Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty Digest™ News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty Digest™ 

Warren Buffett: Obama Tax Shill

February 10, 2012 by  

Warren Buffett: Obama Tax Shill

Well, he didn’t make Time magazine’s “Person of the Year.” But Warren Buffett did make the cover of the magazine last month. The picture showed him smiling an impish grin. The article inside explained why.

It seems the Sage of Omaha has issued a dramatic challenge to Republicans in Congress to help pay down the national debt. Here’s the deal: Buffett said that for every dollar they will contribute to help reduce the national debt, he’ll match them.

And not just dollar for dollar. If Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) kicks in some funds, Buffett added, “I’ll even go 3 for 1 for McConnell.” Why the preferential treatment for the Senate Minority Leader? It seems Buffett is still smarting over a remark McConnell made last year, that if Buffett was truly feeling guilty about paying too little in taxes, he could always “send in a check” to Uncle Sam.

As of this writing, McConnell hasn’t said whether he’ll agree to contribute. A spokesman for the Senator did say that Congressional Democrats should also be included in the challenge, as well as President Obama and members of the Democratic National Committee. Fat chance.

The quickest response came from Representative Scott Rigell (R-Va.), who said he had been doing this long before Buffett suggested it. When he was elected, the conservative Republican promised to send the Treasury 15 percent of his Congressional salary for just such a purpose. That amounted to about $23,000 last year. Rigell estimates this year’s contribution will be about $26,100.

Interestingly, Buffett’s father did something similar when he was a member of Congress in the 1940s. While he was in office, Congress voted to raise its pay from $10,000 a year to $12,500. Declaring that the raise was unseemly, Representative Howard Buffett refused to take it.

And here’s another interesting historical footnote. Once he left office and returned to private life in Omaha, Neb., the elder Buffett became so concerned about the direction our country was moving that he joined and publicly supported the John Birch Society. I guess sometimes the apple does fall far from the tree. From outspoken conservative to tax shill for President Barack Obama isn’t what I’d call progress.

Buffett congratulated Rigell and said he would be delighted to match his contribution for both years. So that’s about $49,100 more your grateful government will receive.

To put all of this in perspective, let me point out that it will take Buffett’s accountant longer to write and mail the check than it will for the government to spend it. Our admitted Federal debt is now well over $15 trillion. That does not include any of our contingent liabilities — that is, the promises to pay that are already written into law, but aren’t counted in the debt figures. There aren’t enough fingers and toes in the country to count that high.

With interest payments on the national debt coming to about $250 billion annually, that means we are spending $685 million on them every single day. Or $28.5 million an hour. Or $475,000 a second.

Thanks, Buffett, for helping to pay this bill for one-tenth of one second. That’s really going to make a difference.

By the way, have you ever written a check to anyone for $49,000? What seems like an enormous contribution is just pocket change for Buffett. I mean that literally: When you’re worth $21 billion, that $49,000 check is about the same as 49 cents to us.

As I’ve written before, Buffett’s comments about the unfairness of our tax system have been misleadingly unfair. Sure, his tax rate of 17 percent is no doubt lower than that of his secretary. That’s because almost all of his income comes from dividends and interest. But what he carefully fails to mention is that the corporations that earned those profits had to pay upwards of 35 percent on that money before he received a penny of it. So the true tax rate for “the rich” is about 50 percent. In fact, when State, local and various user taxes are included, the real number is undoubtedly over 60 percent.

The God of the Old Testament asked His people to tithe 10 percent. In our world today, it is considered normal and natural that government should take six times that much from us. And half of the country wants to make it more.

Even these numbers don’t tell the whole story. When all government spending — Federal, State and local — is added up, it comes to $7 trillion a year. Total interest paid in the U.S. on debt — public and private, including business — comes to another $3.7 trillion per year.

But our gross domestic product comes to only $15 trillion a year. This means we are currently spending two out of every three dollars made in this country on government and debt.

And while it’s great to bash government for its profligate spending, individuals are equally guilty. Our credit card debt amounts to an estimated $798 billion. Student loan debt exceeds $1 trillion. In fact, personal debt in this country is even higher than our Federal debt, since estimates are it stands at $15.9 trillion.

To help put these numbers in perspective, it means that every single taxpayer in this Nation owes more than $1 million as his or her share of the obligations. What a burden we’ve agreed to pass on to our children and grandchildren!

These numbers are, of course, unsustainable. As an analyst friend of mine says, “If something can’t continue, it won’t.”

While we watch the crisis becoming worse, what should you do? For one, continue to count on Personal Liberty Digest™ to keep you informed and energized. Forward the best items you see to family and friends. And use the comments section at the bottom of the daily columns to share your own ideas and recommendations.

Second, do everything you can to get out of debt. Do as much as possible and do it as soon as possible.

Third, start accumulating some real wealth. By that I mean gold and silver. Yes, both precious metals have gotten expensive. Their price has climbed every year for the past 11 years.

But it’s because the U.S. dollar is losing value — that is, its purchasing power — year after year, thanks to our profligate government and our inflating Federal Reserve.

I believe the best way to preserve your assets is to convert them into things with intrinsic and enduring value. For more than 5,000 years, nothing has done that better than gold and silver. Our Founding Fathers knew this; it is why, when our country was founded, they insisted that gold and silver be the only currency.

What a pity that we’ve fallen so far from the legacy they left us.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

–Chip Wood

Chip Wood

is the geopolitical editor of PersonalLiberty.com. He is the founder of Soundview Publications, in Atlanta, where he was also the host of an award-winning radio talk show for many years. He was the publisher of several bestselling books, including Crisis Investing by Doug Casey, None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen and Larry Abraham and The War on Gold by Anthony Sutton. Chip is well known on the investment conference circuit where he has served as Master of Ceremonies for FreedomFest, The New Orleans Investment Conference, Sovereign Society, and The Atlanta Investment Conference.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Warren Buffett: Obama Tax Shill”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Owen D.

    Buffet seems to enjoy coddling up to Government and those in Government. I don’t know where this new found Liberalism of his comes from, but it certainly is not typical of the “sage” mentality that brought him a vast fortune. BTW, Buffet can’t pay down the national debt fast enough. Look at the size of the check Buffet writes, and compare that to the debt clock. The debt runs up faster that he could ever pay it down. Buffet apparently doesn’t understand the concept. This debt is not static. It is increasing faster that a tax increase can pay it down. Someone one wrote that if everyone in the U.S. paid 100% of their income in taxes, it still would not pay down the national debt. Only massive cuts in Government and increased economic activity can even begin to straighten out this horrible mess. Now, we hear about the FED wanting to devalue the dollar by one third, thus trying to inflate the U.S. out of debt. Won’t work unless the size of Government and the amount of spending is drastically cut.

  • aitor

    Buffet and Gates are the most colossal hypocrites when it comes to taxes. Most of their billions in taxes is limited to their 15% long term capital games tax yet the two of them shielded some $70 Billion of their earnings in a non profit trust which they control and thus avoided paying the measly 15% they would have paid on that money but also, they avoided the inheritance tax their estates would have paid when they pass. Yet they want to raise my taxes and everyone else’s income taxes, which most of us cannot shield as they have. Hypocrites!!!

    • Flashy

      He and bill Gates pay according to the law. You have class envy? perhaps then you should be pushing for what they ncourage…have the wealthy pay thier fair share for the benefits they are receiving. Stop the welfare for wealthy programs.

      • DaveH

        What more could I expect from a guy who condones theft?

      • DaveH

        A Society of Flashmans:
        http://mises.org/daily/4125

      • Flashy

        It will be interesting to see if Mr. Livingston chimes in today about personal attacks … any bets?

      • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

        Dear Flashy,

        Strike One.

        Best wishes,
        Bob

      • Flashy

        My apologies Mr. Livingston. I just wondered if one could interchange someone’s nom de guerre with “A Society of Criminals” on this site and stay within the rules.

        I am not being snide nor sarcastic. I am being serious as it is your site and your rules and I recognize that.

        Thank you with all due respect.

      • JeffH

        Flashy…you are nothing more than an agitater…seeing how far you can push the tolerance of Mr. Livingston…your apology is faux at best and insincere. Even Alinsky would tell you to pack it up and move on to a place where you could be effective…at least until you’re fully identified and sent packing again.

        An An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent…”The job then is getting the people to move, to act, to participate; in short, to develop and harness the necessary power to effectively conflict with the prevailing patterns and change them.

        “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time….”

        “When those prominent in the status quo turn and label YOU an ‘agitator’ they are completely correct, for that is, in one word, your function—to agitate to the point of conflict.”

      • libertytrain

        JeffH, I think it’s hysterical to see flashman’s ignorance displayed over and over again…no way out for him.

      • DaveH

        I can prove everything I say about you Flashman.

      • JeffH

        libertytrain, you’re absolutly correct…he’s like a record that skips, keeps playing the same tune over and over to the point that no one even listens. What ever he’s trying to acomplish here he hasn’t…a complete failure I’d say…I guess he’s just starved for attention…whether negative or positive. Some people just can’t be fixed!

      • Flashy

        Jeff…sadly even when i give the respect and apologies, you attack.

      • kkflash

        We should all admit this site would be a lot less fun if we didn’t have some liberals posting here to argue with.

      • JeffH

        Flashy says:
        February 10, 2012 at 1:44 pm

        Jeff…sadly even when i give the respect and apologies, you attack.
        ____________________________________________

        That is because of your lack of credibility Flashy…sadly you’ve “cried wolf” so many times that no one believes you. You reap what you sow Flashy! Live with it. Of course you could change but then you might not draw a paycheck or you could move on and attempt to ply your trade elswhereand continue satisfying your handlers.

      • JeffH

        Flashy, just so you know:

        lack of credibility – is a trait of a person which can not be trusted. i.e. Flashy

      • DaveH

        kkflash,
        I’m here to learn and to impart decades of learning to those who haven’t had the opportunity to learn truth and reality. Flashman is just here to disrupt that process. So no, I will not admit that the absence of those Liberals, like Flashman or Denniso, would be a bad thing.
        Flashman knows that. That’s why he’s here — to prevent good people from learning the truth.
        It does give non-zealots a chance to see what Liberals are really like, so people can see what it will be like when (or if) we let them take full control. I guess that’s a good thing.
        Imagine the frustrating realities of lying, thieving, fact fabricating, controlling Liberals running our lives. Pretty ugly.

    • Karolyn

      Gate gave away half his fortune a couple of years ago.

      • FreedomFighter

        To a tax free organization he runs that promotes EUGENICS. A great man to be sure.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

    • Vigilant

      How does one become a hypocrite for wanting to avoid the inheritance tax on their estates? EVERYONE should be allowed to avoid a tax that is purely socialististic wealth redistribution.

      • Flashy

        If tyou die, why should you care? in theory, you won’t be needing it. As for those who inherit…just exactly what have they done to earn it?

        our tax concept is..when a dollar changes hands, it is available for taxation. if it doesn’t change hands, it is not taxed.

        secondly…since any “inheritance tax” is at levels way above 99% of Americans, do you really think a trust find baby is going to miss half of a few million?

        it also serves, in theory, to break up the potential for “royal’ heirarchial estates so we don’t forge a permannt landed/monied gentry class. toss it back into the mix and let everyone have a shot at it. Keep it mixing…

        Now…why should there not be an inheritance tax on multi million dollar estates?

      • kkflash

        Spoken like a true socialist. When are you going to admit that you just want something for nothing? How does rewarding sloth, mediocrity and stupidity help society as a whole to improve?

