Get His Back!

[Benny B]

Get his back

Middle-class families shouldn't have to pay a higher tax rate than millionaires and billionaires.

So President Obama has proposed the "Buffett Rule," which would require the wealthiest Americans to pay a tax rate at least as high as the middle class. Republicans are already calling this "class warfare," and they will fight this plan with everything they have.

But it's just common sense. Tell the President you've got his back on this one.


Warren Buffett doesn't think his secretary should pay a higher percentage of income in taxes than he does, and most Americans agree. Tell Congress it's time for millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share!

[Benny B]

BUMP

[dan18]

BUMP

please dont bump your own thread its sad. but i agree with you..

[Benny B]

please dont bump your own thread its sad. but i agree with you..

Sad for YOU perhaps, great fun for me! Don't like it, lump it. 
At least you are not a dittohead imbecile and can see that the "Buffett Rule" makes complete sense.

America, the choice is yours. Help towards balancing the budget by making people like wealthy socialite Paris Hilton and multi-billionaire Warren Buffett, or balance the budget off of the backs of the poor and middle class, which includes ALL OF YOU reading this thread. Sorry republican supporting regressives, but President Obama has the upper hand in taking this fight to the American people in the election of 2012. 

[JOCKTHEGLIDE]

I work hard,,to become a millionaire,,,you can too,,,why cant we impose those laws,,,on folks who make 45k/year,,,I used to make that much then I decided I want more,,,this is america,,,,you can make as much asmoney as you want

when I work hard why should i be taxed just as hard,,,harder i work the more i get taxes

[Butterbean]

Wait, you mean Obama has been lying to the public?      

IRS Data Show Most Millionaires Pay Taxes at Higher Rate Than Middle Class
Published September 20, 2011
FoxNews.com

President Obama gestures while speaking in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington Sept. 19.

President Obama and his advisers are presenting the "Buffett Rule" as the cure for an epidemic of millionaire tax scofflaws, but national statistics show millionaires by and large are paying taxes at a much higher rate than middle-class families.

And their income taxes make up a significant portion of the federal budget pie.

Data compiled by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center show households pulling in more than $1 million pay about 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes. By contrast, households making between $50,000 and $75,000 pay about 15 percent.

The so-called Buffett Rule has become the political centerpiece of the president's deficit-reduction program. Named after Warren Buffett, the provision would ensure people making more than $1 million a year pay taxes at a higher rate than the middle class.

The president proposed the rule after Buffett complained he was paying taxes at a lower rate than his secretary. Democrats said he's not the only one -- according to Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid's office, 22,000 people who make over $1 million a year pay taxes at a rate of less than 15 percent. According to the IRS, nearly 1,500 households reporting more than $1 million in income paid no federal income taxes in 2009.

That's out of about 236,000 returns for income above $1 million, most of which belong to households paying taxes at a higher rate. And, as would be expected, they contribute a disproportionate share of tax toward federal coffers.

IRS statistics for tax year 2009 show the millionaires -- who make up a fraction of a percent of all taxpayers -- contributed more than 20 percent of total federal income tax revenue. That's about $180 billion in taxes from millionaires, according to number-crunching from the National Taxpayers Union.

The National Taxpayers Union also found that in 2008 the top 1 percent of American taxpayers paid 38 percent of collections for personal federal income tax while they represented 20 percent of all income.

For those wealthy Americans paying taxes at a seemingly low rate, it could be because they earn income overseas or because a large part of annual income is from investments. Though corporate profits are taxed at 35 percent, in the form of capital gains and dividends they are taxed at 15 percent. Senate testimony in May from the Tax Foundation also showed that for taxpayers making more than $200,000 a year, their salary income made up just 20 percent of national salary income. Much more came from business income.

In total, the Obama deficit-reduction package would seek to raise taxes, mostly on high-income households, by $1.5 trillion over the next decade.

About half of that is from letting the Bush tax cuts expire for households making more than $250,000. Other changes would strip tax breaks for oil and gas companies and other benefits.

The White House would not say how much might be raised from the Buffett Rule or how it would be implemented.

But the Buffett Rule quickly became the rallying cry for the president's plan. In an email to supporters sent Monday night, the campaign urged voters to get the president's back on the plan.

"This proposal makes sure millionaires and billionaires share the responsibility for reducing the deficit," the email said. "The other side is already saying it's 'class warfare' -- that's their rhetorical smokescreen for providing millionaires and billionaires special treatment."

But Republican Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels told Fox News the president's proposal appeared to be "purposely divisive."

"As a practical matter, it's a loser," he said, describing the plan as "hair-of-the-dog economics."

"You know people that have had way too much of something they shouldn't and there's always somebody who says have another one, it'll make you feel better -- it just doesn't work any better in this case," Daniels said.

Louisiana Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal said the problem is spending and described the president's proposal as not serious.

"He doesn't get it," Jindal told Fox News.

The president's plan was presented as a proposal to the bipartisan "super committee" trying to find at least $1.2 trillion in deficit savings by Thanksgiving.

The plan includes more than just tax hikes. It covers $580 billion in cuts to entitlement and other federal programs, including to Medicare and Medicaid. The president also claimed $1.1 trillion in savings from winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- a claim that has been dismissed as a budgetary gimmick in the past. If the war savings are counted alongside interest savings and the cuts Congress enacted in August, the president's plan is worth than $4 trillion over the next decade.

While Republicans slammed the proposal as divisive and unworkable, some Democrats applauded the president for asking the wealthy to pay more while shielding Medicare seniors and other entitlement program beneficiaries from more severe cutbacks.

"With the wealthiest people in this country becoming wealthier and large corporations enjoying huge profits, it is time that we end tax breaks for the wealthy and large corporations and have them pay their fair share," Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said in a statement.

"We call on Congress to immediately pass the president's proposal for job-creating investments, to ask the wealthy to start paying their fair share, to focus on the true causes of our long-term deficits, to reject any cuts to Medicaid or Social Security or Medicare benefits, and to stop scapegoating federal and postal employees and retirees for problems they did not cause," AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/20/irs-data-show-most-millionaires-pay-taxes-at-higher-rate-than-middle-class/.com/politics/2011/09/19/obama-yields-to-liberal-outcry-on-entitlement-reform/

[Butterbean]

the problem is you're flat out wrong that the super rich pay less than their secretaries.  The super rich pay a larger majority of their tax on investment income.  This IS taxed at a lower rate.  However the majority of investment income is coming in the form of capital gains and dividends.  These dividends are taxed once at the corporate level (35%), and then taxed again at the shareholder level (15%).  This is the part of tax that Mr. Buffett doesn't understand.  Just because he's super rich doesn't mean he knows anything about taxes.  He doesn't prepare his own tax returns you guys.  Now some writer with an agenda is misleading you to believe something that is absolutely not true and now you are diseminating this bullshit information to more people on this board.  and I don't expect the average person to understand our tax code.  But let's leave articles like this to CPA's or IRS agents.  Not young liberal writers who don't know their ass from the IRC.  like i said before.  disgusting.

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=392793.0

[jude2]

Damn Buffet has some ugly ass sec.

[Stavios]

everybody should pay the same % of their income, regardless of what they make

simple and effective

[jude2]

everybody should pay the same % of their income, regardless of what they make

simple and effective

This is too simple and easy for the goverment. I say Stavios for Pres.

[Soul Crusher]

 

[bears]

everybody should pay the same % of their income, regardless of what they make

simple and effective

the flat tax has it's problems as well.  unfortunately it's not a slam dunk like some believe.

[240 is Back]

why will NEITHER side get behind flat tax? 

[Soul Crusher]

why will NEITHER side get behind flat tax? 

Because the tax code is the most potent device to get favors , do favors, and punish people and companies. 

I favor a flat sales tax and thats it. 

[240 is Back]

Because the tax code is the most potent device to get favors , do favors, and punish people and companies. 

I favor a flat sales tax and thats it. 

why do rich ppl push for so many things (and get most of them) - but most avoid this topic?

IMO, it's because the poor are ALREADY spending 100% of their income.  You bump the tax rate up, and they stop spending so much at walmart each week.  Period.  THis isn't debatable.

What happens then, is that WMT stock goes down.  ANd the rich - their money is already not being spent - it's being invested in PM and foreign currencies.  They haven't grown industry here in 11 years, despite all the bush tax cuts or Obama's stimulus.  THey just haven't.


SOyoure wasting your breath with the flat tax stuff.  WIll never happen, cause both rich and poor ppl hate it.

[GigantorX]

why do rich ppl push for so many things (and get most of them) - but most avoid this topic?

IMO, it's because the poor are ALREADY spending 100% of their income.  You bump the tax rate up, and they stop spending so much at walmart each week.  Period.  THis isn't debatable.

What happens then, is that WMT stock goes down.  ANd the rich - their money is already not being spent - it's being invested in PM and foreign currencies.  They haven't grown industry here in 11 years, despite all the bush tax cuts or Obama's stimulus.  THey just haven't.


SOyoure wasting your breath with the flat tax stuff.  WIll never happen, cause both rich and poor ppl hate it.

That has a lot to do with the current policy by the Fed and our Govt. And at some point we have to face the facts that our economy is a mature one.

[GigantorX]

And this thread is OVER after Butterbeans post.

Over, Done, Fin, Finished, Dead.

[JBGRAY]

Because the tax code is the most potent device to get favors , do favors, and punish people and companies. 

I favor a flat sales tax and thats it. 

No.  A flat tax would crush the poor and put many of the middle class into the ranks of the poor.  Let's say a family makes a scant $20k a year...a flat %20 tax rate would have them making $16k a year...that $4k missing means a LOT..such as not being able to make rent, pay utilities, afford groceries, have transportation....a necessity for life would almost surely go.  Now lets say if you have a family making $200k a year at the same tax rate, their income would then be $160k a year...no necessities for life would have to go, although perhaps they've had to get a Chrysler vehicle rather than a Mercedes.  This, is of course assuming that one does not live in super-expensive places to live at, such as NYC or LA.

The same result would be had if the income tax were eliminated and instead an additional federal sales tax on top of state taxes on purchasable goods.  Most poor and middle class families(who mostly do not pay hefty income taxes) do the bulk of their shopping at places like Wal-Mart and the grocery store...forcing price increases in an economy where the dollar is tanking would again only increase the ranks of the poor.

End the various tax subsidies(especially in the "Green" sector) and close the tax loopholes that clever accountants can find worm through.

[bears]

No.  A flat tax would crush the poor and put many of the middle class into the ranks of the poor.  Let's say a family makes a scant $20k a year...a flat %20 tax rate would have them making $16k a year...that $4k missing means a LOT..such as not being able to make rent, pay utilities, afford groceries, have transportation....a necessity for life would almost surely go.  Now lets say if you have a family making $200k a year at the same tax rate, their income would then be $160k a year...no necessities for life would have to go, although perhaps they've had to get a Chrysler vehicle rather than a Mercedes.  This, is of course assuming that one does not live in super-expensive places to live at, such as NYC or LA.

The same result would be had if the income tax were eliminated and instead an additional federal sales tax on top of state taxes on purchasable goods.  Most poor and middle class families(who mostly do not pay hefty income taxes) do the bulk of their shopping at places like Wal-Mart and the grocery store...forcing price increases in an economy where the dollar is tanking would again only increase the ranks of the poor.

End the various tax subsidies(especially in the "Green" sector) and close the tax loopholes that clever accountants can find worm through.

all absolutely correct.  just that tax loopholes can be a very efficient way of stimulating different types of investing.  they're not ALL about helping the rich get richer.  we have to eliminate the ones that aren't helping and keep the ones that are.

[bears]

Sad for YOU perhaps, great fun for me! Don't like it, lump it. 
At least you are not a dittohead imbecile and can see that the "Buffett Rule" makes complete sense.

America, the choice is yours. Help towards balancing the budget by making people like wealthy socialite Paris Hilton and multi-billionaire Warren Buffett, or balance the budget off of the backs of the poor and middle class, which includes ALL OF YOU reading this thread. Sorry republican supporting regressives, but President Obama has the upper hand in taking this fight to the American people in the election of 2012. 

so you think that taxing the rich is the solution to balancing our budget?  seriously?     

[Soul Crusher]

so you think that taxing the rich is the solution to balancing our budget?  seriously?     

Yes!   Obama needs more  $ $$  $ for more ball washing, solyndras, light squared, etc etc.   

[jude2]

No.  A flat tax would crush the poor and put many of the middle class into the ranks of the poor.  Let's say a family makes a scant $20k a year...a flat %20 tax rate would have them making $16k a year...that $4k missing means a LOT..such as not being able to make rent, pay utilities, afford groceries, have transportation....a necessity for life would almost surely go.  Now lets say if you have a family making $200k a year at the same tax rate, their income would then be $160k a year...no necessities for life would have to go, although perhaps they've had to get a Chrysler vehicle rather than a Mercedes.  This, is of course assuming that one does not live in super-expensive places to live at, such as NYC or LA.

The same result would be had if the income tax were eliminated and instead an additional federal sales tax on top of state taxes on purchasable goods.  Most poor and middle class families(who mostly do not pay hefty income taxes) do the bulk of their shopping at places like Wal-Mart and the grocery store...forcing price increases in an economy where the dollar is tanking would again only increase the ranks of the poor.

End the various tax subsidies(especially in the "Green" sector) and close the tax loopholes that clever accountants can find worm through.

20% is too high. Didn't Ross P say he only pays 2% tax because of all his write offs.