Vintage HiFi Audio Forum
PoLiTiCs => What's on your cranium??? => Topic started by: Sir Thrift-a-Lot on August 16, 2011, 06:07:14 PM
-
... or is he simply telling the truth?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html)
-
Two can play at that game.
http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/15/screw-the-rich-heres-how/ (http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/15/screw-the-rich-heres-how/)
Then I figured it out. As I wrote then, the super rich won’t mind at all if we “tax the rich” as it’s currently defined. That’s because people who are super rich don’t really pay taxes. They pay taxes on this year’s income, and capital gains on accumulated wealth. But the only “tax” that can ever touch what they’ve already made is inflation.
That’s why a man worth $47 billion dollars can pay just $6,938,744 in federal income taxes and not be accused of a crime. In fact, he can boast about how little he pays, and ask to be charged even more.
That man is Warren Buffett. And his article in today’s NY Times, titled “Stop Coddling The Super Rich” is a huge pile of manipulative garbage.
-
After reaching a decent level of wealth the rich can afford not to care, if they chose to. Their basic needs are met - a 24% vs 31% vs 40% rate will not change their way of living in any significant way. This is specially true of Buffett - He still lives in the same ranch house he bought back in the fifties!! (and drives an aging Cadillac DTS)
-
Two can play at that game.
http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/15/screw-the-rich-heres-how/ (http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/15/screw-the-rich-heres-how/)
Then I figured it out. As I wrote then, the super rich won't mind at all if we "tax the rich" as it's currently defined. That's because people who are super rich don't really pay taxes. They pay taxes on this year's income, and capital gains on accumulated wealth. But the only "tax" that can ever touch what they've already made is inflation.
That's why a man worth $47 billion dollars can pay just $6,938,744 in federal income taxes and not be accused of a crime. In fact, he can boast about how little he pays, and ask to be charged even more.
That man is Warren Buffett. And his article in today's NY Times, titled "Stop Coddling The Super Rich" is a huge pile of manipulative garbage.
Edit: Post modified by admin to add citation of source
What has Arrington produced; an emotional rant, devoid of logic. A 5% increase in marginal taxes on the rich is not going to alter entrepreneurial behavior one iota. This is simply faith-based libertarian politics from the inner-teenager that read Atlas Shrugged and was impressed. :laugh:
Entrepreneurs work because they are crazy and passionate. The vast majority of people who start businesses fail within 5 years. With such odds, you have to have a drive that will not be blocked by a 5% marginal tax on your returns. You're talking about people who are dreaming of 4000% ROI, and 3200% ROI is not going to dissuade them from trying.
Slippery slope rants, such as Arrington's, are juvenile. The world is not binary; 0% taxes vs 100% taxes. No one is even coming close to talking about a 100% marginal tax rate. :laugh: That said, why should the government even be in the business of protecting your property rights? Why not follow David Friedman's lead and privatize those, as well. You want government to protect patents, copyrights, or your physical property? Why don't you pay more then, since you have a disproportionate amount of wealth and you should "pay" for your own security.
Let's see how your expenses go up as society continues to devolve into shantytowns surrounding rich enclaves. Let's see how rich you can get in the future when educated workers are harder to get. Talk about a binary world.... you may get one.
And if taxes are such a disincentive, explain why Silicon Valley, right in the heart of "socialist" "high-tax" California, is a Mecca of entrepreneurs? High cost of living. High state taxes. Yet, incredibly dynamic.
To try and boil down the reasons for entrepreneurial activity, to a single value; taxes, is naive. But, then, that's what makes a certain part of a certain political party attractive to those naive enough to buy their propaganda. :laugh: Let us pray.....
Bill Cain
-
I only posted this here because when I said that taxes should be fairly distributed I was accused of "hating the rich". So, I'll ask again, does Warren Buffet hate the rich?
Two can play at that game.
http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/15/screw-the-rich-heres-how/ (http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/15/screw-the-rich-heres-how/)
Then I figured it out. As I wrote then, the super rich won’t mind at all if we “tax the rich” as it’s currently defined. That’s because people who are super rich don’t really pay taxes. They pay taxes on this year’s income, and capital gains on accumulated wealth. But the only “tax” that can ever touch what they’ve already made is inflation.
That’s why a man worth $47 billion dollars can pay just $6,938,744 in federal income taxes and not be accused of a crime. In fact, he can boast about how little he pays, and ask to be charged even more.
That man is Warren Buffett. And his article in today’s NY Times, titled “Stop Coddling The Super Rich” is a huge pile of manipulative garbage.
-
Their basic needs are met - a 24% vs 31% vs 40% rate will not change their way of living in any significant way.
I agree with this. So why do they fight tooth and nail to keep their tax breaks? They don't need the money, is it a game or sociopathology? (This is a serious question, BTW.)
-
I only posted this here because when I said that taxes should be fairly distributed I was accused of "hating the rich". So, I'll ask again, does Warren Buffet hate the rich?
No. I suspect he might be a bit embarrassed by the current dialogue, or lack thereof, in Congressional circles. ;D
Bill Cain
-
Their basic needs are met - a 24% vs 31% vs 40% rate will not change their way of living in any significant way.
I agree with this. So why do they fight tooth and nail to keep their tax breaks? They don't need the money, is it a game or sociopathology? (This is a serious question, BTW.)
... based upon a tortured interpretation of reality. Just a thought. ;D
Let us pray......... 8)
Bill Cain
-
I hate politicians.
I hate that they can steal or tax money and use for their on personal needs like Rick Santorum did to pay for his kids education.
100,000 $ of our money !
He's a thief !
-
I hate politicians.
I hate that they can steal or tax money and use for their on personal needs like Rick Santorum did to pay for his kids education.
100,000 $ of our money !
He's a thief !
Slick Rick.... God help us all if this asshole gets elected.
-
I don't think Warren Buffet hates the rich, I think he's just expressing his opinion and those of his wealthy friends. Of course there's probably a reason he wrote this article, i'm sure it wasn't out of the kindness of his heart. This country is in bad shape and hopefully his intentions were to stir some further talk about the tax issue but who knows. It was an interesting read anyway.
As for that douche nozzle Santorum, he won't get close to being elected. For the past 10 or so years if you googled his name, this was the first website that showed up on the list. http://spreadingsantorum.com/ (http://spreadingsantorum.com/) He's a joke.
-
Always remember...Warren Buffet IS rich people!!!!!! ;) #1 to him...Warren Buffet!
-
I hate politicians.
I hate that they can steal or tax money and use for their on personal needs like Rick Santorum did to pay for his kids education.
100,000 $ of our money !
He's a thief !
Slick Rick.... God help us all if this asshole gets elected.
Very true! But Rick is an ametuer and petty thief compared to Fast Eddie Rendell. He did so much damage to the Pittsburgh region but still enjoyed the backing of his loyal voters. Been to the Pittsburgh Airport lately? USAir moved to where? Hmmmm Eddie's home town! What a coincidence!
North Shore Connector? Are you kidding me? It will be the most expensive tunnel per foot when completed. Or should I say if completed? The absence of the North Shore connector hasn't stopped anyone to going to the Steelers games, Pirates games or the Casino. The Rendell backed Harrisburg patronage got rich! We need to tax these rich people too!
-
Rendell was horrible, no doubt, but how 'bout Corbett's new "be prepared" commercials? He is spending our tax dollars to tell us that we better get a plan because if something bad happens he ain't helping.
He ain't helping is bad enough, but does he really need to spend our money to tell us so?
-
Corbett stole the money from the tobacco settlement for adult basic.
I can't stand these thieves !
-
Bill, Do you have an alias as "Ray Cromwell" on Facebook?
The reason I ask is because your post here matches almost word for word a response on Arrington's blog that was made by him.
If you are not Ray Cromwell, I suggest that you correct your previous post and cite the original author.
-
Perhaps you can post something that counters my points made.
You have a nice day. ;D
Bill Cain
-
Wow. Just wow.
-
Seems that Master Blaster is pretty hard core. Probably listens to 104.7.
Still, Bill, when you copy/paste, the honest thing to do is to cite your source.
As usual, Jon Stewart nails it...
http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/thu-august-18-2011-anne-hathaway (http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/thu-august-18-2011-anne-hathaway)
-
I fixed Jim Quinn's Conrad Johnson preamp.
He seemed an ok guy.
-
Perhaps you can post something that counters my points made.
You have a nice day. ;D
Bill Cain
Bill,
You did not make those points, Ray Cromwell did.
Your conduct on this forum has gone on for too long, and your response to this situation is the last straw for me.
Admit you copied his comments, edit your previous post to give proper credit that cites your source or you will be banned.
-
I agree with MB - either Bill goes by Ray Cromwell in other forums or he blatantly copied/plagiarized/stole Mr.Cromwell's thoughts. Bill - it looks like you stole someone else's ideas to me. As we say in Spanish - que cojones!
All - judge by yourselves:
This is an emotional rant devoid of logic. A 5% increase in marginal taxes on the rich is not going to alter entrepreneurial behavior one bit Michael and you know it. This is faith-based libertarian politics from the inner-teenager that read Atlas Shrugged.
Entrepreneurs work because they are crazy and passionate. You have to be. The vast vast vast majority of people who start businesses will fail and fail utterly within 5 years. With those odds, you have to a drive that will not be blocked by a 5% marginal tax on your returns. You're talking about people who are dreaming of 4000% ROI, and 3200% ROI is not going to dissuade them from trying.
Slippery slope rants are STUPID. The world is not binary, 0% taxes vs 100% taxes. No one is even coming close to talking about a 100% marginal tax rate.
Why should the government even be in the business of protecting your property rights? Why not follow David Friedman's lead and privatize those are well. You want government to protect patents, copyright, or your physical property? Why don't you pay more then, since you have a disproportionate amount of wealth, you should pay for your own security. Let's see how your expenses go up as society continues to devolve into shantytowns surrounding rich enclaves. Let's see how rich you can get in the future when educated workers are harder to get.
How about we place a Tariff on H1-B workers who are educated by overseas *socialist* education systems? Aren't you John Galt types free-loading off of workers trained by overseas high-tax socialist economies?
The fundamental argument you're making Michael is one of social mobility. America has the lowest social mobility of all of the OECD countries. If you're born in the bottom 40%, you and your children will with high probability, remain there.
And if taxes are such a discincentive, explain why Silicon Valley, right in the heart of "socialist" "high-tax" California, is the Mecca of entrepreneurs? High cost of living. High state taxes. Yet, incredibly dynamic.
Hmm..., wouldn't have anything to do with the history of the UC system, or maybe the Fire-At-Will rule?
To try and boil down the reasons for entrepreneurial activity, social mobility, or success to a single value, taxes, is just plain dumb.
What has Arrington produced; an emotional rant, devoid of logic. A 5% increase in marginal taxes on the rich is not going to alter entrepreneurial behavior one iota. This is simply faith-based libertarian politics from the inner-teenager that read Atlas Shrugged and was impressed.
Entrepreneurs work because they are crazy and passionate. The vast majority of people who start businesses fail within 5 years. With such odds, you have to have a drive that will not be blocked by a 5% marginal tax on your returns. You're talking about people who are dreaming of 4000% ROI, and 3200% ROI is not going to dissuade them from trying.
Slippery slope rants, such as Arrington's, are juvenile. The world is not binary; 0% taxes vs 100% taxes. No one is even coming close to talking about a 100% marginal tax rate.
That said, why should the government even be in the business of protecting your property rights? Why not follow David Friedman's lead and privatize those, as well. You want government to protect patents, copyrights, or your physical property? Why don't you pay more then, since you have a disproportionate amount of wealth and you should "pay" for your own security.
Let's see how your expenses go up as society continues to devolve into shantytowns surrounding rich enclaves. Let's see how rich you can get in the future when educated workers are harder to get. Talk about a binary world.... you may get one.
And if taxes are such a disincentive, explain why Silicon Valley, right in the heart of "socialist" "high-tax" California, is a Mecca of entrepreneurs? High cost of living. High state taxes. Yet, incredibly dynamic.
To try and boil down the reasons for entrepreneurial activity, to a single value; taxes, is naive. But, then, that's what makes a certain part of a certain political party attractive to those naive enough to buy their propaganda. Let us pray…..
I say we Sheeve Bill.
-
Pepe, I agree with you 100% my friend.
-
It is doubly irritating in that not only did he steal someone else's posting, but he judged us to be too stupid to notice.
Sheeved!
-
Damn Bill_Cain......appears your are dancing the SHEEVS dance. Personally, I don't think you've yet achieved the rank of SHEEVS, but I am only one voice.
-
Again, wow. Just wow.
-
Tsk!
-
BYE BILL......http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaxjEpar91g&feature=player_detailpage#t=22s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaxjEpar91g&feature=player_detailpage#t=22s)
-
Folks,
Please don't lower yourself to the level of conduct that raised all the fuss to begin with.
Bill is welcome to stay as part of our community if he is willing to maintain a reasonable level of decorum.
What happens from this point forward is up to him.
-
I can't believe what I'm reading, we're worried about the cost of sending Rick Santorum's kids to PA cyber school? Questions, 1) Was it illegal? 2) Did he ask for and was he granted special favors? 3) If so why was he not prosecuted? If you read the ACTUAL reports of what happened, the Penn hills school board being of the opposing party was out to make Santorum LOOK bad before the election so their "favorite son" Bob Casey could be elected. All Pennsylvania property owners and income earners pay school tax regardless if they have ANY kids in school or not. I'm glad we weren't distracted from any important issues like where Santorums kids go to schoool and we could elect big spending liberals like Casey. THAT'S WHAT REALLY MATTERS! Let's see.... we're mad at Santorum for maybe $67,000. His replacement Casey has voted for EVERY BIG BUDGET since being in office. The past 4-1/2 years Casey has been in office, the federal budget deficit more than quadruple from $250,000,000,000 to $1,620,000,000,000. Since Casey has been in office the nation debt has ALMOST DOUBLED. FROM 8,000,000,000,000 to 15,000,000,000,000 AND HE VOTED FOR ALL OF IT! This reminds me of all the hoopla over the "pay raise" If you were to figure out how much the "pay raise" cost each taxpayer it's about $2.00 year In the meantime while everyone was distracted with the "pay raise", Fast Eddie and the liberals raised the state income tax from .028% to .031% which cost the average taxpayer about $150.00 year! BOY I WISH WE WEREN'T DISTRACTED!
-
I am not mad at Santorum. I just do no not like him. And I would never vote for him.
_____
Mike
-
What does any of that have to do with where Santorum's kids resided? That is the only issue in deciding which district flips the bill.
I think you may be distracted.
-
I'm worried about this state where politicians think they can just take tax payers money to do with as they please.
They are all a bunch of thieves who should be in jail!
Rick Santorum was just one of many.
And he had the gall to say his kids come first !
Does that mean my kids should come last ?
How about Rick Santorum giving me money for my kids.
-
Rick probably was responsible for all the school costs that he rang up. I wasn't a big fan of his. But, I suspect he probably was much better than most of the money grabbers in Washington on both sides of the aisle
-
Well here we go again, liberal/progressives "do as I say...Not As I Do! Warrem Buffet thinks every OTHER rich person should pay more taxes but NOT Warren! See the attached article. His company Birkshire Hathaway has been under investigation by the IRS for the last nine years. The tax liability could be 10's of million of dollars, but rather than just "paying his fair share" he has swarms of lawers fighting to keep his money. Hypocrite? I THINK SOOOOOO. http://netrightdaily.com/2011/08/warren-buffett’s-taxing-hypocrisy/ (http://netrightdaily.com/2011/08/warren-buffett’s-taxing-hypocrisy/)
-
Well, first off Buffet isn't the only decision maker at his company (after all, if the president of a company can be held liable for every decision then Rupert Murdoch would be in jail right now) but more importantly is the fact that his op-ed was dealing with personal taxes, not corporate taxes. Though I personally favor raising both, the article you link shows no hypocrisy whatsoever. What it does show is either an inability on the part of the author to understand the matter at hand or (more likely) a desire to twist the facts to suit a particular agenda.
My favorite part of the article you link...
Interesting questions for the man who professes to want to pay more to Uncle Sam, and who sees fit to raise the burden on all job creators
How much longer will the sheep buy the whole "job creators" line? The last ten years have seen a major decrease in top marginal taxes AND a steady downward trend in US employment. Obviously the two issues do not affect each other in the way that these clowns want you to think.
Of course, in fairness, he didn't specify in what country or at what pay scale these jobs were being created, so if you are interested in giving big tax breaks to people opening factories in China or India, by all means stick with the Republican platform of the last ten years.
-
BTW, you never answered the question about Santorum.
-
How much longer will the sheep buy the whole "job creators" line?
I have never received a job from a poor man. Have you?
-
Of course, in fairness, he didn't specify in what country or at what pay scale these jobs were being created, so if you are interested in giving big tax breaks to people opening factories in China or India, by all means stick with the Republican platform of the last ten years.
What do you think is causing that?
Consumers want to pay the lowest price possible for goods and so the jobs go to the lowest bidder.
Some people are willing to pay more on principle, but most aren't
-
How much longer will the sheep buy the whole "job creators" line?
I have never received a job from a poor man. Have you?
I have never "received a job" from anyone. Employment is an exchange of talents and time for financial return. Nobody is giving anyone anything.
-
Of course, in fairness, he didn't specify in what country or at what pay scale these jobs were being created, so if you are interested in giving big tax breaks to people opening factories in China or India, by all means stick with the Republican platform of the last ten years.
What do you think is causing that?
Consumers want to pay the lowest price possible for goods and so the jobs go to the lowest bidder.
Some people are willing to pay more on principle, but most aren't
For almost two hundred years this country had very minimal taxes because the government generated much of it's revenue in tariffs. The "free trade" republicrats of the last 40 years (except Carter) have ruined that and made the American worker an endangered species in the process.
-
How much longer will the sheep buy the whole "job creators" line?
I have never received a job from a poor man. Have you?
I have never "received a job" from anyone. Employment is an exchange of talents and time for financial return. Nobody is giving anyone anything.
Thanks for the correction, but you didn't really address the point.
-
Of course, in fairness, he didn't specify in what country or at what pay scale these jobs were being created, so if you are interested in giving big tax breaks to people opening factories in China or India, by all means stick with the Republican platform of the last ten years.
What do you think is causing that?
Consumers want to pay the lowest price possible for goods and so the jobs go to the lowest bidder.
Some people are willing to pay more on principle, but most aren't
For almost two hundred years this country had very minimal taxes because the government generated much of it's revenue in tariffs. The "free trade" republicrats of the last 40 years (except Carter) have ruined that and made the American worker an endangered species in the process.
Forget that! I don't want to pay $200 for Absinthe!
Neanderthal welfare tactics like Tariffs do nothing but harm the overall world economy. Instead of clinging to our old manufacturing jobs, we must innovate and find new industries to take their place.
Fwiw.... I believe the underpants Gnomes are looking for willing participants to join their party.
-
Bloody hell. This is an Audio forum. Lets find something more useful to talk about.