      • John

        actually, the person that is inheriting the estate and does not want to pay taxes on the estate is the person who wants a lot for nothing.
        He/she did not work for it, it is 100% income for them, it should be taxed as such period.

      • cawmun cents

        How does rewarding sloth,mediocrity and stupidity help society as a whole to improve?
        It doesnt,just look at who(as a result of these things)is POTUS.
        You put one too many letters in your sentence anyway.
        The prevailing thought of the leftist is to improve society as a hole.
        A hole from which there is no return
        A hole from which the poor will seek their savior in gubment
        A hole from which the finger of doubt is pointed at the specter of debt
        A hole from which the quasi-elitist Ivy League Academics keep you from digging yourselves out of
        A hole from which you wallow in self pity as the worlders shape your nation into a giant piece of fecal matter

        I could go on,but I think we all know what A-hole’s I am speaking of.
        DSA
        YDS
        CPUSA
        etc.
        They gather like locusts,with their bullhorns,and shifty eyed demographics counselors,shouting,”Down wit capitalism!”
        “Democracy now!”,and other marxist slogans designed to entice the dull and melancholy.They herd them up on buses and transport them with union paid fundage to a park,port,plaza,place near you.
        Then they vandalize,and terrorize the local businesses and townfolk in a hack-knee’d attempt to act as if they are anything but hired thugs.Too bad that they were never instucted by the marxist professors,that the only important wisdom and true knowledge come from within.That and a good male bovine fecal matter detector,are as good as raingear in the coming scatstorm to follow.

        As the wise man once said,”Meet the new boss,same as the old boss.”
        Exactly the same as the old boss.
        -CC.

      • libertytrain

        I disagree john, the person leaving them the money already paid taxes on it…I don’t see taxing it twice.

      • Vigilant

        John says, “He/she did not work for it, it is 100% income for them, it should be taxed as such period.”

        Using your yardstick, welfare should be taxed at 100%.

      • kkflash

        You’re making the rash and incorrect assumption that taxing all income is right and just, when in fact, it is not.

      • DaveH

        Flashman says “If tyou die, why should you care? in theory, you won’t be needing it. As for those who inherit…just exactly what have they done to earn it?”.
        The question is, Flashman, What have you done to earn it?
        The man who did earn the money wants it to go to those he loves. Not to thieving Trolls.

      • Flashy

        A dollar passes possession. It is liable for taxation. Such is the way it is. A person can leave it to his heirs. If the estate is one of many millions, then it is taxed as an estate tax. Possession passed from one to another.

        There are social reasons and theories underlying the Estate Tax as well as revenue theories.

      • DaveH

        Evil People can do anything they want if their Numbers and Power allow it. But they can’t change the fact that they are Evil People.

      • kkflash

        The principle of taxation on the basis of income, which is the largest of the myriad of ways in which we are taxed, is inherently unfair to the most productive of society, to the benefit of the least productive.
        Those who are recipients of the government redistribution based on income constantly argue that the wealthy derive the greatest benefits from society, and therefore should pay the greatest share of the centralized costs. This faulty premise is also the reason that they want as much cost centralized as possible.
        The truth is that the productive don’t derive a proportionally greater benefit from society than the unproductive. For most of society’s centralized benefits (e.g. public education) they receive no more or less than those who contribute nothing to the shared cost. This fundamental truth conveniently escapes the rationale of those who support the progressive income tax as a “fair” way of distributing the cost.

      • Flashy

        Say what?

        Your contention is that a family of four making 60K a year enjoys the same benefits and receives the same services as a similar sized family making 500 K a year?

      • kkflash

        Yes, or more correctly, that the differences in services and benefits received FROM GOVERNMENT by the more affluent family in your example is insignificant, when compared to the differece in taxes paid.

      • Flashy

        Roads, bridges, all modes of transportation, police, fire, lowering crime, enhancement of environment, education, etc…all are equally enjoyed ? that the amount of descretionary income available affects none of the use and enjoyment of the benefits and services?

  • del

    How about for every dollar congress spends he will match…….rofl bet that would get the idiots from cranking our money!

  • Flashy

    Wow…an article totally on class envy.

    “By the way, have you ever have you ever written a check to anyone for $49,000? What seems like an enormous contribution is just pocket change for Buffett. I mean that literally: When you’re worth $21 billion, that $49,000 check is about the same as 49 cents to us.”

    Warren Buffet agress and such is why he is saying the taxes on the wealthy should be revised so they do, in fact, pay their fair share. I don’t see Warren buffet stating the additional payments will hurt his investments and ability to invest.

    This article may not have intended it, but it is a VERY good article to cite as to why the tax rates for the wealthy should rise..and loopholes closed.

    • FreedomFighter

      Flash for Flash, Obama is the class warfare president:

      Class Warfare

      http://www.mrctv.org/videos/chuck-woolery-class-warfare

      Obama the great divider of Americans

      Laus Deo
      Semper Fi

      • Karolyn

        “Class warfare” has always been and will always be.

      • FreedomFighter

        BS.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • Vigilant

        Kaolyn says, “Class warfare” has always been and will always be.”

        Maybe so, but one would expect a president of the people to do everything in his power to still the waters, not agitate them. Incessant talk of wealth redistribution or “fairness” exacerbates the problem. The socialists depend upon envy and entitlement mentality to achieve their ends.

      • JeffH

        Vigilant, Hear Hear! Simple, well said and to the point! :)

      • kkflash

        …and government is the battleground. You want to reduce class warfare? Take away the implements and locations for the fight. Make government SMALLER. The liberals (this is for you FLASHY) say government gives too much to the rich. The conservatives say government gives too much to the not rich (entitlements). I say government simply controls too much of the money, period. If we keep all the money out of government hands, then WE the people, will control where it goes. You want more of your money to go to the poor, give it to them directly. You want more to go to education, make a donation to your local schools. We don’t need government in the middle, skimming off 40% for administration and overhead. Government has no right, and no business, being involved at all in most of what they do.

      • Karolyn

        The problem is if left in the hands of the people, there would be plenty of problems because so many want to keep it all and there would not necessarily be enough donated to do everything that needs to be done. Let’s face it; greed runs rampant.

      • libertytrain

        Yes, greed does run rampant – there are far too many people that want someone else, like the government, to pay their way….I call that greed.

      • DaveH

        Karolyn,
        That is a very negative sentiment coming from a supposedly positive person.
        I know that people are very generous on average. Witness you generous Liberals (of course that generosity is with other peoples’ money). But even if they weren’t, they wealthier would have much more money to hire the rest of us to do things for them and earn that money the MORAL way.
        I trust the goodness of my fellow human beings in voluntary transactions among each other. I don’t trust those who have the Power of Force to do good things.

      • Vigilant

        Karolyn says, “The problem is if left in the hands of the people, there would be plenty of problems because so many want to keep it all and there would not necessarily be enough donated to do everything that needs to be done. Let’s face it; greed runs rampant.”

        Odd statement, given the fact that Americans are the most generous people in the world, bar none. And as taxes and disincentives go up for charitable giving, proportionally do those contributions dwindle.

      • libertytrain

        Dave – well put.

      • kkflash

        Yes, Karolyn, greed does run rampant, and nowhere more so than in politicians and government. Second to those, I’d say it runs strongest in the lazy and shiftless, who desire money very badly, but aren’t willing to do anything productive to get it.

      • vicki

        Karolyn says:

        The problem is if left in the hands of the people, there would be plenty of problems because so many want to keep it all and there would not necessarily be enough donated to do everything that needs to be done. Let’s face it; greed runs rampant.

        Perhaps it does. We will send someone right over to your house to evaluate what you need vs what is just you being greedy. We will take the rest for our pet projects. Please have the door open so we don’t have to damage the asset.

      • Donald

        True. Back in colonial times only property owners could vote since they were assumed to be the only ones who could suffer from government actions.

    • DaveH

      Do you really think anybody but Ignorant Liberals will buy your spin, Flashman?

      • Flashy

        DaveH….you don’t count for much so don’t let it worry you.

        At least I know that under hyperinflation asset revaluation occurs. And now you do as well since I just corrected you (again)

      • JeffH

        Flashy, All you know is Alinsky/Marxist doublespeak…nothing more.
        bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…your lack of credibility preceeds you…DUH!

  • http://www.poorgrandchildren.com Poorgrandchildren

    Paying down the Ponzi scheme debt just encourages Marxists to spend more. Tell Buffet to encourage Republicans and Democrats to match each other in de-funding illegal (unconstitutional) government departments and programs.

    • Donald

      Unfortunately, they can’t agree on which Department are unconstitutional and, so far, the Supreme Court has not declared any of them to be unconstitutional.

  • Insurgent

    The best thing Congress could do for this country is implement term limits for Congress, the Supreme Court, and all federal judges. They should also eliminate the federal retirement programs for these three groups.

    • John

      NO, not one law will pass that will restrict or take away a benefit that congress has. All you may, just maybe get are closing of legal loopholes such as insider trading…anything else will never ever happen…they will NOT destroy the golden cow they are milking til the end.

    • Donald

      Then almost no one would seek office.

  • http://gillysrooms.blogspot.com Gillysrooms of Australia

    Chip, you fail to mention the asset backing the debts of the nation, the corporations and the individual citizens in the USA. Please provide those figures prior to assuming that there is any financial crisis. If Australia is any guide to the USA about half if our citizen have assets without any debt whatsoever.
    When we know the total assets then we can decide if there is a real economic crisis as GDP is not a good enough basis to calculate an eminent calamity approaching from a debating point of view.
    Hyper inflation can be beneficial for property assets as against those who hold financial assets which are losing value rapidly.

    • John

      Property, especially property that can be used to grow food or to graze animals are a better investment then gold and silver.

    • DaveH

      What is this “we” stuff, Gilly? You’re not a US citizen.
      See this:
      http://www.usdebtclock.org/

      Total household wealth in the US is estimated to be about $55 Trillion.

      • DaveH

        Note that the above is NOT a yearly figure. It is the total estimated value of all that we own.

      • kkflash

        The “debt clock” is a fantastic tool for seeing the size of the financial problems and the rate of growth of the problems. What’s really scary is looking at the Debt Clock Time Machine in the upper right hand corner. As you switch from year to year notice how Total National Assets (near the bottom of page) went up from 2004 to 2008, but down from 2008 to today, and continues to drop in the 2016 projection, right back to 2004 levels. We’re getting poorer by the minute, folks, ever since Obama took office.

      • Donald

        It started before Obama took office. It’s all part of the economic cycle. Its hard to believe, but Presidents of either party have little control over economic cycles. They eventually run their course and the part that is in office at the time are deemed to be the good guys.

      • http://gillysrooms.blogspot.com GILLYSROOMS in Australia

        “WE” in this forum referes to everyone who contributes to the debate in this forum, needs to be fully informed before using figures. We dont nned to be US citizens.

        What is the total wealth of all your corporations, all your governments ?

    • DaveH

      And Gilly, I know you probably didn’t mean this — “Hyper inflation can be beneficial for property assets”. But Hyperinflation does not increase the Value of property relative to other assets. It just increases the Price of property relative to the paper dollar. So Hyperinflation is NOT beneficial for property assets, unless you owe money on those assets, which debt can be repaid with cheaper dollars later on. However, having said that, if you have a Mortgage, you will very likely have a clause stating that the bank can call that loan at will. What do you suppose would happen if the banks sniffed Hyper-Inflation?

      • Flashy

        “But Hyperinflation does not increase the Value of property relative to other assets.” <— DaveH.

        Errrr…you sure about that? You are stating in times of economic turmoil (such as what occurs in hyperinflation), asset revaluation does not occur?

        Psst…read an econ book.

      • kkflash

        Follow your own advice, Flashy. Hyperinflation causes revaluation of all assets, as measured in terms of the hyperinflating currency in question. DaveH didn’t state otherwise.

      • Flashy

        KKF..my point is hyperinflation indeed causes revaluation of assets in comparison to other assets. Value is a matter of priorities, can we agree? In hyperinflation, food becomes more of a priority, i.e. more value…than a non-food luxury item. And so forth. It (hyperinflation) affects the ‘demand’ portion in supply and demand.

      • DaveH

        The buying power of our money has nothing to do with the relative value of Consumer Goods to each other.
        If a pound of soybeans is worth two pounds of wheat, the current value of the dollar will not change that. If the dollar became relatively worthless (hyperinflation), a pound of soybeans would still be worth approximately two pounds of wheat (under normal agricultural conditions).
        You surely can’t be that ignorant, Flashman. I think your sole purpose here is to harass good people with your lies, personal attacks, and other manipulative techniques employed by useless Liberals.

      • kkflash

        DaveH & Flashy,
        I think I have to agree with Flashy on this one. While all assets are revalued in a hyperinflation scenario, the timing is different and wages revaluation tends to lag. This temporarily causes a lowered standard of living for wage earners, and less discretionary purchasing power. So, the demand side of the price equation is affected more for non-essential products and services than for staples such as food, clothing, fuel and shelter. But, the fact remains that all assets are repriced in the new devalued dollar.

      • kkflash

        P.S. Flashy, DaveH’s original statement, with which you took issue, is still not incorrect.

      • DaveH

        You need to reread my comment, kkflash, I was not talking about dollar pricing. Of course the dollar pricing changes, and of course there will be chaos in all markets, but the relative value of commodities will remain relatively stable before, during, and after the hyperinflation. People don’t change their preferences for various physical items just because the paper currency loses its value.

      • DaveH

        First of all, I want to say that Flashman most likely looked up an article about hyperinflation and picked out a buzzword or two. He really has no clue what he’s talking about.
        But, kkflash, don’t confuse cause and effect. Yes, there is much misallocation of investment money during the period in which the Federal Reserve or other central banks print excess money, and those misallocations of funds result in economic turmoil, as well as including price inflation from the excess money in the economy. But the economic turmoil, which results in people losing jobs, spending less on certain non-necessary items, etc., could be caused by economic calamities other than the misallocation of funds due to excess money creation. For instance, War creates economic turmoil and resultant market disruptions, or an Embargo by an enemy nation causes economic turmoil. But hyperinflation is caused by only one thing — excess printing of money by the Central Bank, or whichever body controls the printing currency in that particular country.
        The hyperinflation didn’t cause the economic turmoil. The economic turmoil was caused by the same thing (in this case) that caused the hyperinflation — money manipulation by the Central Bank.
        To make a long story short, Flashman, due to his economic ignorance, was mixing Apples and Oranges in an attempt to harass me.

      • DaveH

        I’m trying to think of a way, kkflash, that I can explain it to you in the few soundbites that you and other people would actually read and understand. So, I’ll give it an effort.
        Imagine that the Federal Reserve created Double the Money Supply, and distributed that money perfectly evenly. There would be no economic turmoil, no relative “revaluation”, no jobs lost, but the price of goods (all goods) would double eventually. The economic services and goods would “hyperinflate” in price, but their values relative to each other would remain the same.
        At any rate, for a much more detailed explanation of the Money creation process, the resultant investment misallocations that occur because of the Uneven distributions of funds and credit, etc.. read this:
        http://mises.org/books/whathasgovernmentdone.pdf

      • DaveH

        Please don’t expect me to be able to explain a process, which takes one of the greatest thinkers of our time over a hundred pages to explain thoroughly, in a few sound bites on this board.

  • victoria

    ‎1. No Tenure / No Pension.

    A Congressman/woman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they’re out of office.

    2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social
    Security.

    All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the
    Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into
    the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the
    American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.

    3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all
    Americans do.

    4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise.
    Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

    5. Congress loses their current health care system and
    participates in the same health care system as the American people.

    6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the
    American people.

    7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen/women are void effective 1/1/12. The American people did not make this
    contract with Congressmen/women.

    Congressmen/women made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in
    Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers
    envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their
    term(s), then go home and back to work

    • home boy

      sounds good but you forget that congress makes the laws. they win you lose. nice try though.

      • Christin

        homeboy,
        congress make laws… sometimes

        The Apollo Alliance wrote obamacare (tax and rationed healthcare and things having nothing to do with health)… that’s why NWO Nanc Pelosi said we will have to pass it to see what’s in it… they [Congress] didn’t write it!!!

        Of course, our Constitution says ONLY Congress can make LAWS, but who’s following that anymore?!

    • rosina

      Excellent Victoria.
      I have requested these things for the longest time.
      please send it to as many Congressmen/women as you can—if you can.
      i would add one more very large item to your list about Social Security.
      GOVERNMENT MUST REPAY ALL THE MONIES STOLEN FROM SS SINCE THE TIME OF LYNDON JOHNSON FOR OTHER NON-SS REASONS. ALL OF IT-NO IFS ANDS NOR BUTS! THIS WOULD SOLVE THE SOLVENCY PROBLEMS OF THIS PAID FOR PROMISE.

      • home boy

        you forget where you live, the united states of corruption.

    • Donald

      If I may borrow a phrase from Romney: “Ill bet you $10,000″ those changes will never, never be approved by Congress.

  • MK

    Buffet must have something to gain by encouraging government dependency. It’s time to cut the government not give it more. Government doesn’t teach people to fish and provide for themselves. It just gives it away where quick consumption takes place and empty hands come back asking for more. He must have something to gain from this…Hmmm maybe if the US goes down his overseas companies will flourish??? If you know which companies Buffet invests, you’ll note that CNBC has been promoting them more since Buffet’s move.

    • Karolyn

      “Government doesn’t teach people to fish”

      Why is it that when the government DOES provide training or education assistance, like Pell Grants, so many are against it, sayig the usual “Why should my tax money go to help somebody else?”

      • libertytrain

        What I’m against are those, and there are so many, that never get off the government gravy train. A Pell Grant and then perhaps the next freebie…. Perhaps there should be limits on how many freebies you can actually receive. Sorry, I’m hard hearted on this. Because of what I’ve personally witnessed these last 40 years or so.

      • Karolyn

        I agree with you, liberty. I recently heard that in SC thy are working on getting legislation that qould require drug testing to receive unemployment. It has just been revealed that the state has been scammed out of $86m by unemloyment cheats.
        http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/02/01/2618665/south-carolinas-unemployed-are.html

      • libertytrain

        there are so many cheats, anyone that legitimately does need (temporary) help, won’t be able to find it…

      • JeffH

        Gee Karolyn, you’d think if those “uneducated rednecks”(tongue in cheek) in SC can scam the system of $86 mil, just think what the really educated scammers can do in states like NY, California, Illinois, DC and the rest of the US…

      • DaveH

        When the Federal Government provides money for education, Karolyn, they are:
        1) Breaking the Main Law of the Land — The Constitution. They have no Power to provide for education.
        2) Providing other peoples’ money, and doing it with strings attached. Generally speaking those strings have little to do with education and a lot to do with Politics and Propaganda.

      • DaveH
      • Flashy

        DaveH..i believe public education falls under general welfare. you take the position that we should have a massive underclass of untrained and uneducated?

        Not everyone wants to go around being unknowing and unable to face a complex world and instead present unworkable simple solutions to complex problems

      • Capitalist at Birth

        Obviously, you do.

      • Flashy

        good input today CB. On your several comments, I think you are batting 1.000. Nothing of substance.

      • kkflash

        You liberals think everything falls under general welfare.

      • JeffH

        Flashy, more education for you…

        In the Constitution the word “welfare” is used in the context of states and not persons. The “welfare of the United States” is not congruous with the welfare of individuals, people, or citizens.
        http://www.reasontofreedom.com/general_welfare_clause.html

      • DaveH

        There is no such Power given to the Federal Government, Flashman.
        You would know that if you did some studying. The reference in the Constitution concerning General Welfare was intended to keep the Federal Government from passing laws that favored only a limited class of people or states.
        If indeed, the General Welfare clause was interpreted as lying Liberals would have us interpret it, there would be no need for the Constitution to enumerate the Federal Government’s Powers because everything they do can be excused away as being for the General Welfare of the people.
        http://mises.org/daily/3254

      • Flashy

        So DaveH…you’re saying education of the citizenry is not for the General Welfare?

      • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

        Dear Flashy,

        “With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.” James Madison

        On other words: …The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence …

        Best wishes,
        Bob

      • Flashy

        Mr. Livingston.

        The General welfare Clause has been viewed as a duty on the government for promoting health, safety, morals, and well-being of the people.

        I would call your attention not to madison, who was not active in implem,enting the government in the beginning, having to wait until 5th to hold the office. instead, I call your attention to Alexander Hamilton, who, undr Washington, then Adams, was instrumental in the beginning excercise of governmental authority under the new Constitution. A time, I remind you, when the “Founders” were still breathing air and could have raised a ruckus about it had he gotten it wrong.

        Hamilton referred to the “General Welfare” clause as what i cited above. For the promotion health, safety, morals, and well-being of the people. He stated, quite clearly, in his views and as he implemnted the various sections of government under the new Constitution..that “general” meant for all, not for local or a few.

        I cannot help if you have a differing opinion other than those that implemented the new constitution. I can only call your attention to the facts.

      • JeffH

        Flashy, why do you persist?

        The original intent of our Constitution was to chain, or limit, the power and role of government so as to promote liberty and facilitate prosperity (general welfare). After all, liberty, not well-intentioned politicians with special-interest legislation, is the true source of the general welfare! Without solid Constitutional constraints, the good intentions of those in power can lead to oppressive or dictatorial control (one definition of fascism) which chains the people rather than the government.

        In the Constitution the word “welfare” is used in the context of states and not persons. The “welfare of the United States” is not congruous with the welfare of individuals, people, or citizens.

        In 1819, Chief Justice John Marshall said: “The federal government is acknowledged by all to be one of enumerated powers… The principle, that it can exercise only the powers granted to it…is now universally admitted.” Maybe in Marshall’s day, but not now.

        Today, many members of Congress and ordinary citizens view our Constitution as a “living document.” Its well-conceived rules (or powers) and limitations can be reinterpreted or ignored altogether in the pursuit of utopian legislation, all in the name of the “general welfare” of the nation.
        http://jpatton.bellevue.edu/print/welfare.html

      • smilee

        Here is the actual and total words Bob. “The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes,duties,imposts and excises,to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States…

        How Come you do not have your picture on the site??

      • smilee

        Here is the actual and total words Bob. “The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes,duties,imposts and excises,to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States… Do you think this different than what you said??

        How Come you do not have your picture on the site??

      • Flashy

        Jeff…in your view the Constitution was to limit government. How many ways can it be said before it sinks in that your are wrong. The Constitution was to give government power. Without it, the government has no power as power derives from the People.

        Next, unless you were there, you have no basis for claiming anything was “the intent” of the Founders. you don’t realize that the vote on the Constitution was close, and several times during the process of being drafted and debated, it almost went down in flames. it’s obvious you have no clue just how controversial the Constitution was at the time.

