Warren Buffett to Congress: Keep Taxing the Mega-Rich

[GaryC 7]

Gary, donating money to a charity isn't a tax shelter because he's not going to see any of that money again.

I wouldn't call that hypcritical at all... his argument is against high concentration of wealth, handed down generationally, which leads to aristocracy. So, a billionaire like him can choose to let his inheritance be taxed or he can donate it charity - a great system that works.

He made a lot of his money from buying up companies that got hit with the death tax. Of course he wants it to continue. Buffett is a #######.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Double taxation is unfair and wrong.

Don't look now but you're being multiple taxed each and every day, my friend. You pay sales tax, gas tax, wheel tax, tobacco tax (where applicable), alcohol tax (where applicable), etc, etc. with your already taxed earned dollar. Each and every day.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Gary, donating money to a charity isn't a tax shelter because he's not going to see any of that money again.

I wouldn't call that hypcritical at all... his argument is against high concentration of wealth, handed down generationally, which leads to aristocracy. So, a billionaire like him can choose to let his inheritance be taxed or he can donate it charity - a great system that works.

He made a lot of his money from buying up companies that got hit with the death tax. Of course he wants it to continue. Buffett is a #######.

You think his sole motivation is money?

Edited November 19, 2007 by Mister Fancypants

[Kevin and 10]

Double taxation is unfair and wrong.

Don't look now but you're being multiple taxed each and every day, my friend. You pay sales tax, gas tax, wheel tax, tobacco tax (where applicable), alcohol tax (where applicable), etc, etc. with your already taxed earned dollar. Each and every day.

On top of that , the taxes that a Company passes on. The guy hauling goods isn't going to pay the gas tax , the tax gets passed it to me.

Whenever I hear some say raise the taxes on oil companies I cringe. The extra costs involved in Government Mandated Renewable energy won't hurt Energy Companies one bit. Companies will just charge me more for their service.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Gary, donating money to a charity isn't a tax shelter because he's not going to see any of that money again.

I wouldn't call that hypcritical at all... his argument is against high concentration of wealth, handed down generationally, which leads to aristocracy. So, a billionaire like him can choose to let his inheritance be taxed or he can donate it charity - a great system that works.

He made a lot of his money from buying up companies that got hit with the death tax. Of course he wants it to continue. Buffett is a #######.

You think his sole motivation is money?

No it isn't. The guy has a bit of decency. He believes that a tax system such as ours which allows him to pay a lower effective tax rate than his secretary is fundamentally unfair. I tend to agree.

[russ 1]

Whenever I hear some say raise the taxes on oil companies I cringe. The extra costs involved in Government Mandated Renewable energy won't hurt Energy Companies one bit. Companies will just charge me more for their service.

Stupidity, I agree. Oil companies are in trouble in the US anyway, since they pay spot prices for a lot of their oil. The Saudis, Russians and Iranians are the ones making the big bucks. US Oil companies are getting the crumbs. Their exploration costs are much higher, they need the profits to invest in exploiting the old fields they have.

Renewable energy will happen when it is economically viable, which is when carbon-based fuel prices rise above what alternative sources cost. Calling them carbon-based sources is a lie anyway, the energy comes from hydrogen, the carbon is a by-product.

Until that happens, alternative sources are probably WORSE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT. The reason being that much of their expense is the energy required to create them. If a windmill takes 5,000 bbls of oil to produce and install and will replace 4,000 bbls of oil over it's lifetime, is it good for the environment? Of course not. Ditto with hybrid cars. While they may consume less oil over their service life, they consume more oil to produce. People buy them to feel good about themselves, not to help the environment. If they really were better for the environment, they would not require subsidies for people to buy them. They would sell themselves through cost savings.

As an engineer, I can tell you that most of the cost of manufactured goods is related to energy. More expensive things usually cost more because they take more enegery to produce. Labor is also a factor, but with things like cars, it is mostly the same for every car.

When alternative fuels are more efficient than their carbon counterparts, people will happily switch to them to save money. Remember, when oil was cheap, no one wanted nuclear power. Now that it is pricey, everyone does.

[GaryC 7]

Gary, donating money to a charity isn't a tax shelter because he's not going to see any of that money again.

I wouldn't call that hypcritical at all... his argument is against high concentration of wealth, handed down generationally, which leads to aristocracy. So, a billionaire like him can choose to let his inheritance be taxed or he can donate it charity - a great system that works.

He made a lot of his money from buying up companies that got hit with the death tax. Of course he wants it to continue. Buffett is a #######.

You think his sole motivation is money?

If you don't I have a bridge for sale.

[bgreed 0]

"The average 30 year old making $100,000 a year." Brother you have no idea of what average is.

$100k a year is still in the top 3% of earners in this country.

[Ban Hammer 13,337]

"The average 30 year old making $100,000 a year." Brother you have no idea of what average is.

$100k a year is still in the top 3% of earners in this country.

*pats self on back*

that should annoy alex

[GaryC 7]

Gary, donating money to a charity isn't a tax shelter because he's not going to see any of that money again.

I wouldn't call that hypcritical at all... his argument is against high concentration of wealth, handed down generationally, which leads to aristocracy. So, a billionaire like him can choose to let his inheritance be taxed or he can donate it charity - a great system that works.

He made a lot of his money from buying up companies that got hit with the death tax. Of course he wants it to continue. Buffett is a #######.

You think his sole motivation is money?

No it isn't. The guy has a bit of decency. He believes that a tax system such as ours which allows him to pay a lower effective tax rate than his secretary is fundamentally unfair. I tend to agree.

He is free to write an extra check to the government out of his sense of fair play. I doubt if we see that though.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Estate taxes are fundamentally unfair - essentially it amounts to taxing money that was already taxed. While I'm sure it is a loophole for the super-rich (lets face it - one of many), in Britain at least its the general public who get reamed when a relative dies.

When my parents pass - I'm the sole next of kin. I dread to think how much I'll get from the estate - probably not a lot. Not only would I get hit with inheritance tax, but if my parents were to end up in a care home before then, the local authority has carte-blanche to seize their assets to pay for the residential care.

true dat

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Gary, donating money to a charity isn't a tax shelter because he's not going to see any of that money again.

I wouldn't call that hypcritical at all... his argument is against high concentration of wealth, handed down generationally, which leads to aristocracy. So, a billionaire like him can choose to let his inheritance be taxed or he can donate it charity - a great system that works.

He made a lot of his money from buying up companies that got hit with the death tax. Of course he wants it to continue. Buffett is a #######.

You think his sole motivation is money?

No it isn't. The guy has a bit of decency. He believes that a tax system such as ours which allows him to pay a lower effective tax rate than his secretary is fundamentally unfair. I tend to agree.

He is free to write an extra check to the government out of his sense of fair play. I doubt if we see that though.

That's hardly the point, Gary. Nice try dodging the issue, though.