- Joined
- Oct 4, 2011
- Messages
- 27,204
- Reaction score
- 13,299
- Location
- CT
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Right, he is willing to do it so long as everyone else has to as well. How very 3rd grade of him. Again, he would have my support if he put his money where his mouth is. Have him start paying the taxes he wants his countrymen to pay, before FORCING them to do so, and I promise you, he would get a LOT more support for his cause, because he would prove himself to be genuine.Your premise -- that Buffett is not willing to do it -- is false. Buffett is lobbying for a change that would apply to him. In other words, he is willing to do it so long as it's a systemic change.
When person X is the person trying to MANDATE that collective action, I absolutely expect them to participate, and when it's something like this, I absolutely expect them to LEAD THE WAY.You are making the weak argument that conservatives always make in these cases: that there should be no collective action, when collective action is required, because person X hasn't volunteered by himself.
When someone is trying to force a select few members of the town to start laying down 100,000 sandbags, without actually offering to jump in first, what does it look like? Have we totally forgotten what good leadership is, in this country? Sometimes, to get people to follow you, you have to jump into the fray.If someone is trying to convince the town that 100,000 sandbags need to be laid down to hold back the river, it's senseless to criticize that man because he hasn't already laid down 20 or 30 sandbags himself.
Right, he is willing to do it so long as everyone else has to as well. How very 3rd grade of him. Again, he would have my support if he put his money where his mouth is. Have him start paying the taxes he wants his countrymen to pay, before FORCING them to do so, and I promise you, he would get a LOT more support for his cause, because he would prove himself to be genuine.
When person X is the person trying to MANDATE that collective action, I absolutely expect them to participate, and when it's something like this, I absolutely expect them to LEAD THE WAY.
When someone is trying to force a select few members of the town to start laying down 100,000 sandbags, without actually offering to jump in first, what does it look like? Have we totally forgotten what good leadership is, in this country? Sometimes, to get people to follow you, you have to jump into the fray.
Buffet is not. Buffet is only willing to jump in, so long as everyone else has a guy with a gun to their backs, pushing them in as well. How very noble of the man.
So, for the record, you have not yet answered my question.
If someone doesn't want to do it by choice, why then, would they argue to do it by force? It's a simple question. It has a simple answer. I just think none of you want to hear it.
Again, you start with a false premise. He isn't asking everyone else to start first. He is saying that everyone needs to pitch in together, at the same time. He is leading by example by speaking out publicly and advocating for change. That's how a democracy works. If you are lobbying for a new highway interchange you don't go out with a pick and shovel and start building it yourself.
If someone doesn't want to do it by choice, why then, would they argue to do it by force?
Yes, because Thomas Jefferson was an infamous fascist....
They sound absolutely militant authoritarian......
j-mac
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."
When Bush faced increasing unemployment from a recession that he inherited from Clinton, and the effects of 9/11 exacerbated, those gains cuts spurred the lowest unemployment that this country has seen at 4.5%. Now I am sure you'll give me twisted figures to deny this fact. But I don't expect honesty.
j-mac
No it's better to start two wars borrow money to pay for them that the taxpayer will have to repay with interest rather then help the poor of this country is that what you are saying?
Listen to the GOP debates lately?
Again, you start with a false premise. He isn't asking everyone else to start first. He is saying that everyone needs to pitch in together, at the same time. He is leading by example by speaking out publicly and advocating for change.
Are you serious? You read a mission statement which mentions Jefferson and suddenly that is what they are all about? Incredible. This kidnapping of Jefferson fits the MO
If you really are a patriotic American who does NOT want to see a type of fascism come to our land, you should invest the time and read this
ALEC Exposed - Alec Exposed
That's not what "leading by example" is. Leading by example means leading with your actions. And for the record one more time:
Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Owes Taxes Going Back To 2002
Buffett isn't suggesting that people volunteer more of their money to the IRS, he is suggesting that the tax rates are unfair to the middle-class. I'm sure that if they changed the tax rates Buffett will be more than willing to pay his share, as is Mark Cuban and others who have brought it up, so your comparison is FAIL.If I say "people should grow as much of their own food as possible," and I don't grow any of my own food, am I leading by example by expressing that opinion?
What a lame response. It isn't that Buffett wants to pay more, he is voicing his opinion on how unfair the tax rates are for the middle-class - something that conservatives don't seem to grasp in an effort to stay in step with their millionaire leaders.Deductions are strictly voluntary. I would like to know how many folks in the, "please, raise my taxes", crowd voluntarily don't take deductions.
Doesn't surprise me that you miss the whole point.Anyone that doesn't understand how to pay more taxes, on their own, doesn't know much about the tax code.
Brilliant, in the meantime our country is suffering, your leaders want to protect their money, and you don't mind footing the difference, that is, unless you are one of those millionaires.Take fewer deductions...boom!...you pay more taxes.
The point is that once Obama loses this next election they will fade into the background again.
j-mac
That's not what "leading by example" is. Leading by example means leading with your actions. And for the record one more time:
Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Owes Taxes Going Back To 2002
If I say "people should grow as much of their own food as possible," and I don't grow any of my own food, am I leading by example by expressing that opinion?
It amazes me that, at a time when the resentment toward the very rich has perhaps never been higher, one extremely rich guy can come out and say, with his hands in the air, "hey, I support higher taxes" and immediately the left wing believes him and is thankful for his spirit of generosity and can't see through the BS that this is a self-preserving PR move.
Raising the caps on FICA should suffice.
Your argument would hold water if Buffett was saying that wealthy people should voluntarily pay more in taxes, but that's not what he's saying and your argument does not hold water. He isn't holding himself out as a role model. He's saying that, as a matter of pubic policy, the rich should be required to pay higher taxes.
I'm pretty sure people can't voluntarily pay more in taxes than they owe. So don't mistake me for saying this is what he should do, or that this is what HE'S saying he should do. I get it. But his own investment firm has had its tax issues. The disagreement definitely isn't that Berkshire Hathaway has been paying too much in taxes since 2002. And that's just convenient as a point of irony.
I also don't see how offering this opinion (that tax policy should have the rich paying more) makes him some role model when he has so much to gain from being both philanthropic as well as being widely perceived as such. When you're that rich, you pretty much have to work on crafting an image as a philanthropist. Any alternative makes you an easy focal point for public wrath.
Don't write this off as cynicism. From the standpoint of anyone with that much money, it's a rational move.
When you're as rich as Buffett is it really doesn't matter what people think about you.
Ha,ha, and which of the three critters do you propose is going to beat Obama?
Nitpicking the analogy.... I could come up with a closer one, but not necessary.
Here's the key:
The reason it's argued that it should be done by force is precisely that most people won't do it by choice. How many people do you think would pay taxes if it was 100% voluntary?
Thanks for the link - I wonder why ALEC hasn't been exposed more avidly in the news? It's sort of obvious that corporations have had a huge control over our laws, but this is just insane!
Your argument would hold water if Buffett was saying that wealthy people should voluntarily pay more in taxes, but that's not what he's saying and your argument does not hold water. He isn't holding himself out as a role model. He's saying that, as a matter of pubic policy, the rich should be required to pay higher taxes.
If I said we should have a capital gains tax that is comparable to the income tax at the higher income levels, but NO INCREASES on income taxes at any level...would you agree?
I'm not sure what that means. Comparable how?
My personal belief is that we should immediately create a top tax rate of something like 50% for income over $1 million dollars. Once the economy is on a more solid footing -- say, unemployment at 7% and GDP growth at 3% -- that rate should remain in effect and all of the Bush tax cuts should be rescinded.
In addition we should reform Medicare by implementing limited means testing, permitting negotiation of Rx prices, and moving to a France-type provider compensation model. And we should, of course, cut defense spending considerably. We could also raise the SS retirement age slightly and increase the SS tax cutoff.
If we do all those things we will not have a debt problem.
Buffet alone is not going to change anything just with his money, true.
But then, even a pebble tossed into a pond can eventually become a wave. If you're not willing to toss the pebble, why would you expect to try to force others to do it for you? You gotta start somewhere...and I would be a LOT more behind these people if they were willing to start that SOMEWHERE by choice, rather than trying to start right out with the application of federal force against their fellow man.
It took a while, but you got it!!!!
Its not Buffet's decision as to whether we eliminate the tax cuts for the rich. It will be decided by the majority of Americans next November, and the place the majority of America has decided to start is by eliminating the tax cuts given to the rich over the last 30 years.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?