[ontap]

What such a move would do is transform the system from a mimicry of private pensions to a straight welfare program, taking from richer people and giving to the poorer. Any pretense that the Social Security System was one of paying our own way would go out the window.

The founders of SS knew from the beginning that it would inevitably morph into what it has become, it was never anything but a ponzi scheme.

[Alberta's Child]

What Warren Buffett has done, of course, is lump Social Security contributions (payroll taxes) with the federal income tax. Then, he complains (so to speak) that his Social Security taxes aren’t high enough. His claim makes no sense if Social Security taxes are excluded. Considering the basic federal income tax only, he pays at a higher rate than his assistants. Far more.

I beg to differ with the author of this article. What Warren Buffett has done is no different than what Congress itself has done for years (since 1969, I believe) -- i.e., treat payroll taxes as no different than other sources of tax revenue in Federal budget calculations.

This isn't to suggest that Buffett is right when he claims that "rich people" should be paying more taxes in this country. In fact, the guy is an opporunistic fraud who would probably NEVER end up paying effective tax rates as high as his employees' tax rates -- no matter how the tax code changes.

[stevem]

Brokaw immediately eggs Buffett on, asking about why there’s no outrage about this. Buffett is philosophic:

Did Brokaw ask Buffett to take out his check book and make out a check to the revenuer of his choice for that amount he thinks he underpaid over the years?

[AmericaUnited]

But, on my side, I didn’t let myself be interviewed by Tom Brokaw and say that I should be taxed at a higher rate.

The guy is a flaming fraud since absolutely NOTHING prevents him from cutting a check to the United States Treasury for the additional tax he thinks he should be paying. Buffet knows that and the fact that he has not done so every years makes a LIAR out of him.

[The Great RJ]

Marginal tax rates for the highest income brackets during the 1950s topped out at over 90%. Note, the US economy during the 1950s grew at an abysmal rate. The reason....there was no incentive to invest as any significant gains would have been taxed away and for the wealthy their after tax income didn’t allow them to either save or invest. To his credit JFK succeeded on reducing these rates to about 77% in 1963 and started an economic boom.

[Smokin' Joe]

It'll never happen. I have little doubt enough of Congress could be bought for a fraction of the cost of an open ended FICA contribution.

Besides that moving target of income beyond the cutoff was something to pursue once its existence was understood.

[mo]

“Taxing the Rich”...is how we’ve got the oligarchy we enjoy. Depending upon whose figures you use...5% of the country pays more than 60% of the taxes. Heck yes! they’re gonna rule the place...and the more you tax ‘em...the more they’ll grab. Health Care next comes to mind. “Progressive taxation” progressively creates a wealthy ruling class...which has effectively bought the government those who did’nt want a part of, sold them.