• 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!

What are your feelings on the Buffet Rule?

Your opinion of the Buffet Rule

  • It will hurt job creators

    Votes: 11 29.7%

  • It will raise revenue and help the economy

    Votes: 19 51.4%

  • It will promote laziness

    Votes: 7 18.9%

  • It is the definition of socialism

    Votes: 6 16.2%

  • It will help close the gap between the middle class and rich

    Votes: 16 43.2%

  • It punishes the upper tier of social darwinism

    Votes: 5 13.5%
  • Total voters
    37
TurtleDude said:
And I asked you to not feign ignorance and pretend that you haven't seen dozens of posts proving my point.
Click to expand...

You're such a victim of societies ills and woes:2bigcry:
 
winston53660 said:
And counselor your evidence is?
Click to expand...

TD is right to call foul on you and haymarket. CBO data has been listed time and time again on this site, as it was listed to me years ago by Solidus, and countless times by various individuals.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/Average_rates_3.pdf

Total Average Federal Tax Rate
Starting with the lowest income quintile to the highest quintile, then going beyond that to the top 10%, top 5%, and top % income earners, every single step UP the income scale, sees an average INCREASE in federal tax rate.

Clearly the higher quintile pays more in average federal income tax, and in terms of rate. The top 10%. The top 5%. The top 1%.

You want to also see the CBO data that shows how much of the overall tax BURDEN those higher incomes carry compared to all the lower incomes? It's staggering, but I'm sure you have seen that today too, right?

Now, do you accept this, or not? If so, what is your position now?

Only high profile thing they should change is the hedge fund salary loophole using cap gains rates in lieu of ordinary income rates. That's not anti-rich, that's IMO, pay your share. There may be issues I don't know about with it, but it's the one thing that irks me when I hear it beacuse my ****ing 3x% rate, higher when you add in all other taxation, is staggering and I don't make a fraction of what they make...
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
That makes no sense. A person of average intelligence should be able to identify where their own interests lie and who shares those interests.
Click to expand...

So you think the average person is selfish? You do realize the contradictory implications of what you just stated right?
 
Mach said:
TD is right to call foul on you and haymarket. CBO data has been listed time and time again on this site, as it was listed to me years ago by Solidus, and countless times by various individuals.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/Average_rates_3.pdf

Total Average Federal Tax Rate
Starting with the lowest income quintile to the highest quintile, then going beyond that to the top 10%, top 5%, and top % income earners, every single step UP the income scale, sees an average INCREASE in federal tax rate.

Clearly the higher quintile pays more in average federal income tax, and in terms of rate. The top 10%. The top 5%. The top 1%.

You want to also see the CBO data that shows how much of the overall tax BURDEN those higher incomes carry compared to all the lower incomes? It's staggering, but I'm sure you have seen that today too, right?

Now, do you accept this, or not? If so, what is your position now?

Only high profile thing they should change is the hedge fund salary loophole using cap gains rates in lieu of ordinary income rates. That's not anti-rich, that's IMO, pay your share. There may be issues I don't know about with it, but it's the one thing that irks me when I hear it beacuse my ****ing 3x% rate, higher when you add in all other taxation, is staggering and I don't make a fraction of what they make...
Click to expand...

What about toal taxe?
 
Mach said:
TD is right to call foul on you and haymarket. CBO data has been listed time and time again on this site, as it was listed to me years ago by Solidus, and countless times by various individuals.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/Average_rates_3.pdf

Total Average Federal Tax Rate
Starting with the lowest income quintile to the highest quintile, then going beyond that to the top 10%, top 5%, and top % income earners, every single step UP the income scale, sees an average INCREASE in federal tax rate.

Clearly the higher quintile pays more in average federal income tax, and in terms of rate. The top 10%. The top 5%. The top 1%.

You want to also see the CBO data that shows how much of the overall tax BURDEN those higher incomes carry compared to all the lower incomes? It's staggering, but I'm sure you have seen that today too, right?

Now, do you accept this, or not? If so, what is your position now?

Only high profile thing they should change is the hedge fund salary loophole using cap gains rates in lieu of ordinary income rates. That's not anti-rich, that's IMO, pay your share. There may be issues I don't know about with it, but it's the one thing that irks me when I hear it beacuse my ****ing 3x% rate, higher when you add in all other taxation, is staggering and I don't make a fraction of what they make...
Click to expand...

So what?

Turtle makes statements and fails to back it up. There are people here who simply do not know how to use evidence and they make statements based on other peoples previously cited evidence that dealt with some other facet of the question.

They know they have seen some evidence but they make other assertions that are not supported by that evidence and even then it is impossible to give it an honest hearing because they FAIL to present it.

It is akin to going in to a college debate and telling the judge that you presented that evidence last month at a different tournament - but the other team was there and the judge was there so everybody should just accept that it was there and is correct and proves your current point.
 
Last edited:
Mach said:
So you think the average person is selfish? You do realize the contradictory implications of what you just stated right?
Click to expand...

Do you know the difference between identifying your own interests and being selfish?
 
Mach said:
TD is right to call foul on you and haymarket. CBO data has been listed time and time again on this site, as it was listed to me years ago by Solidus, and countless times by various individuals.

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/Average_rates_3.pdf

Total Average Federal Tax Rate
Starting with the lowest income quintile to the highest quintile, then going beyond that to the top 10%, top 5%, and top % income earners, every single step UP the income scale, sees an average INCREASE in federal tax rate.

Clearly the higher quintile pays more in average federal income tax, and in terms of rate. The top 10%. The top 5%. The top 1%.

You want to also see the CBO data that shows how much of the overall tax BURDEN those higher incomes carry compared to all the lower incomes? It's staggering, but I'm sure you have seen that today too, right?

Now, do you accept this, or not? If so, what is your position now?

Only high profile thing they should change is the hedge fund salary loophole using cap gains rates in lieu of ordinary income rates. That's not anti-rich, that's IMO, pay your share. There may be issues I don't know about with it, but it's the one thing that irks me when I hear it beacuse my ****ing 3x% rate, higher when you add in all other taxation, is staggering and I don't make a fraction of what they make...
Click to expand...


several of the libs have an annoying habit of trying to derail or divert posts or threads that are uncomfortable to Obama slurping by demanding proof that has been pounded into their heads dozens of times. Its a rather weak ploy but annoying
 
haymarket said:
So what?

Turtle makes statements and fails to back it up. There are people here who simply do not know how to use evidence and they make statements based on other peoples previously cited evidence that dealt with some other facet of the question.

They know they have seen some evidence but they make other assertions that are not supported by that evidence and even then it is impossible to give it an honest hearing because they FAIL to present it.

It is akin to going in to a college debate and telling the judge that you presented that evidence last month at a different tournament - but the other team was there and the judge was there so everybody should just accept that it was there and is correct and proves your current point.
Click to expand...



I assume that if you are on a thread and responding to posts that you have read other posts that have provided the information you constantly ask for

this is not a college debate and your attempts to divert threads based on rules that have no application to this board are pathetic. IF you responded to a thread a week ago that contained edifying information you cannot continue to feign ignorance merely in an attempt to annoy people whose points you find uncomfortable
 
Chiefgator said:
Does the buffet rule cover total tax or federal income tax?
Click to expand...

It can only apply to federal income tax but its premise is based on a dishonest comparison using FICA and other non-progressive taxes
 
winston53660 said:
And counselor your evidence is?
Click to expand...

Anybody that supports tax rates more progressive than the 1920s is a Marxist, according to the extreme far right!

That's all the evidence they think they need, or can produce.
 
haymarket said:
That makes no sense. A person of average intelligence should be able to identify where their own interests lie and who shares those interests.
Click to expand...
The vast majority of people are idiots, even people who are above average. That goes for both liberals and conservatives. Even when people are right, it's usually for the wrong reasons.
 
Catawba said:
Anybody that supports tax rates more progressive than the 1920s is a Marxist, according to the extreme far right!

That's all the evidence they think they need, or can produce.
Click to expand...

What a change-from silly soak the rich envy based arguments to straw men.
 
winston53660 said:
What about toal taxe?
Click to expand...

No no winston. You asked for evidence that everyone has access to, and I provided it out of courtesy. Admit you're wrong, and TD is correct on the federal income tax.
You wanted evidence.
You received it.
You should now do the right thing and admit the conclusion, and then discuss your "new line of attack". (That we know will be chump change compared to federal income tax anyway!)

First things first right?
 
haymarket said:
So what?
Click to expand...
So when Wnston asks for evidence that refutes his position, and he receives it, your comment is "so what?" I think anyone reading can see the absurdity of your position.

Turtle makes statements and fails to back it up. There are people here who simply do not know how to use evidence and they make statements based on other peoples previously cited evidence that dealt with some other facet of the question.
Click to expand...

Interesting, some people don't know how to use evidence you claim.
But then you appear (above), to think PROVIDING such evidence deserves a "So what?"

Your contradictions defeat your own position.

Furthermore, ignoring your contradictory remarks, Turtle clearly wrote in response to you and winston badgering him, that the information has been posted countless times to both of you, and on these forums, and is trivially available from commonly used government links. In this case, I've directed you AGAIN to CBO, that shows the wealthy in every bracket they listed, paying the most in federal taxes. TD is correct here too, it's readily available, and has been posted on this forum, directed specifically to you before, and should really need no repost. I mean, assuming you have a memory and have processed what you have read, and incorporated the true parts into your thinking.
 
Last edited:
My feelings are it's not a huge game changer but it's something that needs to be done. Tax policy has changed drastically since the 80's under the guise of economic policy.
 
haymarket said:
Do you know the difference between identifying your own interests and being selfish?
Click to expand...
Sure, follow-through.

But if you believe differently, please tell me and we'll either arrive at the same conclusion, or one will be in the wrong.

As an aside, you do know how I relish seeing you admit you support selfishness, the chief tennant of your own personal anti-christ, so loathed by you that it's even in your signature (Rand).
 
Chiefgator said:
:) that was my point. :cool:
Click to expand...

The Obamatards pretend that the entire tax system is not progressive enough so they want to make the one federal tax that was "intended" to be progressive even more progressive to make up for all the other taxes that were not intended to be progressive. Its idiotic. Its like saying the rich don't pay enough extra in gasoline tax so we will tack on a 10K a year surcharge on their FICA taxes to make up for them paying the same amount per gallon as other people in gasoline taxes
 
TurtleDude said:
The Obamatards pretend that the entire tax system is not progressive enough so they want to make the one federal tax that was "intended" to be progressive even more progressive to make up for all the other taxes that were not intended to be progressive. Its idiotic. Its like saying the rich don't pay enough extra in gasoline tax so we will tack on a 10K a year surcharge on their FICA taxes to make up for them paying the same amount per gallon as other people in gasoline taxes
Click to expand...

I just want the discussion to be honest. Income Tax to Income tax. Effective tax rate to Effective tax rate. Tax bracket to Tax bracket.
I am a science guy. You have to compare like quantities. Comparing Total tax to Income Tax is the same as comparing Pascals to Newtons.
 
Chiefgator said:
I just want the discussion to be honest. Income Tax to Income tax. Effective tax rate to Effective tax rate. Tax bracket to Tax bracket.
I am a science guy. You have to compare like quantities. Comparing Total tax to Income Tax is the same as comparing Pascals to Newtons.
Click to expand...

true, but you have posters whining that their total tax bill takes a higher percentage of their income than Mitt's tax on his investment income

1) it doesn't matter since he pays more federal taxes in a year then they pay in their lives

2) and you are right its oozing dishonesty
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom