Myth buster: In fact the rich are making less and paying more taxes

[Redstater]

The Falling Fortunes of the One Percent -- U.S. Business News - CNBC

 

[volprof]

And yet we have Warren Buffett, who says the rich aren't paying enough, and, in fact, that he pays less percentage than his maid. Maybe Mr. Buffett is a big gooberhead. Yeah, he's bound to be a big ole' gooberhead.

 

[Vols520]

And yet we have Warren Buffett, who says the rich aren't paying enough, and, in fact, that he pays less percentage than his maid. Maybe Mr. Buffett is a big gooberhead. Yeah, he's bound to be a big ole' gooberhead.

Is there a point to your post?

 

[volprof]

Is there a point to your post?

Get in contact with Warren.

 

[n_huffhines]

And yet we have Warren Buffett, who says the rich aren't paying enough, and, in fact, that he pays less percentage than his maid. Maybe Mr. Buffett is a big gooberhead. Yeah, he's bound to be a big ole' gooberhead.

Buffet has recently gone to court to dispute taxes he claimed he didn't owe. Strange behavior for somebody who feels like he doesn't pay his fair share. Also, it was his secretary, not his maid, and that whole farce has proven to be just that.

 

[YorkVol]

And yet we have Warren Buffett, who says the rich aren't paying enough, and, in fact, that he pays less percentage than his maid. Maybe Mr. Buffett is a big gooberhead. Yeah, he's bound to be a big ole' gooberhead.

He's a smart gooberhead. His statements earn him political capital on one hand and help him drive his investments up on the other.

 

[volprof]

I guess his original statements should just be written off then. God bless America, and God bless the Rich of the USA! They have it very hard, I know. Look, I'm not even necessarily for the graduated income tax, but this defense of the rich just boggles my mind. Give them some tax breaks, and they'll create jobs some say. Yeah, some will and some won't. Chances are they're just as likely to buy another yacht or two. All I know is that large corporate tax rates are lower now than they were in the 1950s, yet corporations stayed here and provided jobs. Maybe things change and maybe corporations need to grow through other means, but it seems to me that there is some foul (and not just fair) on the part of the corporations.

Anyhow, I don't claim to know all that's going on in our current economy. I'll leave that to the experts.

 

[BigPapaVol]

And yet we have Warren Buffett, who says the rich aren't paying enough, and, in fact, that he pays less percentage than his maid. Maybe Mr. Buffett is a big gooberhead. Yeah, he's bound to be a big ole' gooberhead.

Mr Buffett is a disingenuous bastard and knows fully well that he has been a beneficiary of tax laws and has paid many a tax attorney to help him avoid the tax man. Now that his wealth is built to the point of giving it away, it's easy for him to decry the tax situation.

His stand is akin to the sleaziest guy in the history of the stock market, Joe Kennedy, fighting to curtail insider trading.

 

[MG1968]

I guess his original statements should just be written off then. God bless America, and God bless the Rich of the USA! They have it very hard, I know. Look, I'm not even necessarily for the graduated income tax, but this defense of the rich just boggles my mind. Give them some tax breaks, and they'll create jobs some say. Yeah, some will and some won't. Chances are they're just as likely to buy another yacht or two. All I know is that large corporate tax rates are lower now than they were in the 1950s, yet corporations stayed here and provided jobs. Maybe things change and maybe corporations need to grow through other means, but it seems to me that there is some foul (and not just fair) on the part of the corporations.

Anyhow, I don't claim to know all that's going on in our current economy. I'll leave that to the experts.

do you have any clue how many man-hours it takes to build a yacht? Also, once said yacht is built, it has to be crewed and maintained. There are dozens of well paying jobs associated with big-ticket luxury items. Those people, in turn, make their own purchases, and so on down the line.

 

[volprof]

do you have any clue how many man-hours it takes to build a yacht? Also, once said yacht is built, it has to be crewed and maintained. There are dozens of well paying jobs associated with big-ticket luxury items. Those people, in turn, make their own purchases, and so on down the line.

I guess anytime I spend my money I become a bastion of morality then, since I'm thinking about all of the workers who were involved in the process. Workers who may or may not be from the US.

 

[hog88]

I guess his original statements should just be written off then. God bless America, and God bless the Rich of the USA! They have it very hard, I know. Look, I'm not even necessarily for the graduated income tax, but this defense of the rich just boggles my mind. Give them some tax breaks, and they'll create jobs some say. Yeah, some will and some won't. Chances are they're just as likely to buy another yacht or two. All I know is that large corporate tax rates are lower now than they were in the 1950s, yet corporations stayed here and provided jobs. Maybe things change and maybe corporations need to grow through other means, but it seems to me that there is some foul (and not just fair) on the part of the corporations.

Anyhow, I don't claim to know all that's going on in our current economy. I'll leave that to the experts.

In the 50's the stock trading did not include the average American that jumps, buys or sells, everytime an analyst cries wolf. COE's were more about running their buisness not the daily stock price.

Shipping was also cost prohibitive in the 50's not to mention the infastructure in the 3rd world could not support major manufacturing.

 

[n_huffhines]

I guess his original statements should just be written off then. God bless America, and God bless the Rich of the USA! They have it very hard, I know. Look, I'm not even necessarily for the graduated income tax, but this defense of the rich just boggles my mind. Give them some tax breaks, and they'll create jobs some say. Yeah, some will and some won't. Chances are they're just as likely to buy another yacht or two. All I know is that large corporate tax rates are lower now than they were in the 1950s, yet corporations stayed here and provided jobs. Maybe things change and maybe corporations need to grow through other means, but it seems to me that there is some foul (and not just fair) on the part of the corporations.

Anyhow, I don't claim to know all that's going on in our current economy. I'll leave that to the experts.

It's the attacks that are so mind bottling. I defend the rich because I want everybody to be treated equally under the law.

 

[Redstater]

"The One Percent paid an average effective tax rate of 28.9 percent on their income — far more than any other group, and more than twice the average effective rate of the middle class, who paid 11 percent on average.

So the rich lost more income and paid more of their money in taxes than the rest of the population.
This is not an argument against taxing the wealthy. And the incomes and tax rates of the wealthy may have jumped back since 2009, with the rebound in financial markets.

But when politicians and pundits talk about the rich just getting richer and paying less taxes, they need to pay closer attention to the actual numbers".


Liberals are comfortable when confronting you with their feelings but they go apoplectic when confronted with facts. At the point they preface their argument with "I just feel...", you might as well quit and start talking football because you're getting ready for a lesson in inane reasoning based on how they feel about a topic.

 

[volprof]

It's the attacks that are so mind bottling. I defend the rich because I want everybody to be treated equally under the law.

"The One Percent paid an average effective tax rate of 28.9 percent on their income — far more than any other group, and more than twice the average effective rate of the middle class, who paid 11 percent on average.

So the rich lost more income and paid more of their money in taxes than the rest of the population.
This is not an argument against taxing the wealthy. And the incomes and tax rates of the wealthy may have jumped back since 2009, with the rebound in financial markets.

But when politicians and pundits talk about the rich just getting richer and paying less taxes, they need to pay closer attention to the actual numbers".


Liberals are comfortable when confronting you with their feelings but they go apoplectic when confronted with facts. At the point they preface their argument with "I just feel...", you might as well quit and start talking football because you're getting ready for a lesson in inane reasoning based on how they feel about a topic.

And I want everyone to be treated equally under the law as well. As I told a poster in another thread, I'm actually opposed to a graduated income tax. I think everyone should pay an equal amount, percentage wise. However, I just don't get why so many posters on here are always rushing to the defense of the super wealthy. I can understand why you might want to defend the small business owner but not necessarily the super wealthy. They're not going to be hurting no matter what in most cases.

 

[volprof]

In the 50's the stock trading did not include the average American that jumps, buys or sells, everytime an analyst cries wolf. COE's were more about running their buisness not the daily stock price.

Shipping was also cost prohibitive in the 50's not to mention the infastructure in the 3rd world could not support major manufacturing.

Let me first say that I have no issue with you, hog88. I will say that the stock market is often complete bullcrap. It's one of the dumbest human inventions I've ever known. Someone farts in a foreign oilfield and the market plummets. It's built on trust, and trust is evidently very weak.

Regarding your second paragraph, do you think it's ok then to outsource? I'll be the first to admit that I see the benefits and the disadvantages of such a policy. However, unless I'm just a small business who requires it in order to survive and feed my family, I don't know that I see this maneuver as the best in terms of an American jobs standpoint.

 

[n_huffhines]

And I want everyone to be treated equally under the law as well. As I told a poster in another thread, I'm actually opposed to a graduated income tax. I think everyone should pay an equal amount, percentage wise. However, I just don't get why so many posters on here are always rushing to the defense of the super wealthy. I can understand why you might want to defend the small business owner but not necessarily the super wealthy. They're not going to be hurting no matter what in most cases.

"Are you serious? I just told you that a moment ago."

 

[n_huffhines]

If you supported equal treatment under the law then you would defend the rich who are not treated equally under tax law.

 

[volprof]

If you supported equal treatment under the law then you would defend the rich who are not treated equally under tax law.

Zoolander aside, I thought I just said that I don't support a graduated income tax, nor do I necessarily disagree with anyone making a lot of money by fair means. I defend the rich in that regard. And to be completely honest, I think the rich are doing just fine without my moral support. They will make money regardless. They don't need all of us to defend them. When I start seeing men and women out on the street by the hundreds and thousands, armed to the teeth, threatening to take from the rich (without good reason), then I will come to the aid of the rich.

 

[n_huffhines]

WTF?

Currently the government is armed to the teeth, and taking from the rich. Not threatening to take their wealth. Actually taking it. I don't feel sorry for them, or feel they need moral support. I wouldn't even call my stance a defense of the rich as much as I would call it an attack on immoral government. The same power that allows government to screw the rich is the same power that allows them to screw medicinal marijuana users, victims of eminent domain, etc.

A government who has the power to screw over the big guy is definitely screwing over the little guy too. See where I'm coming from?

 

[volprof]

WTF?

Currently the government is armed to the teeth, and taking from the rich. Not threatening to take their wealth. Actually taking it. I don't feel sorry for them, or feel they need moral support. I wouldn't even call my stance a defense of the rich as much as I would call it an attack on immoral government. The same power that allows government to screw the rich is the same power that allows them to screw medicinal marijuana users, victims of eminent domain, etc.

A government who has the power to screw over the big guy is definitely screwing over the little guy too. See where I'm coming from?

While I don't necessarily agree with the gratuitous "WTF?," I will admit that I do understand your position a little better now. Thanks for clarifying. I don't think that you and I are in that much disagreement on this matter after all. I haven't been on this forum very long, but what little time I have, there have been several articles/threads posted that seem to defend the big guy over the little guy (at least in principle, if not in reality [intention]). It's fine with me if people want to defend each party equally, because I think each party warrants some defense, but it seems to me like the little guy takes it on the chin on this forum. I could be wrong about that; that's just my interpretation of things on here, so I could very well be wrong.

 

[YorkVol]

I guess his original statements should just be written off then. God bless America, and God bless the Rich of the USA! They have it very hard, I know. Look, I'm not even necessarily for the graduated income tax, but this defense of the rich just boggles my mind. Give them some tax breaks, and they'll create jobs some say. Yeah, some will and some won't. Chances are they're just as likely to buy another yacht or two. All I know is that large corporate tax rates are lower now than they were in the 1950s, yet corporations stayed here and provided jobs. Maybe things change and maybe corporations need to grow through other means, but it seems to me that there is some foul (and not just fair) on the part of the corporations.

Anyhow, I don't claim to know all that's going on in our current economy. I'll leave that to the experts.

Hey Prof, I wasn't defending him, I just take everything any rich guy says with a big lump of salt.

 

[PKT_VOL]

Ugh. We have a spending problem, not a collection problem.

 

[vols4sure]

And yet we have Warren Buffett, who says the rich aren't paying enough, and, in fact, that he pays less percentage than his maid. Maybe Mr. Buffett is a big gooberhead. Yeah, he's bound to be a big ole' gooberhead.

What's your definition of rich?

 

[volprof]

Hey Prof, I wasn't defending him, I just take everything any rich guy says with a big lump of salt.

Hey, I've gotcha. I always appreciate your insights on here. I think your opinions are often very good.

 

[volprof]

What's your definition of rich?

Anyone with enough wealth to find a loophole. Anyhow, gentleman, it's been nice this evening. I'm bowing out of this one once again. I'm not going to change anyone's opinion tonight and have some other things to do. I'll come back to fight another day though. In the meantime, fair ye well!