Buffett Speaks The Truth

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by sirliamscross

Whirlaway, you make some of the most asinine comments I have ever heard - and I don't mean your political views. You accuse others of stereotyping and name calling. But that is literally ALL YOU DO. Your arguments will always fall on deaf ears because you sound like a crazy person. Facts be damned. Obama sucks. Facts be damned - The Tea Party Rules! Fuck you and your fucking fairy ass socialist pussy bastard faces - My team rules!

I'm saying this to point out you sound like a crazy Steelers fan. Yes, Big Ben is a date rapist, but he wears the black and yellow so he gets my loyalty.

Every time someone answers Whirlaways nonsense - it's a waste of time. Anytime Whirlaway answers someone else's nonsense... Waste of time. With someone is intractable and mean spirited as Whirlaway - any time spent answering him is just food for a troll.

You just wet your panties and should excuse your self to change them.

[Wizard of Ahhhhs]

Originally Posted by Casanova69

There are plenty of rich people that skip out on their taxes. Did you read about the IRS bust 2 years ago. They found loads of money in Swiss bank accounts. We need stricter tax laws, more brackets, and higher rates for rich people. In case you haven't noticed, this country's infrastructure is falling apart. We desperately need more revenues.

No question we have to restructure our entire tax system and close many loopholes. Although I have avoided the thought previously, perhaps the flat tax is the way to go.

I know this is a cliche that we have all heard lately, but it's true... we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. And... to solve the issue regarding increased revenues? We need more taxpayers!

[sirliamscross]

Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

You just wet your panties and should excuse your self to change them.

I would answer at length, but I have no idea what you're trying to say... So - FUCK YOU. Or, Thanks! Either way, consider your comment responded to.

[BigLouie]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Obama will renew them (when they expire in late 2012 before the election); just like he did in 2010. He will say otherwise, but in the end he will not veto them !

Obama is a phony......He says one thing and does thing other...it's his DNA; he is a 3-card monte hustler from the streets ! Keep an eye on what he does, not what he says.


http://content.usatoday.com/communit...uts-for-rich/1

Why don't you tell the whole story if that is possible.

"When the Bush tax cuts were set to expire at the end of last year, the president sought extensions only for middle- and lower-class taxpayers.The Republicans said no one's taxes should be raised in tough economic times.
As the deadline approached -- with the prospect that all the Bush tax cuts would expire and that everyone would face a higher tax bill -- Obama and the Republicans agreed to a temporary extension of the tax rates for two years."


Obama wanted to keep the extensions for the rest of us but the Republicans wanted the ultra rich to keep theirs. Based on the story who do you think is looking out for the middle class, and yes EVERYONE on this board and in this thread is the middle class, Obama or the Republicans. I doubt if anyone is one a member of the richest 400 families in America that the Republicans want to protect.

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by sirliamscross

I would answer at length, but I have no idea what you're trying to say... So - FUCK YOU. Or, Thanks! Either way, consider your comment responded to.

NOT only clean panties but a little FDS would help too.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

I'm also curious. So when the govt raises taxes on the "rich" that will certainly affect every member of Congress and of course the President. So they want to vote to raise their own taxes? Or will there be the typical "Congressional Loophole" that they are exempt from the regulations they pass?

I've never know of Congress to exempt itself from income tax. That being said, a Congressman's salary alone isn't enough to get you over $250,000 -- the most often discussed cutoff for increasing tax rates. It won't really even get you that close. Congressmen make $174,000/yr. Of course, most have substantial outside investment income. Otherwise, they couldn't afford the pay cut to be in Congress and the attendant expense of maintaining two homes.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by Linus

I wonder, as Pat Buchanan so eloquently put it, why don't these ultra rich people just write the check? If they have all this money why don't they keep 250K a year and give the rest to old Uncle Sam?

Because they would then be economically disadvantaged compared to others who hold opposing ideologies. You enemy still has all of his bullets, but you don't have all of yours. This is especially important now that you can have "independent" corporate spending for political campaigns. I may want my corporation to spend $100,000 for a pro-trial lawyer candidate to get around the individual limits of $2,500/individual in contributions. If I write a big voluntary check to the government, the Republican corporations can do that, but my corporation can't.

[CuteOldGuy]

LOL! There are still people left who think there is a difference between Republicans and Democrats! Look at history, does anything really change? Regardless of who is in office? NO! We will never get anywhere as long as we depend on Democrats and Republicans to solve our problems. Do you really think any one of them give a damn about you? LOL!

Go ahead, tax the rich. See where it gets you. Who owns the government? THE RICH! It's all for show. If taxes go up, loopholes increase. Get real. It is all smoke and mirrors. It's simply a stage show to occupy our attention while the elitists gradually take away our liberty.

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by MrGiz

I accept your point!!

Taking the incredible amount of waste, fraud, & corruption within many Government programs into consideration. . . would a 2 - 3% "real cut" in funding really make much difference in the "real" services they provide? * Many people would sincerely like to know!

You accept his point but ignore his questions.

I'll answer yours. Yes it would. It would make a huge difference.

Using 3.7 trillion as the amount of the federal budget, 3% is 111 billion dollars. Since Congress couldn't figure a way to cut 40 billion, tell the many people who wanted to know that they are dead weight on our country. They are obviously math illiterates. I say and can prove that by the simple fact they oppose a return to a previous tax rate that has no effect on them. People who net $250,000 would not ask if 3% of $3.7 trillion would affect "real" services.

Press the "Start" button, click on "Accessories", select "Calculator". Press "37" and 11 "0"s. Press the "*" key. Press ".03". Press "="

Now that I have done the math you didn't know how to or were too lazy to do and answered your question, will you answer the original asked of you? Probably not.

How the fuck did all these people buy into the notion that taxes shouldn't be put back to pre-Bush. They make nowhere near $250,000.
I understand how Milo buys eggs for $.07 on Malta and sells them to the mess hall for $.05 and makes a profit. I don't understand someone who makes $45,000 and supports the Bush tax cuts for $250,000

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Obama will renew them (when they expire in late 2012 before the election); just like he did in 2010. He will say otherwise, but in the end he will not veto them !

Obama is a phony......He says one thing and does thing other...it's his DNA; he is a 3-card monte hustler from the streets ! Keep an eye on what he does, not what he says.


http://content.usatoday.com/communit...uts-for-rich/1

As usual you ignore the part that requires thinking or reasoning.

The "Why".
"As the deadline approached -- with the prospect that all the Bush tax cuts would expire and that everyone would face a higher tax bill -- Obama and the Republicans agreed to a temporary extension of the tax rates for two years.
The battle has been joined again and will probably carry through the 2012 elections -- and certainly through the upcoming debt reduction date.
"In December, I agreed to extend the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans because it was the only way I could prevent a tax hike on middle-class Americans," Obama said in his speech. "But we cannot afford $1 trillion worth of tax cuts for every millionaire and billionaire in our society. We can't afford it. And I refuse to renew them again."
Of course you would have stood firm and fucked everyone.

And as usual, you include a derogatory lie.
"it's his DNA; he is a 3-card monte hustler from the streets"


This post also contains a morsel of irony. You calling Obama a phony.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by Wizard of Ahhhhs

Prosperity and equality for whom, the 50% who don't pay any taxes??

And if you read this thread, you'd know you're simply a liar.

Hey Colonel Jim, you expect me to believe this guy is referring solely to income taxes when he says "the 50% who don't pay any taxes"?

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by Wizard of Ahhhhs

Prosperity and equality for whom, the 50% who don't pay any taxes??

Who doesn't pay any taxes? They don't buy gasoline, or clothing, or anything thing else at the store? Payroll taxes such as medicare and SS?

Originally Posted by Wizard of Ahhhhs

One of the best comments I read about Mr Buffet... pulled from http://campaign2012.washingtonexamin...warren-buffett

I have six major issues with Buffett. 1) He INTENTIONALLY does not have Berkshire pay him a salary. If he did, his tax consequence would surely be at the highest income tax rate on whatever that salary would be. It is HIS CHOICE not to take a salary, therefore HE is responsible for his own lower tax rate. He paid almost $7 million in fed. inc. tax. If he was paid a salary, it would go into his income pool and he would get to keep @60% of it 2) The taxes that Berkshire pays are truly mostly taxes paid by HIM! It is interesting how he omits Berkshire's tax liability when discussing his tax liability.This is an issue? That he doesn't mix corporate and personal tax liabilities? Next! 3) IF the US government were such a great and competant spender of money, why does he (and many others, including Gates) start foundations? Because money given to the US goes to general revenue. Them getting to decide where the money goes has nothing to do with keeping it out of the hands of the gov. It is all about them getting to decide. The benefit to them is 1) tax reductions and 2) THEY get to decide where that money goes! So, inefficient government agencies decide where your and my money goes, but that isn't good enough for Buffett and Gates! Stop whining! They don't put their taxes into the foundations. They pay the government income taxes just like we do. Foundations are charitable contributions THEY want to determine to whom their money goes.Their charitable contributions. Boy, I would like to decide that too! You get to. You pick who you donate money to. DUH!4) Owning insurance companies that sell insurance to pay for death taxes is a definite conflict of interest.1st off, why is owning an insurance company that sells any legal policy or service a conflict of interest? Conflict with what or who? Second, they don't sell policies that pay for death taxes. They sell estate planning and management services, I.E. setting your estate up in trusts and other such actions to lower your estate tax liability. Most insurance companies sell the same services. It behooves Buffett to keep the tax structure for estate/death taxes as high as possible, so that his companies can sell more insurance policies. He has no control over the tax rates. Your last statement is completely wrong. 6) IF he thinks the tax rates are too low, there is NOTHING preventing him from paying more. He DOES NOT have the right to compel me to pay more Who said he did? What makes you think he tried?, but has the right to pay as much as he wants to. Liberals always want to spend some one else's money, and then take credit..."look what I did for you". I could say "Conservatives want tax laws that favor corporations and the rich while trying to force everyone to live by standards set by 15% of their base."

"Look what I did for you?" Not quite. They say "Look what I did to you."

How do they spend someone else's and not theirs? Tax laws hit all earners within any given bracket the same. Do you mean for health care for all? They can take credit for that and say, "look what I did for you." Conservatives get no credit for that.

Your 6th issue was all about opinion. I responded in the same light. The opinions in the op-ed article are just that. Several of your issues contain misconceptions about one thing or another. Since he is advocating that other very rich people, a group neither you or me fall into, pay higher taxes and that he limits his tax liability the same (legal) way other wealthy people do, I don't understand why you give a rat's ass one way or the other.

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by sirliamscross

Every time someone answers Whirlaways nonsense - it's a waste of time. Anytime Whirlaway answers someone else's nonsense... Waste of time. With someone is intractable and mean spirited as Whirlaway - any time spent answering him is just food for a troll.

I disagree for several reasons. It is true he sometime acts crazier than a shit-house rat. He would like nothing better than for us not to respond to him. He loves to put out only the information that supports his position. The first thing I check is the link he provides. Many times his link has proven his position wrong. That may be why he seldom supplies links to back his statements. Many might actually believe him if he was not constantly called out and corrected.

The most important reason (IMO) is that I enjoy it. He is like a video game that adapts to certain conditions. I would hesitate to say he actually learns from his experiences but he has posted some valid observations and some decent insights. He would be almost certainly unable to pick out examples of the posts I'm referring to.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Wizard of Ahhhhs

Prosperity and equality for whom, the 50% who don't pay any taxes??

That statement just shows your ignorance.

Everybody pays some form of taxes, whether it be local , state or federal.

You compound that ignorance in your next post by then arguing that Warren Buffet can pay more taxes if he wants but that you should not have to. First you bitch about 50% (a lie) not paying any taxes then you argue that folks shold not pay more taxes.

Make up your mind.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

What is it about our education system, or our political process, that leads folks to act in a way that is so clearly contrary to their economic interest. I've studied behavioral psychology and behavioral economics looking for an answer and can't find one. Their actions are at war with the general tenants of democracy and microeconomics. Why do they engage in this behavior. Does anyone have any theories? I'm truly asking because I'm frankly completely stumped on this one.

I have racked my brain over this one too. Here is a great book on the general answer. People get a belief system into their head and no amount of facts will change certain beliefs for most folks. Just look a Christians, they think their God is better/only God. They think Muslims are going to hell because of their beliefs.

There is another book out that delves into political voting. Written in the sixties that answers your question but I can not find it since I moved. It is packed away but I will post it when I find it. Great question TTH.

http://www.google.com/search?q=the+b...archBox&ie=&oe=