HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » WARREN BUFFETT: Here's Th...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 05:42 AM

WARREN BUFFETT: Here's The Thing Grover Norquist Doesn't Understand About Business And Taxes

http://www.businessinsider.com/warren-buffett-calls-out-grover-norquist-on-taxes-2012-11

?maxX=351&maxY=263

Warren Buffett is out with a NYT op-ed calling for a minimum tax on the rich.

We'll get to his specifics in a second, but the part that will get the most attention is his intro, where he calls out Grover Norquist, the powerful activist who gets Republicans who "pledge" that they'll never raise taxes.
Buffett writes:

SUPPOSE that an investor you admire and trust comes to you with an investment idea. “This is a good one,” he says enthusiastically. “I’m in it, and I think you should be, too.”
Would your reply possibly be this? “Well, it all depends on what my tax rate will be on the gain you’re saying we’re going to make. If the taxes are too high, I would rather leave the money in my savings account, earning a quarter of 1 percent.” Only in Grover Norquist’s imagination does such a response exist.

With the fiscal cliff debate heating up, criticism of Grover Norquist and his influence is growing louder.

A Minimum Tax for the Wealthy

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/opinion/buffett-a-minimum-tax-for-the-wealthy.html

SUPPOSE that an investor you admire and trust comes to you with an investment idea. “This is a good one,” he says enthusiastically. “I’m in it, and I think you should be, too.”

Would your reply possibly be this? “Well, it all depends on what my tax rate will be on the gain you’re saying we’re going to make. If the taxes are too high, I would rather leave the money in my savings account, earning a quarter of 1 percent.” Only in Grover Norquist’s imagination does such a response exist.

Between 1951 and 1954, when the capital gains rate was 25 percent and marginal rates on dividends reached 91 percent in extreme cases, I sold securities and did pretty well. In the years from 1956 to 1969, the top marginal rate fell modestly, but was still a lofty 70 percent — and the tax rate on capital gains inched up to 27.5 percent. I was managing funds for investors then. Never did anyone mention taxes as a reason to forgo an investment opportunity that I offered.

Under those burdensome rates, moreover, both employment and the gross domestic product (a measure of the nation’s economic output) increased at a rapid clip. The middle class and the rich alike gained ground.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/warren-buffett-calls-out-grover-norquist-on-taxes-2012-11#ixzz2DK9fK4Dc

27 replies, 4882 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 27 replies Author Time Post
Reply WARREN BUFFETT: Here's The Thing Grover Norquist Doesn't Understand About Business And Taxes (Original post)
xchrom Nov 2012 OP
Iggy Nov 2012 #1
Skittles Nov 2012 #2
geckosfeet Nov 2012 #10
DallasNE Nov 2012 #20
Iggy Nov 2012 #26
banned from Kos Nov 2012 #3
davidpdx Nov 2012 #9
banned from Kos Nov 2012 #11
DinahMoeHum Nov 2012 #19
jmowreader Nov 2012 #4
Berlum Nov 2012 #5
valerief Nov 2012 #6
dotymed Nov 2012 #7
WillyT Nov 2012 #8
Kingofalldems Nov 2012 #12
NoMoreWarNow Nov 2012 #13
BumRushDaShow Nov 2012 #14
UCmeNdc Nov 2012 #15
JHB Nov 2012 #16
Egalitarian Thug Nov 2012 #17
The Wizard Nov 2012 #18
hifiguy Nov 2012 #21
Fence rider Nov 2012 #22
ThoughtCriminal Nov 2012 #23
lefthandedskyhook Nov 2012 #24
fascisthunter Nov 2012 #25
mostlyconfused Nov 2012 #27

Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 06:11 AM

1. It's Not Just the Tax Aspect

 

Norquist and his pathetic band of followers in congress think this gives them some sort of edge politically.

Well, how's that workin' out for you, Grover?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggy (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 06:20 AM

2. CORRECT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggy (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:42 AM

10. And why, are elected officials taking oaths and pledges that undermine the people that elected them?

And why do those people keep electing them?

This is some messed up shit people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggy (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 01:39 PM

20. "Some Sort Of Edge Politically"

That was always the core principle of such a pledge. The message was focus group tested over and over and over again and it tested well every time. One problem. The make up of the focus group did not match the demographics of America so, like Gallup, they missed it by a mile.

So, not only is Grover Norquist a big loser in this election cycle, so is Frank Luntz. In fact, Luntz may be an even bigger loser than Norquist. Luntz was the behind the scene guy who told the mouthpiece like Norquist what words to say. By abandoning Norquist Republicans are also abandoning Luntz whether they are saying it or not and that is not all bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DallasNE (Reply #20)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 09:08 PM

26. The LARGE Disconnect

 

is most of the doofs taking "the pledge" are not fiscally conservative.

They are quite alright with bush's two UNfunded wars of choice-- and his creation of an entirely new department-- Homeland Security.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:03 AM

3. Buffett is this country's wise old man

 

He has no peer when it comes to understanding corporate America and how the political system affects us.

Its too bad the right tries to demonize the countries #1 capitalist by making up lies about him (like he owes a billion to the IRS). Even Huffpo printed that garbage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to banned from Kos (Reply #3)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:32 AM

9. The guy is not only a genius, but he's a generous one

We need more people like Buffet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #9)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:42 AM

11. Yes, he is against vast inherited wealth

 

He supports a large estate tax (to force wealthy people into charities).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to banned from Kos (Reply #11)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 01:02 PM

19. He's also the first to say he didn't get rich by himself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:07 AM

4. What Warren Buffett doesn't understand

...is a list of all the things Grover Norquist doesn't understand about taxes and business won't fit in the Internet.

Any decent businessman operating under Subchapter C can get his taxable income down to 0.1% of gross revenue without breaking a sweat simply by writing off everything that can be legally deducted. If you make $1000 and pay taxes on more than a dollar of it, your profit margin is too damn high. You're either using cheap.materials, paying too low a wage or not reinvesting - and all those things will kill you.


Fuckwads like Norquist like to talk about the millions of Subchapter S and LLCs that will be hurt if the top rate is raised. Puh-leez! You show me an LLC that does $335,000 in profit per annum and I'll show you the poster child for the wrong form of business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:27 AM

5. Norquist & Cronies (R) know the true meaning of FAIL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:28 AM

6. Whose judgment do you trust? Buffet's or

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:29 AM

7. America is so corporate owned and operated

that unless WE can field politicians that actually understand the necessity of returning to fair (high) taxes on the wealthy, dividend income and capital gains, we are doomed to serfdom.
If WE would do this (and legislate citizens united out of existence), we could afford socialized medicine and increases in in SS payments and benefits ($200 funeral allowance...)
Our country as a whole would prosper and equality would be much closer. This is what America was founded on, yet we have allowed Fascism to replace Democracy and we do not have real free markets (for the capitalists). A "free market" does not mean no regulations, it means a market driven by "market forces" not monopolies or guaranteed outcomes.
Too bad that Reagan had his FCC revoke the FAIRNESS DOCTRINE. Before this, America was one of the best informed countries in the world. I would say that currently we are the worst informed people in the 1st world (at least). His (corporate driven) decision resulted in our piss poor educational system also.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:31 AM

8. K & R !!!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:45 AM

12. He's a commie

Right freepers?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:46 AM

13. Norquist doesn't give a shit about business-- his main goal is to shrink govt

 

by starving it of revenue. That's why Buffet's logic will have no effect on Norquist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:56 AM

14. Buffett selling securities in 1951. Dumbass Norquist born in 1956.

Enough said?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 08:04 AM

15. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 08:06 AM

16. Let's not forget to add that Norquist's entire career has been as a political operative

Lobby groups, campaign staffer, party apparatus positions, but no direct interaction with the free market. No services or product beyond schmoozing and propaganda.

A further irony about Norquist:

It's a conservative meme that liberals are stuck in 1968. The conservative bomb of a move "An American Carol" had a whole musical number about it complete with choreographed tie-dyed, sandal-wearing university professors.

My counter has been that if you're going to reduce it to something dopey like that, then conservatives are stuck in 1978: taxes are high, the economy is stagnant, crime is high and going up, looting of stores in the blackout and "the Bronx is burning" are still fresh in everyone's minds, Team B confirmed (for conservatives) that the Soviets were just chomping at the bit for world conquest, every union is just like the mob-controlled Teamsters (and can't adapt), regulation is too tight, etc. etc. etc. Everything from views that were reasonable for that time to complete paranoid delusions were set in stone (and embossed with Ronald Reagan's profile).

Back to Norquist: from a 2009 "First Person Singular" column in the Washington Post:
When I became 21, I decided that nobody learned anything about politics after the age of 21. Look at people who grew up in the Great Depression, and their understanding of politics is Hoover and FDR. Fifty years later, everything is Hoover and FDR.


Norquist turned 21 in 1977.

Thank you, Grover, for being so intellectually stunted as to prove my point with your own.

And let's not forget to add: by his very words, Norquist is obsolete and should be put out to pasture.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 08:30 AM

17. It's never, not for one day, been about taxes. Grover was created for one purpose,

 

to wrest way power from the people so it would fall back to the parasites that he works for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 08:52 AM

18. Norquist is borderline legal

He takes money from the wealthy elites and uses it for bribes to effect legislation designed to benefit the people who pay Grover. In a just world Grover would be working in the prison kitchen. Now he just hides money in Cayman tax havens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 02:48 PM

21. That is the sound of pine meeting skull

as James Carville put it. Wow. That is gonna leave a big, nasty mark.

Would your reply possibly be this? “Well, it all depends on what my tax rate will be on the gain you’re saying we’re going to make. If the taxes are too high, I would rather leave the money in my savings account, earning a quarter of 1 percent.” Only in Grover Norquist’s imagination does such a response exist.


Truer words were never spoken or written. Bravo, sir.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 03:26 PM

22. Ulterior Motive

Grover has an ulterior motive. Look at what he has said. He has made his dream as a twelve year old almost come true. How many of us can say that?
It's because most of the fuckin ideas we had as twelve year olds were really stupid!!!!!!!!!!\
I wanted to be a policeman, I am sure glad that never happened! I think you get the idea. For him to say that there are no fresh ideas over the age of 21 is the biggest insult to my intelligence I can think of. His blatant attack on our democratic process is idiocy on a grand scale! Grover if you don't like it so much "GET THE FUCK OUT", don't fuck it up for everybody else just because your ego is so big!!
He is following a mandate that leads us to the stone ages and by leveraging political power from ill gotten gains " Jack Abramoff" he is getting the republican sheep to follow his every word? How could "we the people" let this go on? Is there nothing WE can do to stop an egotistical mental midget from fucking things up even worse than they are now?
I think we all hoped and prayed that this ass whoppin the republicans took this last election would at least make some of his sheep realize that "the status quo ain't workin no mo" but alas the weazel is out of the cage!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 07:23 PM

23. A person could know NOTHING...

ZERO...and still know more about business and taxes than Grover Norquist.

The magic of negative numbers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 08:41 PM

24. The "supply side" house of cards is falling

How sweet it is! It was always voodoo economics, but that apt frame was doomed because it was coined by the right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 09:02 PM

25. I only wish I could sit with him for a chat

just to speak and then ask questions in a sincerely cordial manner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Original post)

Tue Nov 27, 2012, 12:34 AM

27. Buffet ought to aim a little higher though

the guy no doubt is an economic genius, but if you apply the minimum tax rates he suggests for the wealthy it looks like you only increase tax receipts to the government from individual income tax returns by $50-60 million each year. That's 0.004% of last year's annual budget deficit. We need so much more than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread