Didn't realize that Buffett's secretary

#1
T

tvols75

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Messages
9,219
Likes
14
#1
makes 200-500k a year. Wasn't Obama parading her like she was this middle-class American that paid an outrageous tax rate? He's wanting to tax her bracket even more, is he not?
 
#3
#3
her and hubby also just purchased a second home

Buffet should be ashamed of himself for allowing his secretary to become a political prop
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4
#4
This along with the whole obama aides owing $800K in back taxes pretty much throws out the only argument that they have against Romney
 
Last edited:
#5
#5
MG1968 said:
her and hubby also just purchased a second home

Buffet should be ashamed of himself for allowing his secretary to become a political prop
Click to expand...

Obama should be ashamed to mislead Americans thinking this woman was a middle-class American instead of a person in a tax bracket that he is wanting to tax more.
 
#7
#7
tvols75 said:
Obama should be ashamed to mislead Americans thinking this woman was a middle-class American instead of a person in a tax bracket that he is wanting to tax more.
Click to expand...

neither of our scenarios will happen since neither Obama nor Buffet have a sense of shame anymore, at least not when it comes to class warfare rhetoric
 
#9
#9
nbakerld said:
I need some spin on this, where is LG when you need him?
Click to expand...


On the Obama advisers thing, that's awful. What's the backstory on that? Anyone got a link? (To legit news source, not blog, please).

As to Buffet's secretary, I admit that's pretty funny that she makes that kind of dough and is poster child.

I would say, however, that if you think about it her as example is a pretty good one because the issue is not income inequality. The government should not tinker with that, I think we would all agree. In other words, Buffet and Romney can make all they want.

The issue is taxation inequality. And if we are going to have tiers of taxation on income, the problem is that we should not distinguish between manner of income. That is, whatever a person makes, they fall into a bracket that is shared by all people with that income.

A guy that breaks his back building houses and makes $200,000 a year pays maybe twice as much tax as somebody who earns exactly the same but never works a day and lives off a trust fund is retarded, imo.
 
#10
#10
lawgator1 said:
On the Obama advisers thing, that's awful. What's the backstory on that? Anyone got a link? (To legit news source, not blog, please).

As to Buffet's secretary, I admit that's pretty funny that she makes that kind of dough and is poster child.

I would say, however, that if you think about it her as example is a pretty good one because the issue is not income inequality. The government should not tinker with that, I think we would all agree. In other words, Buffet and Romney can make all they want.

The issue is taxation inequality. And if we are going to have tiers of taxation on income, the problem is that we should not distinguish between manner of income. That is, whatever a person makes, they fall into a bracket that is shared by all people with that income.

A guy that breaks his back building houses and makes $200,000 a year pays maybe twice as much tax as somebody who earns exactly the same but never works a day and lives off a trust fund is retarded, imo.
Click to expand...

Agree. I think we should have a 1-10 scale on work intensity when we file our W2s and 1099s.
 
#12
#12
tvols75 said:
Agree. I think we should have a 1-10 scale on work intensity when we file our W2s and 1099s.
Click to expand...


No need.

Just a sliding scale on all income, regardless of source. No deductions, no breaks or incentives.

0-50,000 Rate is 8 percent
50,0000-150,000 Rate is 12 percent
150,000-500,000 Rate is 16 percent
500,000 + Rate is 20 percent


No corporate income tax. All net revenues of all corporations (minus a predetermined percentage for reinvestment or reasonable reserves) must be assigned to individuals as income and taxed accordingly.

Everyone pays something, even lowest income earners
 
#14
#14
Buffett pays himself a salary of $100k and does everything else he can to lower his tax rate. That's great, no one should pay more in taxes than they are legally required to, however, to then constantly moan about a system he has benefitted greatly from is as ridiculous as a secretary that makes north of $200k
 
#15
#15
lawgator1 said:
No need.

Just a sliding scale on all income, regardless of source. No deductions, no breaks or incentives.

0-50,000 Rate is 8 percent
50,0000-150,000 Rate is 12 percent
150,000-500,000 Rate is 16 percent
500,000 + Rate is 20 percent


No corporate income tax. All net revenues of all corporations (minus a predetermined percentage for reinvestment or reasonable reserves) must be assigned to individuals as income and taxed accordingly.

Everyone pays something, even lowest income earners
Click to expand...

The problem with that is you have a disincentive to get off the couch if currently on welfare. If you make $0, and collect $12K in welfare, it's hard enough to motivate yourself to work 40 hrs/week for $20K (so you're basically working your ass off to make $8K). Now you're saying it's going to be $18,400 after taxes?

This is one of the many reasons I support no income tax at all.
 
#18
#18
VOLatile said:
Multi-hundred-thousandaires just doesn't have the ring to it.
Click to expand...

That might be it or it might be the fact that:

Of the roughly 3.8 million tax filers with incomes over 200K, 3.67 million are not in the "millionaire" club (annual income). Of that 3.67 million, 3.18 million are under $500K.

In truth, the taxes he wants to raise are primarily on people between 200K and 500K but that doesn't sell like millionaires and billionaires.
 
#19
#19
volinbham said:
I still love how the tax hike is aimed at those making $250,000 but the are referred to as millionaires and billionaires :blink:
Click to expand...

What constitues a millionaire, yearly salary or accumulated wealth? Is Buffett a millionaire ($70M in yearly income) or billionaire ($39B in worth)?

I don't really care either way, just saying, maybe your a millionaire to Obama and you just don't know it.
 
#20
#20
Weezy said:
What constitues a millionaire, yearly salary or accumulated wealth? Is Buffett a millionaire ($70M in yearly income) or billionaire ($39B in worth)?

I don't really care either way, just saying, maybe your a millionaire to Obama and you just don't know it.
Click to expand...

The way the tax policy is being presented, it's tied to annual income. However, even someone with annual income of less than $100K could be a millionaire or billionaire technically.

He's not proposing taxing wealth - yet.
 
#21
#21
volinbham said:
The way the tax policy is being presented, it's tied to annual income. However, even someone with annual income of less than $100K could be a millionaire or billionaire technically.

He's not proposing taxing wealth - yet.
Click to expand...

and he won't, if he wants to continue to have most of Hollywood carrying his water
 
#22
#22
Weezy said:
What constitues a millionaire, yearly salary or accumulated wealth? Is Buffett a millionaire ($70M in yearly income) or billionaire ($39B in worth)?

I don't really care either way, just saying, maybe your a millionaire to Obama and you just don't know it.
Click to expand...

Accumulated wealth has always been the standard
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#25
#25
lawgator1 said:
No need.

Just a sliding scale on all income, regardless of source. No deductions, no breaks or incentives.

0-50,000 Rate is 8 percent
50,0000-150,000 Rate is 12 percent
150,000-500,000 Rate is 16 percent
500,000 + Rate is 20 percent


No corporate income tax. All net revenues of all corporations (minus a predetermined percentage for reinvestment or reasonable reserves) must be assigned to individuals as income and taxed accordingly.

Everyone pays something, even lowest income earners
Click to expand...

No to the sliding scale. imo, that takes away the "fairness" aspect and provides incentives for the most successful to be the most creative in hiding their income. Make it flat, same percentage for everyone. The churches are generally happy with 10%, so the government should be also.

Oh, and lets get rid of payroll deductions. Make everyone write a check once a year. If we did that now, without changing anything else in the code, we'd have a wholesale revolt.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top