A couple of thoughts on Buffett
Obama in his SOTU speech trotted out Warren Buffett's secretary to show how unfair America is. Barry tells us that she pays more than the billionaire Warren Buffett. UNFAIR! The secretary pays at the 35% tax rate. That would mean she makes over $350K per year. Warren pays at the 15% rate, which is the corporate rate. Obama says the rich need to pay their fair share. So he proposes to raise the secretary's marginal rate. Douchebaggery!
With the spiking of the pipeline, the Buffett owned rail service will have to move the oil from the Dakotas and Rockies. Windfall for Buffet courtesy of of the Obama administration.
Just sayin.
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email this
Trackback(0)
TrackBack URI for this entryComments (7)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Sequel , January 26, 2012
What are you trying to say Woody?
It that some kind of insult?
Are you trying to say I'm plagiarizing Limbaugh? Tough to do when I neither listen to nor read him. I don't insult you without cause.
How about you comment on the fact that the answer to Buffett paying 15% and the secretary paying 35% is to raise the 35% rate.
How about you take on my ideas straight ahead instead of this snarky bullshit. I think you know that everything I wrote is factually correct, so all you have is this crap.
written by Woody , January 26, 2012
I can't say for certain sequel but I was on the road this AM and I heard rush talking about this. I guess you could have gotten this from anywhere.
written by Sequel , January 26, 2012
I am aware of the following items and made the brilliant deduction.
Obama complained about the Buffet/secretary's difference in tax rates.
35% is above $350K
Obama has been on a quest since his '08 campaign to have those above 200 or 250 to pay more.
Ergo the answer to his complaint is to raise her 35%. It need not make sense, and ABC, NBC, CBS will not point out the inherent bullshit.
And instead of you recognizing the bullshit, you make jackass remarks about how I may have come to know said bullshit.
Defend the "O", agree and pet the pig, or pipe down.
written by Barthélemy Barbancourt , January 26, 2012
There are 2 articles in the WSJ on it today.
The trouble is that no one can agree on what numbers to use. Sequel is correct about the federal rate, but what is Warren is including FICA?
Also SS, cuts out a little over $100K. Warren makes millions so SS is only taken from a tiny percentage of his income, where is may cover most of his secretary's income.
Also Buffest donates millions each year to charity so his AGI might be way off from his gross. If he is paying 15% on his gross, his percentage for his AGI would be higher. The Secretary probably didn't donate millions to charity, has a paid off house and no kids at home, so her Gross and AGI are closer together.
The whole argument is bullshit. We shouldn't base tax policy on the taxes of the top .00001%. Tax policy should be broad based and encourage growth. The lower and middle classes need to pay more and government needs to spend less. Government can wipe out income inequality but a booming economy can reduce it.
written by jokin , January 26, 2012
written by Woody , January 26, 2012
"I can't say for certain sequel but I was on the road this AM and I heard rush talking about this. I guess you could have gotten this from anywhere."
My, that was very Ed Salden of you. And now you're caught in a lie. I was also on the road this AM and Limbaugh devoted the first 90 minutes, 11AM-12:30PM (when I was listening), to the history between Newt Gingrich and Ronald and Nancy Reagan. Buffet was never mentioned.
And you wonder why you get the treatment that every little snotty snarky lefty lurker gets?
written by jokin , January 26, 2012
"The whole argument is bullshit. We shouldn't base tax policy on the taxes of the top .00001%. Tax policy should be broad based and encourage growth. The lower and middle classes need to pay more and government needs to spend less."
I would add that tax policy, in being broad based, besides encouraging growth, should foster a sense of ownership and responsibility as a fellow citizen's duty for funding the programs they from which they directly benefit.
Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
