EPTWarren Buffett - "Stop Coddling the Super-Rich" - Page 10
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
akalarry
United States1978 Posts
| ||
|
procyonlotor
Italy473 Posts
The only way you can cut debt is raise taxes or cut spending (preferably both). I know there was a surplus during Clinton's administration, so I don't see why the same shouldn't be achievable in the future with sensible policies. It's a shame there is such crippling polarization in the US, though. Where are the sensible moderates when you need them? | ||
|
hacpee
United States752 Posts
On August 17 2011 08:13 Whitewing wrote: Then you haven't even thought about it, or you're incapable of logical thought. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just didn't try in this case. Let's say everyone pays $10,000 a year in taxes period. Those people who only earn $10k a year certainly can't afford it. What about those who earn $30k? They can't really afford it either. People who earn absolutely absurd amounts of money wouldn't even notice it. There is no set number that works period, so it's ridiculous. Further, beyond viability, the next question is fairness. Is it fair that the poor should have absurdly high taxes proportionally to their income when the super rich don't even notice it? That's the situation your flat tax creates. It would force people to realize that government spending is outrageous and we can do much to lower it. It would be a truly fair system. If the poor don't want to pay more, they should then argue for less government and less taxes. | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On August 17 2011 08:19 procyonlotor wrote: It makes perfect sense to me for wealthier citizens to pay more taxes. It might sound unfair, but hey, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and contrary to what others might think, the wealth doesn't just "trickle down". The only way you can cut debt is raise taxes or cut spending (preferably both). I know there was a surplus during Clinton's administration, so I don't see why the same shouldn't be achievable in the future with sensible policies. It's a shame there is such crippling polarization in the US, though. Where are the sensible moderates when you need them? The sensible moderates are being accused of being too left or too right, and nobody realizes it. | ||
|
Dragom
194 Posts
On August 17 2011 07:53 hacpee wrote: Everyone should pay their fair share as a percentage of their wealth. That statement is outrageous. If things were fair, then everyone should pay an equal, flat, cash amount for government. That is what fair means, everyone contributes equally. As an example, if people were pitching in to buy a friend some present, it would be fair to charge everyone an equal amount for the present, regardless of how much the individual earned. It would not be fair to overcharge the higher earners because "they can afford it". OMG you're trolling so hard... like what are you smoking??? The B-day present Analogy is the microeconomy, were talking about the macroeconomy, its a big difference. Anyway, if you are serious, then the only fair way is to tax every person an infinite amount of money, that way everyone would be poor... and the gov't will be the richest, and that will just end up resulting in corrupt communism.. | ||
|
rhs408
United States904 Posts
On August 17 2011 08:11 Kaitlin wrote: If it's a party of the rich, and it's only the richest 1% that Obama wants to tax, why do Republicans have more support than just that richest 1% ? Lol, really? You make about as much sense as Tex. Gov. Rick Perry. Thankfully, Republicans aren't too far off of having only 1% of American support. It is already a given that Obama will get re-elected due to how out of touch the Republicans are with the majority of the American population. They really seem to think that all Americans are as selfish as they are! | ||
|
Xaerkar
United States230 Posts
On August 17 2011 06:48 OrchidThief wrote: Wow this is only on the first page, and I'm already facepalming from some of the responses. I read most of the pages up to 10, I have bruises on my face now. If Warren Buffett thinks that the tax rates are too low for the rich, then there probably should be some changes at least for the super wealthy in society. His proposal does make a lot of sense, I mean just because tax rates are increase doesn't mean people won't continue to make money through investments. | ||
|
Equity213
Canada873 Posts
| ||
|
jcarlson08
United States267 Posts
On August 17 2011 07:58 Kaitlin wrote: It's illusory because we're not comparing taxable income of Buffett to taxable income of his secretary or co-workers. Comparing "taxable income" will result in Buffett's % being higher. There's no reason at all to believe that Buffett's creating an illusion or referring to anything other than his taxable income when his quoted figure of 17% is so close to the 15% capital gains tax which he pays on almost all the taxable income he makes. Anything he then earns in salary is obviously taxed at 30% but this amount is far less than his capital gains. Compared to a normal worker who simply makes a salary and is therefore taxed at around 30% he is obviously going to pay less of a percentage of his income than they are. | ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
If you agree with everything this man says, like me for example, there is no debate. The very rich are abusing (and freely reshaping) the system hardcore, to the point of imminent global collapse, and people on the other end of the spectrum are already desperate enough to riot en masse in the first world, even. When heads start to fly and there is serious bloodshed maybe people will understand turbo capitalism isn't so super sweet. But on the other hand it isn't any different from what the European monarchs were doing in the 18th century, and what the "man" was trying to do since the dawn of time. Same shit different packing. But if you are a free market capitalist etc. and disagree, then this man must obviously be your idol because he is the fucking boss of moneys and all you can do is rim his brownhole. Therefore you cannot refute his points because you're an insignificant peon on the grand scale of capitalists and he is the motherfucking tzar. Oh, and saying that squeezing the rich will make them relocate is moot, he is discussing matters in a very general sense, as in squeezing them globally. Because the shit we are in is global and very real, and moving your factory to the next china farm is, historically speaking, an incredibly short-sighted affair. Unless your purpose in life is to have the biggest yacht, the greatest rock of blow and 24 sports cars of course. Just as long as the seriously pissed-off mob doesn't torch it with a molotov cocktail. Every couple hundred of years... | ||
|
Dragom
194 Posts
On August 17 2011 08:20 Whitewing wrote: The sensible moderates are being accused of being too left or too right, and nobody realizes it. Disagree. Heres a Popular question: do you eat the cake or do you save it for l8r This is the Result of the moderates: Half the cake is eaten, half is left. This is the result of the 2 parties doing their own thing: You have the cake... and a full stomach Then the question just keeps occuring, and the person keeps eating the cake because after he eats it, the cake still exists... and is unable to do anything productive People just see the shortterm question: eating or not eating the cake. They don't see what moderates see(which is the next few questions) | ||
|
jcarlson08
United States267 Posts
On August 17 2011 08:27 Equity213 wrote: If Buffet wants his taxes to go up then have at it hoss. I fail to see how giving more money to the corrupt american government is going to help though. You're right bro we should just say fuck it and default on everything, let our economy go to shit, let all our poor starve, and take the whole world down with us. God forbid Americans actually try and find a solution to their debt problem with responsible spending cuts and reasonable tax increases. | ||
|
poor newb
United States1879 Posts
| ||
|
hacpee
United States752 Posts
On August 17 2011 08:28 Kickboxer wrote: I don't even understand why there is a debate here on this. If you agree with everything this man says, like me for example, there is no debate. The very rich are abusing (and freely reshaping) the system hardcore, to the point of imminent global collapse, and people on the other end of the spectrum are already desperate enough to riot en masse in the first world, even. When heads start to fly and there is serious bloodshed maybe people will understand turbo capitalism isn't so super sweet. But on the other hand it isn't any different from what the European monarchs were doing in the 18th century, and what the "man" was trying to do since the dawn of time. Same shit different packing. But if you are a free market capitalist etc. and disagree, then this man must obviously be your idol because he is the fucking boss of moneys and all you can do is rim his brownhole. Therefore you cannot refute his points because you're an insignificant peon on the grand scale of capitalists and he is the motherfucking tzar. Oh, and saying that squeezing the rich will make them relocate is moot, he is discussing matters in a very general sense, as in squeezing them globally. Because the shit we are in is global and very real, and moving your factory to the next china farm is, historically speaking, an incredibly short-sighted affair. Unless your purpose in life is to have the biggest yacht, the greatest rock of blow and 24 sports cars of course. Just as long as the seriously pissed-off mob doesn't torch it with a molotov cocktail. Every couple hundred of years... Let me enlighten you. Conservatives think that they should be able to do what they want with their own money. They don't want to take other people's money and they don't want other people to take their money. It has very little to do with free market and other stuff. Warren Buffet is a liberal. His mentality is that he wants the government to take other people's money but HANDS OFF GOVERNMENT, I decide what to do with my own money. | ||
|
RJGooner
United States2058 Posts
On August 17 2011 08:30 jcarlson08 wrote: You're right bro we should just say fuck it and default on everything, let our economy go to shit, let all our poor starve, and take the whole world down with us. God forbid Americans actually try and find a solution to their debt problem with responsible spending cuts and reasonable tax increases. Until our government gets really serious about cutting spending (and this means reforming entitlements like Medicare) then I don't want to hear anything about higher taxes. If someone comes out with a good, detailed plan, then we can start putting some tax increases on the table. There should be more dollars cut from the budget then raised through revenue, as spending really is the root of the problem here. | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
On August 17 2011 08:19 procyonlotor wrote: It makes perfect sense to me for wealthier citizens to pay more taxes. It might sound unfair, but hey, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, and contrary to what others might think, the wealth doesn't just "trickle down". The only way you can cut debt is raise taxes or cut spending (preferably both). I know there was a surplus during Clinton's administration, so I don't see why the same shouldn't be achievable in the future with sensible policies. It's a shame there is such crippling polarization in the US, though. Where are the sensible moderates when you need them? loud minorities tend to take the spotlight, and for some reason the media treats them as the majority probably because they have more zaz. | ||
|
rhs408
United States904 Posts
/thread | ||
|
DeLoReAn
United States81 Posts
If you have actually read the Warren Buffett op-ed he says that that is one of the most misguided assumptions/theories going around at the moment. He says people will always be spurred to make more money always which makes sense 100%. Buffett says back in the 80's and 90's when tax rates were higher people were still going out and trying to make more and more money all the while not complaining about their taxes. Now, when rates are lower than ever the Right and Rich claim that tax hikes will slow job growth, hu? Makes no sense and I think if anyone knows what is up it would be Warren Buffett. | ||
|
yema1
Iceland101 Posts
| ||
|
CajunMan
United States823 Posts
On August 17 2011 08:00 paradox_ wrote: He's making a point about fair play and nothing else really. Pretty sure the man is smarter and knowledgeable than anyone on this forum on how to handle the current economic issues. There is no point making dee duh dee comments about the size of the deficit in relation to the taxation amount. Yes lets assume this guy is Genius and knows better that's how we should pick our leaders. Taxation shouldn't and doesn't need to be raised in fact the only reason the thought is on the table is because of what has been done to the deficit. | ||
| ||
