Posted on 10/11/2005 6:56:11 AM PDT by stevestras
The appearance of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett at the Lied Center last week was a reminder of the fluidity in American society that allows talent and drive — not birthright and connection — to earn power and wealth.
Although both men came from comfortable backgrounds, neither was born to that old wealth stratum of American society that sometimes seems to be tantamount to an aristocracy.
Dressed casually, they sat on a couple of stools, cracking jokes, speaking plainly, fielding unscripted questions. “They seemed like ordinary people, very normal, very knowledgeable and funny,” observed Yong Zhao, a University of Nebraska-Lincoln graduate student from China.
Their appearance is an example of the sort of inspiring, indelible personal experiences that are an important part of a university education. This sort of special event — even last year’s entertaining visit by rocker Tommy Lee fits the category — is part of a full and varied campus life.
The audience of 1,800 was UNL business students. The appearance will be shared with all Nebraskans next year on NET.
Their comments veered widely from the humorous — Gates admitted that colleagues at Microsoft blow him away when he plays video games like Halo 2 — to the profound — Buffett defined success as being loved by the people you hope love you.
If any students came to the session with a preconception that all the nation’s rich and powerful share the same low-tax political philosophy, they went away with a different impression.
Both Buffett and Gates said that they should pay more in taxes. “The rich should bear a somewhat higher proportion than they are now,” Gates said.
“I’m paying less than half of what I was paying years ago when I was making a lot less,” Buffett said. “There are people fighting in Iraq paying higher rates than mine.”
Perhaps most encouraging was the belief expressed by both billionaires that everyone can help make the world a better place.
Gates suggested that students gain an exposure to living conditions in other places. “Things are improving and there are places for people to jump in.” Buffett told one student that she — and by extension every individual — changes the world every day by the way she behaves around other people.
At a time when American society seems rife with cronyism and Enron-style corruption at high levels, the comments from the two icons of business success, delivered in a relaxed, ordinary, disarming style, provided reassurance that basic American ideals endure — that merit, hard work, optimism and decency can prevail.
But why this fixation on the federal income tax? In this approach the Swedish tax system is the best, since the Swedish federal income tax is ZERO for EVERYONE and Swedes get a lot from their government!
Swedes pay a lot of taxes, it happens that their FEDERAL tax is zero because they do not have FEDERAL government.
The Swedish example shows that picking one type of tax can lead to absurdity. You need to add ALL government taxes all together, whether federal, state, local, whether of on wages, profit, dividends, property, sales, inheritance, services, sales etc ... Then you can reason honestly about it.
BTW, the best way is to add all budgets of all governments and compare them with GDP. (when the budget is larger than taxes it tax the future of out children, when it is smaller it is an investment). I did it once a few years ago and I found that Sweden has total tax as a percentage of GDP a little smaller than US (both were above 50%).
When you pay millions in income taxes, estate (death) taxes, and sales taxes, then you can talk to us about how much you pay versus "the eeeeviilll rich".
Bill Gates probably paid more in taxes on his house this year than you do in a lifetime of all taxes you will ever pay.
"Sweden's federal tax is ZERO :)"
It is? Then why is their "national income tax" set at 20%-25%?
But to make such comparison is incorrect and disingenuous. Swedish tax corresponds to US federal tax AND state tax AND other taxes. But this trick is being played on gullible public again and again.
But to make such comparison is incorrect and disingenuous. Swedish tax corresponds to US federal tax AND state tax AND other taxes. But this trick is being played on gullible public again and again.
Is not. Last time I checked "overall tax" was a little lower than in US (something like 51% versus 53% of GDP)
You can see it as a state income tax. Sweden is smaller than many American states and consists of only one state :)
I just pointed out you are wrong, that you wrote there is no Federal income tax in Sweden, there is. Without knowing all of the facts, I suspect the total percentage of taxes is higher in Sweden that in USA. Check this out: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/tax_tot_tax_as_of_gdp
I think it covers sales taxes, property taxes, income taxes, payroll taxes, and other taxes levied by all tax collecting entities. USA is way down on the list, Sweden is at the top.
I think before you reply next time, so I don't have to waste my valuable time educating the masses, research your facts first.
This can be complicated. Much easier is to compare the FINAL result - all government budgets combined (in case of US, federal, state, local etc ) and compare it to GDP.
The US government budget is about 34% of GDP, state and local government budgets are about 17%. It adds up little above 50%. In Sweden the government budget (there is not state/local versus federal) and is little above 50%.
Comparing the government spending in Sweden to the only one layer of US government is misleading to say the least.
This is my final reply to educate you, so read it well, and if you decide to reply, at least cite some evidence of your assertions, as they are incorrect and dangerous to you ability to reason and have opinions on the matter of economics.
You should have studied the URL that I cited. It spells it out. Or, read this one: http://www.eurosceptic.com/sources_of_information/articles/EUROPE_ISN'T_WORKING.htm
It spells it out also. As I said, you are plain wrong; the USA is much less taxed than Sweden and much of Europe as well. For that, our GDP is much higher and has done well of late. Sweden proves the rule of high taxation for it has lagged since 1970 compared to USA.
You have me on a ping list and I often read your comments but now I shall read them for the facts that you assert in making conclusions.
If the URL doesn't link you may have to type it in.
The percentage of the federal take on the GDP is 19.8% per the federal government, where the GDP is $11.75 trillion and the budget expenditure (including borrowing) is $2.33 trillion. So you are wrong again on your assertions. So if indeed the state government take is 17% or so, the numbers I cited ( by way of web sites) are nearly on the money, so to speak.
You might be right. I looked up the federal budget (real spending will be somehow higher as some items are not included) and it seems that the percentage I have seen applied to combined federal/state spending ("government spending"). If so, I counted state (and local?) spending twice. Sorry.
That's freedom of choice!
OBL's father was born poor, was blind in one eye and illiterate, but managed to acquire great wealth in a political/economic system that is rigid and repressive. The founder of IKEA was born in poverty in Sweden (Sweden has zero "death taxes") and managed to become one of the wold's wealthiest - darn those socialists.
The American dream was not that the extraordinary could build great wealth, but that the average guy, with average abilities could, through hard work at average jobs, provide a good life and measure of security for himself and his family. That was what distinguished us from the rest of the world.
I believe that's my point exactly - that you can be more average and make your fortune here. No need for being extraordinary to succeed, as is general required elsewhere.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.