Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Reply To Thread

What Warren said....Follow

#1 Aug 17 2011 at 7:48 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
Billionaire Buffet has gone on record saying that the super-rich need to be taxed more.
Warren Buffet wrote:
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.


There has been much criticism of this simple statement from both sides of the aisle maintaining that a personal income tax hike on the wealthy will further inhibit economic growth.

But if Bill, Warren, and Wally each kicked in a few billions we could shore up the deficit a bit.

What says you?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#2 Aug 17 2011 at 7:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The deficit is in trillions so a few billion from three people wouldn't make much of a dent.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#3 Aug 17 2011 at 7:54 AM Rating: Excellent
******
49,744 posts
Cut spending and raise taxes blah blah blah same song and dance for twenty pages.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#4 Aug 17 2011 at 8:03 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
Jophiel wrote:
The deficit is in trillions so a few billion from three people wouldn't make much of a dent.

Ten percent would make a dent - though I wasn't really serious. However, does this go to say that raising taxes on the upper income brackets wouldn't help with budgeting issues?

Edited, Aug 17th 2011 4:04pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#5varusword75, Posted: Aug 17 2011 at 8:10 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Elinda,
#6 Aug 17 2011 at 8:25 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Elinda wrote:
However, does this go to say that raising taxes on the upper income brackets wouldn't help with budgeting issues?

The lost revenue from the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy is $42b annually which is a fair sight more than $6bil. It's certainly not a singular fix but it's more significant than three guys passing a hat around.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#7 Aug 17 2011 at 8:27 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
varusword75 wrote:
Buffet is worth about 40billion so if he feels like leading by example and gives up half his wealth voluntarily then I'd change my opinion.

I'm sure Buffet is deeply concerned about how you feel about him.

Your demand is the same lazy thinking as the tired "If you support the war, why haven't you enlisted yet?" remarks.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#8 Aug 17 2011 at 9:42 AM Rating: Excellent
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,246 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Elinda wrote:
However, does this go to say that raising taxes on the upper income brackets wouldn't help with budgeting issues?

The lost revenue from the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy is $42b annually which is a fair sight more than $6bil. It's certainly not a singular fix but it's more significant than three guys passing a hat around.

My god, $42 whole billions? So if we got all that back we could have limited the budget deficit to $400b last year.

NICE!
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#9varusword75, Posted: Aug 17 2011 at 9:47 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Joph,
#10 Aug 17 2011 at 9:48 AM Rating: Excellent
******
49,744 posts
That's because you don't support the war.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#11 Aug 17 2011 at 9:49 AM Rating: Good
****
9,526 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Elinda wrote:
However, does this go to say that raising taxes on the upper income brackets wouldn't help with budgeting issues?

The lost revenue from the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy is $42b annually which is a fair sight more than $6bil. It's certainly not a singular fix but it's more significant than three guys passing a hat around.

My god, $42 whole billions? So if we got all that back we could have limited the budget deficit to $400b last year.

NICE!


By your logic someone paying the minimum on their credit card bills might as well quit their job because they money they bring in isn't enough to cover the whole thing
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.


#12 Aug 17 2011 at 9:55 AM Rating: Decent
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,246 posts
Olorinus wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Elinda wrote:
However, does this go to say that raising taxes on the upper income brackets wouldn't help with budgeting issues?

The lost revenue from the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy is $42b annually which is a fair sight more than $6bil. It's certainly not a singular fix but it's more significant than three guys passing a hat around.

My god, $42 whole billions? So if we got all that back we could have limited the budget deficit to $400b last year.

NICE!


By your logic someone paying the minimum on their credit card bills might as well quit their job because they money they bring in isn't enough to cover the whole thing

No, by my logic someone not making enough to cover the money they spend should stop spending so much instead of mugging people with nice watches in the park.

Also, you're a f'ucking dumbass. Perhaps you and the library should get better acquainted before you start trying to chime in when grown folks is talkin'.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#13 Aug 17 2011 at 10:01 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
MoebiusLord wrote:
So if we got all that back we could have limited the budget deficit to $400b last year.

Good thing I made a point of saying it wasn't a singular solution or else you'd look dumber than usual.

Oh.

Of course, that's about 10% of the deficit then, right? We could make the rest in cuts! I'm sure a 1:10 ratio of tax increases to cuts would be acceptable to conserv...

Oh.

Edited, Aug 17th 2011 11:04am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#14 Aug 17 2011 at 10:09 AM Rating: Decent
Sage
****
4,042 posts
Something tells me that Mr. Buffet is full of ****. My dad has worked his entire life at a company owned by Warren, and over the past few years it's been one employee benefit cut after another. Overtime options, giant cuts in insurance coverage, removal of cost of living wage increases, etc. I think his "Let's share our wealth" line is just total ******** when he's been significantly cutting back the way he pays the people who actually work for him.
#15 Aug 17 2011 at 10:17 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,369 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
Olorinus wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Elinda wrote:
However, does this go to say that raising taxes on the upper income brackets wouldn't help with budgeting issues?

The lost revenue from the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy is $42b annually which is a fair sight more than $6bil. It's certainly not a singular fix but it's more significant than three guys passing a hat around.

My god, $42 whole billions? So if we got all that back we could have limited the budget deficit to $400b last year.

NICE!


By your logic someone paying the minimum on their credit card bills might as well quit their job because they money they bring in isn't enough to cover the whole thing

No, by my logic someone not making enough to cover the money they spend should stop spending so much instead of mugging people with nice watches in the park.


But the gal at the pawn shop is a cutie... Smiley: frown
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#16 Aug 17 2011 at 10:18 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,369 posts
varusword75 wrote:
Buffet is worth about 40billion so if he feels like leading by example and gives up half his wealth voluntarily then I'd change my opinion.


I thought he was already giving most of it away. Smiley: confused

____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#17 Aug 17 2011 at 10:35 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,471 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
varusword75 wrote:
Buffet is worth about 40billion so if he feels like leading by example and gives up half his wealth voluntarily then I'd change my opinion.


I thought he was already giving most of it away. Smiley: confused



He is, though to charity.
#18varusword75, Posted: Aug 17 2011 at 10:48 AM, Rating: Unrated, (Expand Post) Guenny,
#19 Aug 17 2011 at 11:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
varusword75 wrote:
Guenny,

Quote:
Something tells me that Mr. Buffet is full of sh*t. My dad has worked his entire life at a company owned by Warren, and over the past few years it's been one employee benefit cut after another. Overtime options, giant cuts in insurance coverage, removal of cost of living wage increases, etc. I think his "Let's share our wealth" line is just total bullsh*t when he's been significantly cutting back the way he pays the people who actually work for him.


As much as I dislike Buffets politics it's Obama's and the Dems fault this is happening to your father. LMAO. Stupid whores like yourself really just want to blame 'the corporations' as an excuse to ignore what an abject failure you and your father are.


Today I feel as though calling women who peruse this board 'whores' isn't acceptable.

Tomorrow I may feel differently.



Edited, Aug 17th 2011 7:47pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#20varusword75, Posted: Aug 17 2011 at 11:49 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Elinda,
#21varusword75, Posted: Aug 17 2011 at 11:49 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) dp
#22 Aug 17 2011 at 11:56 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
varusword75 wrote:
dp

Edited, Aug 17th 2011 1:49pm by varusword75

Smiley: lol

Jittery?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#23varusword75, Posted: Aug 17 2011 at 12:20 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Elinda,
#24 Aug 17 2011 at 12:22 PM Rating: Decent
We Does Not Hugglez
*****
10,246 posts
Jophiel wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
So if we got all that back we could have limited the budget deficit to $400b last year.

Good thing I made a point of saying it wasn't a singular solution or else you'd look dumber than usual.

The point is that not only is it not a singular solution, it isn't necessary or right. The federal government should stop looking in to the pockets of people who are productive to hand out vote-buying freebies to those that aren't. Warren Buffet could write a check to the G for 99.9% of his entire net worth and still have more money in the bank than 99.9% of American's will earn in their entire lives. His comments about who should and shouldn't pay more are just as, if not more so, meaningless as people who pay no federal income tax.

Jophiel wrote:
Of course, that's about 10% of the deficit then, right? We could make the rest in cuts! I'm sure a 1:10 ratio of tax increases to cuts would be acceptable to conserv...

Oh.

The problem, and you know this, is that the Democrats want their taxes now, their spending now and their headlines now, but they don't want to give up their cuts until after the next election or in to the next decade. I am almost positive that if you had a Democrat proposal to raise $42b in taxes in the 2012 budget, and cut $420b from spending (not make an expected increase smaller, not hold to 2011 levels, cut the budget, meaning we would spend $420b less in 2012 than we did in 2011) that you would see a GOP controlled congress pass it.

Then you could talk about the 2013 budget, and what you were willing to cut out of 2012 spending levels to get your next tax increase.
____________________________
I had a very witty signature once, but apparently it offended the sensibilities of some of the frailer constitutions that frequent this particular internet message board.

[The rest of this message has been censored and I can't tell you what I actually think of you]
#25 Aug 17 2011 at 12:41 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
MoebiusLord wrote:
The point is that not only is it not a singular solution, it isn't necessary or right.

Which explains why you immediately started yelping about the dollar amount.

Quote:
I am almost positive that if you had a Democrat proposal to raise $42b in taxes in the 2012 budget, and cut $420b from spending (not make an expected increase smaller, not hold to 2011 levels, cut the budget, meaning we would spend $420b less in 2012 than we did in 2011) that you would see a GOP controlled congress pass it.

Right, right. Just like Gbaji is sure that the GOP would take a couple years tax increase for some long-term cuts.

Let me know the very moment one of those GOP Congresscritters comes out with this proposal they're just sure to love, ok? I mean, this is so good and acceptable to them, I bet they're working on it right now!

Don't worry... I won't stay up waiting. A panel full of raised hands tells me I'd be better off getting some sleep tonight.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#26varusword75, Posted: Aug 17 2011 at 12:43 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Joph,
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 73 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (73)