• 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
Catawba said:
These are are the Bush tax cuts that Obama proposes ending:

"Citizens for Tax Justice, which advocates steeper corporate taxes, said it surveyed major U.S. companies and found that 26 on average paid no net federal income taxes between 2008 and 2011, among them General Electric and Duke Energy ."

Read more: Companies Use Popular Provision to Avoid Income Taxes
Click to expand...
I read your link. It didn't say that those were Bush tax cuts, and we all know about Obama's support for GE.
 
TurtleDude said:
Its you and your side that wants more and more government that NO TAX plan can fund, not me. Its your heroes who started this mess with the New Deal, not mine
Click to expand...

I can only speak for myself - I want as little of government as is necessary. I also want to start paying that debt so my grandchildren do not get stuck with the tab. That means tax increases for everyone.
And that includes both you and me.
 
gingern44 said:
And yet we constantly hear that this legislation will do nothing to help the middle class. Unless you think this adm will "earmark" these funds for deficit reduction, which will never happen.

The results are obvious. Once again we will aim to make these megacorps pay more, they will use their armies of lawyers and accountants to game the system and small and mid size business people will get hammered. Happens every time. And at the end of it all we get is less economic activity and more govt spending.

I've said it before, giving the fed govt more money is like reloading a gun for a monkey.
Click to expand...

If you think the GOP plans to increase military spending and cutting taxes for the rich even further solves anything, Romney is your man!
 
TurtleDude said:
Most voters think someone else ought to pay for the government they want
Click to expand...

Your disdain for voters and the working class has been noted for years now.
 
Gardener said:
Considering that more than one percent vote for the government economic schemes set up to benefit the one percent, I would say you are correct.
Click to expand...

so it is your belief that the top one percent wouldn't be doing well but for "what"? They'd be doing a lot better if the rest of the country paid its share of taxes rather than having low taxes because the wealthy carry so much of the burden
 
Catawba said:
Your disdain for voters and the working class has been noted for years now.
Click to expand...

Yes, telling everyone they ought to either pay for what they use or NOT demand what they cannot pay for is called disdain in the minds of the far left.You constantly appeal to polls where the masses say others ought to pay more tax. Yes, I have disdain for those who think their very existence is a just claim on the property and labor of others
 
mpg said:
I read your link. It didn't say that those were Bush tax cuts, and we all know about Obama's support for GE.
Click to expand...

You missed this: "between 2008 and 2011"

Additionally:

Bush quietly signs corporate tax-cut bill

"With no fanfare, President Bush Friday signed the most sweeping rewrite of corporate tax law in nearly two decades, showering $136 billion in new tax breaks on businesses, farmers and other groups.

Intended to end a bitter trade war with Europe, the election-year measure was described by supporters as critically necessary to aid beleaguered manufacturers who have suffered 2.7 million lost jobs over the past four years.

But opponents charged that the tax package had grown into a massive giveaway that will add to the complexity of the tax system and end up rewarding multinational companies that move jobs overseas."

"The centerpiece is $76.5 billion in new tax relief for the battered manufacturing sector, but manufacturing is broadly defined to include not just factories but also oil and gas producers, engineering, construction and architectural firms and large farming operations.

The bill also includes a $5 billion tax break primarily for residents of seven states that have no income tax. The measure allows taxpayers to take a deduction for sales tax instead."

Bush quietly signs corporate tax-cut bill - Business - Stocks & economy - msnbc.com
 
TheLastIndependent said:
As you know, Congress will be taking a look at the Buffet rule in the upcoming days. How do you feel about it?
Click to expand...
Please ask a mod to insert your link and quote describing what the buffet rule is into your OP, as some of us do not know.
 
TurtleDude said:
Yes, telling everyone they ought to either pay for what they use or NOT demand what they cannot pay for is called disdain in the minds of the far left.You constantly appeal to polls where the masses say others ought to pay more tax. Yes, I have disdain for those who think their very existence is a just claim on the property and labor of others
Click to expand...

You are still under the delusion that the rich don't receive the most benefit of the government, eh?
 
Catawba said:
You are still under the delusion that the rich don't receive the most benefit of the government, eh?
Click to expand...




What benefit do I get from the government? :lol: I make money, I buy the **** I want. In lieu of not because of, The Government. :doh
 
There IS no Buffet rule. Neal Boortz explained it yesterday. The same rules apply to both Buffet and his secretary.

Capital gains are taxed at a certain rate--for both.
Wages are taxed at a certain rate--for both.
 
