Latest Breaking News

riversedge

(70,286 posts) Wed Jan 14, 2015, 04:45 PM Jan 2015

Baldwin reintroduces ‘Buffett Rule’ legislation

Source: wrn.com

Baldwin reintroduces ‘Buffett Rule’ legislation

January 14, 2015 By Bob Hague

U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin is moving forward with a “Paying a Fair Share Act.” Also known as the Buffett Rule, it would require that multimillion dollar earners pay at least a 30 percent effective federal tax rate.

“For far too long our tax code has unfairly favored the wealthiest Americans, while middle class families in Wisconsin have struggled to get ahead,” said Baldwin, who along with Rhode Island Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse led a group of 16 Senators in introducing legislation this week.

The bill from Baldwin and her fellow Democrats is unlikely to advance in the Republican-controlled Senate.

“If our new Republican majority truley believes in strengthening the economic security of our middle class, I hope they’ll join us in supporting this common sense idea that if you work hard and play by the rules, you’ll have a chance to get ahead,” Baldwin said..........

Read more: http://www.wrn.com/2015/01/baldwin-reintroduces-buffett-rule-legislation/

It is going to be a long two years

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Baldwin reintroduces ‘Buffett Rule’ legislation (Original Post) riversedge Jan 2015 OP

"It is going to be a long two years" BumRushDaShow Jan 2015 #1

The Rs introduced a bill to repeal ACA 50 times. We need to continue to introduce bills like this jwirr Jan 2015 #2

I support this because the rich do "not" create enough jobs with the current system cstanleytech Jan 2015 #3

MORE!!!!! if you get over 50% of everything. you PAY MORE! pansypoo53219 Jan 2015 #4

Since corporations are people... excringency Jan 2015 #5

The whole "fair share" language is BS OnePercentDem Jan 2015 #6

It's great to reintroduce bills such as this. BlueMTexpat Jan 2015 #7

Take the Walton 3 ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2015 #8

BumRushDaShow

(129,376 posts)

1. "It is going to be a long two years"

Reply to riversedge (Original post)

Wed Jan 14, 2015, 05:06 PM

Jan 2015

Ditto.

jwirr

(39,215 posts)

2. The Rs introduced a bill to repeal ACA 50 times. We need to continue to introduce bills like this

Reply to riversedge (Original post)

Wed Jan 14, 2015, 05:10 PM

Jan 2015

and often. Kind of like the old saying "Vote early and vote often." We may not get any of them passed in the congress but people will know what we stand for.

cstanleytech

(26,318 posts)

3. I support this because the rich do "not" create enough jobs with the current system

Reply to riversedge (Original post)

Wed Jan 14, 2015, 05:22 PM

Jan 2015

but to get it passed by the senate they should include a tax cut for corporations with the provision that they have to pay their employees enough so that no less than 80% of them earn atleast 500% over the federal poverty level.
It wont pass of course but with the democrats offering up that tasty little carrot of cutting taxes for corporations it might put the republicans on the defensive.

pansypoo53219

(20,993 posts)

4. MORE!!!!! if you get over 50% of everything. you PAY MORE!

Reply to riversedge (Original post)

Wed Jan 14, 2015, 07:25 PM

Jan 2015

excringency

(105 posts)

5. Since corporations are people...

Reply to riversedge (Original post)

Thu Jan 15, 2015, 10:09 PM

Jan 2015

...I would love to see them hit with an Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) like all U.S. citizens.

OnePercentDem

(79 posts)

6. The whole "fair share" language is BS

Reply to riversedge (Original post)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 10:04 AM

Jan 2015

Who decides what is fair, I hate that term.

BlueMTexpat

(15,372 posts)

7. It's great to reintroduce bills such as this.

Reply to riversedge (Original post)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 06:31 PM

Jan 2015

Even when the bills have no likelihood of passing, such actions begin to clarify that there really is a difference between Dems and Reps.

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)

8. Take the Walton 3 ...

Reply to riversedge (Original post)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 07:30 PM

Jan 2015

they take home $3.18 billion (between them) ... a 30% effective tax rate would even to a zero (to the right of the decimal point) off their collective take!

But it would create the vexing problem of how the hell would one spent $400,000,000? Or, more ... with $400,000,000, what more would another couple hundred million allow one to buy?

Reply to this discussion