The Buffett Rule

[Al Wohlstrom]

What exactly is a "fair share"?

10% on income between $0 and $8,025

• 15% on the income between $8,025 and $32,550
• 25% on the income between $32,550 and $78,850

• 28% on the income between $78,850 and $164,550

• 33% on the income between $164,550 and $357,700

• 35% on the income over $357,700

Do they give you anything for back strain while you're holding on to your ankles?

 

[Chris P.]

What exactly is a "fair share"?

10% on income between $0 and $8,025

• 15% on the income between $8,025 and $32,550
• 25% on the income between $32,550 and $78,850

• 28% on the income between $78,850 and $164,550

• 33% on the income between $164,550 and $357,700

• 35% on the income over $357,700

Do they give you anything for back strain while you're holding on to your ankles?

Disproportionate taxes is not the fix to the root problem, I know, but playing the devil's advocate here, there are other things that are not tiered. Health insurance is one, and the chunk of money that takes out of a bottom wage earner's paycheck is a much higher percentage than what comes out of a $300,000 paycheck. Not to mention the fact that the bottom wage earner has much more of a need for that insurance, given their financial position. Remember, it's those bottom wage earners that are working their backs off so someone else can make that $300,000. Most will also never get to a position where they can buy a house - they will also be renting and again, making someone else money. (I know mortgages have financing that make someone else money, but you build equity in the house....) There IS an argument for taking care of the low wage earners for the sake of society as a whole.

Fire away Bob...

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

from the Internal Revenue Service:
•The top 1 percent: Americans who earned an adjusted gross income of $410,096 or more accounted for 22.8 percent of all wages. But they paid 40.4 percent of total reported income taxes, an increase from 39.9 percent in 2006, according to the IRS.


•The top 5 percent: Americans who earned $160,041 or more accounted for 37.4 percent of all wages in 2007. But they paid 60.6 percent of the country's total reported income taxes, up from 60.1 percent a year earlier.


•The top 10 percent: Americans who earned at least $113,018 paid 71.2 percent of the nation's income taxes, up from 70.8 percent a year earlier.


•The top 25 percent: Americans who earned at least $66,532 paid 86.6 percent of the nation's income taxes, up from 86.3 percent a year earlier.


•The top 50 percent: Americans who earned at least $32,879 paid 97.1 percent of the nation's income taxes, up from 97 percent a year earlier.


•The bottom 50 percent: Americans who earned less than $32,879 paid 2.9 percent of the nation's income taxes, down from 3 percent a year earlier.

47% of Americans pay no federal income taxes.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

from the Internal Revenue Service:
•The top 1 percent: Americans who earned an adjusted gross income of $410,096 or more accounted for 22.8 percent of all wages. But they paid 40.4 percent of total reported income taxes, an increase from 39.9 percent in 2006, according to the IRS.


•The top 5 percent: Americans who earned $160,041 or more accounted for 37.4 percent of all wages in 2007. But they paid 60.6 percent of the country's total reported income taxes, up from 60.1 percent a year earlier.


•The top 10 percent: Americans who earned at least $113,018 paid 71.2 percent of the nation's income taxes, up from 70.8 percent a year earlier.


•The top 25 percent: Americans who earned at least $66,532 paid 86.6 percent of the nation's income taxes, up from 86.3 percent a year earlier.


•The top 50 percent: Americans who earned at least $32,879 paid 97.1 percent of the nation's income taxes, up from 97 percent a year earlier.


•The bottom 50 percent: Americans who earned less than $32,879 paid 2.9 percent of the nation's income taxes, down from 3 percent a year earlier.

47% of Americans pay no federal income taxes.

I seriously thought someone would say that the "rich" (top 1%) were not paying enough!

 

[Mike Christian]

we can afford to pay more.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

we can afford to pay more.

What's this "we" stuff, do you have a mouse in your pocket? Go for it, nothing stopping you! With all of you that feel this way, maybe you can "change" things.

 

[Mike Christian]

Those of us in the top 1% Al (the ones I have talked to); that "we". Not everyone takes every action possible to minimize their taxes to the very minimum possible. When money is no longer an issue in one's life, then actions like that become less important...no?

 

[Graham]

Those of us in the top 1% Al (the ones I have talked to); that "we". Not everyone takes every action possible to minimize their taxes to the very minimum possible. When money is no longer an issue in one's life, then actions like that become less important...no?

Mike, You are a man who should sleep easily at night. I like that :thumbsup:

 

[Nick]

Those of us in the top 1% Al (the ones I have talked to); that "we". Not everyone takes every action possible to minimize their taxes to the very minimum possible. When money is no longer an issue in one's life, then actions like that become less important...no?

Mike,

A generalisation I know, but in that case do you think it is a case of many who don't have to pay these taxes complaining and protesting bitterly for those who do, many of which are not actually that concerned about having to pay them.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

Mike,

A generalisation I know, but in that case do you think it is a case of many who don't have to pay these taxes complaining and protesting bitterly for those who do, many of which are not actually that concerned about having to pay them.

There may be a few people like Mike, but I think the majority would not be happy with a tax hike, especially at the lower levels. Where does "rich" start? Certainly not at $200K! Having a net woth of $1,000,000 used to be something 40 years ago, it's nothing now.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

At the same time, people would be willing to give more if the government was even near being responsible with how and where they spent our money. Reading a list of where stymulus money went is sickening. We give aid to countries that clearly hate us while over 40 million live below the poverty line in our country.

 

[domtoni]

And all of those proposing to raise taxes have not said a word about the fraud that can save the government hundreds of billions. Look IBM offered a free of charge program (as did other technology companies) to reduce fraud, saving in health care alone $90B/year.

I'd bet you can cut the cost of government at least $250B per annum without any major loss to service (and that doesn't mean cutting the military).

And cost cutting and efficiency are obligations of the government.

 

[Mike Christian]

Graham, I do sleep well, thank you. I live way below my means so that I can sleep well. I find that people that live near or beyond their means seem tight and stressed. My dog is happy because he has everything covered. My Dad taught me this lesson. Money was a huge issue for him (he came from a poor family) and he always threw it in my face. I committed to my self that money would not be an issue for me.

Nick, I do belive that is true to a point. I know some people that are "rich" and still live beyond their means. Those people seem to complain about taxes too because they always want more more more. Some people seem to define themselves by what they have and what they want.

Al, I don't know where "rich" starts. I think it is different for everyone. I think it is that point where you have satisfied your needs and then your wants. I agree that a million isn't what it used to be also. Better raise the bar to 5 Mil or more.

I think those that are complaining are trying to hold on to what they have - understandably. The government is considering a larger bite out of their nut and not spending it efficiently. There is no increase in services or quality of service for the increase in payment (kind of the way I feel when I get my annual health plan premium increase letter). What is not to be angry about?

Domtoni, as a business owner and a person who was upside down financially when I started out, I do know what worked for me to get out of debt. That was to work both sides of the equation...increase revenue and decrease expenses. Just suck it up and do it. In my simple mind, there is no magic pill that only works one side of the equation here for the desired result.

I told myself I wouldn't get involved in these types of discussion...better go spank myself.

 

[Jim Craik]

Mike,

It's hard not to agree with whay you say. We really need to work both sides of the equation.

Most recent polls I have seen show that the people want the Govenment to cut spending and for the most part are OK with a slight increase in revenue (taxes).

This seems like the obvious way to go forward. Unfortunatly it seems a small group of vocal protesters are fighting what needs to be done.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

Graham, I do sleep well, thank you. I live way below my means so that I can sleep well. I find that people that live near or beyond their means seem tight and stressed. My dog is happy because he has everything covered. My Dad taught me this lesson. Money was a huge issue for him (he came from a poor family) and he always threw it in my face. I committed to my self that money would not be an issue for me.

Nick, I do belive that is true to a point. I know some people that are "rich" and still live beyond their means. Those people seem to complain about taxes too because they always want more more more. Some people seem to define themselves by what they have and what they want.

Al, I don't know where "rich" starts. I think it is different for everyone. I think it is that point where you have satisfied your needs and then your wants. I agree that a million isn't what it used to be also. Better raise the bar to 5 Mil or more.

I think those that are complaining are trying to hold on to what they have - understandably. The government is considering a larger bite out of their nut and not spending it efficiently. There is no increase in services or quality of service for the increase in payment (kind of the way I feel when I get my annual health plan premium increase letter). What is not to be angry about?

Domtoni, as a business owner and a person who was upside down financially when I started out, I do know what worked for me to get out of debt. That was to work both sides of the equation...increase revenue and decrease expenses. Just suck it up and do it. In my simple mind, there is no magic pill that only works one side of the equation here for the desired result.

I told myself I wouldn't get involved in these types of discussion...better go spank myself.

Mike, You should pass on some of your dad's sensible wisdom to the people running the goverment, they don't have a clue about living within their means, and there lies the problem.

 

[Nick]

Where does "rich" start? Certainly not at $200K! Having a net woth of $1,000,000 used to be something 40 years ago, it's nothing now.

Al,

Guess it depends on where you are, as someone on 1/4 of that (which is above the UK average of $40,000 a year). If I or anyone on an average UK wage was anywhere near those figures we would consider ourselves rich.

"My other piece of advice, Copperfield, said Mr. Micawber, you know. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."

 

[Mike Christian]

Al, my Dad doesn't live within his means. He taught me what NOT to do. I vowed to be different from him.

Sorry if i wasn't clear.

 

[Doug Clark]

From my experience having lived in the USA for 5 years (raised in UK and now living in Australia through choice).
When people in the USA say "tax the rich" most people think that means them personally, or if it doesn't mean them personally now it will mean them one day, because everyone in the USA is planing to be rich at some point.

If you are making even a $1M (I wish) a year you're not rich in the true sense, look at this, from here:

Those are 2007 figures, they've only got worse since then, so basically we have people in the bottom 95% arguing about which of them should pay more tax, meanwhile the top 5% do the right thing for themselves and keep their mouths shut in public mostly.

Look at this:

World's most livable cities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and this:

Quality of Living Survey - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So why do cities in the USA not do so well and and lot of cities from countries with politics and policies far more left wing than could ever be stood for in the USA do so much better?

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

The major problem is that voters have discovered they can get money from treasury by electing those that promise them money from treasury.
Now it appears the way to get elected is not what you can do for your country, but what can the country (treasury) do for me? (the voter).
These political wankers promise more and more welfare, bail outs and free rides while the country is going broke. They care nothing about the people or the country. All they care about is their massive ego's and getting elected and the power that goes with it. They sicken me.:veryangry:

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

The major problem is that voters have discovered they can get money from treasury by electing those that promise them money from treasury.
Now it appears the way to get elected is not what you can do for your country, but what can the country (treasury) do for me? (the voter).
These political wankers promise more and more welfare, bail outs and free rides while the country is going broke. They care nothing about the people or the country. All they care about is their massive ego's and getting elected and the power that goes with it. They sicken me.:veryangry:

They could give a damn if the illegals die in the desert or the welfare recipients starve, only one reason, The Vote!