        Now, you can grab snippets of written verse and use those as an illusory claim, or you can actually use the very actions of the people implementing the powers granted by the Constitution. Knowing, of course, that whiloe the powers were being implemented, had they been against what was thought were proper, there’d be a huge hullaballoo by those same folks still breathin’ air.

        Finally, I don’t know if you realize this, but we are not living in a 19th century agriculturally dominated society with limited communication, travel, or manufacturing and a whole frontier to the west to expand into and allow the excesses to spill over and be taken up by this area allowing almost unlimited expansion. Last i looked, we live in a technologically advanced 21st century society which has no “new frontiers” available, a near closed end economy, and a bunch of yahoos (thankfully few in number) who insist we must be governed under some wild antiquated view of th world.

      • DaveH

        So here’s the question. Do you want to take the words of Liberals who, by virtue of advocating redistribution of other peoples’ wealth, have shown themselves to be of low moral character, or do you want to take the words of learned scholars like Roger Pilon:
        http://www.cato.org/pubs/catosletters/cl-13.pdf

      • DaveH
      • DaveH

        Flashman says “I would call your attention not to madison, who was not active in implem,enting the government in the beginning, having to wait until 5th to hold the office”.
        I am going to have to call that one an outright LIE on Flashman’s part because he can’t possibly be that Ignorant.
        James Madison was at the Constitutional Convention every possible minute. He took the “Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787″. And he wrote many of the Federalist Papers which were written to persuade New Yorkers to ratify the resultant Constitution of the United States.
        Then Flashman says “I can only call your attention to the facts”.
        Yeah, right, Fabricated Facts like we most often get from Flashman.
        See here for a summary of the Welfare Clause:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxing_and_Spending_Clause#General_Welfare_Clause
        From the article:
        “James Madison advocated for the ratification of the Constitution in The Federalist and at the Virginia ratifying convention upon a narrow construction of the clause, asserting that spending must be at least tangentially tied to one of the other specifically enumerated powers, such as regulating interstate or foreign commerce, or providing for the military, as the General Welfare Clause is not a specific grant of power, but a statement of purpose qualifying the power to tax”.
        That is — BEFORE the Constitution was ratified by the States.

        Alexander Hamilton sought a Broader interpretation of the Clause AFTER the Constitution had already been ratified. Sort of like Nancy Pelosi’s Ignorant statement — “But we have to pass the [health care ] bill so that you can find out what is in it”.

        If you read the book “Hamilton’s Curse” by Thomas DiLorenzo, you will find that Hamilton was not exactly being up front about his True Intentions before the Constitution was signed, but afterwards he did everything he could to thwart it and give Absolute Power to the Federal Government.

        Flashman, I can’t say this often enough — You have no credibility.

      • JeffH

        Flashy says “Jeff…in your view the Constitution was to limit government.”

        Sorry Flashy, I know you have a difficult time with that idea, but that is exactly why the Constitution was written the way it was and should still be…to limit governments power …do you expect me to take you’re word that it wasn’t?

        Educate yourself Flashy.

        America’s founders wrote the Constitution to charter a government with a few, limited powers and functions. The U.S. Constitution, which created the federal government, permits Congress to make laws only in those few areas which are listed in the Constitution (Article I, Section 8, clauses 1-16, and a few other Amendments).

        The Federalist Papers are the authoritative commentary on the meaning of our Constitution.

        In Federalist No. 83 (7th paragraph), Alexander Hamilton says:
        “The plan of the convention declares that the power of Congress …shall extend to certain enumerated cases. This specification of particulars evidently excludes all pretension to a general legislative authority, because an affirmative grant of special powers would be absurd, as well as useless, if a general authority was intended.”

        In Federalist No. 39, James Madison says:
        “…the proposed government cannot be deemed a national one; since its jurisdiction extends to certain enumerated objects only, and leaves to the several States a residuary and inviolable sovereignty over all other objects…”

        Our Constitution is one of enumerated powers only. In Federalist No. 45 (paragraph 9), Madison says:
        “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people…”

        In summary, Congress does not have any power unless it is specifically assigned by the Constitution. All other powers were reserved for the States and the people. This is why much of our government is currently operating outside the limits of the Constitution.
        http://samuelatgilgal.wordpress.com/2011/02/09/the-constitution-limits-the-federal-government/

      • vicki

        Karolyn says:

        Why is it that when the government DOES provide training or education assistance, like Pell Grants, so many are against it, sayig the usual “Why should my tax money go to help somebody else?”

        Cause it is not the job of government to provide training or education assistance. That is NOT a power granted to the (federal) government by the Constitution.

        Now consider this. How about we send someone to your house to take all of your disposable income for our pet charity. How is that not ok where you sending someone (Government) to our house to take our disposable income for YOUR pet charity is ok?

      • Donald

        Ah, but they are penny wise and pound foolish. God forbid, that the government would do anything to get people off the dole and back to work, especially provide training so that they could qualify for work they were never educated to perform by our public school systems. Remember, the days of good manufacturing jobs in this country are largely over. They’ve gone to India, etc. Adam Smith is spinning in his grave.

  • Big D

    You’d think that Buffet would be smart enough to realize that we could raise taxes to 75% and the government would just spend it all and still borrow /print more.If they seriously cut spending across the board i think the whole country would get behind paying off our debt,but they are not smart enough to realize it,or more likely don’t care.

    • kkflash

      The thing is, he DOES realize what you’re saying. As a wealthy and influential person with considerable influence on government spending, he supports government growth, so as to help direct more of its spending to his companies. He prefers Obama to say, Ron Paul, because he can direct the large government spending by Obama rather than the smaller amount of government spending we’d have under Ron Paul. He prefers the Democrats to the Repubicans, because Democrats tend to collect more in taxes, and spend more than they collect. You all know the kind of businesses Buffet invests in. They provide things everyone needs and uses every day. He needs the government wealth distribution through welfare and entitlements to continue so those folks always have money to spend on Coca Cola.

  • Jim

    Giving hard earned money to dumb and dumber is stupid! Warren should use his money and influence to end government as it is a cancer that infects these United States of America. Only those that who are not already made surfs of the government understand this. The private sector create wealth, the public sector i.e. Government consumes it. It ain’t that difficult to understand, evidence is everywhere!

    • fiscalsoundbiteme

      By golly you’ve got it! EXACTLY!

    • Donald

      Simplistic! Things are far more complicated than that.

  • Rich W

    Buffet is a piker compared to the national debt. What a joke.

  • http://personallibertydigest Gottaplenty

    They care less what we say or think of them. As long as we keep their name in the spotlight.

  • ROGER, Canadian Libertarian

    IF Buffett were truly sincere about improving the economic and political situation in the U.S. he would back the Libertarians.

    As it is, he is only interested in promoting himself and for those too lazy or lacking in simple math ,he is actually doing nothing for the U.S.
    In fact,like any member of the Establishment he is only interested in more power and wealth for himself and Libertarians are a THREAT to people like he is. Republicans or Democrats are not.

    Any deal with them is another deal with the “Devil”, so-to-speak

    • Donald

      A guy with Buffet’s money does not need to”promote himself”.

  • mark111

    I fail to see anything wrong with the “Flat Tax” proposal. That will eliminate all the fair share BS. Everyone’s fair share will be the same percentage. If you want to make money working for it or by investments, it is all the same. If you want to do both at the same time, it is all the same. If you want to live off government handouts, be prepared to put in some work time cleaning up public roads or buildings unless truly disabled–although I am sure this is wishful thinking.

    • John

      The flat tax will not happen, simply because the rich don’t want it.
      If we would have to pay a flat tax, say 20% (not at all unrealistic), with NO deductions or exemptions then the rich would pay 90% of this countries taxes. Think about this, someone making 100 million a year would have to pay 20 million on taxes. A household making the average ~50,000 would have to pay 10,000 in taxes. That means, you need to have 2000 families making the 2011 average to come up with the same amount of taxes this one person pays And with corporations being persons now, they will be taxed the same…at least one can hope. The rich are crying today that they pay the most taxes in this country (and that is true if you simply look at the amount paid, but not true if you look at the amount paid as a percentage of their income)a flat tax would really stick it to them.

    • DaveH

      The so-called Flat Tax is really a Flat Rate Income Tax. The “Income” part is the problem.
      First, some people are treated as less than Equal, that is those who work harder, sacrifice more, and thus make higher incomes. That is just plain Immoral. Why should they pay more for their Government than the rest of us do? Do Car Dealers ask for an Income Statement before they price the car? Of course not; if they did people would scream bloody murder (rightfully).
      Not only that, but those wealthier people generally consume a smaller portion of their incomes while investing a larger portion than the lower wage earners. That invested money is used to purchase Capital Equipment and Structures which make our businesses more productive resulting in cheaper goods for the rest of us.
      Second, by virtue of being an Income Tax (still), it gives the Government Beast an excuse to nose into how we earn our incomes — NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS! Free People don’t have to report their lawful activities to the Government.
      The only Truly Fair Tax would be one where every adult has the same Liability to the Government. Some people at first wouldn’t be able to pay, they could fill out the paperwork explaining why not. The rest of us would cut a check and be done with it — No Paperwork, No Storage of historical financial documents (unless we desired). And you can bet with everybody having the same skin in the game, we would vote for a LOT LESS Government. We would find private ways to address our needs and they would be much Cheaper than Big Government. The rising economy would be good for Everybody (except perhaps for the Parasitic Leaders).
      Will the Leaders ever willingly accept such a system? Of course not. The reason they passed the 16th and the 17th Amendments, and the Federal Reserve Act in the first place was to decrease the restraints on their Growth of Power and Perks. They’re no dummies. They’re Parasites living on our backs.

      • Flashy

        Simple solutions for simple minds won’t work for complex problems.

      • DaveH

        As usual, the Liberal chooses ad hominem attacks over facts.
        Did you ever answer Bob’s question, Flashman?
        http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/the-real-obama-state-of-the-union/#comment-735061

        “So I’m asking, what of DaveH’s post:…. was incorrect?”

      • Flashy

        Yes DaveH, i answered at length (I figured since you were too lazy to read your own links you post, I’d save you the trouble of looking at yesterday’s posts).

        i cited Charles Bohlen’s book which, acting as the interpreter at Tehran and Yalta, and his credentials. Also historical facts concerning the situation at the time. Mr. Livingston has a different opinion, seems to dismiss Bohlen’s personal rendition, and sees it differently.

        I’ll stand with my view, the majority view of historians, and Bohlen’s view as drawn from an eyewitness in the midst of the entire series of summits.

      • Flashy

        Interesting you didn’t reply though…

      • DaveH

        Bob Livingston addressed your equivocation, Flashman, why should I?
        You did the usual double-speak dance around which had absolutely nothing to do with disproving my statement that you claimed false with much accompanying personal attack.

      • Flashy

        DAVEH. you made a blad assertion FDR gave away E. Europe so he could have the Un formed and take over the world. You gave no back up for such wild outlandish assertions. I cited the fact the Atlantic Charter began the process for the Un back in ’42 or ’43, and then cited Charles Bohlen’s eyewitness accounts of Tehran and Yalta, and he was at every meeting with FDR and Stalin. Every one. I also cited the Potsdam Conference.

        Mr. Livingston cited one quopte from Harriman…and the rest opinion.

        i stand with my statement…your rendition of the events and the causes is total fiction and revisionist history. You don’t like it…then dispute it and cite sonme substance. (Psst…maybe Mises has a link with a catchy title you can try using).

