capital to build valuable companies that create jobs. If the way to increase the number of job creators is to raise the cost of success, why not go all-in and simply say "once you build a valuable company, it will become an asset of the State". I am telling you this, you liberals sure have a firm grasp on what it takes to improve the economy.
Click to expand...

the parasite mentality behind the progressive income tax and the death tax is one that we need to get rid of in order to allow this country to become greater and more prosperous than it is now
 
TurtleDude said:
the parasite mentality behind the progressive income tax and the death tax is one that we need to get rid of in order to allow this country to become greater and more prosperous than it is now
Click to expand...

let me explain this for you
the premise is that those who actually work, and expend effort for a living should not then be expected to pay a higher tax rate on that income than the person who earns their money without the expenditure of effort
 
justabubba said:
let me explain this for you
the premise is that those who actually work, and expend effort for a living should not then be expected to pay a higher tax rate on that income than the person who earns their money without the expenditure of effort
Click to expand...

Most of them do not. and like many socialists you ignore the fact that a guy who makes a billion a year and pays only capital gains rates still pays millions more taxes than say 100 Million americans combined who pay ZERO income tax.

and there are sound reasons why Long term capital gains are taxed much lower than what the uber rich pay on salaries

Most people don't come close to paying an effective rate of 15% on salaries

and why do those who often have the most responsibility and work the hardest in the most complex professions pay a much higher rate on their salary income than those who are in mindless jobs that require no risk, and no long years of training?

your silly argument fails. Doctors and airline pilots and those running major corporations pay much higher rates than burger flippers, union bots and others who have much less taxing occupations
 
TurtleDude said:
Most of them do not. and like many socialists you ignore the fact that a guy who makes a billion a year and pays only capital gains rates still pays millions more taxes than say 100 Million americans combined who pay ZERO income tax.

and there are sound reasons why Long term capital gains are taxed much lower than what the uber rich pay on salaries

Most people don't come close to paying an effective rate of 15% on salaries

and why do those who often have the most responsibility and work the hardest in the most complex professions pay a much higher rate on their salary income than those who are in mindless jobs that require no risk, and no long years of training?

your silly argument fails. Doctors and airline pilots and those running major corporations pay much higher rates than burger flippers, union bots and others who have much less taxing occupations
Click to expand...

you have again proven deuce's point
 
justabubba said:
you have again proven deuce's point
Click to expand...

You gain nothing by me-tooing someone else's claims that have no evidence or proof

I don't think you have the ability to explain it based on your past posts but go ahead

I need a good laugh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom