If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   Warren Buffett, the other noted American communist after Ben Stein, wants to raise taxes on the rich   (reuters.com) divider line 26
    More: Interesting, Warren Buffett, American communists, ordinary income, State of the Union  
•       •       •

779 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Nov 2012 at 9:18 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-11-27 10:27:49 AM
2 votes:

tenpoundsofcheese: incendi: tenpoundsofcheese: Redacted for people who have TPOC on ignore

Couldn't be bothered to read the article or the thread before waltzing in and taking a dump, eh?

From the source NYT: " I would suggest 30 percent of taxable income between $1 million and $10 million, and 35 percent on amounts above that."

So he did NOT call for an increase in the capital gains.


Capitals gains are taxable income you freaking moron.
2012-11-27 09:36:32 AM
2 votes:
But if we raise taxes on the rich, they won't create anymore high paying jobs!

i47.tinypic.com
2012-11-27 03:03:18 PM
1 votes:

Debeo Summa Credo: btchin trans-am: Carn: Carn: Debeo Summa Credo: Wow. Shamefully disingenuous. Buffett (and anyone) are free to argue for higher taxes on the rich. The appropriate level of progressivity is inherently subjective and a matter of opinion.

But buffett has always been wrong on the "my taxes vs. my secretary's" argument. He owns roughly a third of Berkshire Hathaway. Berkshires pretax earnings last year wee $15.3b, his proportionate share is $5.1b. berkshires tax expense last year was $4.6b, his share is $1.53b. So of his share of pretax earnings of 5.1b, corp taxes took 30%. The remaining 70% remained invested in berkshire, and when realized via dividend or sale of
Berkshire stock, would be taxed at 15% for an all in rare of about 40%, before state taxes. I'd suspect buffett's secretary's rate is far below that.

Also, re the "send that guy with the good idea to me" he is full of it as well. Yes, nobody is going to turn down a fantastic investment opportunity Because of an increase in taxes. But they aren't all fantastic. Some are marginal and an increase in potential taxes will reduce incentive to invest. He might not forego any deals because of a tax hike, but across the economy a tax hike will reduce expected returns on investment, thus reducing investment. This also is a fact.

Buffett KNOWS these facts. He's not some ignorant clown who gets all his economic and finance education from think progress and Paul krugman. Buffet is a brilliant investor who understands taxes. Therefore he is lying. Shameful.

Buffett is not the same entity as the corporation Berkshire. Most people don't count corporate taxes on invested companies as a tax to their personal income. The equation begins at the capital gains tax rate, and Buffett has always been consistent and technically correct about this, the best kind of correctly.

Also the best kind of grammar.

Corporations are double taxed because they are people too, my friend.

Corporations are not end users of the income they generate. They cannot consume goods for enjoyment or sustenance the way a person would. They are mere conduits through which individuals collectively own a business. Just like an LLP is a conduit through which individuals own businesses.

Unlike sole proprietorships or llps, however, income taxes take two bites out of corporate business income before it ends up in the hands of the owners. You can agree with this for progressivity reasons, but those who compare the dividend or cap gains tax rates to ordinary tax rates without considering corporate taxes are stupid or lying.

You are correct there there is double taxation, though. Well, technically it's not quite double, do its more accurate to use the phrase "taxed twice".


There is no double taxation. Corporation pay income taxes on income generated. Individuals pay income taxes on income generated. The money only becomes the investors money, after it has been transferred. It is no different that money you use to pay the plumber has already been taxed as income and will be taxed again when it becomes income earned by the plumber.

Any sort of LLC that uses after tax income to transfer money left over after paying expenses to its sole employee/owner needs to hire a better, more Jewish accountant.

A large corporation can "transfer" money left over after paying expenses to the share holders through investing that money in growing the business and making the shares more valuable. The corporation does not have to pay income taxes on the money is used to hire extra outside sales staff to encourage more business nor does it pay income taxes on the money spent to increase its production and warehousing capabilities nor money spent on additional delivery trucks and drivers.The value of that package of money spent on growing the business has potential to generate greater income for the investor than if it was simply transferred to them via cash. Of course there is the risk that the investment will not not pan out, but that risk that is required to be taken to avoid paying corporate income taxes.

Hoarding cash reserves should yield a higher tax than investing it. That's using the tax code to encourage growth and economic expansion, that's exactly the way it should be.
2012-11-27 01:31:30 PM
1 votes:

Debeo Summa Credo: Wow. Shamefully disingenuous. Buffett (and anyone) are free to argue for higher taxes on the rich. The appropriate level of progressivity is inherently subjective and a matter of opinion.

But buffett has always been wrong on the "my taxes vs. my secretary's" argument. He owns roughly a third of Berkshire Hathaway. Berkshires pretax earnings last year wee $15.3b, his proportionate share is $5.1b. berkshires tax expense last year was $4.6b, his share is $1.53b. So of his share of pretax earnings of 5.1b, corp taxes took 30%. The remaining 70% remained invested in berkshire, and when realized via dividend or sale of
Berkshire stock, would be taxed at 15% for an all in rare of about 40%, before state taxes. I'd suspect buffett's secretary's rate is far below that.

Also, re the "send that guy with the good idea to me" he is full of it as well. Yes, nobody is going to turn down a fantastic investment opportunity Because of an increase in taxes. But they aren't all fantastic. Some are marginal and an increase in potential taxes will reduce incentive to invest. He might not forego any deals because of a tax hike, but across the economy a tax hike will reduce expected returns on investment, thus reducing investment. This also is a fact.

Buffett KNOWS these facts. He's not some ignorant clown who gets all his economic and finance education from think progress and Paul krugman. Buffet is a brilliant investor who understands taxes. Therefore he is lying. Shameful.


Buffett is not the same entity as the corporation Berkshire. Most people don't count corporate taxes on invested companies as a tax to their personal income. The equation begins at the capital gains tax rate, and Buffett has always been consistent and technically correct about this, the best kind of correctly.
2012-11-27 12:15:37 PM
1 votes:

Nurglitch: Cythraul: Nurglitch: Lost Thought 00: Of course he's for it, he doesn't make a dime in income. Call me when he proposes taxing capital gains as income, that'll be real news

Interestingly he lives within his salary, which is pretty modest. He's not using those capital gains to do more than earn more capital.

That's weird. I'd buy an island. Or a small third-world country. What does he do? He uses his obscene amount of money to, make more money!

Something somewhat OCD about that.

At the risk of turning this into a financial planning seminar, there's nothing OCD about being frugal, living within your means, and using your capital to make more capital rather than plowing it into costly money-holes and burning it.

Something I think that doesn't get addressed, or maybe isn't addressed directly when finance is discussed, is what is being financed. Take buying a car versus being a house, if we suppose for the sake of argument that they are apples to apples. A car usually depreciates, and a house usually appreciates, and investing money into things that depreciate, that lose value. To my mind, and to wildly over-generalize, a good economy is driven by investments that create value, and specifically value that can in turn create value.



I will stop there:

Houses do not appreciate. Look at any long term index and it stays roughly exactly the same over 50 or even 100 years. The value growth is generally right at inflation. Any non-inflation value growth leads to a bubble like we just experienced.

Well my grandpa only paid 3,000 for his 1 acre and house and it is worth 300,000 today!. And your grandpa was probably working for 30-60 bucks a week which still equates to around 3 to 1 income / cost ratio.

Cars do lose value due to them being an object that degrades. However, if you bought a car in a garage on a piece of land as one package and never drove the car the property would increase in value at inflation and your car would by proxy also increase in value.
2012-11-27 12:02:41 PM
1 votes:

knowless: it won't work, they can't generate enough revenue, basic math. the discussion is irrelevant.


Talk about the most stupid argument I have ever read in my entire life.

This is how stupid your argument is:

"Well I was going to take a road trip across the country but I couldn't make it in one tank of gas so I decided not to go."

Well no shiat you farking dumbarse. Anyone who thinks they are going to drive across the country in a standard civilian vehicle on one tank of gas should be lined up and shot to keep the gene pool from depleting any further.
2012-11-27 11:15:51 AM
1 votes:

randomjsa: A stance he's supposedly taken for awhile now but I don't see him writing extra checks to the government on his own... I wonder why.


Because this is a counterargument used by idiots.
2012-11-27 11:14:54 AM
1 votes:

randomjsa: A stance he's supposedly taken for awhile now but I don't see him writing extra checks to the government on his own... I wonder why.


Because that's not an effective way to get tax policy changed?
2012-11-27 11:08:55 AM
1 votes:

tenpoundsofcheese: jncgrasshopper: tenpoundsofcheese: Wut a surprise!


I would suggest 30 percent of taxable income between $1 million and $10 million, and 35 percent on amounts above that. A plain and simple rule like that will block the efforts of lobbyists, lawyers and contribution-hungry legislators to keep the ultrarich paying rates well below those incurred by people with income just a tiny fraction of ours. Only a minimum tax on very high incomes will prevent the stated tax rate from being eviscerated by these warriors for the wealthy.

Right: he says it wouldn't hurt to raise capital gains, but wut a surprise, he only has a proposal to raise the income tax.
surprise!
He has NO proposal to raise the capital gains tax. NONE.


It's not the raising of taxes, it's the enforcement of a minimum tax. You're reading comprehension is lacking.
2012-11-27 11:08:01 AM
1 votes:

hugram: I uncheck the ignored flag to actually read the troll's comments... After reading the few farkers that handed his ass to him, I don't think tenpoundsofderp will be back to this thread. 

Come on troll, defend yourself on this thread!!!


What a surprise. After getting his ass thoroughly handed to him on a silver platter Warren Buffet's McDonalds tray, he's back to triple down on the same debunked stupidity.

Will he go for the rare quadruple down?
2012-11-27 10:41:23 AM
1 votes:

Carn: That taxable income includes capital gains, you simpleton.


It's cute, I think he really thought he had won this one for a change.
2012-11-27 10:35:52 AM
1 votes:

tenpoundsofcheese: jncgrasshopper: tenpoundsofcheese: Wut a surprise!


Shocking that he is NOT calling for an increase in the capital gains tax...wut a surprise, most of his income is from capital gains (which is why his effective rate is low).

He is going against 0bama by setting the bar at $1M instead of 250k

From the Actual article and not the article about the article. So let's forget about the rich and ultrarich going on strike and stuffing their ample funds under their mattresses if - gasp - capital gains rates and ordinary income rates are increased....We need to get rid of arrangements like "carried interest" that enable income from labor to be magically converted into capital gains.

But the cool idea of the article is

Additionally, we need Congress, right now, to enact a minimum tax on high incomes. I would suggest 30 percent of taxable income between $1 million and $10 million, and 35 percent on amounts above that. A plain and simple rule like that will block the efforts of lobbyists, lawyers and contribution-hungry legislators to keep the ultrarich paying rates well below those incurred by people with income just a tiny fraction of ours. Only a minimum tax on very high incomes will prevent the stated tax rate from being eviscerated by these warriors for the wealthy.

Right: he says it wouldn't hurt to raise capital gains, but wut a surprise, he only has a proposal to raise the income tax.
surprise!
He has NO proposal to raise the capital gains tax. NONE.


Buffett published a national column that essentially mocked the idea that higher tax rates on capital gains discourage investment. According to Buffett, legislators should increase taxes on those earning more than $500,000, including minimum rates of at least 30 percent on all income above $1 million.
2012-11-27 10:31:03 AM
1 votes:

Philip Francis Queeg: tenpoundsofcheese: incendi: tenpoundsofcheese: Redacted for people who have TPOC on ignore

Couldn't be bothered to read the article or the thread before waltzing in and taking a dump, eh?

From the source NYT: " I would suggest 30 percent of taxable income between $1 million and $10 million, and 35 percent on amounts above that."

So he did NOT call for an increase in the capital gains.

Capitals gains are taxable income you freaking moron.

2012-11-27 10:23:51 AM
1 votes:

tenpoundsofcheese: Wut a surprise!

Shocking that he is NOT calling for an increase in the capital gains tax...wut a surprise, most of his income is from capital gains (which is why his effective rate is low).



Been pointed out by others. I just wanted to make sure that tendpoundsofderp and others see how to be an unsuccessful thinker. Reading for him is, apparently, very hard.
2012-11-27 10:17:27 AM
1 votes:

tenpoundsofcheese: Wut a surprise!


Shocking that he is NOT calling for an increase in the capital gains tax...wut a surprise, most of his income is from capital gains (which is why his effective rate is low).

He is going against 0bama by setting the bar at $1M instead of 250k


From the Actual article and not the article about the article. So let's forget about the rich and ultrarich going on strike and stuffing their ample funds under their mattresses if - gasp - capital gains rates and ordinary income rates are increased....We need to get rid of arrangements like "carried interest" that enable income from labor to be magically converted into capital gains.

But the cool idea of the article is

Additionally, we need Congress, right now, to enact a minimum tax on high incomes. I would suggest 30 percent of taxable income between $1 million and $10 million, and 35 percent on amounts above that. A plain and simple rule like that will block the efforts of lobbyists, lawyers and contribution-hungry legislators to keep the ultrarich paying rates well below those incurred by people with income just a tiny fraction of ours. Only a minimum tax on very high incomes will prevent the stated tax rate from being eviscerated by these warriors for the wealthy.
2012-11-27 10:07:56 AM
1 votes:
It looks like noted Supply-Side proponent and Reagan adviser, Bruce Bartlett, has also joined the ranks of the communists.


Link


/Semi-threadjack
2012-11-27 10:06:47 AM
1 votes:

tenpoundsofcheese: Wut a surprise!


Shocking that he is NOT calling for an increase in the capital gains tax...wut a surprise, most of his income is from capital gains (which is why his effective rate is low).

He is going against 0bama by setting the bar at $1M instead of 250k


FTFA: So let's forget about the rich and ultrarich going on strike and stuffing their ample funds under their mattresses if - gasp - capital gains rates and ordinary income rates are increased. The ultrarich, including me, will forever pursue investment opportunities.

Yes, he is calling for raising capital gains taxes, dumbfark. Is your reading comprehension at a preschooler's level or something?
2012-11-27 09:44:43 AM
1 votes:

Headso: Capital gains are great for middle class and poor people who are trying to get ahead, taxes on capital gains should be progressive and structured in a way where the middle class and poor pay almost nothing when they actually have those gains. People so quick to say just tax capital gains like income should think about how that could hurt small time entrepreneurs.


FWIW, short-term capital gains are already taxed as regular income... so, when I buy/sell my stock options in the same day, I pay regular income tax rates on my profits. I guess it's a shame that I don't have 10s of thousands of dollars laying around to just BUY the shares and sit on them for over a year before selling them to take advantage of those long-term rates... I guess that is something people with a lot more money than me can take advantage of.
2012-11-27 09:39:10 AM
1 votes:

incendi: Nurglitch: Interestingly he lives within his salary, which is pretty modest. He's not using those capital gains to do more than earn more capital.

Link

Yep, he's gotten super-rich by investing in companies and encouraging them to grow, not investing in companies, loading them with debt, paying himself dividends and management fees from the borrowed money, and then casting them off to die. It's almost like you can be a successful businessman without being an asshole sociopath.

/yeah, I'm lookin' at you, Romney


Compared to Buffet Romney is a poor looser who has no idea how to invest properly and gets shiatty returns.
2012-11-27 09:37:13 AM
1 votes:

Nurglitch: Interestingly he lives within his salary, which is pretty modest. He's not using those capital gains to do more than earn more capital.


Link

Yep, he's gotten super-rich by investing in companies and encouraging them to grow, not investing in companies, loading them with debt, paying himself dividends and management fees from the borrowed money, and then casting them off to die. It's almost like you can be a successful businessman without being an asshole sociopath.

/yeah, I'm lookin' at you, Romney
2012-11-27 09:36:07 AM
1 votes:

cirby: Gee... the guy who makes most of his money off of selling tax shelters to rich people wants more taxes on rich people, so they'll invest more money with his companies so he can make even more money. What a shock.


Higher taxes on the rich will lead to increased investment? Funny, I've heard right-wingers of all stripes claiming that any increase in capital gains taxes will lead to decreased investing.
2012-11-27 09:34:04 AM
1 votes:

Lost Thought 00: Of course he's for it, he doesn't make a dime in income. Call me when he proposes taxing capital gains as income, that'll be real news


"So let's forget about the rich and ultra rich going on strike and stuffing their ample funds under their mattresses if - gasp - capital gains rates and ordinary income rates are increased," he said. "The ultra rich, including me, will forever pursue investment opportunities."

He was calling for a minimum tax for the rich in TFA and the above statement does not seem to indicate a desire to leave capital gains untouched.
2012-11-27 09:31:36 AM
1 votes:

Lost Thought 00: Of course he's for it, he doesn't make a dime in income. Call me when he proposes taxing capital gains as income, that'll be real news


FTFA: "So let's forget about the rich and ultra rich going on strike and stuffing their ample funds under their mattresses if - gasp - capital gains rates and ordinary income rates are increased," he said. "The ultra rich, including me, will forever pursue investment opportunities."
2012-11-27 09:26:43 AM
1 votes:

Cythraul: hinten: The most amazing thing to see is that the comments under TFA all focus on the fact that "poor people don't even pay 1% in taxes."

Tax the poor!

Also, Warren and Ben have been saying this for years now. Not exactly news.


This. Subby, he was saying this before Ben stein
2012-11-27 09:22:01 AM
1 votes:
in before donate your money to the goverment
2012-11-27 09:15:20 AM
1 votes:
"In the meantime, maybe you'll run into someone with a terrific investment idea, who won't go forward with it because of the tax he would owe when it succeeds," Buffett said. "Send him my way. Let me unburden him."

I think I have a Buffett crush
 
Displayed 26 of 26 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report