"Stop Coddling the Super-rich"

Warren was spot on.

I agree with you, Rosebud. It's ridiculous that my husband and I pay a higher percentage in taxes than the richest Americans. I wish we only had to pay 17 percent! Imagine what we could do with that extra $$!

I read the article yesterday. Very profound to say the least. A person making $250,000 is in the same tax bracket as one making so much more. It doesn't seem right. I liked the part where he said most of their money comes from investing, so there tax is not as high as it other wise would be as those who earn money form working. Yes, the uber-wealthy should be paying more taxes. He said he, a billionaire, pays lower taxes than his secretary. How is that ethically right, or even legal?

The coddling article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-t...

He explains his stance here:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61464.html

I could not agree with you more, Rosebud. I am apalled that middle class people could support those who agree that the billionaires and multi millionaires of this world should never have to pay one cent more in taxes. Thanks for making the point. Jobs can be created whether or not there are slight tax increases. Slight tax increases to the mega rich are barely a blip on the radar.

I laugh every time I read a middle class mom, on here, going on and on about those poor rich people, why should they be punished for the success they worked so hard for? HA! The Middle Class shoulders the tax burden and accepts the line of bull the rich have fed them about it being the welfare mom that isn't doing her share! And yes, a great number of our troops come from disadvantaged neighborhoods. Kids with few economical prospects enlist. Some of those no good lazy welfare moms are sending thier sons to war, only to hear nightly on the news that she is the problem and those poor poor job creators are footing her bills. But people buy it, hook line and sinker.

Well, I'm thinking that when the super rich themselves are actually admitting and suggesting that their own taxes are too low...maybe, just maybe, it's time to raise their taxes.

How about the Starbucks CEO-COO who is proposing a ban on campaign fund donations until our government stops focusing on re-election and starts focusing on fixing what's broken? Brilliant!

Washington needs to stop focusing on self-preservation and start focusing on doing the jobs they need to do.

3boysunder3--what a brilliant statement!!! You get it. Not many do.

ETA: LOTS of misinformation out there. First of all Federal Income Tax is not the only TAX--even poor Americans pay taxes!
Here's a good summary of how the tax laws do NOT work for lower or middle ecnomic classes:
http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-17350-9_things_the_...

Here's O. good point from the article. Take heed all you criers of "the poor don't pay taxes!:

Gretchen Carlson, the Fox News host, said last year “47 percent of Americans don’t pay any taxes.” John McCain and Sarah Palin both said similar things during the 2008 campaign about the bottom half of Americans.

Ari Fleischer, the former Bush White House spokesman, once said “50 percent of the country gets benefits without paying for them.”

Actually, they pay lots of taxes—just not lots of federal income taxes.

Data from the Tax Foundation show that in 2008, the average income for the bottom half of taxpayers was $15,300.

This year the first $9,350 of income is exempt from taxes for singles and $18,700 for married couples, just slightly more than in 2008. That means millions of the poor do not make enough to owe income taxes.

But they still pay plenty of other taxes, including federal payroll taxes. Between gas taxes, sales taxes, utility taxes and other taxes, no O. lives tax-free in America.

When it comes to state and local taxes, the poor bear a heavier burden than the rich in every state except Vermont, the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy calculated from official data. In Alabama, for example, the burden on the poor is more than twice that of the top 1 percent. The O.-fifth of Alabama families making less than $13,000 pay almost 11 percent of their income in state and local taxes, compared with less than 4 percent for those who make $229,000 or more.

I was CHEERING when I heard him talking last night. CHEERING.

There is so many scary things that could come out of this Presidential race this time around.

I am terrified of all the candidates.

I think the Religious Radicalism is Scary and I am a religious person.

They say these big Corporations are the JOB CREATORS so we cant Tax them. Well what the hell happens to us when They JOB CREATORS Send all of their Jobs over seas, so they can pocket more of the bottom line...WE CANT COMPETE WITH ASIAN COUNTRIES THAT WILL WORK FOR .50 CENTS A DAY. This is what we are up against if these job creators are not helping.

They keep blowing smoke signals, so that it looks like the Corporate CARE. They dont care. They care about the bottom line in their wallets.

When you have people selling and buying votes How can we the people win. WE THE PEOPLE LOST OUR VOICE TO BE HEARD LONG AGO.

Sadly there are enough people that have no choice but to hold onto the hope that the Republicans keep feeding them. They cant see the hog wash.

I want to say I also think that Democrats are Just as at fault.

Both sides are playing this game and The public is the one to suffer from this game the most.

I am really glad I saw something posted about this. I didnt want to be the one to open the can of worms.

I cheered for Warren Buffet. I think it is one of those things where you go ''FINALLY''.

So I dont look like a Republican basher...I like/respect RON PAUL. I agree with alot of his Policy and thoughts. It breaks my heart that he is one of the more legit Reds running for office and he is getting no air time. The Republicans wont even say they think he is running. Why would they drowned one of their own?? Oh yes, because he is not Radical(I wish this could mean Radical, like totally cool:)) enough to the right.

I have not read answer's yet. Please no Hate mail. These are solely my feelings and views on things as they stand right now.

Actually everyone does not pay taxes. Many people have taxes withheld - but that doesn't mean they don't get them back at the end of the year. Everyone pays SS & Medicare - but everyone doesn't pay federal taxes. Some people in lower brackets with a few kids or more actually get more back fromt he government than they pay.

1 - I'm not rich - my husband is a sergeant in the NYPD - and if you know anything about cost of living in the NY area and the NYC cop's pay you would fully understand that we are solidly working class people. I work part-time in the insurance industry in a professional position. We are taxed as if we're rich because pay in the NY metro area is high in comparison to other parts of the country - although the cost of living is disproportionately higher. The real estate taxes on our modest home (less than 1/3 acre and about 1700 square feet) are nearly $7,000 a year. The cost of electricity in the NY metro area is 3 or 4 times the national average and don't even get me started on gas (high % gas taxes in NY), homeowners and auto insurance, etc. And NY state income taxes! So while the federal government taxes us becuase we are in a "higher income" bracket we are not even at the upper edges of middle class. (our cars are 10 and 7 years old, high mileage, we go on "minivan" vacations, my kitchen is retro-70's...) ;o)
That's my first item of contention with Warren Buffet's premise.

2 - the wealthy are the ones who own companies which create jobs. In the last 20 years I've worked 15 of them for small companies owned by small groups of wealthy people. These companies provided good pay and benefits - and the owners treated their people right. The tax structure is designed with incentives for the rich to create jobs for workers and to provide benefits. Warren Buffet owns many companies that employ thousands,

3 - The rich are the ones who buy luxury cars & boats, eat out all the time, buys lots of things - clothing, electronics, sporting goods & vacations. They hire contractors, landscapers, plumbers, electricians, cleaning services and caterers. They have their cars detailed, their moustaches waxed, they get pedicures & facials and their hair highlighted & cut - and then they take their kids out to have the same done for them. They play golf and tennis at the club, they pay babysitters to watch their kids and tutors to help them learn. Their consumer activities keep alot of people employed.

4 - I have no problem increasing taxes on the uber-rich - but keep in mind it would not even provide a bucket of sand on the beach of federal deficits. It may help us all feel better that the most wealthy of the taxpayers will pay more. But the very sad reality is that we are just spending way more than we have coming in - and even if we taxed the mega-rich at 90% we would still have huge deficits to make tough decisions about.

5 - Finally - if we do increase the taxes dramatically on the rich we have to face the fact that some will take their money and go elsewhere. That's bad news for their neighborhood hairdresser, contractor, waitress and Egg Harbor yacht factory worker in NJ.

I am highly skeptical. It seems that "class warfare" and talk of increasing taxes on the rich really does nothing more than infuriate people on the lower edges of the economic scale. So while we can certainly increase taxes on the mag-rich to a level that's comensurate with the middle - we shouldn't hope for even a minute that it will solve our country's financial problems. It may make us feel better - that the rich are getting the screws turned on them - but we will still wake up tomorrow with a hugh federal debt owed to China and we'll still be beholden to the middle east for energy needs.

The better option is that we defer gratification and learn to live on what comes in than to try to find a rich person to mug on the street corner at night.

I love where he said that tax breaks have basically NO effect on hiring more people. Kinda throws the "creates more jobs" thing under the bus huh? I even read one commenter that said, "You know where tax breaks go? Right into my wallet." So, yeah no new jobs there. The bottom line is if people are purchasing the product/using the service they will hire more people. BTW we make about 125,000 and last year we paid 27,000 in taxes. If we can do it, so can they.

Interesting isn't it that one of the richest men in the world wants to tax the rich even more. He already has his. Now he wants taxes to keep anyone else from getting as rich as he is. To the super rich, it can be a numbers game.

I admire what Warren Buffet has done. And if I had the stock trading knowledge I have now, back when I was first married, I'd be rich too. But it has taken me 40 years to learn the stock market and I'm still not as smart as Buffett. But I know people that won't invest in the stock market and would rather have the bank pay them 1% interest in a CD, than have Mcdonalds pay them a 3% dividend. AND the dividend is taxed at a lower rate than the CD's interest. Go figure (pun intended.)

I personally think he wrong. Tax the rich, yes, but tax them too much and the same thing will happen to us that happened to England. The Brittish call their super rich "Tax Exiles". Why? Because they were so desperate for funds to pay for their bloated public social welfare programs, they figured the rich couldn't be taxed enough. The rich simply left Brittan. Who left? The most famous 4 that left were the Beatles. Why? Because they made so much money that their tax rate was going to 115% of what they made. No, 115% was not a typo. If you made more than X pounds, you paid 100% of your earnings into the tax department PLUS a 15% penalty.

Money has super legs. The rich would simply make their money from the Grand Caymans, or the Bahamas, or a dozen other countries that would welcome them with open arms. AND, "we the people", would loose the revenue and the jobs.

I watch CNBC all the time. They say the top 5% of income earners pay 70% of all the income taxes collected. 5% pays 70% of the taxes! That kind of says it all to me. I'll never be one of those super rich, but I don't begrudge them having the intellect to have made the money. If I was as smart as Bill Gates, I'd be a billionaire too!

The problem in America or most of Europe is that we pay people to not work hard and be frugal. If we eliminated the welfare rolls and took Social Security elegiblity requirements back to the 60's we could increase Social Security payments by almost 50% and abolish the income taxes for anyone making less than $1,000,000 per year.

Be frugal? How can people on WIC or food stamps possibly do without bonless skinless chicken breasts at $2.99 lb, when bone in skin on chicken breasts are $.99 lb on sale at a store 2 miles away. To ask other wise literate people to read grocery store sales ads is rediculous, right?

Anyway, I could go on, but we want to help the homeless and the poor when they often times are their own worst enemies. They would rather try and milk the system than work for a living.

Good luck to you and yours.

I believe (may be wrong company) thay GE did not pay ANY taxes last year because of tax breaks and corporate loopholes! Buffet is right! If you have millions and millions or even billions, you damn well need to pay a higher percentage! It's not like someone worth 200 million is really going to miss it!

if the middle and lower income class didnt have to pay almost half their income to taxes, there would be less WIC, less FOODSTAMPS, less WELFARE....we are on WIC and foodstamps so no i'm not bashing others who are....but, if taxed werent almost 40% and if insurance wasnt almost $600 a month (my husbands work has good insurance, but damn it is expensive), then we wouldnt have to be on WIC or foodstamps...think about it, makes sense to me...of course I admit i know very little about economic issues, but to me this makes a lot of sense.

All I can say is "Amen, sister!" to you, Rosebud, for posting this. (And no sarcasm is present in this reply).

The taxes that Warren Buffett pays are on his investment earnings. So he already paid taxes on the money he earned BEFORE he invested it and then when you take it out- there is smaller taxes that you pay on that(if any depending on the type of investment you have). That's how he makes his money- he takes what he earns and invests in different things like stocks, other bussinesses and real estate. If you do it right,(roll the profit of one thing into the investment of another thing) you won't pay that much in taxes.
The taxes his employee's are paying are INCOME taxes. Meaning anything they earn they can be taxed on because they don't have the means to live off of their investments(once they live off their investments and stop making an income by going to work- they will be in the same place as Buffett- and should they have to pay taxes twice? once on the earned income and then again on the the retirement they invested? I don't want to!)
And it's not just the "ultra Wealthy" that provide jobs and why shouldn't we tax them(no one is stopping them from giving the government more money- go ahead Mr.Buffett and write a check) but the small business owners that are across America that provide more than half the jobs in the country. These are those evil wealthy people that make the magical number of $250,000 or more a year. You have to keep in mind that $250, 000 is NOT their take home pay. It is the money the business made- and out of that they have to pay employees and over head and all other expenses (including their salary) and any money they have left over is usually invested back into that business to help it to grow. If that money has to be sent to the government instead, the business doesn't grow and they can't hire more people to work for them. It becomes stagnant and will eventually rot.
People rally against big bussiness like Wal-mart and other stores like that, but they are the ones that can take the hit of higher taxes- the mom and pop shops that people want to come back- won't have a chance because they are lumped in with the Wal-mart's when it comes to taxes.
I'm for a flat tax(that way-the more you earn, the more you will pay) and getting rid of a lot of those tax shelters that "hide" income from the government at tax time.
I am sick of the "the wealthy should pay their fair share" argument. HALF of the country doesn't pay taxes(that doesn't include those who don't hold jobs) Those that Buffett talks about in his article- the ones that pay the average of 36% are the ones the government considers wealthy- that is why they are paying so much. My sister makes between $50,000 and $60,000 a year- but because she is single she is considered wealthy and pays about 35% to taxes. Do you feel wealthy at $50,000?
Thanks for posting this- I just think we need to be better informed before we start shouting for the "Wealthy to pay their fair share"
~C.

(p.s- we make way below what my sister makes- we have 6 kids- no debt and no government assistance. It's tight, but we survive) :)

They pay less taxes because they are the ones that give big donations to politicians. WE have to change our election procedures.

I agree with Warren Buffett here, this is absolutely INSANE! Our government needs to be fixed in a major way...as a republican, I feel that our elected officials are more to blame on this issue than any one else because they truly are the ones who back these policies.

However, on the opposite end of the spectrum, here is an article to back up what Stacey B. said, not everyone is paying taxes. There is corruption on both ends. We all live in this country and all reap the benefits of living here, we should ALL be paying taxes.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/30/pf/taxes/who_pays_taxes/i...

The super-rich pay less in taxes simply because they have better tax attorneys than most of us. I do believe that if you make more, then it makes sense to pay a bigger percentage of taxes. In other words, yes I belive that the person making 250K annually should pay a bigger percentage of taxes than the person making 20K. The middle class does shoulder the burden of more taxes than any other group and that just isn't right.

I read it this morning. In our local paper someone comment below that he should run for president. He seems a bit old for such a demanding job. But darn it I was livid to see they pay an average of 17% WTH??? That's just wrong.

This is a clear, well-written article, by a man in a position to know what he's talking about.

During the highest economic and spiritual point of this nation's history, following the Second World War, wealthy Americans were paying considerably higher tax rates than they are now. And they kept expanding their businesses, hiring, making a handsome living.

Consider these hypotheticals. A family earning $36,000 (my family's income range) and paying 20% in taxes (close to what we actually pay now), requires tight budgeting of housing expenses, food and clothing, transportation, education and health care. There are pennies left over for saving against emergency expenses. If a family earning $80,000 a year pays, say 25% in taxes, they would have $60,000 left over to spend, invest, or save. That's still enough for a comfortable life, but there would be little left for extravagances like travel or a new car. But if a family earning a million dollars paid half that income in taxes (and nobody is suggesting a rate that high), that family would still have $500,000 in income to use, invest, or save as they wish. That's half a million dollars, a handsome income that would allow a lavish lifestyle and plenty of money to "invest." (In summary, it doesn't make nearly as much sense to me to tax on gross income than to tax on disposable income after a deduction for basic living expenses.)

Now, I can sure understand the argument that the wealthy are the engine of national commerce, and should be allowed to invest their money in job-building expansion. However, corporate profits are exceeding all-time highs, corporations are awash in cash and seeking ways to invest it with low risk and maximal profit, and are mostly NOT expanding business or creating new jobs. But they are increasing compensation packages, which are already obscenely huge, to their highest-paid managers and CEO's. I've been listening carefully, but have yet to hear an argument that excuses that. Those well-paid owners, officers, and employees are not working harder than they did 10 years ago, even though they are demanding more productivity from fewer employees, or sending jobs oversees to exploit low-cost workers.

I can also understand the argument that we need those exceptionally well-paid people to take more risks that help run the national economy. Sorry, they are not taking more risks than our soldiers in the Middle East, or than average working moms or dads who scramble from one month to the next to meet essential expenses. Many of their hard-working employees are one market collapse, one serious injury or untimely death, one expensive illness, or sometimes just one automobile breakdown away from financial catastrophe. And exactly that is happening to thousands of families who are losing their homes to market forces they had nothing to do with, or emergency expenses that drive them into bankruptcy or out of their homes.

I understand the concern that average working Americans deserve to keep their money, and should not have it drained off by an inefficient government. Yes, the government suffers from the same inefficiencies that virtually all huge organizations do. Many of those inefficiencies are perpetrated by those making very fine incomes but padding budgets and expense accounts, overcharging for services – in other words, the culmination of all the bits and snippets of human greed by individuals that can be found in many large industries and in every poor nation. There's no simple way that's going to go away, especially with the prevalent attitude in the American populace that that profit is the highest good, sharing is an unnecessary evil, and greed wins, so get some while you can.

Anyway, nobody is seriously talking about balancing the economy on the backs of the average working person. There's just not enough potential revenue there. If anything, some legislators would like to be able to direct tax relief to those of us with average incomes. So, what's left? We can try further cost-slashing, but if you think (education / police protection / veteran's benefits / drivable roads / programs to lift the poor / the retirement security our elderly have paid into their whole working lives, Medicare, etc.) are too expensive, let's find out WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST US in national security, a functioning society, and human dignity and compassion by throwing those things under the bus.

The bus is approaching right now – ready? One, two, three… WAIT! This is our children's future nation we're talking about.

Think it through. There is much we can do to tweak and improve existing programs, and maximize their effect at lower cost. Those things must happen. Those things will happen if we, the citizen, keep insisting. And taxing the wealthy, who can well afford to pay rates closer to what they always had until just a few brief decades ago, is a reasonable option to helping keep afloat the great society that has made this nation a shining light to less-developed nations.

Oohh, oooh! Wait, let me get my soap box! I love this question!

I have always been, and still am, a firm believer that everyone should have to claim every bit of their income - working, investments, whatever - and EVERYONE should have to pay the same flat percentage of it. 10% would be about right, I think.

If the wealthy paid 10% of their income - oh, and I forgot to say, absolutely NO tax breaks for anyone - just think how much money we would have to pay off the deficit!

I'm a big fan of Warren Buffet (having been a stock broker in my single life) and think that people would be wise to listen to what he says. He's a very smart man when it comes to finances and the economy.

We - all of us on this site - are responsible for what happens with the economy. (Yes, I know, so is every other American) But we, the "soccer moms" as the media and politicians like to call us, WE are a huge demographic in this country. And we have influence over our men and our friends and our family. We can change things if we want to. But it will take our time - time that most of us feel we don't have enough of as it is - to step up and become activists.

And it doesn't matter whether we are Democrat or Republican. It only matters that we all agree what we have is not working, and politicians can't change it.

It only matters that we think every American should pay the same percentage rate, and not be allowed to have tax breaks.

It only matters that we all agree to stop allowing Senators and Congress members to make politics their career, rather than their civil service. If we only allowed the offices held to have terms of 2 years or 4 years max, without re-election, then we would have only people in office who truly cared to help this country, and NOT because they got beaucoup perks and millions of dollars and wanted to make it a career.

It only matters that we all agree special interest groups and lobbyists should be banned from making contributions to anyone in office.

It only matters if we all agree there should be a cap on election contributions, and businesses should NOT be allowed to contribute at all. Businesses are NOT "We, the People". And ONLY we, the people, should be allowed to contribute to a campaign of someone we believe in and would like to see elected.

It is an honor and privilege (at least it used to be 150 years ago, and still should be) to serve this country as an elected official. It is not (at least it SHOULD not be) a career path.

We can do it. We really can.

We can write our reps and tell them we want the terms of office changed; we want a limitation on terms; we want the salaries and perks of those offices cut; we want our country back.

We can elect people to office that agree with what we want and abide by it. Hell, we can run for office ourselves!

We can do this. We just need to band together as the People of the United States (not Reps or Dems).

Let us make our voices heard! And God bless America.

Until they balance the budget I will NOT support raising taxes of any kind. EVERYONE should be paying taxes! EVERYONE!

As someone who knows a "trust fund baby" it is frustrating that "wealth" is not taxed the same way as working "income." To me, people who WORK for their money should pay less taxes than money that earns passive income (i.e., the money begets money).

That being said - what constitutes "wealth"? Where I live, $250K per year doesn't go that far (though it's certainly still a blessing). That's the case in many big cities or metropolitan areas. Two lawyers, doctors or accountants, married to one another and making $125K per year - are suddenly wealthy and evil and worthy of punitive taxation? That doesn't make sense to me either.

Too bad the House won't listen to him. Of course, all their very rich cronies would have to lose a few bucks they WON'T EVEN MISS, they are so rich. But it's the principle of the thing, isn't it!

Warren Buffett is smarter than all those idiots. They are too dumb (and selfish) to listen to him.

Dawn

It is pretty despicable how small the percentage of a super-rich person's income goes to taxes. AND they are the ones who can afford the best accountants to find loopholes and tax shelters for them so that they can pay even less than their fair share. What is interesting to me is that so many people who want to defend the super-rich and call them “job creators” are so bad off financially! Yet they defend those who really need no defending. I also get a kick out of all the people who think that they are “middle class” when really they are not. I was in a college class once where the teacher asked all those who are middle class to stand up and practically everyone did, and then she said if you do NOT make between $50,000 and $250,000 then sit down, you are not middle class. Very few people in the class (mostly older, non-traditional students who worked full time and took night classes) did make the salary of the middle class. Where I live people making $30,000 a year think that that is middle class when really it is not. Most of the county is working hard, long hours and living on a pittance while a small percentage has more money than they could spend in 2 lifetimes. That is just not right, why don’t these “job creators” increase the salaries of the workers whom they are supposedly supplying with jobs? It would not hurt the “job creators” one bit. Oh, that’s right; it would cause them to lose face in front of their other “job creator” friends when they could not afford a new private jet next year.

I think that if Warren Buffet wants to send more money to Washington he is free to do so. So are his friends that feel as he does. The entire tax code is screwed up and should be abandoned. "Income" taxes are a bad idea, period and federal taxes on individuals violate the intention of the Constitution. The federal government should levy taxes on the states and the states should determine how they collect that revenue - the smart ones would institute taxes on consumption, not production (income).