Occupy Wall Street

[Riot]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Whether or not I'm ever lucky enough to make that much money, I'll still never agree with the premise that rich people need to be taxed at a higher percentage simply because they're rich.

Small point ... that's not what they are saying, and we have a progressive, not regressive, tax system.

And: Warren Buffett released some of his income tax information today

Earned: $63 million last year
Paid less than $7 million in federal income tax.

Mr. Buffett's adjusted gross income was $62,855,038 in 2010, according to the letter, while his taxable income was $39,814,784. He said he paid $15,300 in payroll tax, and $6,923,494 in federal income tax. That made for an effective tax rate of 17.4%.

According to the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan group, the average tax rate for taxpayers in the middle quintile—those earning between $34,000 and $60,000 a year—is 12%, including payroll and income taxes. Those earning from $103,000 to $163,000--the top 80% to 90% of earners—pay 18.2%. Those earning from $163,000 to $211,000 pay 19.8%, and those earning from $211,000 to $533,000 pay 20.4%.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...875519978.html

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

Small point ... that's not what they are saying, and we have a progressive, not regressive, tax system.

And: Warren Buffett released some of his income tax information today



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...875519978.html

What were Mr. Buffet's claimed charitable deducttions? Under the current tax code he is able to write them off!

Damn charities and rich people who support them!

If Buffet was half a man he'd drop what he was doing and live in a tent on Wall Street.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

What were Mr. Buffet's claimed charitable deducttions? Under the current tax code he is able to write them off!

Damn charities and rich people who support them!

If Buffet was half a man he'd drop what he was doing and live in a tent on Wall Street.

Buffett never announced his charitable deductions, but it is calculated to be about 23 billion - yes billion - dollars to Gates Foundation. Buffett has always said that when he and his wife die, the vast majority of their money will go to Gates Foundation (rather than leave a huge estate to the kids).

Buffett is fully supportive of the OWS movement. Buffett released this information in an attempt to garner congressional support for increasing the tax revenue from the rich by decreasing the loopholes, etc. that allow the more wealthy to pay a far lesser rate than the less wealthy.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

Buffett never announced his charitable deductions, but it is calculated to be about 23 billion - yes billion - dollars to Gates Foundation. Buffett has always said that when he and his wife die, the vast majority of their money will go to Gates Foundation (rather than leave a huge estate to the kids)..

Then why bring up his tax rate, not knowing what his deductions were? His tax rate is the max!

Seems to me the culprit you should be blaming is the write off allowed for charitable deductions. Make a sign and get to Wall Street. See how 'NO MORE CHARITABLE DEDUCTIONS' plays.

[Riot]

[quote]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Then why bring up his tax rate, not knowing what his deductions were? His tax rate is the max!

Why don't you read the article, so you have a clue before you comment? Rather than just babbling on about things asked and answered.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Buffett is fully supportive of the OWS movement. Buffett released this information in an attempt to garner congressional support for increasing the tax revenue from the rich by decreasing the loopholes, etc. that allow the more wealthy to pay a far lesser rate than the less wealthy.

Uh doesnt this snippet from one of your posts show this to be at least partially untrue?

That made for an effective tax rate of 17.4%(Buffett).

According to the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan group, the average tax rate for taxpayers in the middle quintile—those earning between $34,000 and $60,000 a year—is 12%, including payroll and income taxes. Those earning from $103,000 to $163,000--the top 80% to 90% of earners—pay 18.2%. Those earning from $163,000 to $211,000 pay 19.8%, and those earning from $211,000 to $533,000 pay 20.4%.

Unless "far lesser" has a different meaning to some

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Uh doesnt this snippet from one of your posts show this to be at least partially untrue?

That made for an effective tax rate of 17.4%(Buffett).

According to the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan group, the average tax rate for taxpayers in the middle quintile—those earning between $34,000 and $60,000 a year—is 12%, including payroll and income taxes. Those earning from $103,000 to $163,000--the top 80% to 90% of earners—pay 18.2%. Those earning from $163,000 to $211,000 pay 19.8%, and those earning from $211,000 to $533,000 pay 20.4%.

Unless "far lesser" has a different meaning to some

The tax rate for Buffett's income level is 35%. Buffett payed 17.4%. Looks like "far less" to me. Looks like "far less" to Buffett, too. That's his deal. Not mine. I just posted that he did a rare thing, in pursuit of the change he wants. You might read what he has to say, and why he is lobbying for a tax rate change, if you want to comment on it.

You guys (you, Slot, Dell) are hilarious: you all have negative comments about something you've heard a little about, you base your arguments on partial information you read here, and you absolutely refuse to be fully informed about what you're bitchin' about, because it's so much easier to argue your imaginary "what ifs" than what someone like Buffett or the OWS crowd has really said on the record.

[slotdirt]

Originally Posted by Riot

The tax rate for Buffett's income level is 35%. Buffett payed 17.4%. Looks like "far less" to me. Looks like "far less" to Buffett, too. That's his deal. Not mine. I just posted that he did a rare thing, in pursuit of the change he wants. You might read what he has to say, and why he is lobbying for a tax rate change, if you want to comment on it.

You guys (you, Slot, Dell) are hilarious: you all have negative comments about something you've heard a little about, you base your arguments on partial information you read here, and you absolutely refuse to be fully informed about what you're bitchin' about, because it's so much easier to argue your imaginary "what ifs" than what someone like Buffett or the OWS crowd has really said on the record.

Honest question: do you understand the difference between income earned by salary or wages (subject to the federal income tax) and income earned off investments (subject to capital gains taxes)? Further, do you understand that capital gains taxes are significantly lower than income taxes in order to encourage capital investment? Lastly, the only ways to make Warren Buffett pay more than 17.4 percent in taxes is to give him a larger salary (his is $100k and has been for 30 years), eliminate deductions, or to tax capital gains at a significantly higher rate. Pick your poison.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Honest question: do you understand the difference between income earned by salary or wages (subject to the federal income tax) and income earned off investments (subject to capital gains taxes)? Further, do you understand that capital gains taxes are significantly lower than income taxes in order to encourage capital investment? Lastly, the only ways to make Warren Buffett pay more than 17.4 percent in taxes is to give him a larger salary (his is $100k and has been for 30 years), eliminate deductions, or to tax capital gains at a significantly higher rate. Pick your poison.

Which would make sense if that's how it worked in the real world, but it's not. Because most stocks aren't initial public offerings, where the money goes to the company, theoretically to be used to expand; in fact, they're traded on the secondary market between private individuals and organizations that have no interest in their sliver of ownership of the company besides whether they can make a financial profit on eventually selling the stock. It's the difference between financial investment and economic investment. Most trading is a financial investment, which doesn't do the economy any good, unless the Warren Buffets of the world are taking their profits to build things. Which they aren't; they're buying more secondary market stocks and pocketing the profits.

So taxing capital gains as income isn't poison at all. It's far more fair than the current system. If the gov't wants to make an exception for IPOs, and tax them at a lower rate to encourage the company to further expand , fine, but once the stock has changed hands, it's not encouraging anything other than more profit-making with no intent to put that money back into the economy.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Honest question: do you understand the difference between income earned by salary or wages (subject to the federal income tax) and income earned off investments (subject to capital gains taxes)? Further, do you understand that capital gains taxes are significantly lower than income taxes in order to encourage capital investment? Lastly, the only ways to make Warren Buffett pay more than 17.4 percent in taxes is to give him a larger salary (his is $100k and has been for 30 years), eliminate deductions, or to tax capital gains at a significantly higher rate. Pick your poison.

Yes, I pay different tax rates on my regular income versus my capital gains. Duh. Are we in economic kindergarten here?

What I suggest you do is read what Buffett is lobbying for regarding the tax code, rather than guessing and assuming. It's a bit more complicated than the mean understanding so far expressed.

[slotdirt]

Originally Posted by Riot

Small point ... that's not what they are saying, and we have a progressive, not regressive, tax system.

And: Warren Buffett released some of his income tax information today



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...875519978.html

I don't know how many times it has to be stated that Buffett pays 17.4 percent of his earned income to Uncle Sam and not 35 percent because he makes virtually all of his money off investments that aren't subject to the federal income tax. I realize Mr. Buffett is suggesting that people of his ilk should pay higher taxes, but I can't imagine he's suggesting that dividends and capital gains should be taxed at a higher rate. I can assure you that idea would hit many, many more people than just the top echelon of income earners.

In any event, Warren Buffett himself could just stroke a check for $30 billion or so and it would save the government just as much money as letting the Bush tax cuts expire for the current 35 percent tax bracket.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

I realize Mr. Buffett is suggesting that people of his ilk should pay higher taxes, but I can't imagine he's suggesting that dividends and capital gains should be taxed at a higher rate.

Why don't you read what Warren Buffett himself has said about that very thing, you know, in the article, about it? Then you won't have to imagine and speculate.