Warren Buffet....Shill in Chief

[Jackie S]

You miss my point. I have no deductions because I do not qualify for any, or at the most, very few. I have no mortage, I pay cash for automobiles and all other major purchases, all of my income is "earned income,' my salary from by business, which is W-2 income, is my sole source of financial gain. I do not own a credit card aside from the gas card through my business.

None of my medical or any other expenses add up to enough to deduct, and while I do give to charities, (the Salvation Army in particular), I deduct none of it.

I probably live as comfortable in my world as Mr Buffet does in his. I still say that after Mr Buffet goes through all of this shilling for more taxes, he will end up with some sweet heart deal that will allow him to pay what he does now. And the major news media will look the other way.

Sorry you do not approve.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

I still say that after Mr Buffet goes through all of this shilling for more taxes, he will end up with some sweet heart deal that will allow him to pay what he does now. And the major news media will look the other way.

And what do you base this on? Besides, of course, your desire to want it to be true.

Sorry you do not approve.

Of your pretend facts?

[Jackie S]

I would not expect you to agree with me.

That being said, what do you think of the idea of taxing all income, regardless of the source, at the same rate as standard W-2 Wage Income.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

That being said, what do you think of the idea of taxing all income, regardless of the source, at the same rate as standard W-2 Wage Income.

Assuming it's by "income" you mean net and not gross, in general I think it's a good idea. I don't have a problem excluding for basic tax rates IRA's up to some limit. Likewise, I don't have a problem making some limited amount of capital gains or qualified dividends eligible for preferential treatment. (Say the first $5,000 or $10,000 of each.) But the notion of tens of millions in cap gains being treated at preferential rates is just plain nuts. Likewise, the carried interest exception is crazy, at least past a certain point. Just don't mess with my depletion allowance!!

[budman33]

Most of us pay 6.2% extra to the 'ponz scheme' as payroll tax... and the majority of american on every single paycheck year after year.

but as its capped at 106,000. A millionaire stops paying in february, and a lotta CEO's on January 1st sometime just before the hooker rolls off of him and he reaches for a Tylenol to deal with that hangover.

As bachman says, every little bit helps.

[Jackie S]

They could fix SS over night by simply lifting the cut off, in other words, you pay the rate on ALL income, regardless of the way the money was earned.

It would bite me, I get a nice little pay raise every year mid way into the second quarter, depending on bonuses. I would be willing to pay SS for my entire wage for the entire year.

Of course, the Government would probably just throw all of that into the big "black hole" that is the general fund, and in short time, we would be in the same mess again.

I think the rule is a hog will keep on eating as long as you keep throwing slop into the trough.

[Laz]

Is Social Security a welfare program or something you pay into and get benefits from? If it is welfare then eliminate the payroll tax and increase everyones tax rate from dollar one by about 15%. That way there are no illusions. To say that the tax should apply to any income level when the added benefit at high income levels is $0 is deceptive. Be honest and simply increase the base tax rate.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

They could fix SS over night by simply lifting the cut off, in other words, you pay the rate on ALL income, regardless of the way the money was earned.

Not quite true. That only solves a bit over 85% of the demographic problem. But it's a hell of a start.

Originally Posted by Laz

Is Social Security a welfare program or something you pay into and get benefits from?

Yes, it is both. It has always been a program where current workers pay for current retirees benefits. Otherwise, how could the first beneficiaries have even been paid?

[Laz]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Yes, it is both. It has always been a program where current workers pay for current retirees benefits.

That was the original flaw. They should have set up a process where it transitioned to a persons benefits were paid by the persons lifetime of contributions and not allowed Congress access to the funds. Back then demographics would have made that easy. Now it will be a nightmare that will over time transition to simply a welfare program.