2016 Postmortem

savalez

(3,517 posts) Wed Apr 11, 2012, 04:12 PM Apr 2012

Millionaires stand in support of the Buffett Rule

President Obama met with some of America’s most successful businesspeople and entrepreneurs—all millionaires—to talk taxes this morning.

They came to the White House to show their support for the Buffett Rule, a bill up for a vote in Congress next week that would make sure the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share in taxes. Noting that two-thirds of America’s millionaires support the Buffett Rule, the President said:

"The people who have joined me here today are extremely successful. They’ve created jobs and opportunity for thousands of Americans. They’re rightly proud of their success. They love the country that made their success possible, and most importantly, they want to make sure that the next generation, people coming up behind them, have the same opportunities that they had.

They understand, though, that for some time now, when compared to the middle class, they haven’t been asked to do their fair share. And they are here because they believe there is something deeply wrong and irresponsible about that.

Now, it’s not that these folks are excited about the idea of paying more taxes … In a perfect world, none of us would have to pay any taxes. We’d have no deficits to pay down. And schools and bridges and roads and national defense and caring for our veterans would all happen magically."

more: http://www.barackobama.com/news/entry/millionaires-stand-in-support-of-the-buffett-rule?source=blog_ems

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Millionaires stand in support of the Buffett Rule (Original Post) savalez Apr 2012 OP

Of course 2/3 of millionaires support it: They're happy it's capped at 30% and FailureToCommunicate Apr 2012 #1

That's not entirely accurate. savalez Apr 2012 #2

Most Millioniares Earn Majority of Income from Investment Income Not Salary Indykatie Apr 2012 #3

The President is spot on. MatthewStLouis Apr 2012 #4

FailureToCommunicate

(14,020 posts)

1. Of course 2/3 of millionaires support it: They're happy it's capped at 30% and

Reply to savalez (Original post)

Wed Apr 11, 2012, 05:02 PM

Apr 2012

mainly on investments, not income.

Pretty lame.

savalez

(3,517 posts)

2. That's not entirely accurate.

Reply to FailureToCommunicate (Reply #1)

Wed Apr 11, 2012, 05:13 PM

Apr 2012

How would the Buffett rule work?

By changing the tax code. The Paying A Fair Share Act of 2012 would create “a minimum effective tax rate for high-income taxpayers.” Regardless of whether their income derived from long-term capital gains, dividends, wages or salary, Americans earning over $2 million a year would be required to pay a tax rate equal to 30 percent of their total income. Americans earning between $1 million and $2 million would pay a graduated rate approaching 30 percent.

Source: http://www.salon.com/2012/04/11/the_buffet_rule_explained/

It doesn't matter anyway since majority doesn't rule anymore and it will not pass the vote.

Indykatie

(3,697 posts)

3. Most Millioniares Earn Majority of Income from Investment Income Not Salary

Reply to FailureToCommunicate (Reply #1)

Wed Apr 11, 2012, 09:49 PM

Apr 2012

Having it taxed at 30% is an improvement. This would include capital gains which is hugh as we like to say at DU.

MatthewStLouis

(904 posts)

4. The President is spot on.

Reply to savalez (Original post)

Thu Apr 12, 2012, 08:32 AM

Apr 2012

I love this line, "In a perfect world, none of us would have to pay any taxes. We’d have no deficits to pay down. And schools and bridges and roads and national defense and caring for our veterans would all happen magically."

The President is hitting at the heart of the Teabagger (Free-bagger) argument. They think all good things that come from government should be free without paying their fair share in taxes. They live in a fantasy world where the "free" market takes care of everything and there is no need for any kind of worker, environmental, or financial market protections or safeguards.

Reply to this discussion