Buffet and other Lefties complaining about not paying enough.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

https://www.pay.gov/...FormId=23779454

Somehow I doubt they will have this in their book marked, folder.

Massachusetts (a liberal paradise) has a higher tax rate you can voluntarily choose. It's rarely chosen.

"In 2000, voters decided to lower the Mass. tax rate from 5.85% to 5% by a 59 to 41 margin. To appease the voters who voted against the reduction, they put in an option on the tax forms that lets voters pay the old, higher rate.

People are very predictable. Almost no one choose to pay the higher rate. Typically, people against lowering taxes really want other people to pay higher taxes...not themselves. Of the 3,240,000 returns filed in 2005, only 1,162 opted for the higher rate causing less than $200,000 in extra taxes to be collected. The latest data for 2006 shows that of the 1,540,000 tax returns filed, only 424 people opted for the higher rate. The average income of these people is $20,000.

I bet if the one could check a box that forces their neighbor to pay a higher rate, more boxes would be checked."

[Danno 1,228]

Massachusetts (a liberal paradise) has a higher tax rate you can voluntarily choose. It's rarely chosen.

I bet if the one could check a box that forces their neighbor to pay a higher rate, more boxes would be checked."

Oh Jez if we have that option I would be screwin over some of my VJ neighbors big time.

[Pooky 3,828]

The "Buffet Brigade" as you would label it is addressing issues they see with our current tax policy. There's something fundamentally wrong with our tax system. That's the point we can all agree on. What needs to happen to fix it is where people natuarally have different views. What everyone with a sound mind should be able to concede, however, is that voluntary contributions are NOT a viable path to fixing the tax system.

I never said it was a viable option, and that wasn't the point I was trying to make.

Warren Buffett wants to think he can be a guiding hand, advising the administration which way to direct its policy on taxation. Yet he and others like him are unwilling to do something, as opposed to saying something, unless legislation is put in place to ensure a level playing field. It's this disconnect I'm interested in.

Why? Because most Americans, at least the ones I talk to, respect actions, not words. They look at Warren Buffett and his billions of dollars and wonder why he's fine talking about contributing more, but seems in no hurry to act on his words.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I never said it was a viable option, and that wasn't the point I was trying to make.

Warren Buffett wants to think he can be a guiding hand, advising the administration which way to direct its policy on taxation. Yet he and others like him are unwilling to do something, as opposed to saying something, unless legislation is put in place to ensure a level playing field. It's this disconnect I'm interested in.

Why? Because most Americans, at least the ones I talk to, respect actions, not words. They look at Warren Buffett and his billions of dollars and wonder why he's fine talking about contributing more, but seems in no hurry to act on his words.

Not doing anything? We're having a public debate on this, no? Besides, Warren Buffett has done and continues to do so much more than that.

http://givingpledge.org/#warren_buffett

In 2006, I made a commitment to gradually give all of my Berkshire Hathaway stock to philanthropic foundations. I couldn't be happier with that decision.

Now, Bill and Melinda Gates and I are asking hundreds of rich Americans to pledge at least 50% of their wealth to charity. So I think it is fitting that I reiterate my intentions and explain the thinking that lies behind them.

First, my pledge: More than 99% of my wealth will go to philanthropy during my lifetime or at death. Measured by dollars, this commitment is large. In a comparative sense, though, many individuals give more to others every day.

Millions of people who regularly contribute to churches, schools, and other organizations thereby relinquish the use of funds that would otherwise benefit their own families. The dollars these people drop into a collection plate or give to United Way mean forgone movies, dinners out, or other personal pleasures. In contrast, my family and I will give up nothing we need or want by fulfilling this 99% pledge.

Moreover, this pledge does not leave me contributing the most precious asset, which is time. Many people, including -- I'm proud to say -- my three children, give extensively of their own time and talents to help others. Gifts of this kind often prove far more valuable than money. A struggling child, befriended and nurtured by a caring mentor, receives a gift whose value far exceeds what can be bestowed by a check. My sister, Doris, extends significant person-to-person help daily. I've done little of this.

What I can do, however, is to take a pile of Berkshire Hathaway stock certificates -- "claim checks" that when converted to cash can command far-ranging resources -- and commit them to benefit others who, through the luck of the draw, have received the short straws in life. To date about 20% of my shares have been distributed (including shares given by my late wife, Susan Buffett). I will continue to annually distribute about 4% of the shares I retain. At the latest, the proceeds from all of my Berkshire shares will be expended for philanthropic purposes by 10 years after my estate is settled. Nothing will go to endowments; I want the money spent on current needs.

This pledge will leave my lifestyle untouched and that of my children as well. They have already received significant sums for their personal use and will receive more in the future. They live comfortable and productive lives. And I will continue to live in a manner that gives me everything that I could possibly want in life.

Some material things make my life more enjoyable; many, however, would not. I like having an expensive private plane, but owning a half-dozen homes would be a burden. Too often, a vast collection of possessions ends up possessing its owner. The asset I most value, aside from health, is interesting, diverse, and long-standing friends.

My wealth has come from a combination of living in America, some lucky genes, and compound interest. Both my children and I won what I call the ovarian lottery. (For starters, the odds against my 1930 birth taking place in the U.S. were at least 30 to 1. My being male and white also removed huge obstacles that a majority of Americans then faced.) My luck was accentuated by my living in a market system that sometimes produces distorted results, though overall it serves our country well. I've worked in an economy that rewards someone who saves the lives of others on a battlefield with a medal, rewards a great teacher with thank-you notes from parents, but rewards those who can detect the mispricing of securities with sums reaching into the billions. In short, fate's distribution of long straws is wildly capricious.

The reaction of my family and me to our extraordinary good fortune is not guilt, but rather gratitude. Were we to use more than 1% of my claim checks on ourselves, neither our happiness nor our well-being would be enhanced. In contrast, that remaining 99% can have a huge effect on the health and welfare of others. That reality sets an obvious course for me and my family: Keep all we can conceivably need and distribute the rest to society, for its needs. My pledge starts us down that course.

[Danno 1,228]

Naturally, "Obamas rich buddies" are trusted to write or heavily influence the tax laws..... not so much with Bush.

Trying to imagine the Left peeing their pants if Bush sat down with Haliburton to write Tax law.

And then of course name it after them.

[mawilson 2,133]

First, my pledge: More than 99% of my wealth will go to philanthropy during my lifetime or at death.

I missed the part where he pledged 99% of his wealth to the government.

Giving your money to the government is the worst, most wasteful thing you can do with it.

I bet Americans would be open to more taxes if they knew the money went to philanthropy instead of Northrop Grumman and Washington bureaucrats.