      • DaveH

        Do you know the difference between a hypothesis and a “blad assertion”, Flashman? My exact words — “The only reasonable conclusion that one can come to is that FDR thought he would gain Leadership of the World through the UN”.
        You know “reasonable” — something you’re not, Flashman. Of course nobody can state factually that FDR’s intentions were to be Leader of the World. Only FDR knew the answer to that. But the fact that the most powerful country in the world, under FDR, ceded so many victimized countries to yet another victimizer (Stalin), with little in return, sure points in that direction.
        Evidence:
        “I just have a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man … I think that if I give him everything I possibly can and ask for nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won’t try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace”. — FDR 1943
        From “While You Slept” by John T. Flynn:
        “Then, in April 1943, the Saturday Evening Post printed an article by Forrest Davis outlining Roosevelt’s dream of victory. It was an obviously White House inspired piece. Roosevelt, we were informed, had a Grand Design. It was a plan for the United Nations. But Roosevelt was convinced that this would not work unless Stalin would come in as a sincere and willing partner. He therefore decided to cultivate Stalin’s good will. He knew he would have to sell his Great Design to Stalin. And he would have to sell Stalin to the American people”.
        And this quote from “While You Slept”:
        “The moment was now at hand for Stalin to sit down with Roosevelt and Churchill. It would be a gigantic swap — Roosevelt’s Grand Design for Stalin’s Grand Design. And the swap would be made on Stalin’s terms. He would get an arrangement by which he would ultimately take over Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Rumania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Albania and as much of Germany as possible and the destruction of Germany as a military and industrial agent for a century”.
        Of course history proved that indeed much of Eastern Europe, including a large part of Germany was given over to Stalin, a man who Winston Churchill deemed to be a “devil”-like tyrant leading a vile system. After losing all those American lives to supposedly save Europe, it came down to the US just turning all those victimized countries over to a known tyrant.
        And yes, Flashman, I use mises.org a lot because they are a trusted source, unlike you. And they have a great volume of important historical books and articles which are free to the public in PDF form. Like this book by John T. Flynn:
        http://mises.org/books/whileyouslept.pdf
        I have proved repeatedly on this site that you are a man of little integrity, Flashman. Why do you suppose anybody in their right mind would take the word of a known liar over that of the Mises Institute?

      • DaveH

        Here is another free book, courtesy of the great folks at mises.org, which further demonstrates FDR’s lack of integrity:
        http://mises.org/books/pearl_harbor_greaves.pdf

      • DaveH

        The readers should note that Flashman’s Liberal Jig has nothing at all to do with my comment. I said nothing of when the United Nations was first conceived by FDR. Refer back to my original comment (linked high on this thread), and tell me where I said anything about when the idea for a United Nations was first conceived? But it was a concept promoted by FDR. See here:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt
        From the article — “Stalin supported Roosevelt’s plan for the United Nations and promised to enter the war against Japan 90 days after Germany was defeated”. Get that “Roosevelt’s plan”?

        When you read Flashman’s comments, you need to look past the equivocation.

  • Mike

    What difference does it make how much they knock off of the debt when Obama and the Democrats continue to spend with wreckless abandon? His real challenge should be to his president to stop spending like a drunken sailor (and I do apologize for the comparison to drunken sailors everywhere). Of course it is all a sham because Buffett is raking in money left and right from all of Obama’s spending…..follow the stimulus money and see who the big winners are….surprise….surprise…..tax payers are being played

    • DaveH

      Yes, Mike, you should apologize to the drunken sailors, because at least they are spending their own money.

  • Lueder

    Well, Warren shouldn’t have to put up too much money then, should he?

  • Phyllis

    I wonder if he paid his late taxes. That would be a start! There could be a place in a box when you do your taxes asking if you want to volunteer more. Then let’s see how many do it.

  • deanbob

    When is the MSM going to stick a mic in Buffet’s face and ask when his company is going to pay their back/outstanding tax bill?

  • John Carey

    Why challenge just Republicans–there are plenty of wealth Democrats in the Congress, as well as Obama and his Executive Branch of Government. Buffett needs to pass on in life and leave his fortune to the Government.

  • Karolyn

    I don’t understand the Buffett bashing. It certainly appears to me the man is an extremely generous man and is just challenging others that can afford it to do the same. Let’ see who steps up to the plate. Ha, fat chance! Even if what he is doing doesn’t make a dent in the national debt, it is the principle that counts. We are all in this together; and if people would just stop thinking “Me, Me, Me!” so much, it would go a long way towards making a difference. At least Buffett is addressing issues that politicians would more likely want to sweep under the rug.

    I don’t hear Forbes in the media. Whatever happened to him anyway. I used to live in his county in Jersey; and one story I like to tell is when his wife and kids came into the antique shop I worked at. She was/is a very frumpy ordinary looking woman and was driving a station wagon with, I think it was, five of their kids. I could not beieve her frugality when she asked for a discount on a reconditioned antique candlestick phone. She also would not buy anything for the kids, instead saying “You’ll have to ask your father.” I was very impressed by their normality.

    • fiscalsoundbiteme

      …and you still can’t buy that brain, now, can you? OMG Buffet Bashing!? Sounds also like a tad pile of le poope from yo pie hole babe, stfu

      • Karolyn

        And you sound really intelligent with the language you are spouting. No credibility at all.

      • DaveH

        If people would stop thinking “Me, Me, Me”, Karolyn, we wouldn’t have this Leviathan Government which takes from the Rich (and the rest of us) and gives to themselves.
        If Warren Buffett was indeed a generous man, he wouldn’t have $21 Billion to begin with. Why do you think he needs that much money? He isn’t being Generous with his tax the rich scam, he’s trying to Steal other peoples’ money — Nothing more Noble than that. He can give away his own money any time he wants.
        The ironic thing is that Not Only are the redistributive actions of the Progressives Immoral, they also don’t even work in the real world. They hurt the very people they are promising to help. Progressives have impoverished countries wherever their agendas have been fully implemented. The Progressive agendas are good only for the Leaders who always come out on top, unless the citizens finally wise up to the fact that they are being taken severe advantage of.

      • JeffH

        DaveH, speaking of “impoverished” have you seen the latest news about Greece. I beieve this is one issue that needs to be addressed globally. Obviusly this brings to mind the “partnership in crime”…Federal Reserve, International Monetary Fund, European Union…Thank you Ron Paul for stating the obvious…abolish the Federal Reserve!

        ATHENS, Feb 10 (Reuters) – Greece’s largest police union has threatened to issue arrest warrants for officials from the country’s European Union and International Monetary Fund lenders for demanding deeply unpopular austerity measures.

        “Since you are continuing this destructive policy, we warn you that you cannot make us fight against our brothers. We refuse to stand against our parents, our brothers, our children or any citizen who protests and demands a change of policy,” said the union, which represents more than two-thirds of Greek policemen.

        “We warn you that as legal representatives of Greek policemen, we will issue arrest warrants for a series of legal violations … such as blackmail, covertly abolishing or eroding democracy and national sovereignty.”
        http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/greek+police+union+wants+arrest+officials/6132553/story.html#ixzz1m0P4No5P

      • DaveH

        Yep, and it won’t end until people just let them fail and learn their lessons.

      • JeffH

        It’s kinda refreshing to see this coming from and recognized by citizens of an EU/IMF country, let alone Greece…let’s hope the MSM and PTB don’t silence them…does it mean the cat’s getting out of the bag? I hope so.

      • LilyonRadio

        Funny thing is..you liberals, it’s all you understand. You can’t grasp reality, so we have to ise simple, every day, common words we PRAY sink in..

    • Mike

      Karolyn what makes you think he is such a nice guy? Have you ever read anything about him other than what the leftwing media tells you?
      Look at how he influences Obama to make decisions that directly benefit Warren Buffett….i.e., G.M., G.E….Goldman Sachs…..Wells Fargo…..his little railroad investments….made just before convincing Barry to pump billions into rebuilding railroad infrastructure…yeah he’s a real sweetheart. And that whopping 49,000.00 he gave last time, that’s 0.00000125% of what he has. To compare, if you made 100,000.00 last year you would need to pony up 12.5 cents to match him……very benevolent.

    • FreedomFighter

      Here you go K, watch this it will explain it to you:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjPo7DoYi-M

      Bailmeoutbuffy

      Laus Deo
      Semper Fi

      • Old Henry

        That is awsome FreedomFighter. And he really hits the nail on the head! I passed it on to many, many others.

    • Jim

      How dare you! I have been paying my fair share since I was 16. I’m married, with 4 children (that’s 18 meals on the table everyday) and still paid all my town, local, state, and Federal taxes (plus sales tax)… my fair share. And what do we have for it, 47 percent of America on the government teat! Every time I try to make a future for my wife and I for our retirement years, it all gets taxed again and again and again. And the Government dependence continues to grow and grow and is not completely out of control to the tune of 16.2 Trillion dollars. What happens when I run out of money, and everyone else who is productive? I don’t think I need to answer with anything but GREECE!

      • FreedomFighter

        The goverment will take all your stuff, use Agenda 21 to pack you into a high rise building in a very controlled city, feed you GMO food to sterilize your children, floride in the water to keep you docile, tell you where you will work, how much you will make, brainwahs your children to be obedient slaves to the system.

        Oh and you wont be able to jump off the buildings like in China, great advances in suicide nets will make it impossible.

        AGENDA 21, COMING FOR YOUR LAND, LIFE AND LIBERTY

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

    • Flashy

      Karolyn…read the article on Syria and Iran. The Right cares not one whit about this nation. They care about getting Obama out of the WH even if it means sacrificing our National Security and our nation’s well being. They have two goals. Destroying the one person who has taken up the gauntlet and fighting against those who war on the Middle Class; and entrenching a wealthy and corporate elite to rule as an oligarchy.

      Understanding that explains why they have no care for this nation or its People.

      • FreedomFighter

        Flash you are part of the ZOMBIE Apocalypse, you are fortunate they only feed on brains, your safe.

        http://www.mrctv.org/videos/chuck-woolery-zombie-apocalypse

        Thanks Stan for the link.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • Flashy

        FF !

        You have to get up to date on the danger of Zombies !

        Here…check this out (it’s good. Non political).

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzkJbWl45kU

      • FreedomFighter

        Zombies eat brains Flash, that flick was false advertising…

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • DaveH

        Oh sure, now Flashman is claiming to care about our National Security.
        Pray tell, Flashman, how is Obama responsible for our National Security?
        And how is Spending our Nation into oblivion good for our “nation’s well being”?
        For those who don’t know just how bad it is:
        http://www.usdebtclock.org/
        Look especially at the US Unfunded Liabilities, and the Liability per Taxpayer (at the bottom).
        And those figures are just on the Federal Government.
        And it’s Growing.

      • Flashy

        Let me make sure I have this straight. You are asking how the President is responsible for our National Security?

        Well…seeing that Bush squandered a great opportunity, drove us instad to the brink of a Depression, ran up massive deficits and hid most of it as “unfunded wars’ in his budgets, and you’re against any program or policy presented by a President who was elected by a landslide.

        I can see how you’d be confused. OK should it be a basic rule of thumb then that if it may be good for America, DaveH will oppose it?

      • Capitalist at Birth

        Once again you demonstrate your lack of knowledge. Probably, because you spend more time stroking your keyboard than you do reading.

      • Flashy

        CB….why don’t you do what you’ve calimed to do in the past. go away unless you ave somthing of import to say. I was asking DaveH for clarification because it is difficult to fathom anyone with an iota of intelligence stating the President of the United States is not responsible for national Security …

        Wait … I think I just answered my own question concerning DaveH’s statements…

      • DaveH

        How did Bush run up those massive deficits, Flashman, and what is Obama doing to correct that situation?

      • DaveH

        And to set the record straight, lying Liberal Flashman, I didn’t say that “the President of the United States is not responsible for national Security”.
        I asked “Pray tell, Flashman, how is Obama responsible for our National Security?”. You know, like list the ways he is responsible? Apparently either your reading comprehension is poor, or you’re just purposely distorting my words. I’m inclined to believe the latter given your history of dishonesty.

      • Charles

        Flashy, you insist that GW “ran up massive deficits” yet you (and all liberals) blindly refuse to admit that BO has run up deficits at a rate unheard of before. That is why your comments have no merit. No matter how much you can attribute to the previous administration, the truth is that this administration has spent more money than ALL of the preceding administrations, back to the beginning of the country. Admit that, then we will begin to pay attention to you.

    • Old Henry

      Karolyn:

      There is a huge difference between being generous and having the government steal your money at virtual gun-point.

      The more anyone gives the DC Scammers, the more the DC Scammers will spend. Giving them more is not the solution. Cutting them off at the knees is the solution.

      Here is a link to a good article about how this could all be fexed:

      http://www.newswithviews.com/fredinburg/fredinburg140.htm

  • Don

    Why just the Republicans? Why don’t he tell the Dems to do the same?

    • Karolyn

      I can’t why imagine he didn’t offer the same incentive to the Dems too. However, he has upped the anty with a challenge to congress, saying he would pay 15% of his 2011 income if 10% of congress did the same. I’m sure he doesn’t expect any of them to do it, but it would sure show some character if they did.

      • Karolyn
      • DaveH

        Karolyn,
        If you know anything at all about the history of Congress, you know that they will just feel freer to spend even more money if somebody were to pay down the debt. It’s much easier to spend Other Peoples’ Money. The fact that they were willing to put our children and grandchildren in Great Debt demonstrates just how devoid of compassion they really are.
        Every dollar they take from the private sector just diminishes our net productivity meaning that our products will become scarcer and more expensive. Which of course leads to more imports and more whining from the ignorant people who are unaware of what’s really going on.
        Government is now spending 42% of our Gross National Product. And it doesn’t stop there because much of that money is spent enforcing burdensome regulations which slow down the productivity of our private businesses. As a result they produce even fewer products resulting in even higher costs to the consumers.
        It’s a double whammy, and we the consumers and taxpayers, are the ones who suffer from it. Meanwhile the Leaders and their Cronies live fat and happy on our backs.

      • Margie

        Did you consider all the companies that outsource production to countries where they can take advantage of missing or inefficient child labor laws, where there is no minimum wage law….and the list goes on (talking about compassion!). Just take a look at Apple. But there are many others just like Apple. That means that they are still producing and making large profits, just not here in the US! And then look at their tax shelters because of their outsourced labor and production! Oh yeah…Does this, may be, present a different angle?

      • Old Henry

        Yes Margie, and it is those onerous regulations that have greatly contributed to the loss of jobs here.

        Also, Apple does so much mfg. in China because the skilled labor they need to meet production IS NOT AVAILABLE here in the U.S. They are also a global corporation that is nt dependent solely on U.S. sales. They are simply doing what you liberals screem about – spreading the wealth.

      • kkflash

        Margie, the PEOPLE that own and control those companies should be free to get their labor and build their products wherever they want. While manufacturing in another country may be bad for American jobs, it’s good for jobs in that other country, where people benefit from that company’s decision. If the American people want the jobs here instead of there, they should elect representatives who will create a business environment that makes companies decide to locate their facilities here. That’s called competition, and we have it on a global scale whether we like it or not. You don’t attract business investment by making it harder to profit, by coersion, by threat of force, or by imposition of penalties for going elsewhere. You do it by offering more benefits than the other country for locating here.

      • Capitalist at Birth

        You need to spend less time stroking your keyboard and more time reading. You obviously are very ignorant of all of the facts.

      • DaveH

        It sure does present a different angle, Margie, a skewed one.
        Has it ever occurred to you that those children might want to work and help put some food on their families’ tables? Or that they have no choice if they don’t want to starve? You know nothing of their plight, yet want to impose your will on them.
        And Minimum Wage laws harm people who truly want to work. They are feel-good placebos to those who don’t understand the reality of economics. If a business owner can’t make more than $8/hr (for example) on an employee, why would he want to hire somebody who he has to pay $9/hr? He didn’t invest his money and efforts into a business to lose money. So he won’t hire those who are worth less than the minimum wage. So all those people go without work. And has it occurred to you, Margie, that maybe those lesser skilled people might want to work for less? Is it any of your business if they do?
        You kid yourself, Margie, if you think you’re compassionate. You’re just controlling.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        When did work become a curse word? Who supports or will support those that will not work?
        Children need to be trained that work does not cause misery in life but laziness does incredible harm.
        According to your feelings, asking children to make their bed, study,wash the dishes,or take out the garbage is harmful because you are making them work. Such rubbishy mindset.

      • Old Henry

        “The fact that they were willing to put our children and grandchildren in Great Debt demonstrates just how devoid of compassion they really are.”

        DaveH, that would also include the people who continually vote those scum-bags back into office term after term. The electorte is just as guilty as the DC scammers.

    • Falcon

      Because the Democrats don’t have their head up their a** about paying down the debt. The time to pay down the debt was when Bush the Dumber inherited an economy and budget that was set to pay the debt off in the next ten years plus have a $1T surplus. Since Dumbya spent 8 years squandering that, mainly with tax giveaways to the rich, we are left in a situation where we need to invest in the economy with paying down the debt being secondary. Of course with conservatives being against progress, it takes them a while to catch up. We are still trying to drag most of them out of the 18th century.

      • kkflash

        Every sentence in your post above is a lie.

      • DaveH

        It’s not a party thing, Falcon, it’s a Big Government thing.
        The Leaders are simply distributing our wealth among themselves and their Cronies with just enough going to the trough feeders to get their Votes. When the time comes that they have achieved Absolute Power and have impoverished our country (the inevitable fate resulting from Big Government), the trough feeders who have developed little or no productive skills will be the first to suffer tremendously. The Leaders always keep the lion’s share for themselves, and what’s left won’t be enough to support the unproductive citizens.
        Research the countries on the bottom of this list to see what Big Government does to countries’ economies. If you think you are suffering now, Falcon, wait until we have reached their level of Poverty:
        http://heritage.org/index/ranking

      • Cliffystones

        “invest in the economy”. Hmmm… I don’t recall that line in the Constitution. And just who is this “we” you’re talking about?

        And considering the amount of money spent on “investment in the economy” since the Democrats had control of Congress, we should be living in the Emerald City by now. Just do the math and divide the Simoleons that have been blown in the last 4 or 5 years by the number of taxpayers. If we each got a check for that amount we’d all be “Mini-Me-Buffets”.

      • cawmun cents

        What you mean is,that the Democrats will use OUR money,even if it is fiat currency,to pay the debt.They have no problem telling me how to spend my money.Heck,unlike the Republicans,(who often at least tell you what stocks are hot)they just legislate a little more,then a little more,then a lot more,etc.Funny thing is,even when they run out of OP’s money,they keep spending like its 1999,and the world is going to end tomorrow,so they dont think they have to pay it back.
        Then they tell me that I owe the gubment all this money that they spent on my behalf,to seem(to folks who lack the cranial matter)to be philathropic to the poor.But the poor stay poor!Nothing changes but the incresing debt!What arrogance!People like you who are in favor of
        the left/right paradigm,who smooch the backsides of these corporate lawyers out in DC,who proport to give to the poor yet wouldnt give a dime to someone who asks on the street,are commonplace in our nation.
        As long as you can point your semi-literate finger at somebody that the marxist professors indoctrinated you into hating,you dont care about anything else.
        OWS doesnt stand for Occupy Wall Street,it stands for Obamas Willing Stooges.
        Willing to spend OP’s money
        Willing to throw rocks at tanks in an herculean(but in reality convincing the world how stupid you really are)effort to look brave while committing suicide
        Willing to point the finger at anyone but gubment(didnt see you Occupying the White House Lawn)
        Willing to rob from the rich and give to the Fed
        Willing to sell your freedom for antiquated idealism
        Willing to stop other peoples way of life to raise consciousness(a good plan since no sane person thiks you are conscious to begin with)
        Willing to smoke dope,have sex,and deface property and demolish local parks to espouse your anger at people who can spend their money wiser than you can
        Willing to take the law into your own hands
        Willing to walk side by each with anarchists and radicals
        Willing to spread perversity and deviancy to school children in the name of higher education
        Willing to tell others how to live their lives
        willing to wear Che tee-shirts as if that means anything other than your rabid support of communism
        Willing to submit to some madman’s idealistic changes which only encite further spending from Democratic Socialists in Congress

        The problem here folks,is the grandiose tendency of some people to start vast projects,with half-vast ideas.
        -CC.

      • FreedomFighter

        Well stated.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • Old Henry

        Well Falcon, it was not the tax reductions that got us into trouble. It was funding Shrub’s wars – which he was told to conduct by TPTB. I’m sure he did not want to, ah, loose his head like one of his predecessors when he chose to countermand TPTB.

      • Capitalist at Birth

        Who is We? Your fellow totalitarian socialists?

      • Donald

        Every sentence in your above post is True.

      • LilyonRadio

        Man, I didn’t realize there were still morons in America who still blamed CRAP on “W”. WE WERE ATTACKED. {I’m sorry, you don’t see it that way..} Was he suppose to sit back and allow 3,000 people from around the globe to go unnoticed? In your pea brain, of course. Bush HAD to have monies to fight the good fight, where Obama has spent MORE MONEY combined with ALL presidents EVER in US history, raising the debt, prices of everything from your favorite, toilet paper..OMG..it took a tree to wipe you ass.. It’s you and your type that want to see America fail. May I suggest just get out, now, so those of us who love to fly our flag, love our Military so you can spew your hatred, rather then burn it? Knowing God IS our Rock and foundation, not you loose cannon liberal tree hugging, gay approving, wrong living friends of Satan builds my faith in knowing I can get thru the eye of the needle much easier then you can going thru the tunnel of Hell, which IS wide. Why don’t you shut your pie hole and give thanks to “W” for keeping your smart mouth and most likely fat lazy ass alive and well. That, or go have tea with Iran, and end up in prison, then head cut off. What a glorious day indeed. BITE THIS….(_!_)…. then go pray. Only two MEN have ever died for your freedom..A Soldier, and JESUS. You hate both. You deserve no freedoms ever. PPHHHYYT

    • Old Henry

      Don:

      Communists, er ah, Democraps don’t believe in using their own money, only that of others.

      • eddie47d

        That’s an odd statement since all the Democrats I know pay their taxes which are used for national programs. So they do use their own money and are even generous enough to use it on the Iraq War which they mostly disapproved of. It certainly goes both ways in who is paying for the “other sides” favorites.

  • dusterdog

    The governments past record on spending clearly shows that the more you give them the more they want & need.

    • Old Henry

      And Duster, if you look at the amount they steal from us and compare it to the Dept. of Defense budget they are earily familiar.

  • RevNowWhileWeCan

    Why dosen’t he just say that for every dollar Obamanation puts into a bailout , he’ll match…Lol

    • http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/warren-buffett-obama-tax-shill/?eiid&replytocom=736050#respond R K

      Why no bodody is talking about forking money out of those Wall St Gangsters and bankers. I am sure Warren Buffett will match it.
      Wall St Bankers and the Big Banks have looted the savings of American people and they have created the worldwide financial meltdown in 2008, knowing fully well that they were gabling with hundreds of Billions of “some one elses money”.
      The Wall St.and bankers CEO’s & CFO’s and other highest ranking officials should be made bald on their head and paraded in NYC on mule with a hanging banner in their throat saying that they are “criminal”

      • s c

        R K, I don’t know what your politics are, but it sounds like you don’t realize that Big Banks are also known as the Fed. Yes, that PRIVATE CORPORATION that “owns” America’s wealth. WHY is Obummer claiming to distrust Big Banks but he won’t do anything to unchain America from THE FED? Smell a rat? Yep, what we are told is crap. Hypocrisy is THE religion in Washington. I hope you’re not a utopian. Dig. Read. THINK.

      • Donald

        You totally misunderstand the banking system.

      • Wyatt

        Everybody is quick to blame Wall Street for their and our countries troubles . But without Wall Street , there would be no millionaires or a whole lot fewer of them . The millionaire’s would control most of the business and money in this country and you would not be able to go to store for that candy bar or pack of overpriced smokes .
        In fact what you pay for cigarettes as an example is inflated by state and federal taxes tacked on to actual cost which is probably around a dollar a pack . All of this because allegedly the Government thinks this will stop people from smoking .I am certain this also applies to other “Luxury items” like say candy . Why is it that the once nickle candy bar or pack of gum now costs a dollar plus a sales tax at the register . The state is collecting its 7% or so of each sale and the Federal government is taxing the companies on the ingredients they buy to make your little snack . And all the while they turn around and pay the growers and farmers NOT to grow certain crops such as wheat , corn or potato’s . That and they then turn around and sell what is grown or give it to some starving country and the taxpayer absorbs the costs all because so politician in a really bad suit wants to look like the great man he isn’t .
        On the other side of the coin, people like Warren Buffet invest in a market knowing what is going on with these products and become very ,very rich then criticize the very thing that made them their billions and allowed them to take advantage of the tax loopholes built in to encourage investments . Bill Gates for example sells his product , and a very fine product it is , but that product is not made in this country . It is made in some Oriental Country by people who earn perhaps $ .10 an hour if they earn that . Then it is shipped here where import duties are leveled and a sales tax added . And on top of that , he receives royalties for allowing others to use the technology and programs he developed . And yes , he too receives tax breaks from the government and shelters for his investments .
        That these guys would be critical of the very system that allows their vast fortunes to be made tells me that they know a lot more than they are telling and that their taxes will probably remain the same . I also wouldn’t be surprised if they had Off Shore Bank Accounts to shelter most of their wealth .
        When the Liberal Regime learns to control spending and stop giving taxpayer money away to their pet projects or flavor of the month , Soylantra for example, and eliminates the breaks to the Japanese Auto Industry , then perhaps America can begin her return to financial greatness . Level the playing field for the American Auto industry , curb the Unions who now run rampent and hinder manufacturing . Yes they served their purpose once , but now they put far more businesses out of business or drive them to move to a friendly land of cheap labor .
        Start with America’s ills , cut the welfare system by going through the roles of recipient and look at if they are A. Really entitled and unable to work (handicapped0) or just freeloading and B. Are these people legally allowed to be in this country . There are reportedly around 3 million illegals in the U.S. presently and a great many of them are on our welfare roles . The presidents aunt is one of them and she has been for years ! And while we are at it , lets look at our Educators . They are constantly demanding pay increases and benefits and all the while the standard of education drops . Is it the student or is it in reality the teacher .
        Higher taxes is not the answer , cutting costs to the taxpayer is and always has been . Balance the budget Washington . The average household has to do it . Why not you ?

      • RevNowWhileWeCan

        It’s tuff to see the light at the end of the tunnel when bankers pay lobbyist’s to get laws passed to keep them in power. The only way to really change the status quo is to cut the head of the snake off and somehow end corporate lobbying. Anyone lobbying in D.C. can only use their own money and cannot be backed by ANY company or even ceo’s. Hold politicians accountable by charging them with accepting bribes and hold lobbyists accountable by charging them with racketeering. Unfortunately they currently won’t even call the payoffs a conflict of intrest never mind call them the criminal acts that they are!!
        Man! I’m 40 and just starting to really follow politics. I’m good looking and a good orater. I think I’m gonna start with my anti-establishment rhetoric at the local level and if I talk enough sh– I should be in office by 2036!!

      • Darold Boucher

        Who do the bankers and lobbyists give the money to. Congress, local and state government officials, and Obumbler. They are elected poor and leave uber rich.

    • Margie

      I can’t believe how easily most of you are influenced by an article like this! Unbelievable! You all need to get your facts straight before you blindly follow this kind of media communication

      • Old Henry

        Margie:

        Most everyone here has been plugged in for many years to what is going on.

        It would appear that you spend too much time glued to the anti-America MSM – and yes, that includes FOX News – other than The Judge.

        As s c stated just above – Dig. Read. THINK.

        Also Margie, you must learn to ALWAYS use the MSM as a perfect reverse barometer. They say good, it’s bad. They say bad, it’s good.

    • LARRY

      WARREN BUFFET IS AN OBLAMER SCAM’ER, HE JUST WANTS TO TRY AND GET THE GOP TO GIVE UP MONEY THAT HE KNOWS THEY NEED TO GET A REPUBLICAN ELECTED THIS YEAR, AND IF THEY WON’T DONATE , HE WILL JUST SIT BACK AND BLAME THEM FOR NOT WANTING TO REDUCE THE NAT DEBT, WHAT A SCAM BLAMER HE IS, THAT’S WHERE O BLAMER LEARNED HOW TO SCAM US, FROM WARREN BUFFET EATER, AND HE IS TRYING EVERY TRICK HE KNOWS TO HELP HIS LOVE CHILD OBLAMER RE-ELECTED. I DON’T BELIEVE A WORD HE SAYS , AND I DON’T LIKE HIM, HE WANTS TO TAKE US DOWN , JUST LIKE OBUMMER AND GEORGE S. THE ALL THREE LIE EVERY TIME THEY OPEN UP THEIR MOUTH,

  • s c

    Gates and Buffet seem to be unofficial suckups to Uncle Scam. Being a suckup seems to take off any potential ‘heat,’ and people like Gates and Buffet keep on making the big bucks and never have to fear the loss of enough wealth or position to make any difference. Soros, on the other hand, seems to have gone under Uncle Scam’s radar.
    If you will remember, Soros is the one who almost broke the Bank of England. That makes Gates and Buffet mere investors, while Soros has the connections to someday buy and sell Gates and Buffet.
    On the bright side, Buffet and Soros aren’t getting any younger. Gates can look forward to another 20 years or so – assuming that if he gets sick he doesn’t rely on FDA/AMA medical theories. It would be nice to be filthy rich, I guess.
    On the other hand, without the wisdom of Solomon, wealth may give you a sense of temporary protection, but even money can’t keep death away from one’s front door.

    • Vicki

      Gates and buffett should lead by example. Just see how far their billions really go.

      • FreedomFighter

        Bill Gates is a backer of Eugenics, and Buffet, after Obama canceled the pipeline for America is making million maybe billions shipping oil to the west coast for China. Buffet also involved in Bank of America got billions in tax payer money (not sure how much at this seceond).

        One wants eugenics, the other another whiteman with forked tongue.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • MK

        You need to read his biography, The Snowball. On page 641 it says that Buffett supports population control via eugenics!

      • FreedomFighter

        I didnt know this, but Im not surprised:

        Bill Gates And Neo-Eugenics: Vaccines To Reduce Population

        F. William Engdahl
        Financial Sense
        Friday, March 5, 2010

        http://www.prisonplanet.com/bill-gates-and-neo-eugenics-vaccines-to-reduce-population.html

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • Christin

        Freedomfighter,

        WOW,WOW, WOW!
        Just read the article that you posted on Eugenics through vaccines and GMO seeds and the accompanying GMO toxic chemical herbicides by Gates, Buffet, Turner, UN, and many others.

        I have already learned some about tainted vaccines, but now I know how the GMO and herbicide toxins work to kill a pregnancy or render women infertile.

        Hope more of you click on his site above and learn how it is being done… so evil.

      • John

        If you read the companies website, that oil is destined for Europe,India and China anyways. That’s one of the reasons the pipeline is being build to the gulf so it can be shipped out. If it would be for domestic production, it could end at one of the refineries in Wyoming that has ample capacity to deal with every drop from this pipeline and has the infra structure in place to distribute the final product throughout the US. Not one drop of this oil will be used in the US.

      • Margie

        We don’t need that darn pipeline, anyways. It would mean so much environmental destruction that our children and future generations would have to pay the price forever. Many more jobs could get created via clean and sustainable energy sources instead of continuing to feed into the addiction to oil. Other means of energy production are and have been available and just need to be further developed. Other countries are well ahead of us.

      • Dale on the left coast

        John . . . your paragraph is “Utter Nonsense” . . . why is the pipeline going to the Gulf? Because the refineries there have capacity, they are also used to handling heavy crude, like the crude that comes from Venesula and the North West US. The stupidity surrounding the pipeline thing is astounding. Pipelines are the safest way to transport crude oil . . . unlike the railroad cars taking North Dakota crude oil to the south on Buffet’s railway.

      • JeffH

        Margie…”We don’t need that darn pipeline, anyways. It would mean so much environmental destruction that our children and future generations would have to pay the price forever.”

        Margie, your comment is based soley on your emotions.

        Here’s a little FYI for you…The US has over 2.3 million miles of pipelines in the U.S. carrying natural gas, and hazardous liquids (chiefly petroleum and refined petroleum products, as well as chemicals and hydrogen).
        http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/portal/site/PHMSA/menuitem.ebdc7a8a7e39f2e55cf2031050248a0c/?vgnextoid=a62924cc45ea4110VgnVCM1000009ed07898RCRD&vgnextchannel=f7280665b91ac010VgnVCM1000008049a8c0RCRD&vgnextfmt=print

      • mikeles

        Thank you, John. I have always heard/read that little to none of the oil from Keystone is destined for domestic US consumption. That is why I have always questioned why we as a nation would want to bisect our country with this pipeline.

      • JeffH

        I have to question the idea that none of the Keystone XL pipline oil wouldn’t be sold to the US…that’s just not true.

        Billings Gazette, Oct 2011…HELENA — A big selling point for the Keystone XL pipeline is that its billions of barrels of Canadian crude oil would provide“energy security” for the United States, giving the country a long-term, reliable supply of petroleum from a friendly ally.

        Terry Cunha, a spokesman for TransCanada in Calgary, Alberta, said it’s his understanding that most of the oil will be for domestic use in the United States.

        “As we’ve highlighted, why not get (this oil) from Canada, versus importing it from other countries that don’t share the same beliefs as we do in Canada and North America?” he said.

        A spokesman for the largest U.S. petroleum refiner, Valero Energy Corp. of San Antonio, Texas, said that while some of the Canadian oil may be refined into products for export, it would be a small part of its overall use.

        And even if some of oil ends up as exported fuel, he says that’s still good for the economy and the oil-refining business, which he calls “one of the last, strong manufacturing industries (in this country) that can compete worldwide.”
        http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/article_f2e54343-51ba-57e7-89bd-a2656901ba62.html#ixzz1m0w0cJKC

        As Marty Durbin, executive vice president of the American Petroleum Institute, notes, Keystone XL will initially deliver 700,000 barrels of needed oil per day, and with the pipeline “U.S. crude imports from Canada could reach four million barrels a day by 2020, twice what we currently import from the Persian Gulf.” Energy independence, anyone?

        Keystone XL would also help to advance further development of the oilfields in the Bakken shale formation that has led to an economic boom in North Dakota. Plans are under way to tie into Keystone XL and ship increasing amounts of Bakken oil south through Keystone XL.

        The pipeline is estimated to create 20,000 direct jobs during construction as well as 118,000 spinoff and support jobs.

      • 270 Win.

        Margie, you are an idiot…………..

      • texastwin827

        Refine it in Montana? You are kidding, right?
        http://www.eia.gov/neic/rankings/refineries.htm

        MONTANA:
        EXXON Billings 60,000
        CHS,Inc Laurel 59,600
        Conoco Billings 58,000
        Connacher Oil/Gas 10,000 Total Capacity: 187,600 barrels/per day

        TEXAS (Houston area only):
        EXXON Baytown 560,640
        BP Texas City 406,570
        Deer Park Refiner 327,000
        Access Ind-Houston 280,390
        Valero Houston 88,000
        Marathon Texas City 76,000
        Petroleo Brasileiro 100,000 total capacity: 1,838,600 brls per day

        And yes, just those 7 Houston area refineries, refine over 1 3/4 MILLION barrels per day. Montana doesn’t even refine 200K barrels a day.

        Keep in mind, this only includes our refineries in the Houston area. We have others in Beaumont, Port Arthur, El Paso, Tyler, Corpus Christi which are owned by many of the same companies in the Houston area. I’m sure if they needed to they probably have pipelines between Houston and the others.

        There is no other state that refines as much oil as Texas does. Louisiana comes in 2nd :-) )

      • baker john

        Better yet refine it in CANADA I’m sure there are refineries there that could be put to use and keep Canadian gas prices down at the pumps.

      • Richard Minear

        Yes if Buffet were really serious he would drop his suit against the IRS and pay the billions he owes. This is for Berkshire Hathaway. He fights them about paying taxes and then acts like he wants to pay more.

      • Flashy

        if you were serious you’d realize it’s not Buffett’s tax bill, it is Berksire’s. They have a fiduciary duty to the stakeholders to fight it if there is honest dispute.

      • DaveH

        They DON’T have a fiduciary duty to “Stakeholders”. They have a fiduciary duty to Shareholders, those people who risk their money investing in ownership of a company.
        Stakeholders is a Liberal concept whereby workers at a company, nearby community members, suppliers, etc. magically claim the rights lawfully contracted to the owners of a company, even though they have risked none of their own money in company ownership, and in fact many (if not most) of them are actually receiving benefits from the company, which a normal person might think they should be grateful for.
        Read this for more:
        http://mises.org/daily/2832

      • Flashy

        Every man has a property in his own person: this no body has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his. John Locke, “The Second Treatise On Civil Government”

        Every employee gives, by their labor, property and value to the growth and continuance of that company. It is their investment in the company. It carries weight and the company has the responsibility to give this investment its due inherent value.

        “Stakeholders” means just that, everyone who has a stake in the company. Be it a monetary investment, or one of labor and property.

        And before you spout off and state a Man’s labor has no value and the company should ignore such, I suggest you stand in the midst of a bar in West Virginia (or any working man’s town) on a Friday night and proclaim it. When you do, I hope you have good health insurance though most don’t cover attempted suicide

      • DaveH

        The owners of the company and the potential employees decide voluntarily how much the former should compensate the latter. There is no further owed compensation unless both parties voluntarily (something Liberals don’t understand) agree to it. Some people invest their money in cars or other material goods. Others choose to invest in companies and capital equipment. Each, by any kind of morality, has the right to make those decisions with their own money or property.
        For somebody else to interject themselves in the middle by force is just plain immoral slavery or theft.
        We all like to possess our own property. But some of us like to possess other peoples’ property (against their will). Those people are thieves, plain and simple, whether they perform their theft personally or by proxy (voting for others to do it).
        And Flashman, I won’t be committing any suicide. I like myself. I treat my fellow man fairly, like I would like my fellow man to treat me. I don’t have to drown my inconsistencies in liquor or drugs.
        And I’m glad to see you exposing your violent side. Yet another reason for the readers to recognize your complete lack of morality.

      • Dione
      • eddie47d

        When does any extremely wealthy person lead by example? They all have dark hidden secrets in amassing their booty and they have few political boundaries. We think because they donate a few million to an art museum or for cancer research they are God’s gift to the world. Those gifts are appreciated but what did they do to achieve that donation money? Who did they bribe and how many tax loopholes did they finagle?

      • mikeles

        I’m not really going to disagree with you, Eddie, but as I read your words I was reminded of the words of friend of mine years ago, that what a person believes another is doing in a circumstance, they believe they would do themselves in that same circumstance.

    • wandamurline

      Of course, the news medias never report any truth about anyone like Warren Buffett, but it is my understanding from a couple of articles that I read that Mr. Buffett (the rich guy who is sooooo generous) is in a lawsuit with the IRS over 34 million dollars he owes to the IRS under one of his companies. Sooooooo, before you start criticizing others for not paying their fair shares, you really need to pay what you already owe.

      • Donald

        If the amount is in dispute, it is not owed. When the dispute is settled, then we may have an indication of what is owed. You talk as if the IRS is always right in these matters. Such trust of the Federal Government is unusual on this web site.

      • independant thinker

        It is not a matter of trusting the feds but rather the double standard Buffet is living. He claims he should be paying more in taxes while fighting the feds over a tax bill. If he were truly serious about paying more in taxes he would say something to the effect of “alright I don’t believe I owe as much as you say but since I pay so little in taxes I will pay what you claim I owe to help the US pay down its debt”.

      • Flashy

        it’s not Buffett’s tax bill…it’s the company Berkshire. As such, Buffett cannot just pay the tax claims. There is a fiduciary to the shareholders …

      • Buster the Anatolian

        Buffett controls Berkshire.

      • Flashy

        Does he own 100% ? Besides, “ownership’ is much different than “Stakeholders’ …

    • Polski

      Gates Foundation is also allied with the evil empire, MONSANTO, to ruin the world’s food with GMOs, Genetically MOLESTED Organisms, so that their food monopoly will make them $BAZILLIONS before it kills every human being.

    • Old Henry

      “It would be nice to be filthy rich, I guess.”

      You are correct s c, but as the country song goes: “I’ve never seen a hearse with a luggage rack on top.”

      The pall bearers at Soros’ funeral may well have to wear asbestos gloves. Unless, however, he’s the anti-Christ.

      • Donald

        What nonsense!

      • smilee

        90% of this site is nonsense

      • Flashy

        you’re an optimist

      • DaveH

        Are there that many Liberals posting here?

      • FreedomFighter

        Dave the liberal hacks and Soros paid hit men are coming here to obfusicate, badger, diffuse, pollute dialoge.

        Many decent freedom loving people pull from this site to use elsewhere, having a multiplyer effect on distribution of freedom and PERSONAL LIBERTY ideals and conversation, the evil maggots cant have that.

        We the American People are waking, they cant have that.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

    • Ellen

      Buffet has got to be smart enough to know our government needs spending cuts. While chipping in money to pay down the national debt would be the icing on the cake, it is useless if we don’t stop the spending. If I maxed out my credit card and couldn’t pay my bill and a relative bailed me out, I would have to agree to stop over-spending. Otherwise, my credit card will be maxed out again soon. At that point, my relative would’ve wasted their money because I’d be in debt again. This same reasoning goes for tax increases. If they don’t stop the spending, the increases only took money out of the economy to be wasted. Spending has doubled in the past 10 years and we have nothing of value to show for it. We have uneducated kids, filled prisons, illegal immigrants living off welfare, welfare dwellers perpetuating the cycle, broken families, lost values and lost personal responsibility. Maybe I should add that we’re fat and sickly, too.

    • NC

      SC, do you find it a little odd that Chip was so quick to cite the Old Testament as to tithing and so quick to ignore the New Testament when advising the readers on how to accumulate wealth!You can always count on a conservative to be true to their “values” Yeah, right!

      • JeffH

        …and you can always count on a liberal to not “get it”…

      • Donald

        Tithing is voluntary, tax paying is not. This is comparing apples and oranges

      • NC

        DONALD, I WASN’T TALKING ABOUT TAX PAYING! IT WAS THE ACCUMULATION OF WEALTH! WHAT WOULD JESUS SAY ABOUT THE ACCUMULATIOM OF WEALTH TODAY??
        WHAT DID HE SAY ABOUT CAESAR AND HIS TAXES?

      • smilee

        give onto ceaser, taxes,

    • Warren

      Warren is a pretty smart guy. He knows that just giving a dollar amount of his wealth, and setting a limit on how much he will give, there will no fear of using up his fortune. He’s also playing with the tax code because he’d get a deduction on his next year’s tax for the amount contributed unless he agrees not to do that.

      Warren Buffett should make THIS offer. He will give a small but specific PERCENTAGE of his wealth to the government to pay down the U. S. (Obama’s) debt and let others match. In other words, if I give 1/10 per cent of my wealth, he will give 1/10 per cent of his wealth.

      As pointed out in the article “When you’re worth $21 billion, that $49,000 check is about the same as 49 cents to us.”

      So, if he designated any reasonable PERCENTAGE of his wealth the rest of the country could easily have him pay down his wealth to zero. Even one tenth of 1 per cent (.001) of his wealth! If a person were worth $1,000,000 and paid one tentah of 1 percent (.001) that would be $10000. If 210000 people paid $10,000 or a larger number a smaller amount, he would have to divest himself of all his holdings to pay off the agreement. Or, 2,100,000 people paying in $1,000 would also bankrupt him if he held to this standard.

      We don’t need a billionaire loudmouth who has outrageous amounts of money making statements that will have no real impact on his wealth. Of course, even that would only raise a small portion of Obama’s debt, but it could get rid of this loudmouth’s silly ideas.

      Since he has a problem with the tax code as applied to the rich, he should also agree not to apply any tax benefits to next year’s taxes but not require us non-billionaires to do that.

      • kkflash

        If Buffet agreed to give 100% of his personal wealth to paying down the debt, it would pay only the interest on the current federal debt for just one month.

      • vicki

        Not even a week. And that is presuming you take Gates money too.

        http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/warren-buffett-obama-tax-shill/?replytocom=736817#respond
        (Buffett and Gates are discussed starting at 4:00)

      • Donald

        If 10,000 people put in $10,000. Buffet needs only to put up $10,000. That is a match for the individual gifts, but not the total gifts. That’s how this game is played. Wise up!

    • Joan

      Buffet’s challenge is only trying to get some of the greedy senators that vote themselves a raise every year and Obama too. But we won’t ever see the results because none of them will take the challange.

    • Larry

      Buffet should first pay up the nearly billion he owes in corporate taxes and has been evading since 2002.

      • Donald

        He has not “evaded”. He has “avoided”. There is a difference. One is illegal and the other is legal. You avoid taxes by using the loopholes provided in the law by our wonderful Congress

      • Flashy

        Ummmm, the corporation is more than just Buffett…you realize this do you not? it has a duty to all shareholders to fight any tax issue it believes it is correct and the IRS not.

    • Noni

      Mortality: …and may Soros be escorted to his reward in Hell soon.

blog comments powered by Disqus
Bottom