• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ronald Reagan Backs The Buffett Rule?

whysoserious said:
Everyone keeps talking about this number like it is so huge, but there is no frame of reference. What is the number historically? What was it last year, 5 years ago, 10 years ago, et al? They have latched onto this number like it is the Holy Grail, but there is no way to really use it as a statistic unless we know more about it.
Click to expand...

I assume you are talking about the "x% that pay nothing in fed income tax". I think that number did jump when the recession started. Obviously it didn't jump due to tax cuts as there were none that correlated with the start of the recession, so I would think that it could be attributed to unemployment. A family with two $35,000 incomes would pay federal income tax, but a family that lost one of those incomes for more than a few months would drop into the category of those who don't.

I do know that when income tax was first created, it only applied to the top few percent, most people paid nothing, and I beleve it stayed that way until WWII at which time everyones taxes went up substantially.
 
Last edited:
1Perry said:
Buffett doesn't support the Buffett rule.

Buffett Doesn’t Support “Buffett Rule” » The American Mind
Click to expand...

Your source is lying to you. From the source:

In essence, Buffett wants another Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) while the administration proposes a broader tax that applies higher tax rates "to those making over $1 million." Neither are good, because both would hurt American job creators and make them less competitive globally.
Click to expand...

See that link to "administration proposes"? If you follow it, you find out:

Second, even among the three out of every 1,000 who make more than $1 million, it affects only those within that group that pay at low rates. Some millionaires pay near the top marginal rate of 35 percent—higher than middle class families. In fact, many — if not most — of the few true small business owners making over $1 million already pay ordinary income tax rates (and not the preferential rates) and thus would not be impacted at all by the Buffett Rule.
Click to expand...

Oops.....
 
Heres some real numbers for you ....why is there less jobs today than ever...when today the rich and corporations pay HALF what they did 30 yrs ago...there goes the gimme more tax cuts and we will create jobs..LIES..

1980 the richest americans paid 70% income tax... the unemployment rate was 6.3....today they pay 35 % and who knows what the real unemployment rate is..

Historical Top Tax Rate

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/UNRATE.txt

I wish the teaparty and their cheerleaders would please stop lieing to me face
 
And what happened in 2008 to cause that sharp spike in people not owing income tax?
 
Samhain said:
I agree. low rates + no deductions = no loopholes.

Throw in a 0% corporate tax rate and I'm sold.
Click to expand...

The thing is, that it is not the taxes that are the main problem, the main problem is that 5% of the people of this country has hoarded up all the money in this country, but the problem is not really the hoarding of the money but that the 5% of people with the money are unwilling to invest the money back into the country that made them rich, but want to desert the country and the people that made them rich and invest that money (American money, money they made in America off the backs of the American people) in China and other country that have a lower pay rate than the American people do. Then they don't want to pay any capital gains tax on the money they make off the money they have hoarded up. I say you can do one of two things, you can come to your sences an invest in the country that made you,or the people are going to march and take it form you. The next move is your. I hear ya'll talking about class war fare, I say what war, because even at 80% to 20% there is no war. We're starting to march, the numbers are growing,so you have very little time to change, or we're going to change you.
 
imagep said:
I am fairly sure that it also includes retire people. As our population ages, even more people will pay little or nothing in income tax. How we supposed to tax people who are living off their savings and have little income?
Click to expand...

It won't be a problem until they can actually make money on their savings.
 
Redress said:
Your source is lying to you. From the source:



See that link to "administration proposes"? If you follow it, you find out:
Click to expand...

I'll find out it's a link to the White House. What they believe the "essence" of what Buffet's arguement is seems to differ from what he says it actually is.
 
Redress said:
You know that Buffet is not Berkshire? You know that the taxes in question where disputed, not just ignored?
Click to expand...

He is the CEO as such there is little within the company he can't get done if he wants to.

This is not materially different than his shielding paying taxes by giving shares to a charity. This is not a bad thing, he is playing by the rules. Just wish he was a bit more honest about others who also play by the rules.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Buffett is CEO, you would think he would have jumped at the chance to pay all the tax he could since he thinks he doesn't pay enough.
Click to expand...

Except he has never claimed any one should pay more than they owe. So sorry, but you still fail.

Oh, and a hint: attacking Buffett personally in no way changes the validity or lack thereof of his claims. What you are doing is what people who can't actually challenge the substance of the issue do.
 
Redress said:
Except he has never claimed any one should pay more than they owe. So sorry, but you still fail.

Oh, and a hint: attacking Buffett personally in no way changes the validity or lack thereof of his claims. What you are doing is what people who can't actually challenge the substance of the issue do.
Click to expand...

Buffet says he doesn't owe enough then when IRS sends him a bill he calls his lawyers, oh and hint: if someone comes out and says they don't get enough to eat and they weigh 400lbs they just may be be dillusional and or fulla s***.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom