The rich are selfish, antisocial unaware a-holes

[WGO-Jango]

Therefore I repeat, let no man talk to me of these and the like expedients, 'till he hath at least some glympse of hope, that there will ever be some hearty and sincere attempt to put them into practice. -"A Modest Proposal" Jonathan Swift

[Matt-Chicago]

Published today, an article by the radical socialist Warren Buffet:
*edit - added some bold
Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
By WARREN E. BUFFETT

Omaha

OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.

While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.

These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.

Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.

If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.

To understand why, you need to examine the sources of government revenue. Last year about 80 percent of these revenues came from personal income taxes and payroll taxes. The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.

Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.

I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.

Since 1992, the I.R.S. has compiled data from the returns of the 400 Americans reporting the largest income. In 1992, the top 400 had aggregate taxable income of $16.9 billion and paid federal taxes of 29.2 percent on that sum. In 2008, the aggregate income of the highest 400 had soared to $90.9 billion — a staggering $227.4 million on average — but the rate paid had fallen to 21.5 percent.

The taxes I refer to here include only federal income tax, but you can be sure that any payroll tax for the 400 was inconsequential compared to income. In fact, 88 of the 400 in 2008 reported no wages at all, though every one of them reported capital gains. Some of my brethren may shun work but they all like to invest. (I can relate to that.)

I know well many of the mega-rich and, by and large, they are very decent people. They love America and appreciate the opportunity this country has given them. Many have joined the Giving Pledge, promising to give most of their wealth to philanthropy. Most wouldn’t mind being told to pay more in taxes as well, particularly when so many of their fellow citizens are truly suffering.

Twelve members of Congress will soon take on the crucial job of rearranging our country’s finances. They’ve been instructed to devise a plan that reduces the 10-year deficit by at least $1.5 trillion. It’s vital, however, that they achieve far more than that. Americans are rapidly losing faith in the ability of Congress to deal with our country’s fiscal problems. Only action that is immediate, real and very substantial will prevent that doubt from morphing into hopelessness. That feeling can create its own reality.

Job one for the 12 is to pare down some future promises that even a rich America can’t fulfill. Big money must be saved here. The 12 should then turn to the issue of revenues. I would leave rates for 99.7 percent of taxpayers unchanged and continue the current 2-percentage-point reduction in the employee contribution to the payroll tax. This cut helps the poor and the middle class, who need every break they can get.

But for those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate.

My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.

Warren E. Buffett is the chairman and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway.

[Heatmaster78]

Richdog:
The wealthy and powerful and the corporations, banks, businesses, lobbyists, and think tanks they own and control come up with those numbers you listed, using every trick in the book to make data appear how they want it to. Like George Soros. I'm sure you'd accuse me or some of my sources of the same thing, so instead of getting lost in the pissing contest like taxes - where poor people still pay a high percentage of their income in taxes which may not be federal income taxes, but payroll taxes, sales taxes, etc - why don't we discuss more the big picture.In other words, no facts, but I will tell you what is what.

Over the past 30 years, we've seen a major concentration of wealth in the US and to a lesser extent across the world.
The wealthy have seen their incomes skyrocket while everyone else has seen their pay stagnant and declining, even though workers have made significant advances in productivity. How has that happened? Well obviously it has been a conspiracy by the rich. You know, its kind of funny, but you cannot get a hundred people into a room to agree on anything, yet you would have us believe that all of the rich in the entire world, are working solely to keep all citizens of every nation poor?

People try to argue it's all just natural, it's "the market" nobody is controlling it - which is a load of BS.Economics without political bias is a [female dog], but it is natural until government intervention and interference.
Very specific policies have been thought up and implemented by the people who have the wealth and power to give themselves more wealth and power - at the expense of the poor, working people, the environment, and society itself.No way the Progressives were part of that over the last century?

Forty years ago, an American with a high school diploma could earn enough to purchase his house, a car, food, medical care, raise kids, and retire comfortably. That came about through generations of labor struggle during which time nobody was prevented from getting rich. Most people held their jobs for decades with a great amount of stability.
Corporate America set upon undoing that situation, making labor cheaper, less secure, offering less benefits, getting tax loopholes for themselves, tax breaks for the ways many wealthy make money such as capital gains, deregulation, and overall just socializing the costs of doing business while privatizing the profits.And the rise to power by Unions had nothing to do with raising the costs of anything?

Our society subsidizes business and the wealthy an order of magnitude beyond what's done for the poor and working class. Through various government agencies and a revolving door between government and industry/financial institutions, hundreds of billions are spent every year through the Pentagon, Intel agencies, NIH, and dozens of other agencies - which finance much of the cutting edge technology and medical advancements.Waste comes from both sides of the aisle my friend. If you and your buddies had your way, you would love to tax every business into the ground so that they have no profit, and the majority of the population could sit on their arses and reap the benefits of others? That is called socialism. As discussed earlier, socialism never works.

Every business can pit every state of the union and country of the world against each other for what are becoming crappier and crappier jobs. Another conspiracy of the rich? That's their job right, maximize profits to the extent allowed by law and then some. They aint in business to lose money. That would be the government's bailiwick. So like where I live, Chicago gave I can't remember how many tens of millions of dollars to Boeing to move their corporate headquarters to Chicago - which includes allowing them to not pay taxes, get the land for free, etc - and this is a very common arrangement. Wow, even after Illinois raised the tax rates on businesses? Wonder what you would say when all the corps and businesses tell Illinois to screw their taxes and leave to make money in other states that are a little more business friendly, like say Texas? You would be [female dog] about all the unemployment and how the rich put those poor people there. Then you would have your unwashed masses ready for revolution?

Another part of the equation is the costs which society are forced to eat while the profits are privatized, things like pollution, chemical dumping, etc - which kill thousands of Americans each year, cause things like asthma and cancer, devastate the environment, foul streams and aquifers, etc - yet the people who made all the money don't have to pay those consequences. That is why we have laws. If a company comes into my neighborhood and pollutes the land, I can sue them. You are also illustrating the classic argument against corrupt politicians on the local, state, and federal levels who get kickbacks to allow this kind of thing to occur. Instead of [female dog] about the business owners who have to play this game, why not go after the politicians at all levels who receive moneys from corporations because they set up the system? Again, bipartisan. Greed on both sides of the aisle there.

Then we get to all the tax breaks, loopholes, accounting tricks, offshoring, 10,000 corporations sharing a 100 sqaure foot office in the Cayman Islands - to get out of paying what government and society has deemed their fair share. Fight for a Tax Reform. Start throwing the bums out of office who we elected in, that stand in the way of a fair Tax Reform. Again, you blame the wealthy for the way the system is set up, when you should be looking at the career politicians who benefit and get kickbacks to keep the system the same.

The people who make the most don't make most of their money from wages. They make it from stock options, capital gains, insurance, real estate, and various other types of speculation which are taxed at a much lower rate and don't go into the nice numbers you quoted above for who pays what, on the very specific kind of tax, federal income tax. It's called investing. It keeps businesses open, corporations running, and employing people. It is also a risk that the investor takes with his or her money. If the business tanks, they lose. If they make money on the deal, they reinvest in other companies they think are sound. Ask George Soros, he does it all the time.


I feel obligated to post a chart so here you go, but keep in mind this has become even more lopsided after the 2008 collapse:No chart? No comment.

I am not sure what you intend to prove with your post, other than the fact that you really hate "rich" people. We got it. You don't like capitalism. You love socialism. We got it.

Just reading some of your posts lately reminds me of a young Austrian who had a problem with a certain segment of society. Blaming all the ills of the world on just one group of people, casting them in the light that they do not think like "normal" citizens. Pretty soon you will be calling them animals? Parasites? Curious isn't it?

I tried to stay out of this thread but when I saw this reply I laughed.

You're calling Matt Hitler?

[Richdog]

Corporate America set upon undoing that situation, making labor cheaper, less secure, offering less benefits, getting tax loopholes for themselves, tax breaks for the ways many wealthy make money such as capital gains, deregulation, and overall just socializing the costs of doing business while privatizing the profits.

Pray tell, how did *they* make labor cheaper? As for offering less benefits, I don't feel bad about generalizing because that's what this whole argument has been about: benefits are an expense, just like any other, that goes into the cost of making a product. Businesses with higher expenses, and therefore more expensive products will quickly go out of business, rendering their employees completely jobless. But this whole idea of "taxing corporate America" is and always has been a total farce. Your beloved middle class owns stocks in corporations. And I guarantee you that corporations will not take a loss when taxes on them are raised. They will pass it on to the consumer as an additional operating expense. We all are the ones who pay corporate taxes.

Our society subsidizes business and the wealthy an order of magnitude beyond what's done for the poor and working class. Through various government agencies and a revolving door between government and industry/financial institutions, hundreds of billions are spent every year through the Pentagon, Intel agencies, NIH, and dozens of other agencies - which finance much of the cutting edge technology and medical advancements.

I'm not sure why you of all people would have a problem with cronyism, since that's what excess regulations, profit sharing, and government spending through any number of programs always leads to.

Every business can pit every state of the union and country of the world against each other for what are becoming crappier and crappier jobs. That's their job right, maximize profits to the extent allowed by law and then some. So like where I live, Chicago gave I can't remember how many tens of millions of dollars to Boeing to move their corporate headquarters to Chicago - which includes allowing them to not pay taxes, get the land for free, etc - and this is a very common arrangement.

Now I am not for exporting all our jobs to some 3rd world country to estrange workers from their wage labor, as in many cases, that does more harm than good for the country. (See IMF) But as for Boeing, you can be sure that I am not for governments paying anybody to do anything. Boeing moving to Chicago (where I just was this weekend btw) might conceivably be good enough for Chicagoans to offset the unnamed millions of tax dollars they spent, but I doubt it. More likely the presence of Boeing HQ only really creates tax revenue for the city. And you're right these cases are common, but look at if for what it really is: governments spending their citizens money for the benefits of the government/ individuals in government. That's what social programs are: governments taking your money to give to someone else, so that someone else will continue to vote for that elected official/party.

[Duel of Fates]

You're calling Matt Hitler?

I merely point out the dangers in placing the blame for all of society's woes and ills on just one group. To do so is folly and ignorance.

[WD-40]

I wish people who post here wouldn't quote the entire damn article! That's just lazy. You DON'T need to repost/requote the whole thing! Now, regarding Buffett's letter, if true, then that's good. I'm sure a few of his rich friends either agree or hate him. But I have to wonder...early in Obama's Run for prez and in his Presidency, wasn't Buffett supposed to be an 'insider' to Obama's administration? Shouldn't he already have his ear?

[Mandalore]

To get this back on track....I wouldn't say that they are lacking socially, I would say they know the right time to step on toes and climb over some people.

Edit: Duel, I found it funny that a (presumably) tea party-esque member made that statement, given that the ultra conservatives are frothing at the mouth when it comes to illegal aliens, the queers, and not to mention anyone who thinks welfare is a solid idea in any form.

[Corpse]

You Americans are so [m'kay] passionate and serious.

[Duel of Fates]

Edit: Duel, I found it funny that a (presumably) tea party-esque member made that statement, given that the ultra conservatives are frothing at the mouth when it comes to illegal aliens, the queers, and not to mention anyone who thinks welfare is a solid idea in any form.

Which statement?

[Heatmaster78]

You Americans are so [m'kay] passionate and serious.

While you Brits are careless and indifferent.