Warren Buffett: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich

[THE MATRIX]

My link

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Billionaire investor Warren Buffett, saying he doesn't want to be "coddled" by Congress, says that wealthier Americans should pay higher taxes, and that higher taxes do not dampen job growth.

Buffett, chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA, Fortune 500), wrote in an op-ed piece published Monday in The New York Times that taxes should be raised on Americans who make at least $1 million per year.

"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," wrote Buffett, who has mentioned in past interviews that the rich should pay higher taxes.

The philanthropist said that his 2010 federal tax bill, including income and payroll taxes, was $6,938,744.

"That sounds like a lot of money," wrote the Omaha, Neb.-based billionaire. "But what I paid was only 17.4% of my taxable income - and that's actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office."

He added that some investment managers were taxed only 15% on billions of dollars in income. He compared that to the middle class, with its income tax bracket of up to 25%.

He said that 40 million jobs were created between 1980 and 2000, when the tax rate for the rich was higher than it is now. "You know what's happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation," he wrote.

Buffett proposed that Congress impose a higher tax rate on millionaires, and an even higher tax rate on those making at least $10 million per year.

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

[supervike]

Mr. Buffett knows a thing or two about economics.

I think he should at least be listened to.

[Order66]

6,938,744 @ 17.4% means he earned 39,877,839.08. If he paid 90% income tax, he'd still be a millionaire several times over. If I paid 90% in taxes I wouldn't be able to pay the rent. I don't think Warren Buffett relates to what most of America is dealing with right now and I personally don't like getting preached about this class warfare whose 7-figure lifestyle won't be affected either way. If he wanted to help, he would be calling for the lower income bracket to pay less taxes, not for the rich to pay more.

EDIT: 39 million seems kind of low, I wonder what percentage of his income he's actually reporting

Edited August 15, 2011 by Halloween78

[Ryinrea]

6,938,744 @ 17.4% means he earned 39,877,839.08. If he paid 90% income tax, he'd still be a millionaire several times over. If I paid 90% in taxes I wouldn't be able to pay the rent. I don't think Warren Buffett relates to what most of America is dealing with right now and I personally don't like getting preached about this class warfare whose 7-figure lifestyle won't be affected either way. If he wanted to help, he would be calling for the lower income bracket to pay less taxes, not for the rich to pay more.

Face palms! I think that what Warren Buffet was saying that the lower income bracket should pay less in taxes and the rich should pay more as well....... He said that stop coddling the super rich which means that each of us should pay our fair share of the taxes.

[Order66]

Face palms! I think that what Warren Buffet was saying that the lower income bracket should pay less in taxes and the rich should pay more as well....... He said that stop coddling the super rich which means that each of us should pay our fair share of the taxes.

I'm of the opinion that while on the surface it seems like Warren Buffett is pointing the finger at rich people urging them to pay more, I think in reality what he is doing is pointing the finger at poor and urging them to hate the rich because it serves his political agenda.

[supervike]

So instead, let's do nothing, since he obviously has an agenda?

I think Buffett a straight shooter, he calls it like hes sees it.

[Damrod]

He makes solid and sound reason and the point he made about job creation from 1980 to 2000 at a higher tax rate is also widely acknowledged...the problem is really not the truly, super rich...it's all the wanna be's that think a few percentage points makes the difference between being rich and wanting to be rich....and it doesn't.

[questionmark]

He makes solid and sound reason and the point he made about job creation from 1980 to 2000 at a higher tax rate is also widely acknowledged...the problem is really not the truly, super rich...it's all the wanna be's that think a few percentage points makes the difference between being rich and wanting to be rich....and it doesn't.

The problem is those idiots who think that not paying taxes they will get rich.

Not paying interest on the stuff they have thrown into the trashcan 3 years ago is more like the ticket.

[regeneratia]

I have become quite fond of Buffet. He creates stores where people can buy expensive products for rather cheaply.

I have never thought of him as money-grubbing.

He invests in a company that I have great heart for: Dendreon.

I'm of the opinion that while on the surface it seems like Warren Buffett is pointing the finger at rich people urging them to pay more, I think in reality what he is doing is pointing the finger at poor and urging them to hate the rich because it serves his political agenda.

What is his political agenda?

[MissMelsWell]

I'm very fond of Warren Buffett, Bill Gates and the other "super rich" in the USA. They all think like good old Warren does. Let's face it... most of America's super rich are liberal... Don't think for a minute they're all republicans... they aren't. Looks at the states with the wealthiest populations.. these aren't conservative voting states. So what does that tell you?

[Order66]

What is his political agenda?

He wants control, he wants to make you think he is the one who is on your side while the rest are against you. He wants to be a Fidel Castro or a Cesar Chavez, presenting himself as a man of the people when the cameras are on but when they are off, party like a rockstar. Just like union leaders who say they are trying to help the little guy while they pocket kickbacks, stage walkouts, make unreasonable demands that kill the industry. Do you think when Warren Buffett is mingling with his rich friends on the golf course that he is telling them they need to pay more taxes? If you really want a laugh, ask him to pay 17.4 % of what he really made last year let alone 20 or 30 percent. Ask him if he loves green energy enough to let a wind farm block his view of the ocean from his summer home in Maine. Sacrifice is for everyone else, not for him, he is too important. His image is like a Hollywood movie plot, the billionaire who suddenly grows a conscience and has a Jesus complex, but its all bogus.

[BlindMessiah]

He wants control, he wants to make you think he is the one who is on your side while the rest are against you. He wants to be a Fidel Castro or a Cesar Chavez, presenting himself as a man of the people when the cameras are on but when they are off, party like a rockstar. Just like union leaders who say they are trying to help the little guy while they pocket kickbacks, stage walkouts, make unreasonable demands that kill the industry. Do you think when Warren Buffett is mingling with his rich friends on the golf course that he is telling them they need to pay more taxes? If you really want a laugh, ask him to pay 17.4 % of what he really made last year let alone 20 or 30 percent. Ask him if he loves green energy enough to let a wind farm block his view of the ocean from his summer home in Maine. Sacrifice is for everyone else, not for him, he is too important. His image is like a Hollywood movie plot, the billionaire who suddenly grows a conscience and has a Jesus complex, but its all bogus.

He's donated massive amounts of money to charity over the years. None of those donations have given him any sort of control over you. It's absurd to claim that simply because he is wealthy he is a sociopath. Your claim that he is pretending to "suddenly grow a conscience" is obnoxious. The implication is that he didn't have one in the past. This isn't a man who became wealthy through corrupt dealings. This is a man who has simply made good financial decisions since he was a small child. He started a business when in high school and paid his own way through college. He earned his money fair and square and you have no right to judge him for it.

Edited August 16, 2011 by BlindMessiah

[Order66]

He's donated massive amounts of money to charity over the years. None of those donations have given him any sort of control over you. It's absurd to claim that simply because he is wealthy he is a sociopath. Your claim that he is pretending to "suddenly grow a conscience" is obnoxious. The implication is that he didn't have one in the past. This isn't a man who became wealthy through corrupt dealings. This is a man who has simply made good financial decisions since he was a small child. He started a business when in high school and paid his own way through college. He earned his money fair and square and you have no right to judge him for it.

All of that is true, I have nothing against his achievements and I think philanthropy is great. I just don't like it when he points the finger at others and judges them, standing on the moral pulpit and saying you're not doing enough, not making enough sacrifice. I can name some great wealthy philanthropists in America today who freely give money without self-aggrandizing and without indignation towards others. People should give because they want to, not because somebody lays guilt trips on them and preaches about sacrifice.

[Damrod]

All of that is true, I have nothing against his achievements and I think philanthropy is great. I just don't like it when he points the finger at others and judges them, standing on the moral pulpit and saying you're not doing enough, not making enough sacrifice. I can name some great wealthy philanthropists in America today who freely give money without self-aggrandizing and without indignation towards others. People should give because they want to, not because somebody lays guilt trips on them and preaches about sacrifice.

And when they don't and they seem to relish in the collateral damage and suffering around them? I applaud him for pointing our the moral deficiency in some of the greed driven habits of his associates. I think anyone in his or Gates' position is entitled to call others to task and challenge them to step up to the plate...if they don't, do you think they will just because "it's the right thing to do"? Good luck with that.

Edited August 17, 2011 by Damrod

[Order66]

And when they don't and they seem to relish in the collateral damage and suffering around them? I applaud him for pointing our the moral deficiency in some of the greed driven habits of his associates. I think anyone in his or Gates' position is entitled to call others to task and challenge them to step up to the plate...if they don't, do you think they will just because "it's the right thing to do"? Good luck with that.

Actions speak louder than words. Don't tell other people what is the right thing to do, just do it.

Edited August 17, 2011 by Halloween78

[BlindMessiah]

All of that is true, I have nothing against his achievements and I think philanthropy is great. I just don't like it when he points the finger at others and judges them, standing on the moral pulpit and saying you're not doing enough, not making enough sacrifice. I can name some great wealthy philanthropists in America today who freely give money without self-aggrandizing and without indignation towards others. People should give because they want to, not because somebody lays guilt trips on them and preaches about sacrifice.

All of that is true? That's rich. Everything you just admitted was true is in complete contradiction with everything you've been saying this thread.

Actions speak louder than words. Don't tell other people what is the right thing to do, just do it.

He gives to charity and advocates forcing himself and others to pay more in the tax code. His actions are speaker louder than his words, but that doesn't mean he has to shut up. There's a lot of irony in you judging a man over what you call judging other people, when you're using rhetoric like, "Don't tell other people what is the right thing to do, just do it."

[Harte]

Actions speak louder than words. Don't tell other people what is the right thing to do, just do it.

Particularly apt sentiment, since people are largely unaware of Buffet's motivations regarding taxes:

The article also includes a quote from Chuck Collins, an “income inequity” specialist and pro-death tax advocate who has worked with Warren Buffett as well as Bill Gates to advance the death tax agenda: “The ultra-wealthy in this country will still be able to pass on enormous wealth to the next generation.” After all, argues Collins, the death tax is merely “a recycling program for economic opportunity.”

It’s misleading, however, to cite Buffett’s support for the death tax as evidence that the “oracle from Omaha” is some rare breed of enlightened capitalist who has no problem with giving a huge chunk of his fortune back to the state.

Buffett’s support for the death tax is hardly altruistic. Dick Patten, executive director of the American Family Business Institute, writes: “In the process of building his company, Berkshire Hathaway, Mr. Buffett benefited tremendously from death tax. In fact, the tax is critical to two of the three legs that make up Mr. Buffett’s financial stool.”

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that; just because the death tax is poor public policy doesn’t mean that entrepreneurs shouldn’t be able to take advantage of the opportunities it presents. What is problematic, however, is when death-tax advocates cite Warren Buffett’s support for the death tax as evidence vindicating their crusade against income inequality.

Buffett doesn’t worry about the death tax’s effect on the deficit or income inequality; he cares about the fact that, as Grover Norquist pointed out, if “the death tax goes away for good, so does much of Buffett’s wealth. He’s doing everything he can to make sure the death tax comes back in full force.”

Besides, Buffett is already planning to transfer a large majority of his considerable wealth to a charitable foundation (The Bill and Melinda Gates Fund) upon his death, thereby ensuring Treasury never gets a hold of his fortune. Buffett also plans to give a portion of his remaining fortune to other foundations run by his three children—a savvy method of avoiding the death tax while ensuring his heirs’ financial well-being. Not a bad set-up and one that must make it pretty easy to assume the public role of mogul-cum-martyr.

Source

So, if we can trust the government with our money, why can't Buffett?

Also, what exactly is preventing Buffett from giving huge cash amounts to the Treasury right now, and why is he using a loophole to avoid doing so upon his death, if he feels "undertaxed"?

Harte

[Order66]

All of that is true? That's rich. Everything you just admitted was true is in complete contradiction with everything you've been saying this thread.

He gives to charity and advocates forcing himself and others to pay more in the tax code. His actions are speaker louder than his words, but that doesn't mean he has to shut up. There's a lot of irony in you judging a man over what you call judging other people, when you're using rhetoric like, "Don't tell other people what is the right thing to do, just do it."

Thank you BlindMessiah for your reply. I have found a great editorial today that sums up how I feel about Buffett's position ( and a good commentary on Obama as well ), from

http://howestreet.com/2011/08/assisting-quest-god-particle/:

Many of you have already read Warren Buffett’s New York Times op-ed calling for higher taxes on the ultra-rich. Why, even Obama has mentioned it in his speech. I don’t want to counter everything that Buffett said point by point; other authors have already done so. Rather, I’d like to discuss the general theme of this type of op-ed.

The formula is always the same: take some incredibly rich guy and have him talk about the need for higher taxes or more spending for some government cause or another. The audience is supposed to be awed by the person’s generosity – or “sacrifice,” as Buffett refers to it in the article. However, my question is, “What constitutes a sacrifice for these people?” The sacrifice really depends upon what one values.

Among those who value material wealth (the rich as well as just plain, regular Joes), I’ve noticed two broad groups. Those in the first group tend to desire material possessions. They want to own a Ferrari and a mansion simply for the fact that they would like to drive a Ferrari and would enjoy the comforts of a mansion. Those in the second group, however, buy the Ferrari and mansion to garner the respect or admiration of those around them. They don’t enjoy wealth for the materialistic ends in themselves. Rather, they enjoy feeling important. These types also value fancy corporate titles and being seen at high-end charity events. I would put practically all politicians into this latter category, but many folks in the private sector belong there too. Some get that feeling of importance through political power, and some can get it through piles of money.

So, which category does Warren Buffett fall into? In my opinion, the second one. After all, he’s famous for living in the same plain home for the past 50 years. To me, that’s a dead giveaway. Also, don’t forget that this 80-year-old is still busy commenting on world events, donating to charities, and offering investment advice.

I consider myself more in the materialistic category. And let me tell you… If I make it to 80 with plenty of wealth, I won’t be wasting any time commenting on world events and investments. I’ll be too busy unhooking my latest catch in the Virgin Islands and spending my last years with family.

The same millionaire theme is often used in articles about the presidential salary. The piece will note, “It’s amazing how little the president of the United States gets paid.” The authors ignore one thing: The type of people who want to become president often desire something more than money. They want the feeling of power and the limelight. In that view, U.S. presidents are probably the most overpaid people on the planet.

So, just because some millionaire or billionaire wants more taxes doesn’t impress me. Are they really sacrificing what drives them? Perhaps if Warren Buffett said, “I’m going on a year-long fishing trip, and I won’t comment on any world events or Berkshire Hathaway until the tax revenue situation is fixed,” I would start listening to him… because then the man would be giving up something that he actually values.

[BlindMessiah]

Thank you BlindMessiah for your reply. I have found a great editorial today that sums up how I feel about Buffett's position ( and a good commentary on Obama as well ), from

http://howestreet.com/2011/08/assisting-quest-god-particle/:

Your response is quoting someone else and his pseudo-psychological babbling. First mistake, he categorizes the entire population into two black and white categories. This instantly displays that he has a limited mindset. Then he goes on to hand pick who has which psychological condition when he has most likely not even met the man.

[Order66]

Your response is quoting someone else and his pseudo-psychological babbling. First mistake, he categorizes the entire population into two black and white categories. This instantly displays that he has a limited mindset. Then he goes on to hand pick who has which psychological condition when he has most likely not even met the man.

I did quote it although I wish I had written it, psycho babble as it is. Thanks and have a good weekend.

[ninjadude]

I did quote it although I wish I had written it, psycho babble as it is. Thanks and have a good weekend.

It's a beautiful example of a logical fallacy. Set up your argument as having only two choices. When in fact there can be many choices. Pigeon hole your problem into one of the choices and complain about it. It's called False Dilemma.

Warren Buffet isn't one to be used by anyone. He is his own man. He has as much right to comment as anyone else. The point he's trying to make is that the super rich are getting a lot of breaks that the rest of us don't. And they should be paying more. I agree with him.

[Cyberfly]

As most of the media goes gaga over Billionaire Obama fundraiser Warren Buffett calling for tax hikes, (like he did in 2001, and 2004, and plenty of times in between), let’s remember a few things.

Buffett Profits from Taxes He Supports

Buffett regularly lobbies for higher estate taxes. He also has repeatedly bought up family businesses forced to sell because the heirs’ death-tax bill exceeded the business’s liquid assets. He owns life insurance companies that rely on the death tax in order to sell their estate-planning businesses.

Buffett Profits from Government Spending

Buffett made about a billion dollars off of the Wall Street bailout by investing in Goldman Sachs on the assumption Uncle Sam would bail it out. He also is planning investments in ethanol giant ADM and government-contracting leviathan General Dynamics.

If your businesses’ revenue comes from the U.S. Treasury, of course you want more wealth.

[preacherman76]

He makes solid and sound reason and the point he made about job creation from 1980 to 2000 at a higher tax rate is also widely acknowledged...the problem is really not the truly, super rich...it's all the wanna be's that think a few percentage points makes the difference between being rich and wanting to be rich....and it doesn't.

Really? Seemed to me he insuinuated that somehow the rich paying more taxes helped create jobs. As if.

[preacherman76]

He's donated massive amounts of money to charity over the years. None of those donations have given him any sort of control over you. It's absurd to claim that simply because he is wealthy he is a sociopath. Your claim that he is pretending to "suddenly grow a conscience" is obnoxious. The implication is that he didn't have one in the past. This isn't a man who became wealthy through corrupt dealings. This is a man who has simply made good financial decisions since he was a small child. He started a business when in high school and paid his own way through college. He earned his money fair and square and you have no right to judge him for it.

The super rich benifit big time from giving to charities through tax breaks. Not saying that he did it souly for that reason, but it is what it is. NTM, its not like he ever had to do without anything he ever wanted cause of his charitable giving.

[preacherman76]

As most of the media goes gaga over Billionaire Obama fundraiser Warren Buffett calling for tax hikes, (like he did in 2001, and 2004, and plenty of times in between), let’s remember a few things.

Buffett Profits from Taxes He Supports

Buffett regularly lobbies for higher estate taxes. He also has repeatedly bought up family businesses forced to sell because the heirs’ death-tax bill exceeded the business’s liquid assets. He owns life insurance companies that rely on the death tax in order to sell their estate-planning businesses.

Buffett Profits from Government Spending

Buffett made about a billion dollars off of the Wall Street bailout by investing in Goldman Sachs on the assumption Uncle Sam would bail it out. He also is planning investments in ethanol giant ADM and government-contracting leviathan General Dynamics.

If your businesses’ revenue comes from the U.S. Treasury, of course you want more wealth.

WOW, if thats true, his picture should be in the dictionary next to the word hypocrit.