Login    Forum    Search    FAQ

Board index » Racing Forum » Ken0069's Blog




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 10:07 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
Here is this guy out calling for more taxes again on the "rich" when that upper 5% of taxpayers already pay 40% of the total taxes paid?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/ ... LY20121126

Then there's this article which states that "The Buffett Rule would raise $3.2 billion a year, and take 514 years just to pay off Obama's 2011 budget deficit." Mark Steyn

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/ ... mark_steyn

So if you think that Buffet is an all in tax guy, you need look no further than this article which shows us something completely different!

Watch What Warren Buffett Does, Not What He Says
Seems that his company owes right at a BILLION dollars in back taxes that he still hasn't paid?? :-

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/wat ... 64022.html

Then there's this little gem where Buffet is still "negotiating" with the Internal Revenue Service trying to get out of paying what he already owes!

Report: Buffett's Berkshire Owes $1 Billion In Back Taxes

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/buffett ... /id/409520

One would have to wonder what's in it for Buffet since he's pushing it so much? :-k

So what we really have in Washington is a SPENDING problem, not a REVENUE problem! WE NEED TO CUT SPENDING TO MEET THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE THAT IS TAKEN IN! You and I can't continue to spend money we don't have so why should the government do that?? We are destroying our children's future with a debt that even they will never be able to repay! [-(


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 10:34 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
Here's an article written by Thomas Sowell, one guy I read almost daily!

The ‘Tax Cuts for the Wealthiest’ Lie
Higher tax rates don’t equal higher tax revenues.

By Thomas Sowell

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/ ... as-sowell#

Quote:
Anyone who wants to study the tricks of propaganda has a rich source of examples in the statements of President Barack Obama. On Monday, July 9, for example, he said that Republicans “believe that prosperity comes from the top down, so that if we spend trillions more on tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, that that will somehow unleash jobs and economic growth.”

Let us begin with the word “spend.” Is the government “spending” money on people whenever it does not tax them as much as it can? Such convoluted reasoning would never pass muster if the mainstream media were not so determined to see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil when it comes to Barack Obama.

Ironically, actual spending by the Obama administration for the benefit of its political allies, such as the teachers’ unions, is called not spending but “investment.” You can say anything if you have your own private language.

But let’s go back to the notion of “spending” money on “the wealthiest Americans.” The people he is talking about are not the wealthiest Americans. Income is not wealth — and the whole tax controversy is about income taxes. Wealth is what you have accumulated, and wealth is not taxed, except when you die and the government collects an inheritance tax from your heirs.

People over 65 years of age have far more wealth — but lower incomes — than people in their thirties and forties. If Obama wants to talk about raising income taxes, let him talk about it, but claiming that he wants to tax “the wealthiest Americans” is a lie and an emotional distraction for propaganda purposes.

The really big lie — and one that no amount of hard evidence or logic seems to make a dent in — is that those who oppose raising taxes on higher incomes simply want people with higher incomes to have more money, in hopes that some of their prosperity will “trickle down” to the rest of the people.

Some years ago, a challenge was issued in this column to name any economist, outside of an insane asylum, who had ever said any such thing. Not one example has yet been received, whether from economists or anyone else. Someone is always claiming that somebody else said it, but no one has ever been able to name and quote that somebody else.

Once we have put aside the lies and the convoluted use of words, what are we left with? Not much.

Obama is claiming that the government can get more tax revenue by raising the tax rate on people with higher incomes. It sounds plausible, and that may be enough for some people, but the hard facts make it a very iffy proposition.

This issue has been fought out in the United States in several administrations — both Democratic and Republican. It has also been fought out in other countries.

What is the real argument of those who want to prevent taxes from rising above a certain percentage, even for people with high incomes? It has nothing to do with making them more prosperous so that their prosperity will “trickle down.”

A Democratic president — John F. Kennedy — stated the issue plainly. Under the existing tax rates, he explained, investors’ “efforts to avoid tax liabilities” made them put their money in tax shelters, because existing tax laws made “certain types of less productive activity more profitable than other more valuable undertakings” for the country.

Ironically, the Obama campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney for putting his money in the Cayman Islands substantiate the point that President Kennedy and others have made, that higher tax rates can drive money into tax shelters, whether tax-exempt municipal bonds or investments in other countries.

In other words, raising tax rates does not automatically raise tax revenues for the government. Higher tax rates have often led to lower tax revenues for states, the federal government, and other countries. Conversely, lower tax rates have often led to higher tax revenues. It all depends on the circumstances.

But none of this matters to Barack Obama. If class-warfare rhetoric about taxes leads to more votes for him, that is his bottom line, whether the government gets a dime more revenue or not. So long as his lies go unchallenged, a second term will be the end result for him and a lasting calamity for the country.


— Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. © 2012 Creators Syndicate, Inc.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 11:38 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:20 pm
Posts: 1457
Location: Missouri
You (and the writers of those articles) seem to get confused over PERSONAL income tax and CORPORATE income tax.

When rich M-F'ers are making $$$millions of dollars from capital gains and only paying 15% tax when I am paying 30%+ taxes I think it's wrong. People can do business and make money only because of the system, infrastructure and protection that is provided by the government. They should pay their share of that when they are benfiting the most.

No rich MAN has ever given me a job or anybody I know. Most rich people are hiring illegals as yardworkers and housekeepers so they can get them cheap and not paying any tax on them. BUSINESSES hire people.

Tax the rich person, not the business.

Rick


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 12:40 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:38 am
Posts: 11804
Location: Coming At Ya!
Buffet's claim of paying only 17% in taxes is somewhat misleading if not a down right lie. I've highlighted the part in this story that disputes his claim. This is a article that was written in 2011 but the tax laws are still the same.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/ed ... 8q2Woq9yjJ

Warren Buffett, hypocrite

Last Updated: 11:51 PM, August 28, 2011
Posted: August 29, 2011

Quote:
This one’s truly, uh ... rich: Billionaire Warren Buffett says folks like him should have to pay more taxes -- but it turns out his firm, Berkshire Hathaway, hasn’t paid what it’s already owed for years.

That’s right: As Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson notes, the company openly admits that it owes back taxes since as long ago as 2002.

“We anticipate that we will resolve all adjustments proposed by the US Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for the 2002 through 2004 tax years ... within the next 12 months,” the firm’s annual report says.

It also cites outstanding tax issues for 2005 through 2009.

Obvious question: If Buffett really thinks he and his “mega-rich friends” should pay higher taxes, why doesn’t his firm fork over what it already owes under current rates?

Likely answer: He cares more about shilling for President Obama -- who’s practically made socking “millionaires and billionaires” his re-election theme song -- than about kicking in more himself.

Buffett’s free to back Obama, of course.

And if his firm wants to keep its tax bill low, well, that’s its right, too.

But it would be nice if this “pro-tax-hike” tycoon were a bit more honest about it.

Start, for example, with his grossly disingenuous recent claim that, as he wrote in The New York Times, he paid only 17 percent of his income last year to the government -- even as many working stiffs who make far less than him coughed up higher percentages.

Fact is, unlike most other folks, Warren Buffett gets most of his income from dividends and capital gains, which are nominally taxed at 15 percent.

Left unsaid is that much of that is taxed at 35 percent (via the corporate income tax) before he even gets his hands on it. So in effect, he’s paying taxes twice (that is, when his companies actually pay, anyway).

Counting both taxes, his effective rate would really be well north of 40 percent for a big chunk of his income.

There’s more. Obama, and co-conspirators like Buffett, claim to want to slap only “millionaires and billionaires.”

But in 2009, for instance, fewer than a quarter-million taxpayers (less than two tenths of 1 percent) reported income over $1 million -- and their combined bill was less than $200 billion.

Raise the top tax rate on them by 13 percent, as Obama wants (from 35 percent to 39.6 percent) and you bring in only another $26 billion, tops -- and that’s if your tax hike doesn’t stifle the economy and kill jobs (which it surely would). Yet what’s $26 billion in a world of $4 trillion federal budgets with trillion-dollar-plus deficits?

No wonder Obama’s hikes on “millionaires and billionaires” actually start with folks earning as little as $200,000.

Looks like Buffett’s not the only disingenuous one here. But again, that’s clear from their individual behavior: Obama, Buffett and Democrats like Bill Clinton keep saying they want to pay more taxes.

Fine. They can always write checks.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:39 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:20 pm
Posts: 1457
Location: Missouri
Buffet is speaking of PERSONAL income tax, what Berkshire paid in taxes wasn't HIS money it was the corporation's money. Every business pays employee taxes too.

How is raising taxes on the super rich PEOPLE going to stifle the economy? Rich people don't hire people, businesses do the hiring. Don't raise business taxes.

If you want a lower than income tax rate for capital gains make them keep it for 10+yrs before it is considered long term capital gains. Right now keeping an investment 1 year or longer is enough to be long term cap-gains. That type of short term incentive is how and why the Romney types rape and pillage companies. I could see reason to make a somewhat lower rate for cap-gains on REAL long term investments, but not for a year, that's not a long term investment.

Rick


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 12:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:01 pm
Posts: 140
Is it a Revenue problem or a spending problem. I wouldn't give more money to an Alcoholic and expect him to clean up. If only they could show me somehow that they can handle what they have without printing more currency and destroying our dollar value.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:33 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:20 pm
Posts: 1457
Location: Missouri
just primer wrote:
Is it a Revenue problem or a spending problem. I wouldn't give more money to an Alcoholic and expect him to clean up. If only they could show me somehow that they can handle what they have without printing more currency and destroying our dollar value.

It's both a revenue problem and a spending problem. The revenue problem got a lot worse after the crooks on wall street caused the financial meltdown in 2008 putting so many tax payers out of work ... no work - no taxes.

If I were to advise a friend in financial trouble I would tell him to look for a better job (ie. more revenue) and to reduce his spending. BOTH need to happen.

Rick


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:01 pm
Posts: 140
Well spoken and a good point about less workers. My point is that I haven't seen the current administration do anything positive with the cards they hold, and There seems to be no opposition party. Just a fake we have no choice from the Republicans. It's the your comment about rich people hiring all the illegals that has me thrown a little. I live one hour from the border and believe me Rich people are not the reason illegals are here. I have seen one on my crew bring his wife over days before she had her two kids to have them here (each time). I have personally seen one of my bosses give the same guy a fake check stub on his request to say that he earned less money so he could get more benefits. The president wants to create more jobs in the Government but at the same time he is cutting Government left and right. I lost my job with a contractor for the government because of his decisions not because some rich man has all of the money.


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 4:06 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:20 pm
Posts: 1457
Location: Missouri
just primer wrote:
It's the your comment about rich people hiring all the illegals that has me thrown a little. I live one hour from the border and believe me Rich people are not the reason illegals are here. I have seen one on my crew bring his wife over days before she had her two kids to have them here (each time). I have personally seen one of my bosses give the same guy a fake check stub on his request to say that he earned less money so he could get more benefits.

My comment wasn't really about the illegals, but about how rich people would hire them to save a buck instead of Americans. However, I agree with cutting/limiting any gov't services for illegal immigrants.

My comment was about the rich Judges, Politicians, Lawyers etc that after getting appointed to a new political appointment they then have to go back and pay the payroll and SS taxes on the maids, yardworkers and others they had working for them for 20 years knowing that the press will dig up any dirt on them. I've read about it many times. It seems common enough with politicians that I am assuming most rich people are doing the same ... bypassing the system, not paying what they should in taxes in order to save them a buck. Illegals won't rat them out either since they'd go back home if caught.

Rick


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:01 pm
Posts: 140
What you say is true. There have been many stories of politicians with immigrant workers. I think in general, politicians are idiots. With total disregard, look at Nance Pelosi with her inside stock trade, and she got off. I still think that if we were to cut funding to all the Muslim nations.(Libya) and all of our enemy nations we give funding to. Like South Korea. We could save a lot of money. Maybe I am just on some sort of simplistic wave length. I don't understand the whole picture. I am just shocked to see so much of the public saying "yeah give them more money!". I think if we gave them 90% from every single person including welfare income they still would waste it and need more. Only because I haven't seen any example to say otherwise. When I was in a Union and Bush was ready to make a Bailout at the end of his term, My liberal Friends opposed it. As did I. When Obama told over and started the bailout they did not say a word, they said without it we would be sunk. My Union had pull out postcards in my Monthly newsletter to be mailed to the White House asking for more bailout money.
I don't know what exactly defines a person the be Rich, is it 2 hundred thousand and over, but in my area the people who are better off don't try and find the lowest price Contractor. I have done many jobs for well off people and they want piece of mind and quality. They usually pay more, not less. Some may not have overcome the language barrier to feel comfortable in hiring immigrants. Where I live it is not uncommon to go there whole life without speaking 5 or 6 words of English and still get by just fine. They are not as low wage as one might think, I have seen plenty making as much and more than anyone else. That is becoming a think of the past. The savings is in the No tax business that saves the customer money and brings in no Revenue for big brother. Thanks for the debate it is good practice for me. I have nearly lost my relationship with my Father because I am not good a debating without getting angry. He is very left and I am very Right.


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

Board index » Racing Forum » Ken0069's Blog


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron