General Discussion

cherokeeprogressive

(24,853 posts)

7. Nothing Warren Buffett says should be taken at face value without analyzing his motives.

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:02 PM

Dec 2012

Warren Buffett is ALL FOR taxing the INCOME of the rich at a higher percentage, YOU BET! Why, you might ask?

Warren Buffett KNOWS it's either tax his millions in "income", derived investment, or tax his many BILLIONS IN WEALTH.

So what, if faced with having to decide, would Warren Buffett support more wholeheartedly... an increase in his "income" tax... or a tax on his WEALTH?

He sure has a lot of people fooled...

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

29 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Warren Buffett's $250K difference of opinion with President Obama [View all] red dog 1 Dec 2012 OP

How much revenue would we lose? That's probably a lot of people! mucifer Dec 2012 #1

"How much revenue would we lose?"...That's a good question. red dog 1 Dec 2012 #8

I would compromise on that, but ONLY for concessions Republicans are not willing to make bluestateguy Dec 2012 #2

Why even have a debt ceiling? (nt) AlexSatan Dec 2012 #27

More importantly, raising it from $250K to $500K hughee99 Dec 2012 #3

That might be a good selling point to 50 or 60 GOP House members ... red dog 1 Dec 2012 #23

Cut it off at 375K. That's compromise. SCliberal091294 Dec 2012 #4

That's only compromise if the Repubs want $500k, which they have not proposed. nt Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #12

I don't like that idea, but it's better than 37% for the top bracket democrattotheend Dec 2012 #14

What if the Dems propose an increase to $375K? red dog 1 Dec 2012 #19

The Repubs don't work for the people making less than $10MM per year. Lucky Luciano Dec 2012 #5

Not true. There are a lot of plain ol' millionaires (you don't have to have a ton of income Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #11

I don't think the thugs are beholden to mere doctors or lawyers... Lucky Luciano Dec 2012 #15

There are more Republicans than the ones in Washington. They're all connected, and it starts locally Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #17

All we need are 50 of them to "jump ship" and join the Dems on this vote... red dog 1 Dec 2012 #25

Depends if the budget works with the loss in revenue. DireStrike Dec 2012 #6

Nothing Warren Buffett says should be taken at face value without analyzing his motives. cherokeeprogressive Dec 2012 #7

With Buffett, what you see is what you get. There are no games there. He's so rich.... Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #10

Why not just consider raising the cutoff to $500K as a possible compromise? red dog 1 Dec 2012 #13

Nonsense. Buffett is for the only wealth tax we have - the estate tax. banned from Kos Dec 2012 #16

This could be a point that the Dems could "give" on, increasing the cutoff to $500k. Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #9

Some historical perspective: in 1955 there were 24 tax brackets (as opposed to 6 now)... JHB Dec 2012 #18

$500,000? Then make top tax rates 50% like they were under Reagan. Deal. JaneyVee Dec 2012 #20

I doubt if even one House Repug would go for a top tax rate of 50% red dog 1 Dec 2012 #21

The big money kicks in a above 5M, so a compromise of 500k, or even 1M JoePhilly Dec 2012 #22

Sure, make it $500K, but tax capital gains the same as wages TexasBushwhacker Dec 2012 #24

"tax capital gains the same as wages"?....Sounds good to me. red dog 1 Dec 2012 #26

Lower it to $100,000 FreeJoe Dec 2012 #28

Won't work....Obama already set the low cutoff at $250K. red dog 1 Dec 2012 #29