The rule is a joke. Did anyone stop to consider that the reason it won't raise any revenue is because the majority of millionaires already pay an effective tax rate close to 30%? When the rule was first proposed it could be somewhat rationalized as a revenue raiser. Now that it's been shown that it would take a year to raise the equivalent of one day's debt issuance, the President has pivoted to his usual topic of "fairness". I fear the day when policy is enacted purely because our President thinks it's fair.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
What benefit do I get from the government? :lol: I make money, I buy the **** I want. In lieu of not because of, The Government. :doh
Click to expand...

Why the Rich Should Pay Higher Taxes

"The very rich benefit most from national security, government-funded research, infrastructure, and property laws. Defending the country benefits the rich more, because they have more to defend. Taxpayer-funded research at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (the Internet), the National Institute of Health (pharmaceuticals), and the National Science Foundation (the Digital Library Initiative) has laid a half-century foundation for their idea-building. The interstates and airports and FAA and TSA benefit people who have the money to travel."

"Finally, back to the tax statistics. Why should financial earnings (i.e., capital gains) be taxed less than wage earnings from actual work? The richest 10% of Americans own over 80% of the stocks, the gains from which are taxed at a 15% rate. Most wage earners pay more.

Furthermore, over the past 15 years millionaires have seen their income tax rates drop from 30% to 22%. During approximately the same time period, American economic growth declined from an annual 3.2 percent rate to 1.7 percent. Lower taxes for the rich do not lead to productivity.

Will the rich stop investing or move to another country if their taxes are increased? Not likely. They have it too good here. As Warren Buffett recently stated, "I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone - not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 - shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain."

Mr. Buffett is admitting what everyone else is beginning to realize. The rich take much more than they pay for."

Why the Rich Should Pay Higher Taxes | Common Dreams
 
Catawba said:
Why the Rich Should Pay Higher Taxes

"The very rich benefit most from national security, government-funded research, infrastructure, and property laws. Defending the country benefits the rich more, because they have more to defend. Taxpayer-funded research at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (the Internet), the National Institute of Health (pharmaceuticals), and the National Science Foundation (the Digital Library Initiative) has laid a half-century foundation for their idea-building. The interstates and airports and FAA and TSA benefit people who have the money to travel."

"Finally, back to the tax statistics. Why should financial earnings (i.e., capital gains) be taxed less than wage earnings from actual work? The richest 10% of Americans own over 80% of the stocks, the gains from which are taxed at a 15% rate. Most wage earners pay more.

Furthermore, over the past 15 years millionaires have seen their income tax rates drop from 30% to 22%. During approximately the same time period, American economic growth declined from an annual 3.2 percent rate to 1.7 percent. Lower taxes for the rich do not lead to productivity.

Will the rich stop investing or move to another country if their taxes are increased? Not likely. They have it too good here. As Warren Buffett recently stated, "I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone - not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 - shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain."

Mr. Buffett is admitting what everyone else is beginning to realize. The rich take much more than they pay for."

Why the Rich Should Pay Higher Taxes | Common Dreams
Click to expand...

for this crap to have any merit you would have to prove that the richest 5% use more of the government service than the other 95% because the richest 5% pay more federal income taxes than the other 95% comboned.

Your proof is speculative and has no basis on fact. IT ASSUMES that national defense etc benefits 5% more than the other 95%.

IN terms of direct spending, the bottom 20% use the most of any quintile

common dreams=socialist wet dreams. the turd that wrote that opinion piece supplies no support for his claims.
 
Last edited:
Catawba said:
Why the Rich Should Pay Higher Taxes

"The very rich benefit most from national security, government-funded research, infrastructure, and property laws. Defending the country benefits the rich more, because they have more to defend. Taxpayer-funded research at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (the Internet), the National Institute of Health (pharmaceuticals), and the National Science Foundation (the Digital Library Initiative) has laid a half-century foundation for their idea-building. The interstates and airports and FAA and TSA benefit people who have the money to travel."

"Finally, back to the tax statistics. Why should financial earnings (i.e., capital gains) be taxed less than wage earnings from actual work? The richest 10% of Americans own over 80% of the stocks, the gains from which are taxed at a 15% rate. Most wage earners pay more.

Furthermore, over the past 15 years millionaires have seen their income tax rates drop from 30% to 22%. During approximately the same time period, American economic growth declined from an annual 3.2 percent rate to 1.7 percent. Lower taxes for the rich do not lead to productivity.

Will the rich stop investing or move to another country if their taxes are increased? Not likely. They have it too good here. As Warren Buffett recently stated, "I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone - not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 - shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain."

Mr. Buffett is admitting what everyone else is beginning to realize. The rich take much more than they pay for."

Why the Rich Should Pay Higher Taxes | Common Dreams
Click to expand...



Common dreams can go pound sand, hippy dirtbags. :lol: What a bunch of idiots, the military defends you as much as it does me, the poor use the internet as much as I do.


but I love this idiotic line:


"Mr. Buffett is admitting what everyone else is beginning to realize. The rich take much more than they pay for."


Then Mr. Buffet, why are you suing the IRS?


Berkshire's NetJets Sues IRS Over Tax Bill - WSJ.com




besides his secratary, that earns from work, 75k more than buffet, would be in a higher tax bracket, than Buffet who takes a 75k salary, they both pay the same on thier capitol gains.... :lol:
 
ChuckBerry said:
Don't recall seeing any proofs for yours.




Sent from my homing pigeon using Crapatalk.
Click to expand...

you ignore the fact that the rich are as likely to support welfare socialism as they are to support laissez faire capitalism
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
but I love this idiotic line:


"Mr. Buffett is admitting what everyone else is beginning to realize. The rich take much more than they pay for."
Click to expand...

Its fortunate that you love it, as it is a major distinction between the candidates and will be a theme from now through the election.

How did the working class in this country benefit from the GOP War in Iraq that cost us $2 trillion dollars in debt?


Then Mr. Buffet, why are you suing the IRS?


Berkshire's NetJets Sues IRS Over Tax Bill - WSJ.com
Click to expand...

Buffett has never suggested he is ok with paying illegal taxes.







besides his secratary, that earns from work, 75k more than buffet, would be in a higher tax bracket, than Buffet who takes a 75k salary, they both pay the same on thier capitol gains....
Click to expand...

What percentage of Buffett's secretary's income is from capitol gains??? :lol:
 
TurtleDude said:
for this crap to have any merit you would have to prove that the richest 5% use more of the government service than the other 95% because the richest 5% pay more federal income taxes than the other 95% comboned.
Click to expand...

Everyone but you, apparently, knows that FIT makes up for less than half of federal taxes. The rich that earn most of their income from investments pay a lower total tax rate than do those who work for a living. Most Americans agree with the presidents, Obama and Reagan, that this is not right.

You can whine all you want, but it will be decided by the people as it should be.
 
Catawba said:
Its fortunate that you love it, as it is a major distinction between the candidates and will be a theme from now through the election.

How did the working class in this country benefit from the GOP War in Iraq that cost us $2 trillion dollars in debt?




Buffett has never suggested he is ok with paying illegal taxes.
Click to expand...


wow, i guess some rich people get a pass....


What percentage of Buffett's secretary's income is from capitol gains??? :lol:
Click to expand...


irrellevant. The poor woman sugfering at 150k a year.


Class envy is such a funny thing.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
wow, i guess some rich people get a pass....
Click to expand...

From paying illegal taxes???




irrellevant. The poor woman sugfering at 150k a year.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant? The whole point is, that because capital gains are now taxed at a lower rate than earned income, those who's income is primarily from investments, like Warren Buffett and Mitt Romney, pay a lower total tax rate on their total income.


Class envy is such a funny thing.
Click to expand...

You don't understand the purpose of the progressive tax system, as intended by our forefathers, do you?


I have to agree with presidents Obama and Reagan:

 
Catawba said:
From paying illegal taxes???
Click to expand...


you havent establised prof they were illegal. He said the rich should pay more. Yet he's suin the irs.




Irrelevant? The whole point is, that because capital gains are now taxed at a lower rate than earned income, those who's income is primarily from investments, like Warren Buffett and Mitt Romney, pay a lower total tax rate on their total income.
Click to expand...


you forgot john kerry. And most of the senate..... The top of which are democrats....

Everyone pays the same capitol gains tax no?

U haz the class envy.


You don't understand the purpose of the progressive tax system, as intended by our forefathers, do you?
Click to expand...


Sure i do, govenmental theft. And out forfathers? Please proof please. :lamo:

I have to agree with presidents Obama and Reagan:

Click to expand...



on the tapatalk. No interest in your video.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
None of the above. Raise revenue maybe a bit, but not significantly. All it does is try and ensure that if you make more, you pay a higher effective rate.
Click to expand...

What's sad is that on NPR the supporters of it had to be dicks and word it as "to ensure the wealthy pay more". Which of course is absurd, because the wealthy already pay more, and in fact pay the vast majority of the overall non-direct benefit tax burden (and even more proportionally of simply the federal tax).

I don't support it, but I support your quick and concise remark...compared to the professional panel I hear whining this morning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom