BUFFETT: TAX THE RICH

Mott the Hoople said:
OK, apparently your fair flat tax is a religion to you cause your not going to think this through as I have challanged you.

I'll be honest with you, it's the former Republican and economic conservative that doesn't like your fair flat tax and the thing I don't like most about it is the prebate scheme. You're blowing off the administration of this tax scheme of yours and not thinking through the consequences of administering it. You think SS and medicare are big entitlement programs? Well what you're proposing with the prebate would be the largest government social entitlement in entire history of human government. SS and medicare would pale in scope compared to administering this prebate. You're talking about sending the majority of house holds in the US a monthly check. It would take a vast bureaucracy to administer this, the largest in government history! You would have to make sure all those homes got their check, that the sums on the check are accurate, that they go to the proper address, that you have the resources to prevent fraud (and that would require vast policing resources) to assure each household in making the correct claim on dependents and income. Clerks to calculate household income to calculate the amount of the prebate and we haven't even gotten to collecting the damn tax (more on that later), etc, etc.

Now let's talk about the ethical side. Now you've not only created the largest bureaucracy in US history to administer and police this prebate you've now made the overwhelming majority of Americans dependent on a monthy check from the government. Fuck I oppose that on a visceral level. It's just simply wrong to make that many people depedent to that large a degree on that large of a government entitlement program. SS is childs play compared to this prebate scheme!

Then let's talk about collecting your fair flat tax. How the fuck are you going to do that with 100% compliance with billions to trillions of points of sale? How will you assure that the moneys from each sale, at the point of sale, is calculated correctly and witheld with near 100% compliance. How would you prevent whole sale fraud from occurring and how would you ensure compliance in collection of your fair flat tax with out a vast number of bureaucrats and enforcement officials who can police these billions, even trillion points of sales? How are you going to do this with our making your vast bureaucracy created by your prebate even vaster? And you think this would be simpler then with holding income? You're nuts. You're simply not thinking this through.

So let's sum up the weaknesses of your fair flat tax.

It makes the majority of Americans dependent on a staggering huge and costly government entitlement program with the monthly prebates.
It would take the largest bureaucracy in human history to manage and enforce it.
It would be extraordinarly difficult, if not impossible, to keep fraud and abuse to manageable levels.
At the top end of the income scale the scheme is regressive and thus unfair.
It increases the cost of living by over 23%
It would not collect the levels of revenue the present system does with projected annual short falls of $400 billion.
It would require changing our constitution as well as ammending or eliminating the 16th ammendment. A task that would take 10 to 20 years to accomplish even if the political will to do so existed (it does not).
Click to expand...

What "prebates"?

You are still stuck on sales tax, he isn't talking about a sales tax. Your entire premise is off and you spent a wall of text just making yourself look like an idiot.

Let me repeat the important part of this....

None of this is correct because it actually entirely misses what Superfreak said and argues against something else.

It would be like me saying, 1/3 is a number, and you saying that chicken eggs are good to eat then declaring yourself the winner.

Superfreak says: Standard deduction with everybody paying the same rates. You say "sales tax is bad"... He hasn't said anything about a sales tax.

And just one more time: Superfreak has not said anything about sales tax other than to tell you he isn't talking about sales tax.

Just to make it very, very clear.... Not sales tax =/= sales tax.

(although taxing corporations does equal a sales tax, one without "prebates" and one that is infinitely more regressive than taxing individual income).
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Yea I knew you would run instead of addressing my criticisms on your fair flat tax. Keep drinking the Tea Freak.....taste good don't it? Sure beats thinking!
Click to expand...

You are truly a fucking idiot. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOUR STUPID COMMENTS WAS ADDRESSED. Just because you ignore them doesn't mean they weren't answered. You are showing yourself to be a complete fucking moron.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Yea it would be. Hell why fix what aint broke. I think our current system is a pretty fair one. I think that due to current revenue shortages and budget deficit a modest progressive tax increase back to the levels of the Clinton era would be justified. These guys are in lala land about the Fair tax proposal. You notice they didn't address a single one of the valid criticism I made. I mean I can't believe they call them selves conservatives when what they are advocating is creating the worlds largest government entitlement program in history. They just simply aren't thinking this through.
Click to expand...

Tell you what.... I will simplify this for you.... If we took the CURRENT tax system and did the following....

1) Eliminate ALL loopholes/deductions/subsidies except the standard deduction
2) Make the standard deduction $30k per adult
3) Only two tax brackets 20% on ALL income sources (earned, divs, cap gains) up to $1million and 30% on ALL income sources over $1million

Would you support that Mott?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Well duh! I was porpusefully trying to get under his skin. It worked too if you hadn't of noticed. Be that as it may, I don't expect that I'm going to get an honest attempt at a rebuttal on my criticisms of the "fair tax".
Click to expand...

LMAO... No Mott... not under my skin.... you were instead showing the board what a complete fucking idiot you are. Good work dumbass. There is NO way you were EVER a fiscal conservative. EVER.
 
I think it would be a good idea to go back to Clinton-era tax rates all around. For that reason I would support allowing all of the Bush/Obama tax cuts to expire. If you can think back to the 90's, and try to block out the unfortunate obsession with plaid, the peace and prosperity don't seem so bad do they? I know it would be socialism to bring that back. Maybe we can do it just for a short while?
 
brazenhussy said:
I think it would be a good idea to go back to Clinton-era tax rates all around. For that reason I would support allowing all of the Bush/Obama tax cuts to expire. If you can think back to the 90's, and try to block out the unfortunate obsession with plaid, the peace and prosperity don't seem so bad do they? I know it would be socialism to bring that back. Maybe we can do it just for a short while?
Click to expand...

I will agree to this, if we go back to the same level of spending all around.
 
Yurt said:
Why Warren Buffett is wrong

The first problem with Buffett's view is that the number of super-rich is too small for higher rates to make much difference to our budget problems.

In 2009, the income earned by the 236,833 taxpayers with more than $1 million in adjusted gross income was about $727 billion. Imposing a 10% surcharge on this income would generate at most $73 billion in new revenue -- only about 2% of federal spending. And $73 billion is optimistic; the super-rich will avoid or evade much of the surcharge, significantly lowering its yield.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/08/16/miron.buffett.wrong/index.html?hpt=po_bn1

another viewpoint, also offers why buffet is right

since bfgrn claims that no one can counter buffet...can you counter this guy?
Click to expand...



Tax cuts are estimated to have totaled $2.8 trillion, which we guess would count as “trillions,” as the president put it. Strictly speaking, the two big tax cuts during the Bush years are estimated to total about $1.5 trillion, But many continued into the early years of the Obama presidency, and in December he cut a deal with Republicans to extend them even more, which brings us to $2.8 trillion.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...e-bush-tax-cuts/2011/05/09/AFxTFtbG_blog.html
 
Taichiliberal said:
Tax cuts are estimated to have totaled $2.8 trillion, which we guess would count as “trillions,” as the president put it. Strictly speaking, the two big tax cuts during the Bush years are estimated to total about $1.5 trillion, But many continued into the early years of the Obama presidency, and in December he cut a deal with Republicans to extend them even more, which brings us to $2.8 trillion.

The Bush years....thats 8 years...1.5 Trillion.....the Obama reign fo error....2 years ?..1.3 trillion...??

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...e-bush-tax-cuts/2011/05/09/AFxTFtbG_blog.html
Click to expand...
Left out a little there, Clara...

Over the 10-year period, the overall size of the tax cut dropped about 5 percent, or $65 billion, to $1.285 trillion. Some people might call that a rounding error in the context of a ten-year federal budget.
The Bottom Line

There certainly might be other ways to calculate the actual impact of the tax cut, and we would welcome suggestions. It seems clear that the impact was less during the recession — though one could argue that government’s fiscal condition would be much better if those revenues had been collected. No matter how you count it, nearly $1.3 trillion is a lot of money.
 
bravo said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Tax cuts are estimated to have totaled $2.8 trillion, which we guess would count as “trillions,” as the president put it. Strictly speaking, the two big tax cuts during the Bush years are estimated to total about $1.5 trillion, But many continued into the early years of the Obama presidency, and in December he cut a deal with Republicans to extend them even more, which brings us to $2.8 trillion.

The Bush years....thats 8 years...1.5 Trillion.....the Obama reign fo error....2 years ?..1.3 trillion...??

Learn to READ, jackass, "...tax cuts during the Bush years are estimated to total about $1.5 trillion, But many continued into the early years of the Obama presidency...". Right into 2009, actually. So you and your equally brain dead cohorts were screaming that Obama had not cleaned up the Shrub's mess in ONE YEAR.....meaning all the neocon wailings about Obama making things worse is highly exaggerated, to say the least.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...FtbG_blog.html
Click to expand...


Left out a little there, Clara... (For those living in the 21st century...our intellectually impotent Bravo uses "Clara" --short for "Clarabell"...a clown sidekick of "Buffalo Bob" from the "Howdy Doody Show" from the early b/w days of television.....I guess this is a big insult from his generation...so much more to pity Bravo.)

Over the 10-year period, the overall size of the tax cut dropped about 5 percent, or $65 billion, to $1.285 trillion. Some people might call that a rounding error in the context of a ten-year federal budget.
The Bottom Line

There certainly might be other ways to calculate the actual impact of the tax cut, and we would welcome suggestions. It seems clear that the impact was less during the recession — though one could argue that government’s fiscal condition would be much better if those revenues had been collected. No matter how you count it, nearly $1.3 trillion is a lot of money.
Click to expand...

It's part of the article, you idiot, so how could I "leave it out"? I just gave an example, or quote of what the article's about... Especially since what you quoted STILL confirms my point as to the sizeable amount of money the Shrub's tax cuts are screwing the American coffers out of....and how the neocon/teabagger GOP want YOU and I to make up that loss of revenue by cutting Soc Sec and Medicare, by destroying unions and to continue to subsidize outsourcing corporations.

God damn, Bravo...I hope you're getting paid to be the ass backwards neocon/teabagger toadie that you are in your posts/responses.
 
(For those living in the 21st century...our intellectually impotent Bravo uses "Clara" --short for "Clarabell"...a clown sidekick of "Buffalo Bob" from the "Howdy Doody Show" from the early b/w days of television.....I guess this is a big insult from his generation...so much more to pity Bravo.) ???

An insult ? Hardly.....I just try to give you and your ignorance the respect they truly deserve....please consider it a compliment....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top