• 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’

Republic Now! said:
Who was responsible for the balanced budget in your mind?
Click to expand...

Sorry, don't really care to get off topic with you. Taxes were raised and we ended up with a surplus. I'm not claiming that the tax cuts were 100% the reason, but if you're trying to argue that tax increase can not lead to a balanced budget, as TD was, then that person is completely wrong. That's all I am trying to show.
 
lizzie said:
It's pretty self-explanatory. Buffet whines about how the rich should pay more, and he can voluntarily give the feds as much extra money as he wants to, but he doesn't really want to do that. If he really wanted to, he would. He just likes to play the benevolent nobleman without having to do anything concrete.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but even if the tax rate were jumped to 50 percent overnight, his billions have already been earned and are safe. Then, we'd have an aristroratic-like society with the pre-rich people getting grandfathered and the soon-to-be rich people getting slaughtered.

Buffett knows this. He doesn't want any more richies in the club.
 
roughdraft274 said:
It's his opinion that we should raise taxes on the wealthy, not that the wealthy should voluntarily give up more money. The conservatives on this thread are purposefully misunderstanding his point. Him paying more wouldn't do ****. Every wealthy person paying more would.
Click to expand...

It's a waste of time my friend. When something challenges your world view...like the richest man in the world telling you your pro-rich tax platform is ridiculous....people get defensive as ****.
 
ARealConservative said:
that is the only it would make sense.

it goes the same way when you buy goods. you buy in volume, you get a better rate per item.

the idiots want to turn this axiom on its head, and those that deal in volume have to pay a higher rate.
Click to expand...

Except that paying taxes in like buying goods.

What's like buying goods is buying goods. So why do Republicans oppose using the government's market power to get volume pricing for Medicare prescriptions?
 
Deuce said:
Yes, people should not express opinions I disagree with. That's the America I want.
Click to expand...

Kinda like Christie expressing his opinion. Yes?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Buffet's secratary pays the same rate as he does on capitol gains. :prof
Click to expand...

Right, and if she wants to buy a private jet she will pay the same price that Buffett would pay.

Oh wait ... she probably can't afford to buy a private jet ... or to invest much in equities.
 
roughdraft274 said:
It's his opinion that we should raise taxes on the wealthy, not that the wealthy should voluntarily give up more money. The conservatives on this thread are purposefully misunderstanding his point. Him paying more wouldn't do ****. Every wealthy person paying more would.
Click to expand...

The point is, that if Buffet thinks the rich should pay more taxes, he should lead the way by taking fewer deductions thereby raising his tax bill. As far as I know, he's still a billion dollars in the rears, which makes him a gigantic hypocrite.

I would love to see a show of hands among all the Libbos who pay more in taxes than they have to. I think the hypocrisy in those circles would be overflowing.
 
AdamT said:
Right, and if she wants to buy a private jet she will pay the same price that Buffett would pay.

Oh wait ... she probably can't afford to buy a private jet ... or to invest much in equities.
Click to expand...

She can afford two homes, on opposite ends of the country. Let's stop acting as if she's working for minimum wage.
 
AdamT said:
Except that paying taxes in like buying goods.
Click to expand...

Technically, taxes is paying for services, and since the amount of services you use has no direct correlation with income, the amount you pay for the services would have no correlation with income.
 
iliveonramen said:
It's a waste of time my friend. When something challenges your world view...like the richest man in the world telling you your pro-rich tax platform is ridiculous....people get defensive as ****.
Click to expand...

But you fail to see the obvious. If the tax rate were jumped on FUTURE earnings, that would make Buffett more wealthy and powerful than ever before, as it would for all billionaires. They're money is secure. It's already been taxed. And it'll be infinitely more difficult for the next Buffett to get there because of it.

It's like if you build a house really cheap, then the area builds up around it at a much higher price per square foot. You have a $500 mortgage payment, but your neighbor's is $2,500. Are you going to sell your house based on what you paid? No, you're going to sell it based on what your neighbor paid.

Buffett made his. He's free and clear. It's easy for him to play class warfare after the fact; same for Hollywood, btw.
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
Right, and if she wants to buy a private jet she will pay the same price that Buffett would pay.

Oh wait ... she probably can't afford to buy a private jet ... or to invest much in equities.
Click to expand...

Jealous much?
 
But you fail to see the obvious. If the tax rate were jumped on FUTURE earnings, that would make Buffett more wealthy and powerful than ever before, as it would for all billionaires. They're money is secure. It's already been taxed. And it'll be infinitely more difficult for the next Buffett to get there because of it.
Click to expand...

He's been taxed at higher Pre-Bush rates for the majority of his life...as have most billionaires. Buffet didn't become a billionaire because of Bush tax breaks. Most billionaires have been billionaires well before the Bush tax breaks. If anything, a hypothetical person that started working in 2000 has had the lowest tax rates since The Gilded age.
 
in return for Buffets help in The Obama's class war, The Obama blocked the Keystone pipeline to keep the oil transported to texas on Buffets train.
 
ARealConservative said:
Technically, taxes is paying for services, and since the amount of services you use has no direct correlation with income, the amount you pay for the services would have no correlation with income.
Click to expand...
Not true, those who are making high salaries are in general using much greater amounts of govt services, namely they are using much greater amounts of financial/banking, which uses treasury/banking/regulatory services. If they are using trading markets, the same applies, along with capitalizing upon whatever industries they are investing in which rely on multiples of govt services to exist. It goes on and on and it is very shortsighted to think that as income increases, there is no correlation.
 
Jeezy said:
Christie: Buffett Should



:applaud :applaud:applaud:applaud​
Click to expand...

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.
 
apdst said:
The point is, that if Buffet thinks the rich should pay more taxes, he should lead the way by taking fewer deductions thereby raising his tax bill. As far as I know, he's still a billion dollars in the rears, which makes him a gigantic hypocrite.

I would love to see a show of hands among all the Libbos who pay more in taxes than they have to. I think the hypocrisy in those circles would be overflowing.
Click to expand...

He's playing by the rules, but he thinks the rules should be changed. There's nothing hypocritical about it. You just think it is because it goes against your "oh, liberals are just poor people that hate rich people" nonsense.

He's not arguing that the country would be better if one wealthy person paid more in taxes. He's arguing it would be better off with slightly higher rates on all wealthy people.

What you're arguing is like saying Bush is a hypocrite for not fighting in the Iraq war. If he thinks it's a good thing, why didn't he do it? Huh?

Stupid point right? So is yours...
 
Last edited:
roughdraft274 said:
He's playing by the rules, but he thinks the rules should be changed. There's nothing hypocritical about it. You just think it is because it goes against your "oh, liberals are just poor people that hate rich people."

He's not arguing that the country would be better if one wealthy person paid more in taxes. He's arguing it would be better off with slightly higher rates on all wealthy people.

What you're arguing is like saying Bush is a hypocrite for not fighting in the Iraq war. If he thinks it's a good thing, why didn't he do it? Huh?

Stupid point right? So is yours...
Click to expand...

Well said - you hit the nail firmly on its head.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Buffet's secratary pays the same rate as he does on capitol gains. :prof
Click to expand...

And everyone in the country pays the exact same percentage in income tax then. I paid 35% on everything I earned over 250,000 dollars. It equaled out to 0, but I did pay the correct percentage...

Thanks for arguing that our progressive income tax structure is completely fair...
 
Jeezy said:
Are we defining the revocation of exemptions as a backdoor tax increase?
Click to expand...

I don't see why not. My comment stems from the relationship between savings rates among different income demographics, and how that impacts growth given different effective rate differentials.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom