Bush's Tax on the Wealthy

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Just read that the 2nd or 3rd richest man in the US is being taxed at a lower rate than his $60,000 secretary. WTF? Is this another one of Bush's wonders?
Warren Buffett has complained that he pays a lower rate of tax than any of his staff - including his receptionist. Buffett, who is worth an estimated $52 billon, said: "The taxation system has tilted toward the rich and away from the middle class in the last 10 years.
The United States' second-richest man has delivered a blunt message to the Bush administration: he wants to pay more tax.
Warren Buffett has complained that he pays a lower rate of tax than any of his staff - including his receptionist.
Buffett, who is worth an estimated $52 billon, said: "The taxation system has tilted toward the rich and away from the middle class in the last 10 years. It's dramatic; I don't think it's appreciated and I think it should be addressed."
During an interview with NBC television, Buffett brandished an informal survey of 15 of his 18 office staff at his Berkshire Hathaway empire. The billionaire said he was paying 17.7 percent payroll and income tax, compared with an average in the office of 32.9 percent.
"There wasn't anyone in the office, from the receptionist up, who paid as low a tax rate and I have no tax planning; I don't have an accountant or use tax shelters. I just follow what the US Congress tells me to do," he said.
Buffett also took a pot shot at hedge fund managers. He said: "Hedge fund operators have spent a record amount lobbying in the last few months - they give money to the political campaigns. Who represents the cleaning lady?"
His intervention comes amid an increasingly rancorous debate on Capitol Hill about tax. Shortly after taking office, President George W. Bush pushed through $2 trillion in temporary tax cuts, including sharp reductions for high-earners. These expire at the end of 2010 and the White House wants to renew them.
The Guardian

[058]

If Mr. Buffet want to pay more taxes the IRS will gladly accept any and all dollars he wishes to pay over and above what his tax rate may be. I love the way liberals spin this BS about "the rich are not paying their fair share" Exactly what is their fair share? Perhaps the government should learn to live within it's means rather than tax the people that [inpart] provide jobs, buy things that poor and middle class can not afford, pay a higher tax rate already [39+% now] buy houses and property at inflated rates that generate more tax dollars than if the property were not sold or sold at a much lower rate. The one thing that stands out with liberals is they do not understand the concept of Creation of Wealth. To Liberals if someone makes a dollar it is because it was taken from someone else. They do NOT know how to create wealth, just take from those that do.

[bigq]

Something isnt right there if she is paying that much. I don't know about you, but I am nowhere near 39% that is insane. Mine is right at about 18%.
If he feels so bad why not give some of that cash to his secretary, he makes Billions and pays her 60 ? Whats up with that....OLD FART!
His informal poll I think is a bunch of shit. Here is that tax rate schedule according to the IRS used for estimating your taxes.
http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article...150856,00.html
At a quick glance she is paying about 14% if married without any deductions.

[Boatcop]

He didn't state what amount that 17.7% is applied to. But with his being the "second richest" man in the US, you can bet that's a pretty healthy sum.
Even with a conservative 100 million, that 17.7% would be 17.7 million into the US treasury.
And that 17.9% includes payroll tax of 6.2% (SS) and 1.45% (medicare), which would make his personal and business income tax much higher.
So let's nail the rich with higher taxes. That'll teach them for being successful. Maybe that would let their employees pay lower taxes. Or even no taxes, since higher taxes would force the "wealthy" to cut staff and put those people out of a job.
Every single time a tax cut has been put in place, for the wealthy, middle class or poor, tax revenue into the treasury has increased substantially. And every time a tax increase is applied, revenue declines.
But for some reason, the left cannot grasp this concept, and want to punish those who are successful, to make it "fair" for the lazy.
Why do liberals think the only reason socialism has never worked, anywhere it's been tried, is because THEY weren't in charge?

[Schiada76]

Warren Buffet made his fortune by taking advantage of egregious death taxes.
He's a bloodsucking bottom feeder.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

If Mr. Buffet want to pay more taxes the IRS will gladly accept any and all dollars he wishes to pay over and above what his tax rate may be. I love the way liberals spin this BS about "the rich are not paying their fair share" Exactly what is their fair share? Perhaps the government should learn to live within it's means rather than tax the people that [inpart] provide jobs, buy things that poor and middle class can not afford, pay a higher tax rate already [39+% now] buy houses and property at inflated rates that generate more tax dollars than if the property were not sold or sold at a much lower rate. The one thing that stands out with liberals is they do not understand the concept of Creation of Wealth. To Liberals if someone makes a dollar it is because it was taken from someone else. They do NOT know how to create wealth, just take from those that do.
My post was not attempted to be a spin. I thought that you folks might find it interesting. If someone who is worth 50 plus billion dollars, is paying income tax at a lower rate than I am, there is something f'n wrong. What does this have to do with be being liberal or conservative. It's f.n wrong.
If this is the case, the system is even more broken than I thought.
He didn't state what amount that 17.7% is applied to. But with his being the "second richest" man in the US, you can bet that's a pretty healthy sum.
Even with a conservative 100 million, that 17.7% would be 17.7 million into the US treasury.
And that 17.9% includes payroll tax of 6.2% (SS) and 1.45% (medicare), which would make his personal and business income tax much higher.
So let's nail the rich with higher taxes. That'll teach them for being successful. Maybe that would let their employees pay lower taxes. Or even no taxes, since higher taxes would force the "wealthy" to cut staff and put those people out of a job.
Every single time a tax cut has been put in place, for the wealthy, middle class or poor, tax revenue into the treasury has increased substantially. And every time a tax increase is applied, revenue declines.
But for some reason, the left cannot grasp this concept, and want to punish those who are successful, to make it "fair" for the lazy.
Why do liberals think the only reason socialism has never worked, anywhere it's been tried, is because THEY weren't in charge?
How about taxing folks like this at the same rate as you or I. Not at a higher rate, the same. You seem to be defending taxing the ultra rich at a lower rate than the middle class.
Something isnt right there if she is paying that much. I don't know about you, but I am nowhere near 39% that is insane. Mine is right at about 18%.
If he feels so bad why not give some of that cash to his secretary, he makes Billions and pays her 60 ? Whats up with that....OLD FART!
His informal poll I think is a bunch of shit. Here is that tax rate schedule according to the IRS used for estimating your taxes.
http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article...150856,00.html
At a quick glance she is paying about 14% if married without any deductions.
I agree that 39% is off.
Do you agree with the ultra rich should be taxed a lower rate than middle class. BC seems to think that the rich paying an equal % is in some way socialist and liberal.

[bigq]

My post was not attempted to be a spin. I thought that you folks might find it interesting. If someone who is worth 50 plus billion dollars, is paying income tax at a lower rate than I am, there is something f'n wrong. What does this have to do with be being liberal or conservative. It's f.n wrong.
If this is the case, the system is even more broken than I thought.
How about taxing folks like this at the same rate as you or I. Not at a higher rate, the same. You seem to be defending taxing the ultra rich at a lower rate than the middle class.
I think conservative or liberal they both want our money

[ULTRA26 # 1]

I think conservative or liberal they both want our money
I agree.
Please help me here. Is it the Conservative way to tax the ultra rich at a lower % rate than the middle class?

[Boatcop]

My post was not attempted to be a spin. I thought that you folks might find it interesting. If someone who is worth 50 plus billion dollars, is paying income tax at a lower rate than I am, there is something f'n wrong. What does this have to do with be being liberal or conservative. It's f.n wrong.
If this is the case, the system is even more broken than I thought.
How about taxing folks like this at the same rate as you or I. Not at a higher rate, the same. You seem to be defending taxing the ultra rich at a lower rate than the middle class.
Those figures are "fuzzy math". Here's the tax rate for Income Taxes in the US. (Adjusted Gross Income)
Single
0 - $7,550 10% of the amount over $0
$7,550 - $30,650 $755 plus 15% of the amount over 7,550
$30,650 - $74,200 $4,220.00 plus 25% of the amount over 30,650
$74,200 - $154,800 $15,107.50 plus 28% of the amount over 74,200
$154,800 - $336,550 $37,675.50 plus 33% of the amount over 154,800
$336,550 - no limit $97,653.00 plus 35% of the amount over 336,550
Married/Joint
$0 - $15,100 10% of the amount over $0
$15,100 - $61,300 $1,510.00 plus 15% of the amount over 15,100
$61,300 - $123,700 $8,440.00 plus 25% of the amount over 61,300
$123,700 - $188,450 $24,040.00 plus 28% of the amount over 123,700
$188,450 - $336,550 $42,170.00 plus 33% of the amount over 188,450
$336,550 - no limit $91,043.00 plus 35% of the amount over 336,550
Show me where the ultra wealthy have a lower tax rate than the middle class?
I don't advocate the wealthy paying a lower tax rate, and the tables above show that they don't.
On Buffet's hypothetical 100 Mil income, his income tax is around 35%. His secretary at $60,000 is closer to 24%. And those figures are without any deductions. That secretary with typical deductions would probably lower the tax rate to around 12-15%, while deductions for Buffet wouldn't lower his 35% rate any.
People throw up figures and no body questions them. A few minutes with a calculator would show that Buffet's statements and figures are misleading and definitely not correct.

[bigq]

I agree.
Please help me here. Is it the Conservative way to tax the ultra rich at a lower % rate than the middle class?
I would be in favor of a flat tax rate across the board or some kind of a national sales tax so you only pay on use.
I disagree with taxing the rich more or less than someone with average income for several reason.