Skip to comments.Obama: Millionaires should pay at least 30 percent in taxes (Obama paid 25%, Mitt 13%, Buffett 10%)
Posted on 01/25/2012 3:23:15 AM PST by tobyhill
People earning over $1 million per year should pay an effective tax rate of no less than 30 percent, President Obama said in his State of the Union address Tuesday night.
The president laid down one of his most political markers of the annual policy speech by crafting what he called the "Buffett Rule," named after the famous billionaire investor.
"Tax reform should follow the Buffett rule: If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes," Obama said.
(Excerpt) Read more at firstread.msnbc.msn.com ...
I would pay that if I could get the favors Warren Buffett gets from you.
The Buffet rule:
Warren Buffett reveals his 2010 income... a paltry $62.9million (and he paid just 10% of that in tax)
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER
Last updated at 12:57 PM on 13th October 2011
“The Buffet Rule”?
Disinherit your kids and park your wealth in tax shelters to minimize your taxable income?
Hire a law firm to dispute a decade’s worth of unpaid taxes with the iRS?
So if investment income, cap gains, and ordinary income are taxed at the same rate, what effect would that have on investment in the US?
“Hey Obama, send your check to the IRS.”
A Pox upon Obama and the Obamoids!
The correct response to the Obama “proposal” is:
Reduce the cost of government by restricting government’s actions to those originally specified in the Constitution.
When the ‘Beast of Government’ is once again chained into the carefully created limits clearly defined by the Founders, government will become the minor financial burden is was for most of our history
Let’s call the bluff. Republicans in the House should propose a 30% flat tax on the wealthy ... as part of a unified tax code that counted state and local income taxes, corporate income taxes, payroll taxes, property and sales taxes, and all other assorted taxes and fees against the total. Let 30% be the ceiling in a unifed tax code.
I spent most of my childhood wondering why, since I was not susceptible and those I knew who were tempted in that direction only had minor levels of that flaw, so that I misunderstood its damage at full force. It was only once I started interacting with liberals that I understood the full power and evil of envy. As always, God got that one right. As always, those of us who are tempted in that direction need to fight that temptation, not wallow in it.
Right, because it was so much more important for Romney to send in another few seconds worth of interest on the national debt than to make millions of dollars worth of charitable donations.
Why is Obama so stupid?
Is this idiot ever going to stop with this? He’s like a broken record, his whole Presidency has been nothing but “The rich have got to pay their fair share” or “Why is (enter middle class job here) paying a higher tax rate than a millionaire (or Warren Buffet).....He’s like an automaton, plug in his batteries and he repeats this stuff over and over and over and over and over and over.
I'm sure Buffett has lawyers he can lend to Obama to show him how to give the IRS more.
By the way, Newt Gingrich’s plan would have us all paying closer to what appears to be the standard millionaire’s rates, ie, 15% or less. Newt wants a personal flat tax of 15% after deductions for us working stiffs and he wants to cut the corporate tax rate down to 12.5%, and eliminate the capital gains tax altogether.
This article claims Buffet pays only 10% on his income and I’ve seen articles stating Romney pays 13%. With Newt’s plan, we damned near pay the same rates. Fair is fair. /s
Of course if Newt gets his way and drastically cuts the income tax, then the federal government can’t live on that and that’s got the establishment in a panic.
Well, surprise, surprise. Newt also wants to gut the federal government too. Strip it of its unconstitutional socialist welfare programs and ship them all back to the states and the people where they can either control them locally or shut them down!
He also wants to privatize social security and medicare, phase them out, and eliminate the payroll taxes.
This is Reagan on steroids.
We’re talking major economic boom here!!
The last time these jerkweeds tossed a hissie over millionaires “not paying their fair share”, they instituted the Alternative Minimum Tax.
I’ve had to deal with that monstrosity every year for the past four or five, and I’m sure as hell no millionaire.
Whatever these clowns want to do, at whatever income level they claim they’re going to target, you can bet your bottom dollar (if you’ve still got it after April 15) that it’ll drift down to the middle class - without that revenue, they really can’t confiscate at the levels they want.
If we didn’t have the Obamazombied Americans they would figure out that 15% flat tax is the fair tax.
The whole SOTU was about more welfare to buy votes.
I think Obama fears going up against Newt more than Ole Mittens because Newt strips Obama of any argument about “fair share”.
You make a good point and I had the same experience. As a kid, I never understood the covet thing. Why would I want something that is someone else's? It didn't make sense to me THEN, but as you put it, it didn't make sense until I met liberals.
So after your death you can change social Polices like Plan Parenthood, Population Control, Open Borders and many other leftist causes like the Ford, Carnegie and Rockefeller have been doing for decades.
Buffett’s rate is closer to 1%.
Most of his income is “unrealized capital gains”. And the combined federal-state-local rate on “unrealized capital gains” is 0%. Since he is moving these assets into charitable trusts where they will never be taxed, almost all of his income will never be taxed. (except the taxes at the source, the corporate taxes.)
The DEMS would never dare to tax folks like Buffett.
The INCOME tax is the biggest lie. In essence, it’s a paycheck tax. Rich men don’t get paychecks. They have wealth.
Wealth is not taxed the same as income. An increase in the rates for income will not affect the rich who have vast amounts of wealth in various trust funds and then consume things from the trust fund.
The rest of us have to have jobs where we get paid, i.e., our labor is exchanged for money. We consume things from that money. The government takes from that money first; their cut. Then what’s left over is ours to pay bills, mortgage, buy food, clothes, gas for the car, et., etc.
A rich man lives in a mansion paid for by his trust fund. The limo he rides in is owned not by him, but by the trust fund. The limo driver is not his employee, but rather works for the trust fund. A fancy dinner at the mansion? The food is bought by the trust fund and the chef is paid by the trust fund.
Why would a rich man need an “income”?
On the other hand, a small business owner sells stuff, goods or services, for money. That money is considered income by the government. Even if he uses that income to restock items, pay staff, buy equipment, replace faulty equipment, pay insurance, etc, it’s still all income. Make a million on your small business but pay out $950,000 in expenses?
Guess what? You’re a millionaire. And Obama is gunning for more of your money. So what do you do? Well, that new hire? Hit the road Jack! One more on 99 weeks of unemployment, one more not paying taxes. The economy gets worse. You have to let more workers go.
You see my point. This is hurting, not helping.
How do we get the word out to those who don’t understand this?
When I explain it so to my non-political firends the light bulb goes on over their heads and they start to understand what a mistake an “income” tax is, especially in regards to the wealthy versus the small business owneres.
We all need to do a better job explaining this!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.