Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Washington Post: Taxing the rich fairly can be done — and would raise revenue
Washington Post ^ | 08/23/2011

Posted on 08/24/2011 2:38:56 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

IT HAS BEEN a little over a week since billionaire Warren Buffett called for higher taxes on the richest Americans, and now comes the reaction. Harvey Golub, a former chairman and chief executive of American Express, writes in the Wall Street Journal that he “resents” Mr. Buffett’s suggestion. I already pay plenty of taxes, Mr. Golub asserts, adding: “Before you ‘ask’ for more tax money from me and others, raise the $2.2 trillion you already collect each year more fairly and spend it more wisely.”

Who’s right? Mr. Golub points out that almost half of the population pays no income tax, and that the very top earners — 250,000 Americans who make $1 million or more per year — already pay 20 percent of the total. State income taxes are often quite high, especially in places where the rich cluster, such as New York, New Jersey and California — yet, notes Mr. Golub, Mr. Buffett doesn’t factor that in. The current code is “replete with favors to various interest groups and industries,” as Mr. Golub puts it, from the mortgage-interest deduction to the exemption for employer-paid health benefits. On top of that, the government wastes a lot of money on farm subsidies and duplicative job-training programs.

All true. But this doesn’t really refute Mr. Buffett, whose main argument — that the burden of deficit-reduction should fall most heavily on the well-to-do — Mr. Golub doesn’t dispute. Mr. Buffett acknowledged that higher taxes on the very rich should be part of a deficit-cutting package that also tackles excessive entitlement spending. Unlike Mr. Golub, he noted that lower-income people who don’t pay income taxes do pay substantial payroll taxes, which are less progressive.

More to the point, there’s no contradiction between Mr. Golub’s attack on tax expenditures and Mr. Buffett’s lament,

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: democrats; economy; liberalfascism; mediabias; revenue; spreadthewealth; stealthewealth; tax; taxcheatparty; taxes; taxtherich; wealthy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last
To: Williams
2 Just wondering, can the poor be taxed “fairly”? It astounds me we talk about paying a fair share when 50% pay nothing.

It's worse than that, when you consider that many who pay zero taxes also get "refunds".

21 posted on 08/24/2011 3:03:11 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (The only problem some people have with tyranny is that theyÂ’re not the tyrant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

15% excise on all concert tickets and movie revenues, 10% wealth tax on all property derived from income due to entertainment 20% surtax on legal services - that’s fair, isn’t it?


22 posted on 08/24/2011 3:04:14 PM PDT by Jim Noble (To live peacefully with credit-based consumption and fiat money, men would have to be angels.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
All true. But this doesn’t really refute Mr. Buffett, whose main argument — that the burden of deficit-reduction should fall most heavily on the well-to-do

They already do, and always have. Next stupid point...

23 posted on 08/24/2011 3:06:33 PM PDT by Paradox (Obnoxious, Bumbling, Absurd, Maladroit, Assinine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Increased taxation reduces individual liberty and the ability of the productive sector to resist tyrannical government. That’s what this is really about. Increased taxes never translate into reduced national debt because either revenues fall or if revenue actually increases, the government will spend the money to maintain their power through racketeering.


24 posted on 08/24/2011 3:06:39 PM PDT by grumpygresh (Democrats delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

We need to get more money from the rich so we can afford the welfare state.


25 posted on 08/24/2011 3:07:01 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The rich pay plenty, the problem is the poor pay nothing.

when nearly 50% pay no income tax, the system is offically broken.


26 posted on 08/24/2011 3:09:09 PM PDT by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama = Epic Fail)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

The very wealthy have already protected their estates from the death tax. They set up Foundations and other protected investments.


27 posted on 08/24/2011 3:09:11 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: emax

I don’t think you stopped to actual read my response.


28 posted on 08/24/2011 3:11:40 PM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Marxism at its finest. From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs, Comrade.


29 posted on 08/24/2011 3:13:28 PM PDT by Marathoner (Government schools = Marxist indoctrination centers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kabar
They set up Foundations and other protected investments.

I agree but the public policy reason of deducting such amounts from the estate is that these organizations provide goods and services which benefit all people and also supplement or provide what the government/public would otherwise have to provide. So, yes we are still borrowing from our future wealth when we take from the wealthy.

30 posted on 08/24/2011 3:16:11 PM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009
The rich pay plenty, the problem is the poor pay nothing.

The problem is the poor have no idea what they are actually paying that is built in the costs of goods they purchase, the rent they pay, the utilities etc. They merely think they have a free ride and that the Dem politician is the one giving it.

31 posted on 08/24/2011 3:18:55 PM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Marathoner

Wonder if the Washington compost is sitting on a big pile of cash. Why won’t they start hiring? Bunch of corporate fat cats lighting their cigars with $100 dollar bills.

Ignorant media thinks none of their poo flinging will ever stick to them. Just wait there wapo. Your dear leader will target you also.


32 posted on 08/24/2011 3:20:05 PM PDT by Texas resident (Hunkered Down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

Well I noticed you had pointed out that the current crop of politicians we have would not be able to spend any additional revenue responsibly. True enough, but the point is also about the possibility of finding and electing representatives who could ensure that the tax money goes towards such sources as health care and medicare and funding for research and other such purposes.

So I get the point about how our tax dollars right now would not be used responsibly. But that means that we could not effectively tax the richest 1 % right now - and that for many non rich Americans would simply beg the question-what if we could ? A Large numbers of them see higher education , Medicare, quality doctors and drugs being so hard to afford and inevitably will wonder why the obscenely rich, capable of spending money like it’s going out of style, shouldnt be required to use a bulk of their unnecessary wealth to fund these things. I hear endlessly from people I work with as to why public sectors cant get more federal funding and often it leads to why we cant get more funding from the obscenely rich in our nation. I guess I just wish there were more real economists around to explain about how it doesnt really work that way - Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, et al-and could get our news outlets to take decent notes.


33 posted on 08/24/2011 3:21:58 PM PDT by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Must be nice for Warren Buffet, he’s wealthy enough that he can afford to be a socialist. Problem is, the rest of us poor folks have to suffer the consequences of his advice should anyone be stupid enough to act on it.


34 posted on 08/24/2011 3:22:36 PM PDT by Sudetenland (There can be no freedom without God--What man gives, man can take away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: emax

The revenue obtained would be very limited, in exchange for disproportionate economic damage. Several articles on it in the conservative mags, ie:

http://www.american.com/archive/2011/august/obamasfollytaxingtherich


35 posted on 08/24/2011 3:25:06 PM PDT by globelamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa
I agree but the public policy reason of deducting such amounts from the estate is that these organizations provide goods and services which benefit all people and also supplement or provide what the government/public would otherwise have to provide.

Where did you come up with that one? The real reason is that the very wealthy have effectively lobbied Congress to pass laws so that they can shelter their wealth for their progeny. These charitable or other type Foundations use their wealth to employ the survivors as directors and to use their influence around the globe. Gates and Buffet will use lots of their Foundation money overseas. Americans won't benefit from it.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

36 posted on 08/24/2011 3:25:58 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

37 posted on 08/24/2011 3:29:10 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: basil
You have confused the "flat tax" with the "fair tax". The "flat tax" is a fixed percentage of EARNED INCOME. The "fair tax" is a fixed percentage of NEW items CONSUMED. The truly "wealthy" would still be skirting the flat tax because much of their income is PASSIVE i.e. rents, royalties, interest and equity appreciation. The fair tax hits everyone who purchases something new. Wealthy and poor alike pay a fixed sales tax with the fair tax. The defect in the proposed "fair tax" scheme is an attempt to redistribute the wealth by sending a "rebate check" of the amount of taxes that are estimated to apply to "basic needs". The "fair tax" also makes every merchant of new goods a federal tax collector.
38 posted on 08/24/2011 3:33:02 PM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sudetenland
Buffet is a classic "looter". He uses the death tax policy to drive people to purchase insurance from his insurance companies. The death tax often forces people to divest property at fire sale prices to cover the tax. Buffet swoops in and buys the distressed property at a substantial discount.
39 posted on 08/24/2011 3:37:31 PM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: 10thAmendmentGuy

Here! Here!

The issue is the War on Upward Mobility, which is that people earning 1099 income or W2 wages are screwed by all the Government takes.

The people who HAVE ACHIEVED are not taxed on net worth, only gains and income are taxed.

The Liberals and Socialists do not like upward mobility, it creates a company, which COMPETES with their end-all Government, which can never happen.


40 posted on 08/24/2011 3:48:52 PM PDT by wac3rd (Somewhere in Hell, Ted Kennedy snickers....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson