Voting on the Buffett Rule
By Neal Boortz
After 42 years of talk radio ... of course I’ve had many policy differences and problems with presidents. Republican, Democrat --- it matters not. There’s always something to disagree with -- and always room to compliment and agree.
This guy Obama is different. To put it bluntly, Obama is a liar. A pathological liar. I’ve encountered presidents and politicians who lied before .. but never one who lies so boldly and so persistently. Right now his entire reelection campaign is centered around his pandering to jealousy and wealth envy with his precious “Buffet Rule.”
Every time I see Obama on TV saying that Warren Buffet pays a lower tax rate than his secretary, I literally get sick to my stomach. Sick because the nation is in the clutches of this liar, and sick because I know we actually have enough ignorant voters out there who will believe him and will vote to reelect him to assuage their envy. This, after all, is Obama’s goal. He knows that the Buffett Rule is not going to pass. Even Obama, as ignorant about free-market economics as he is, knows that to hit investors with a minimum 30% tax rate will simply cause them to change their investing behavior. Obama knows that investment funds will head overseas to friendlier tax climates. He knows that smart investors will put their money into tax-free municipal bonds and other low-tax investment vehicles. He knows this ... but it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter because he also knows something else. He knows that wealth envy is a reality -- and he’s been working full time to encourage wealth envy since he was sworn in. When Dear Ruler talks about the Buffett Tax these people yell “Hell yeah! Those rich people don’t pay anything! The president said so! They’re not paying their fair share! Obama will fix that, and I’m voting for him!” These wealth-envy voters, of course, are dumb as stumps. They have no clue what the rich pay in taxes. So if Obama says they’re not paying their “fair share,” and they don’t hear anything different in the media, then it must be true.
Every time Obama utters this “Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary” he knows that statement to be untrue. He knows he’s lying. He also knows that he will get a good deal of protection from the New York and DC press corps that wants him reelected.
is it possible that there is someone out there who doesn’t necessarily understand just why Obama’s assertions are a lie, and would like to know the truth? When the truth of this difference in tax rates between Buffett and his secretary is revealed -- the most common response is a sense of disbelief. It’s hard to believe that Obama will tell such a blatant lie -- and repeat it over and over without being shamed into silence.
Here you go. Buffett is paying capital gains taxes, and his secretary is paying income taxes. It’s just that simple. Buffett earns a very minimal salary at Berkshire-Hathaway. Most of his income comes to him in the form of capital gains. Capital gains are returns on investments. Capital gains are taxed in the United States at 15%. Buffett’s secretary is paying income taxes on wages. Income taxes range up to 36%. If Buffett’s taxable income from wages equaled the taxable income of his secretary he would be paying exactly the same income tax rate. If his secretary realizes any capital gains income during the year, she will pay exactly the same 15% capital gains tax rate Buffett pays.
I’ve said this before ... and I’ve challenged anyone out there to refute this. So far nobody has.
WARREN BUFFETT PAYS EXACTLY THE SAME INCOME TAX RATE ON THE SAME TAXABLE EARNED INCOME THAT HIS SECRETARY PAYS.
WARREN BUFFETT’S SECRETARY PAYS EXACTLY THE SAME TAX RATE ON HER CAPITAL GAINS INCOME THAT WARREN BUFFETT PAYS.
Now what Obama is referring to is something called the effective tax rate. This is very simple. Your effective tax rate is the percentage of your total income from all sources; earned income, capital gains, gifts ... you name it ... that you pay to the federal government. If you have more income from capital gains than you do in earned income from wages, professional fees, etc., then your effective rate will be lower because the capital gains tax rate is only 15%.
By the way ... why are capital gains tax rates so comparatively low? To encourage investment, that’s why. When the capital gains tax rates go up people with money to invest -- and that’s where capital gains come from -- simply send that money somewhere else to play. Perhaps overseas, or maybe into tax-free municipal bonds. History has shown ... WITHOUT FAIL ... every single time ... when you raise capital gains tax rates the amount of money the government earns in capital gains taxes goes DOWN.
Now Obama knows all of this. The key is that he knows the voters -- or most of the voters --- DON’T know it. So he is playing them for suckers. He is calling for capital gains taxes to be doubled. He knows it will result in less money for the government, but that doesn’t bother him. It’s about playing the wealth envy game. The voters will think that their hero will punish those evil rich people ... and on that basis they’ll eagerly vote for him.
Remember ... there have been sociological studies that have shown that people will actually pay -- give up money out of their own pockets --- if the government will promise to take even more away from the rich. That’s the level and the nature of wealth envy in the U.S. today.
But wait, as they say .... there’s more!
So after all of the whining and complaining about “fairness” from Dear Ruler, we’ve come to find that Barack Obama himself pays a lower effective tax rate than his secretary. This will, no doubt, be used as political leverage to push for his Buffett Rule. The only problem? Barack Obama didn’t earn enough in 2011 to qualify for his precious Buffett Rule. So for all intents and purposes, Congress could pass the Buffett Rule to nail the evil rich people, but in the end, Obama will still be paying a lower effective tax rate than his own secretary.
The problem here isn’t rich people, the problem is our tax code. We need a new plan. I have one … it’s called The FairTax … ever heard of it? But back to Dear Ruler’s tax returns …
Obama’s tax returns reveal that he, too, is taking advantage of special loopholes in the tax code … something that he has often derided the “millionaires and billionaires” for.
Are the Obama’s doing anything illegal? Absolutely not. Not one thing. Caesar Obammus pays exactly the same tax rate on capital gains as does his secretary, and he pays the exact same income tax rate on the same earned income as his secretary. He is taking advantage of legal loopholes available to anyone in his position.
As if releasing his tax returns wasn’t enough, Obama topped off his wealth envy week by making his Saturday Address to the Nation also about the Buffett Rule. As I’ve already said ... If you are a regular reader of Nealz Nuze, you will know that he is lying through his teeth, trying to get Americans to demand that Congress pass the Buffett Rule later this week.
Then you had his propaganda minions adding to the chorus … on Fox News over the weekend, David Axelrod discussed the deficit-cutting claim of the Buffett Rule: “Nobody can argue, nobody can argue, Chris, nobody can argue that it makes sense for people who are making $1 million or more to pay less than the average middle class worker in this country. So it both helps us stabilize the deficit and ensures an amount of fairness in our tax system. And if Mr. Gillespie and you want to argue otherwise, then so be it. But those $47 billion can be put to much greater use.” You see, the Obama administration believes that this money belongs to them and that they are the ones who know how to best spend it. Got it? Maybe there is another shrub somewhere in San Francisco that needs to be moved …
Oh ... and there’s another new lie in Axelrod’s statement. Do you see how he moved from tax rates to taxes paid? Now we have Obama’s campaign guru saying that people who make over a million are paying less in taxes than the middle class. Another lie, but who’s counting.
While we are talking about the Buffett Rule and the deficit, Mark Steyn has done the math for us. This should give you some perspective …
Obama's Buffett Rule will raise – stand well back – $3.2 billion per year. Or what the United States government currently borrows every 17 hours. So in 514 years it will have raised enough additional revenue to pay off the 2011 federal budget deficit. If you want to mark it on your calendar, 514 years is the year 2526.
When it comes down to it, what the Obama propagandists can’t admit is that Americans can’t afford their big-government dreams and schemes. As Mark Steyn puts it, there aren’t enough rich people.
For what Obama's spending, there aren't enough of them, or us, or "the rich" – and there never will be. There is only one Warren Buffett. He is the third-wealthiest person on the planet … Mr. Buffett is worth $44 billion. If he donated the entire lot to the Government of the United States, they would blow through it within four-and-a-half days … No. 6 six is Larry Ellison. He's American, but that loser is only worth $36 billion. So he and Buffett between them could keep the United States Government going for a week. The next-richest American is Christy Walton of Wal-Mart, and she's barely a semi-Buffett. So her $25 billion will see you through a couple of days of the second week. There aren't a lot of other semi-Buffetts, but, if you scrounge around, you can rustle up some hemi-demi-semi-Buffetts: If you confiscate the total wealth of the Forbes 400 richest Americans it comes to $1.5 trillion, which is just a little less than the Obama budget deficit for year.
And the kicker? It turns out this Obama proposal will cost federal revenue.
Read More: http://www.boortz.com/weblogs/nealz-nuze/
See Votes by State
News & Politics