• 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!

Should the Buffett Rule" be made law?

Should the Buffett Rule" be made law?


  • Total voters
    47
It appears you are wildly uninformed as to what the new proposal is, TD

Why don't you try to explain it and then justify the economics of what is clearly political pandering
 
There is nothing confusing here aside from your cheeseburger reference which is a mystery.

Social Security is a societal program which benefits society. It is NOT an IRA and should not be confused with one by equating benefits. To do that is a fallacy as well as intellectually dishonest since it attempts to ignore the societal aspect of Social Security. Please note the name of the program. It is not Your Individual Retirement Benefit.

In point of fact you get the benefit of living in a society where older people have a decent standard of living and you benefit in that situation as it benefits the entire nation.

Like most dem schemes it benefits their voters while costing people like me money we could better spend on other things or invest better

I don't derive any benefits from that ponzi scheme
 
"Good or Bad for America" is really irrelevant in terms of Taxes until we get a handle on SPENDING.

IF, after we have reduced spending to its Constitutionally mandated limitations we still need Tax Increases to cover our expenses, then I'd be all for it. However, the political types will never even consider that type of reduction in spending because we'd see just how much excess income the US Government would have at the current tax rates.


That's a bad argument. There is no reason to NOT fix this situation. It's just an argument to not eliminate the inequity.



why don't you explain how this works. So what the moron in chief wants to do is to change capital gains and dividend taxes so that the "rich" pay as much as the very top of the middle class. what about the rest of us "rich" who pay more than either. Are we gonna get a reduction

there are reasons way beyond obumble's ability to comprehend why tax rates on LTCG (inflation for example) and dividends (double taxation) are lower than on earned income

he is pandering based on politics and his proposals are not based on rational economic facts

Why don't you try to explain it and then justify the economics of what is clearly political pandering


I did explain it. And they have this new invention, called Google. If you're going to spout off about it, you should know wtf you're talking about. Because, it looks really silly to be shouting about something you clearly are uninformed about.
 
That's a bad argument. There is no reason to NOT fix this situation. It's just an argument to not eliminate the inequity.

What "situation" would that be? If you're talking about the rich "not paying their fair share", I'd make the same suggestion about the poor. The only truly "fair" way to fix the tax system is to go to a flat tax (say 5-7%) of all "new" income; which I would define as income from sources which did not rely on an investment of previously taxed income (this would remove all taxes on capital gains, stock sales, etc...). There would be no deductions allowed for anyone. At 5%, if you make $1000 a year, that's $50 you owe. If you make $100,000 you owe $5,000. If you make $10,000,000 you owe $500,000. Nice, clean, simple, and EVERYONE gets to pay their fair share.
 
Like most dem schemes it benefits their voters while costing people like me money we could better spend on other things or invest better

I don't derive any benefits from that ponzi scheme

What the hell do turtles invest in anyways?

Cleaner lakes? More hiding places?
 
What the hell do turtles invest in anyways?

Cleaner lakes? More hiding places?

munitions so when the public teat runs dry and the sucklers riot I can deal with the rabble
 
munitions so when the public teat runs dry and the sucklers riot I can deal with the rabble

Seems like a piss poor investment choice unless the munitions are cast of gold/silver ;)
 
What "situation" would that be? If you're talking about the rich "not paying their fair share", I'd make the same suggestion about the poor. The only truly "fair" way to fix the tax system is to go to a flat tax (say 5-7%) of all "new" income; which I would define as income from sources which did not rely on an investment of previously taxed income (this would remove all taxes on capital gains, stock sales, etc...). There would be no deductions allowed for anyone. At 5%, if you make $1000 a year, that's $50 you owe. If you make $100,000 you owe $5,000. If you make $10,000,000 you owe $500,000. Nice, clean, simple, and EVERYONE gets to pay their fair share.


The situation that the millionaire's minimum tax addresses: where hedge fund managers and the like pay a lower rate than the middle class.


And, disagree on the flat tax.
 
Seems like a piss poor investment choice unless the munitions are cast of gold/silver ;)

you can invest in food, I invest in munitions. if there is famine which one of us is going to eat:lamo
 
To OP:

Warren Buffet is one of the few "Rich Guys" I am OK with. But their is not enough information for me to make my quick judgement to start rambling about. I guess I will talk about it on Monday when the "Buffet Rule" is revealed.
 
you can invest in food, I invest in munitions. if there is famine which one of us is going to eat:lamo

Neither (food needs food too!). However, given the likelihood of such a scenario, i'll take my chances with the famine and purchase more of those "worthless" paper investments ;)
 
you can invest in food, I invest in munitions. if there is famine which one of us is going to eat:lamo

You should take a wander through Glen Beck's webpage; heard he was endorsing some apocalyptic food backpacks which last you about 2 weeks. After that, you need to rely on the flesh of human corpses and grass.
 
Last edited:
The situation that the millionaire's minimum tax addresses: where hedge fund managers and the like pay a lower rate than the middle class.

I'm going to ask you a question..... Is there anything ILLEGAL about what these hedge fund managers and the like are doing to "hide" their income from taxation? Is it really any different than when some middle class wage earner gives $500 to their favorite charity right at the end of the year, or sticks it in an IRA or other non-taxable investment to "hide" it from the Tax Man; or is it just a difference in the numbers on the check? So far as I'm aware, what these people are doing is perfectly LEGAL, just as the different things that I do to try and "hide" some portion of my $65K a year from the Feds is.

If you want to close the loopholes that allow these people to "hide" that money, that's one thing. You MIGHT even get me to agree to some of those closures. What you will not EVER get me to agree to is raising taxes on a group that already pays a much higher percentage of the overall revenue of the Government than any other group in the country; and do so in a disproportionate ratio to their percentage of the population.

Again, if we would be willing to REDUCE THE ILLEGAL, IMMORAL, and UNCONSTITUTIONAL spending, and we still need more revenue, I'll stand right there with you and demand that MY OWN TAXES be RAISED. However, while we are spending on these items which were never intended to be part of the Federal Budget, I will not agre to a single penny of additional revenue for the Federal Government.

And, disagree on the flat tax.

That's fine. I didn't expect that you would agree with me on that, considering your prior comments.
 
You should take a wander through Glen Beck's webpage; heard he was selling some food backpacks for apocalyptic type scenarios which last you about 2 weeks. After that, you need to rely on the flesh of human corpses and grass.

I live on a farm that has apple and pear trees, livestock, and a pond full of fish and woods full of deer rabbits, doves and quail

I am going to be eating for a lot longer than 2 weeks.
 
I live on a farm that has apple and pear trees, livestock, and a pond full of fish and woods full of deer rabbits, doves and quail

I am going to be eating for a lot longer than 2 weeks.

So turtles do invest in ponds. Good for you, sounds quite nice.

For me, now, it's the city. Maybe one day...
 
So turtles do invest in ponds. Good for you, sounds quite nice.

For me, now, it's the city. Maybe one day...

You'd never catch me living in Obamaville
 
The talk is always about tax increases and never about spending cuts.

Thats because liberals and globalists in office do not want to give up that spending.
 
we are talking about individuals. and did GE not pay payroll taxes? what about taxes in other jurisdictions? I don't believe in corporate taxes either.

As an American who lives in America and stands by as GE earns billions upon billions in profits but pays nothing in US corporate taxes, why do you care one iota about "other jurisdictions"?
 
Back
Top Bottom