Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

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

  • 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.

      • 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.

  • 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,

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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

  • 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.

  • 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?

  • 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.

  • Lueder

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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”.

  • http://personallibertydigest Gottaplenty

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

  • Rich W

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

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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://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.

  • 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!

  • del

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

  • 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?

  • 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.

  • http://www.ralphgregorio.com Ralph

    First of all, I am not a rich person, that said, The wealthy pay 15% on Capital Gains..long term capital gains) and how much does the average person pay??? If being honest, no where close to 15%. On a 100K income I have never paid 15K so if Buffets secretary is making 100K/year and they said over 20% then she would be paying 20K. I really doubt that! Most people pay very little in taxes and most have the taxes taken out of the paycheck yet get back a refund each year. Is that refund counted in thier total tax bill?

    • kkflash

      About half the personal income tax-filers in 2010 paid ZERO income taxes.

      • Deerinwater

        well, if you didn’t acquire additional wealth why should you be required too?

  • Roger

    Didn’t I read a little while back that buffet owes a few billion in back taxes?? Why doesn’t he just pay that, I’m sure that would help with the deficit some.

  • Patriot

    Since Buffet made much of his money from inside government knowledge, he should be happy to hand over 95% of his assets so Obama can redistribute it to whatever group he wants. Buffet just trust Obama, like the rest of us have to do, do you think he would trust Obama with his money? Then why should the rest of us?

  • Chuck

    Buffet and Gates are nothing more than silver spoon socialist tools. They should have every asset they own seized by the feds, after all they seem to think the government is better at spending money than they are. What a load of hypocrisy when these losers set up a 50 billion dollar foundation to keep it from the feds because they think they know better what to do with their money.

    • John

      It seems to me, that their track records says they know a lot more about what to do with their money… after all, they had to earn that 50billion first before they could put it into a foundation.

    • Karolyn

      What??? Are you saying that people shouldn’t be able to start foundations to help ohers because they don’t pay taxes on them? Why should the gov. tell them what to do with their money other than how much to pay in taxes?

  • oldbill

    Mr. Buffett is well aware that if the government keeps increasing the debt and borrowing (and printing) to pay for it, he is losing billions of dollars of value of his fortune. One of the offsets to high debt, is to repay it with real, earned income. Thus increasing the income tax, even on his income, helps control the decrease in the value of the dollar. Of course, once the “millionaires” tax goes into effect, even the counter help at McDonalds will “feel like a millionaire” when he gets his tax bill every year.

  • D B

    Capitalism,
    Is a great thing! Quit dinging the rich we all could have done what they have. This country cannot run like Europe! It does not work!
    Many people in this country feel like these people owe them. If most people only knew what these people have given to many people, organizations and the Government. We need to export and quit importing most items. The DEP needs to back off, let us build and put people to work. As far as the oil, more oil is used for many other things than just fuel, look at any label on most things and it has petroleum in it. The Government has created this by giving to the people who don’t want to work. Look at how many people don’t file income taxes. Look at how many don’t work and the amount of money they recieve.
    I take my hat off to the rich, not the wealthy in Congress, but the people who have made tons of money. Ask any of the people in Congress if they even know what a P&L is, never mind knowing how to make one. I hope one day that one of my companies will be as succesful as Warren Buffets or Bill Gates. But the way it is going the Country won’t alow it!!
    Don’t get me wrong I love my Country, we just need to clean up the Government, or there won’t be one!!!!!!!!!!!
    Capitalism not socialism!

  • Alan

    We have come so far to be so stupid as to believe this old blowhard! He has fallen far from the tree of his roots! Warren Buffet used to be a sage of the investment world as well as Gates. Looks like Soros has found a way to corrupt two of the world’s greatest capitalists. Soros’ Fascism knows no bounds and Soros will continue until he has conquered the world for his Fuhrer!

  • Cameron

    He is a Typical liberal. He want everyone else like him to pay more taxes. If he is serious he will send the treasury 99% of his worth. He could still be rich. Even if he did, that wouldnt be but about a .25% of the national debt. Nobody is stopping him from paying more

  • Cathey Rocadas

    When you say “start accumulating some real wealth. By that I mean gold and silver”, does that mean ACTUAL (real) pieces of gold and silver? Or do you mean stock in gold and silver? Sorry, I am so s-l-o-w.

    • John

      What good is your stock certificate if the country collapses?

  • Vigilant

    Chip Wood says, “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.”

    “Intrinsic” value?

    First it was the lawyers who began distorting the meanings of words to suit their own ends, now it is the financial gurus who bombard the airwaves with commercials to convince you to part with your money.

    I’m not sure whether it was the wet-behind-the-ears fat kid who replaced G. Gordon Liddy on the Rosland Capital ad, or the slick huckster on the Goldline commercial, but we keep hearing the term “intrinsic value” to describe gold.

    Let’s be honest for a change: beyond some electrical and medical uses, gold and silver have virtually no intrinsic value. As beauty (and ugliness) is in the eye of the beholder, so it is with precious metals. It is purely a construct of the mind.

    Once the product of a condition called “rarity,” even that measure carries no weight, as silver is physically more scarce than gold at this time, but trades for much less.

    Once the CME or EMP strikes, or even one or two months into a disastrous financial meltdown, see how much your hoarded gold will get you in a world forced to adjust to barter. When I’ve a family to feed and I have a crop of vegetables, no amount of gold will convince me to part with my items of truly intrinsic value.

    It’s been said that all that glitters is not gold; it could as well be said that gold is not the only thing that glitters.

    • kkflash

      You’re forgetting how difficult it is to acquire through barter, all the things to support a modern lifestyle. To facilitate those exchanges, people have used money as an intervening medium of exchange for thousands of years. What Chip and others have often pointed out here, is that gold & silver have properties that make them suitable as a form of money. Their intrinsic value as money derives from a collection of properties they share, that makes them superior to paper money. The most important of these properties is the difficulty of creating them out of nothing of value, a practice known as counterfeiting, and in which our government has been engaging for many years now, in order to systematically rob the people of their wealth.

      • John

        You forget that none of the modern amenities that make our modern lifestyle will be available not will one be able to use them if this country really collapses. If I have fuel, I would not barter them for gold or silver but only for food or tools. Food, clean water and tools will be the barter items, nobody in his or her right mind will part with food or essential tools for gold or silver. Yes there will be people that will horde it just in case civilization will rebound, but they more likely or not will just take it from most anyways. Gold only has a value if there is civilization of some sort, and has absolute no value if there is not. People always have this wet dream that just because they have a few rifles and hundreds of thousands of rounds of ammo they will be able to defend anything they have. History has shown that this is a big fallacy a determined foe will always get what he/she/them want. There are millions of ways to skin a cat, but only a couple of ways for the cat to avoid being skinned.

        • kkflash

          In a complete collapse of civilized society, your statements would be more, but still not entirely true. If you are of the belief that a state of anarchy and primation could soon exist, such that all intermediary forms of exchange would be entirely valueless, then I encourage you to stockpile food, fuel, clothing, and tools. Meanwhile, I’ll accumulate gold and silver. Good luck.

      • Vigilant

        “You’re forgetting how difficult it is to acquire through barter, all the things to support a modern lifestyle.”

        Obviously, I’m not talking about a “modern lifestyle.” When the balloon goes up, “modern lifestyle” will be a thing of the past. And I’m not talking of a temporary financial setback. My comments address the very survival mode we would be pushed into in the event of a true catastrophe.

        “To facilitate those exchanges, people have used money as an intervening medium of exchange for thousands of years. What Chip and others have often pointed out here, is that gold & silver have properties that make them suitable as a form of money.”

        No argument with the obvious from me.

        “Their intrinsic value as money derives from a collection of properties they share, that makes them superior to paper money.”

        Take out the word “intrinsic” and we will agree. Intrinsic: “belonging to or arising from the true or fundamental nature of a thing; essential; inherent.” I repeat: it is not the abstract value assigned by human beings that makes an item essentially valuable. While the “collection of properties they share…makes them superior to paper money,” those properties will never make them superior to the items of intrinsic value (food, fuel, etc.) upon which they were originally based.

        “The most important of these properties is the difficulty of creating them out of nothing of value, a practice known as counterfeiting, and in which our government has been engaging for many years now, in order to systematically rob the people of their wealth.”

        Money originally arose as a convenient medium of exchange to facilitate barter of items with different intrinsic values. Try and counterfeit an ear of corn or a bushel of wheat and see how far that gets you.

        We have no real disagreement on the basics, with the sole exception of the meaning of the word “intrinsic.”

        • kkflash

          I stand behind what I wrote. Money has “intrinsic” value because it facilitates the easier acquisition and barter of the other basic need items you described. There something that makes good money, like gold and silver, has intrinsic value as money.

          • kkflash

            oops… meant to type “therefore” not “there” in the last sentence.

    • DaveH

      Gold has been a sought-after commodity for thousands of years.
      It’s rare. It makes beautiful jewelry. It doesn’t oxidize:
      http://matsci.uah.edu/courseware/mts501/reports/sschwitalla.html

      That’s intrinsic enough for me.

  • TeaParty Patriot (TPP)

    For Buffet to match dollar for dollar any contribution made by RINO’s is very disengenuous and means little to Buffet, to be meaningful Buffet should match percerntage for percentage. if a Senator or Rep contributes 15% of his or her income then Buffet should contribute and equal percentage of his income. Otherwise he continues the same tax ratio he castigated with his secretary. Match % for % and get soros and gates to do the same.

    • FreedomFighter

      Its pure theater from Buffy and Obummer to throw egg on republicans, to get the big 0 elected in 2012.

      If a repub gets elected Buffy will lose:

      Bailout money (billions)
      Oil Trains for oil to China(more billions)

      Remember those that will vote for Obama this time around are BRAIN DEAD ZOMBIES.

      usually referred to as “Democrates”

      Laus Deo
      Semper Fi

      • Deerinwater

        Life is not as simple as you seem to believe FF.

        I’m not voting for Newt , Mitt or Rick , you can forget that.

        Offer me Ron Paul and the GOP is in contention for the title of 1st chair.

        Obama is no more guilty of Constitutional violations then any President that came before him, he’s brought us away from the edge of disaster.

        It is true, that you can get so busy bailing water and fighting alligators the thought of just draining the swamp in the last thing on your mind. And I think that describes the last 3 years rather well.

        When the eminent threat of sinking and being chew to small pieces seems less apparent, this draining off of the Federal Government Swamp has great appeal. Just not now, not at this moment, we have soldiers coming home and some correction to make to prepare for such a grand change.

  • Ted Crawford

    Obama can’t tax his way out of this mess he’s made, og course he would have had a smaller hill to clime if he, Pelosi and Reid would have addressed this in 2008, instead of trying to spend their way out!

    • NC

      TED, as I recall it was a Republican, bush, running to Congress in 2008 begging and screaming for billions to try to save his administration’s economy from disaster.Remember the 3 page bill he proposed to limit how HE would spend those bllion?
      If I am not mistaken it was also a Republican, McCain in 2008, who was blasting Republicans in Congress, where he served and should know, for spending like a drunk sailor! Maybe it was not just Pelosi and Reid!

      How big was the “mess” when Obama took office and as an adult what do you say is a reasonable time to correct asituation that was causing the economy to bleed 700,000 jobs a month before he took office? Try not to let denial effect your answer!!

      • DaveH

        In general, it was the Progressives in both Parties who got us where we are today.
        Read this to learn more:
        http://mises.org/books/historyofmoney.pdf

        • Deerinwater

          and the GOP HAWKS , whom I would not call progressives at all.

  • Bjoe

    Its rather easy for Warren to play this game. He is playing with all the money he got away with in the 90′s . Take it over sell it off .Other people’s hard work.. Hey Warren give every veteran a thousand dollars.You have some of my hard work. Give the money you made from the sell of the company I worked at , You didnt even have to buy but reaped the benefits from the money you made from the sell off.. give it to the VETS …. Ron Paul 2012

    • Flashy

      Whatever is said about Buffett, he never played the Vulture Capitlaist game. He always counseled buy a stock/company looking long term growth and soundness of existing management.

  • CMT460

    If has he ever considered helping a elderly Vietnam Vet get his head above the water if his mortgage is under? If so then I am in. Just send my Lender a check for 50K. Specifics are available in a heartbeat.

    • DaveH

      Lol. Well put, CMT460.

  • Jay Vincent

    If Buffet is really serious and not just grand standing, he would pay the 1 billion dollars in back taxes his company Birkshire/Hathaway owes. BACK TAXES

    • Bettijo

      Sorry, Jay, I did not see your post before I posted mine.

  • Bettijo

    Apparently Buffett’s company Berkshire Hathaway is fighting the IRS over payment of back taxes totaling around $1 Billion. Maybe Buffett should take care of this little matter first.

  • Flashy

    hilarious. you guys scream about too much taxation. Scream it. Buffet’s company is in a legal battle over what the tax bill is for 2002-04. If it were a slam dunk case, it would have been paid or assets seized or levied against.

    The fact is…you scream about companies paying too much in taxes. the outstanding tax claims amount to a miniscule fraction of the assets of Berkshire, and yet you crucify the man because he supports this dministrations goal to make the wealthy pay a fair share for the benefits they receive.

    Is your support for anti America so strong that it doesn’t matter what you said yesterday, if it helps America you’re against it?

    • FreedomFighter

      Its not “Anti-America” Flash.

      Its just most of us are repulsed by crony capitolism, a president that stomps on the constitution, and a congress full of socialist/communist scumbags destroying our way of life.

      Jus so you know.

      Laus Deo
      Semper Fi

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

        Dear FreedomFighter,

        And once again, Mr. Buffet comes out smelling like a rose as a result of Obama crony capitalism.
        http://freebeacon.com/warren-buffetts-net-worth-jumps-154m-thanks-to-mortgage-settlement/

        Yeehaw!

        Best wishes,
        Bob

        • JeffH

          :) Oh those pesky facts :)

      • JeffH

        FreedomFighter, don’t expect these highly educated, multiple degreed, independent thinking, ever mind expanding and socially engineered progressive/Marxist/communists to understand your comment.

        • NC

          jEFFH, DEMOCRATS ARE JUST BUSY RUNNING THE ECONOMY’S STOCK MARKET 41% BETTER THAN THE OTHER OPTION(REPUGNUTS) OVER THE LAST 80 YEARS!
          SEE “BULLS, BEARS, DONKEYS, AND ELEPHANTS” FOR THE FIGURES AND FACTS!!!!
          WHERE ARE THE CONSERVATIVE FIGURES?? YOU HAVE JUST SEEN WHAT THE “COMMUNIST, MARXIST,PROGRESSIVES” HAVE ACCOMPLISHED!’
          INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW!!! GIVE US FIGURES NOT SOUND BITES! YOU KNOW! LIKE SOME NUMBERS! SOMETHING WE CAN COMPARE! NOT YOUR OPINION!!

          • kkflash

            I did a personal study of your assertion, looking at the last 20 years, and here are the facts:
            Clinton, who took office on 1/20/93, presided over a Democratic Senate and House until 1/2/95, a time when the S&P 500 moved from 435 to 459 (decimals omitted). This lackluster performance of the stock market during the “Clinton/Democrat” years is +5.5% over 2 years, less than the commonly accepted rate of inflation.
            The Republicans gained control of BOTH houses in the 1994 elections, & from 1/2/95 until the end of his term in 1/19/01, the moderate Clinton, who was actually able to work with Republicans, saw the S&P 500 go from 459 to 1342, a prolific gain of 292%, or 19.6% annually over 6 yrs of Republican-controlled Congress.
            George W took office 1/20/01 with a narrowly Democratic Senate, and a narrowly Republican House, a condition which remained for 2 years, during which the S&P500 went from 1342 to 880 (the “dot.com bust”), a 2yr. loss of 65% with a mixed Congress.
            Republicans again gained control of both houses in the 2002 elections, and taking office 1/2/03, they presided for the next 4 yrs., while the S&P500 rose from 880 to 1418, a gain of 61%, or 12.7%annually.
            In Bush’s final 2 yrs. he was saddled with a narrowly Democratic Senate and heavily Democratic House. The change in the S&P500 was a 63% drop during the mortgage crisis from 1418 on 1/3/07 to 902 on 1/2/09, the day the now heavily Democratic Congress took their seats.
            The S&P recovered somewhat from the mortgage crisis during Obama’s first 2 yrs., going from 902 to 1272, a gain of 41%, and gained another 4% since with a mixed Congress. It’s still not reattained the heights reached 5 yrs. ago when Republicans were controlling all 3 positions.
            Over the last ~20 yrs. and 3 administrations, the facts show that large stock market gains have occurred with Republicans in control of the legislative branches, and stock market losses with a mixed Congress. An all-Democrat legislature produced large losses in one case, and gains in the other two.
            There’s no data to support the accusation that George W Bush was bad for stock markets, as he presided over both the great gains (under the Republican legislature) and great losses, once under a Democratic and once under a mixed legislature.
            If stock market performanceover the last 20 years is any indicator of the nation’s economic health, we should all want Republicans in all 3 branches to achieve that most certainly. Personally, I think Libertarian Ron Paul in the White House, exercising fiscal restraint over a Republican Senate and House would produce the best combination for the economy and jobs.

          • JeffH

            NC-RE: my original comment…it surely applies to you too!

            Why are you yelling?

          • JeffH

            NC…and you are the one who has equated the Democrats with the “Marxist/progressive/communists”…your words not mine… :)

            How’s those “crow” feathers tasting or do you prefer the taste of shoe leather?

    • kkflash

      Once again, I ask you to explain how wealth distribution through taxation and government spending is pro-America and allowing individuals to keep what they earn is anti-America?

      • Flashy

        Wealth distribution, as you put it, is in place for several reasons. i’m not a fluent expert but here are some of them.

        1. It has those who receive most of the benefits in this society pay for them.
        2. It is not wealth confiscation, it is payment for services rendered and benefits received.
        3. Those benefits received and services rendered are then affordable to continue.
        4. it prevents the reation of a permanent and immobile class structure wherein an elite minority can dictate to, and have all the bills born by, the lower classes in the heirarchy.

        It is not ‘wealth resdistribution’ as the propoaganda term is used today. It is paying the tab for benefits received and services rendered. The wealth was made because of the societal makeup. For that environment to continue and to grow enhanced, the ones benefitting the most from that makeup should pay for what they benefit.

        Got that?

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

          Dear Flashy,

          You can call a cat a dog but that won’t make it bark. When you take from one person or group in order to give that money to another person or group, that is redistribution of wealth. You and your statist buddies (whether you or they identify with the “D” party or the “R” party) are working out of a playbook.

          “Nevertheless in the most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
          1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
          2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
          3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
          4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
          5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
          6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
          7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
          8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
          9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
          10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c., &c.”

          Anyone want to guess where these 10 items are found?

          Best wishes,
          Bob

          • Flashy

            Mr. Livingston. I agree when you take from one and give to another it is wealth distribution. In all but an anarchial society, isn’t that what is present in any organized society?

            Today, in the US, for the past 30 years, there has been wealth redistribution on a massive scale as wealth has become concentrated in the upper tier of about 1%. I would further submit that there is that same small class receiving/taking the majority of the benefits and services offered by the society and the majotiy paying for them to have that welfare-like subsidy.

            I would argue that in such a case of inequity when it reaches a point as to endanger the very core fabirc of the society, at the least the inequitable allocation must be addressed to prevent further abuses.

            would you have issue with this?

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

            Dear Flashy,

            Actually, wealth redistribution has been going on since 1916, and yes, I have issue with it. I write about from time to time, as you may have noticed. I also have issues with the crony capitalism between elites in Washington DC and the K-Street/Wall Street/Military-Industrial complex crowd and Federal Reserve. Until these issues are addressed and the bloated Federal Government trimmed to Constitutionally-required limits there will be no chance for Americans or the American economy. It is headed for default. I’m sure you don’t believe it, but it is true.

            Best wishes,
            Bob

          • Flashy

            Mr. Livingston:

            I do not believe it is possible for the US to default unless the debt limit is not raised and cash is strapped. That’s not saying I approve. We have many examples of what occurs in the situation when debt grows too large and money is printed (per se).

            I do not believe we are close to that point as yet. “Yet” being the key word. Yes, spending has to be taken care of and controlled. You state something about “Constitutional limits”. This is where we begin to digress in approach.

            I believe revenues should equal the amount to spend. We were close in 2000. Then we up’d spending due to rampant incompetence by the then new administration, and the bill of goods was sold to the public as the attack on the Middle Class began in earnest and with all shades discarded. Fear and hate was used…fear and hate. What galls me is that many who post here were for the spending and for the revenue reductions of that time, and cannot admit it nor will they admit to return to a sound fiscal policy we simply cannot afford to continue to allow the wealthy the massive subsidies and free ride they have had.

            What you advocate would, in reality, given this time, be destructive to this nation. Without a complete and utter social disrution, perhaps to the extent of a true overthrow of the government, it simply canot be done. If you would state it to be otherwise, i would certainly like to hear your opinion on why it would not be so.

            We need to cut spending, raise revenues. Balance the books like a business or a family would. The past 30 years the ones with the wealth have seen massive increases in said wealth. the Middle Class has seen in essence zero wealth growth.

            The wealthy have benefitted greatly by the con job foisted upon us by the war against the Middle Class launched by reagan and continued for the next 30 years. It’s time they paid their bill. The Middle Class is strapped. There is no more. They have paid and have not benefitted.

            The talk of increasing tax rates on the wealthy to be destructive is false, misleading and hype. No one can with any honesty state differently. Historical economic activity proves such. A 5 point hike in the rates of wealthy incomes will not be the Doomsday the Right scream. I would advocate going back to the rates under Clinton for all incomes above $250 K and complete elimination of any difference in Capital gain versus earned income.

            As for spending. Here you and I may be closer than you think. I agree government should not be giving subsidy and welfare to those who do not require it. thus, cut the subsidies to the upper incomes and big Corporations such as Ag, Pharm, Banking. Thus, we do indeed step away from that type of “socialism” where the corporate and the government co-exist.

            however, we do have to ecognize the reality that we are a modern nation/State in a closed end economy. Outside Growth is limited. Prior to the early 20th century, we had enough land and undeveloped areas where it couild fairly be described as an open end economy. there was room for growth without impacting existing industry and manyfacturing. We do not have that today.

            We are facing an era where capitalism has never been in history. A closed end economic sphere with a large degree of income disparity. we can, as i believe your views would lead us to, turn into an aristocratic semi-feudal corporate society or we can utilize government to counter balance those forces and instead use the means and powers of government…AS A SOCIETY … to invest and manipulate the areas of industry and technology which will be required to enter into the new era of technology, science, energy and development that lies ahead. The next step in advancement of society. One which none has ever been…ever.

            There are those who fail to recognize that. They have fear and are unknowing. Those that would stand to entrench in the upper levels of the classes encourage that fear for what is propsoed as the alternative…i.e. what is supported here day after day, will lead to immobility of class movement, an aristicratic heirarchy, and eventually an oligarchical governemnt. I will fight tooth and nail to prevent that. I do not fear the future. I do not fear the change we will need to adapt to the modern world we are in and the future we will need to go. wary…yes. fear…no.

            And that is where we digress. You desire a return to the past, a past that never can be again. A series of proposals which will, in every scenario envisioned, destroy this nation.

          • DaveH

            Flashman says “What galls me is that many who post here were for the spending and for the revenue reductions of that time, and cannot admit it”.
            What? And you know this how? Good Grief, Flashman, you have no credibility and statements like that just prove it.

          • DaveH

            So much in the way of Broad Generalizations, and Double Speak.
            Flashman says “We are facing an era where capitalism has never been in history”.
            Only one problem with that, we don’t have Capitalism. We mostly have Socialism where Government is involved in almost every economic decision and many personal decisions as well. They spend 42% of the GDP.
            It’s so convenient, for the Progressives at least. First they destroy Capitalism, replace it with Crony Capitalism and Socialism, then when the inevitable economic failures occur — They blame it on Capitalism.
            For those who truly want to learn some reality about the History of Capitalism in our country:
            http://mises.org/books/historyofmoney.pdf

          • DaveH

            Another of Flashman’s truisms (more like falsisms) — “You desire a return to the past, a past that never can be again”.
            Who do you think that Propaganda works on, Flashman? You need to take it to DailyKos or some other Liberal website where Emotion replaces Logic, where fabricated facts pass as reality, where fear-mongering and personal attacks are promoted as rigorous debate.

        • kkflash

          Oh yes, I “got it”, but you obviously don’t:
          “i’m not a fluent expert”
          The only completely true thing you’ve posted here.

          “It has those who receive most of the benefits in this society pay for them.”
          No, it has those who are most productive, and create wealth for themselves and others, pay a disproportionate share of the cost in relation to the benefits they receive.
          “It is not wealth confiscation, it is payment for services rendered and benefits received.”
          No, it is socially condoned theft of the property of others under the threat of force. If it were payment for services rendered, then all would pay the same price for the same services. If it were payment for benefits received, why are so many paying nothing.
          “Those benefits received and services rendered are then affordable to continue.”
          No, those benefits and services are only made more costly by the addition of the cost of huge government bureaucracy. They won’t continue at all when the whole Ponzi scheme collapses under the weight of the overpromised benefits to too many, being paid for by too few.
          “it prevents the reation (sic) of a permanent and immobile class structure wherein an elite minority can dictate to, and have all the bills born by, the lower classes in the heirarchy.”
          I’m going to give you a chance to simply retract this stupid statement, which suggests that the lower income classes in this country are bearing a disproportionate share of “all the bills”.

          “It is not ‘wealth resdistribution’ as the propoaganda term is used today. It is paying the tab for benefits received and services rendered.”
          Repititious of your statement above. See response above.

          “The wealth was made because of the societal makeup. For that environment to continue and to grow enhanced, the ones benefitting the most from that makeup should pay for what they benefit.”

          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

            “which suggests that the lower income classes in this country are bearing a disproportionate share of “all the bills”.” <— KKF

            Suggests nothing. It is a statement of fact. 99% are paying a large amount of the bills on behalf of the wealthiest 1%. There is no question there is a huge welfare system in this nation for the wealthiest 1%.

            No question at all.

          • kkflash

            That’s completely ludicrous. You sound like Obama’s SOTU address.

        • Ted G

          BS all you did was try to put lipstick on a socialist pig

          • Ted G

            I should have identified that this was for Flashy

    • DaveH

      What’s hilarious, Flashman, is that you continue to post on this site when you know you have NO credibility with the regular readers.
      Ask me to prove it.

  • angie

    Why do people complain? It’s more than I could contribute. I don’t see anyone else doing anything about the debt.

    • Karolyn

      It’s because they have to find something bad in everything. If Buffett said he was going to give all his money to the government, they would still find something wong with it.

      • http://WeThePeople Jean

        Mainly because it is not all his stinking money – there are investors who own stock in his company. A few years ago when I looked each share was over 100 grand. What I have to say to all of his stock holders – is sell while the selling is good. If you want to dump your money dump it into gold or silver – fine. But for heavens to mercy – stop doing the idol worship —- with this guy.

      • libertytrain

        Karolyn according to what you preach, he has no right to all his money, that much money in particular – and ought to give it away. Frankly I don’t care what he does with his money.. especially this kind of show… give it away if he wishes, pay more to the gov. if he wishes -

        • Karolyn

          I don’t know where you got that from, liberty.

          • libertytrain

            From you. You frequently have posted that people, like him, don’t have a right to that much money and should give it away or they are selfish. i.e. No one needs that much money — – perhaps you’ve changed your mind.

      • Ted G

        Come on it was nothing but a cheap publicity stunt to gain progressive points.

  • John

    Hmm, I don’t know, but I went to school before this countries education system went to hell and the math I learned says that if we have 28.5 million per hour, then that would come out to $7917 per second. If the writer can’t even perform and present a simple calculation right, then how factual is the rest of the article?

    • DaveH

      You’re correct, John, but Chip was doing okay until he got to the seconds breakdown. His Figure was correct per minute though.
      Everybody makes mistakes, John. I’m sure that you make plenty yourself. I know I do.

  • Polski

    So how much does Chip Wood contribute to decreasing the deficit?

  • TrvlSEA

    Trying to make himself look generous on someone else’s actions. (Typical thought process for people who think stealing from others is ok in the name of government.) Just give if you are going to give Mr. Buffet.

  • Polski

    Many corporations, like GE, do NOT pay any taxes at all. Chip Woods is just another shill for the wealthy 1%.

    • FreedomFighter

      Obama allows GE to do this, they contribute millions to his election and presidency.

      Crony capitolism at its best, from your commi president.

      Laus Deo
      Semper Fi

    • kkflash

      Corporations are owned by PEOPLE. People get the benefits of government, not corporations. People should pay taxes to earn those benefits, not corporations. I’m sick and f***ing tired of PEOPLE blaming corporations for their problems. If you don’t get all you want out of life, you have YOU to thank for it. Everyone doesn’t start the game of life with the same number of chips, so get over it. Do something each day that is of value to someone else, and they will pay you for it. Quit demanding that government redistribute the game chips to you for doing nothing of value to anyone else.

    • DaveH

      GE is one of Obama’s Crony Capitalists, Polski. Bad example:
      http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/jeffrey-immelt-obama-s-pet-ceo_536837.html

  • polishsniper

    Why not let him match every dollar for every dollar that Obama has raised the deficit in the last 3 years. Who do you think caused the trillion dollar deficit!

    • John

      Congress, on both sides.

  • Kerry

    If I’m not mistaken Warren Buffet owns the Sante Fe Railroad(I know he own one for sure)so he has his boyfriend Obama fight against the Keystone Pipeline which in effect would give Buffet the contract to haul oil by rail from Canada to Texas at $3 more per barrel or about $1.2 Million dollars a day for his pockets!

  • dhellew2

    I see Comrade Karolyn is spouting her usual commie propaganda. First, Buffet should challenge the democrats after all they caused the national debt. Second Buffet, congress, Gates, and all the other super rich don’t have enough assets to pay the interest on the national debt if you took every dime they have.

    There is only one solution to the economic problems an 85% reduction in the size of government. That would mean an 85% reduction in expense, 85% increase in potential tax payers, and the reduction in expense to the private sector which is the economy. Government does not generate income only expense. Government employees do not pay taxes or contribute to their two UNFUNDED ENTITLEMENTS. Government pay is taxes and you cannot pay taxes with taxes.

    • John

      It was not just the democrats who caused the national debt, it was not even Obama or Bush who caused it, it was CONGRESS and specifically, it was BOTH parties of congress doing it…

      • dhellew2

        John, your need to brush up on your history. Government expenses go up when the democrats control congress, down when the republicans do.

        It is even worse then congress and the president are democrat. Granted both parties have spenders, but there is a reason the nearly all the democrats are liberal and the republicans are mostly conservative… it is about spending.
        Another thing you probably don’t know or realize that spending is not just the debt. Every year democrats in congress have been in control, even during Bush’s presidency, the federal budget escalates. Debt = revenue (private sector taxes) – budget. When they talk about Obama increasing the national debt it does not include his biggest budget in the history of the USA.
        Just a suggestion, before you open your mouth and insert your foot it would serve you better to learn the facts first. You can review every single congress and president and you will find what I said can be verified.

  • roderick usher

    I believe Warren Buffet probably has his own reasons for being an Obama puppet, or appearing to be such. The name of the game is ACCESS to the nation’s chief executive. Those in the Billionaire’s club now view that as a sort of Divine Right.

    It is even possible that in his heart of hears, Warren Buffet means well. But only Ron Paul has correctly diagnosed the taproot of our problem – it is our fiat money system and the Federal Reserve. So even if Buffet’s heart is pure, it is too little, and too late. R.U.

  • Diane

    Take a hike Warren. It’s bad enough that I have to listen to the tripe that comes out of the White House. I don’t need to listen to you too. In fact, thank God for the remote. I just quickly change channels at the first indication that either you or B O is going to be on the screen. We don’t need or want your tirades. We can think for ourselves.

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

    I’m amazed that for republicans who don’t like to pay tax you seem to be obsessed by other people who pay little or no tax. You don’t believe govt should spend so much or charge high taxes yet you want warren buffet to give uncle Sam more. Everyone should pay more except you republicans. You are a bunch of hypocrites when you complain about others tax contributions when you really don’t know what risks they have taken or their real expenses which are deductible. When commentators don’t know the full story, its better you don’t comment on so little factual information available to the public. There are so many armchair experts in these posts, yet why you not employed to give your expert skills too the govt. I suggest more of you do some proper research before you make such outlandish comments on other peoples tax situation. My view is either nominate Dr Ron Paul or expect Obama to stay president. Why are you people so obsessed with Obama? He’s not the only culprit in your countries woes, just look at the lazy Greeks.who don’t want to pay for their previous years of lavish spending. Let the Greeks go broke, let them suffer, don’t help them.

    • FreedomFighter

      You are somewhat correct:

      Socialism/Communism is the true culprit.

      Then again, Obama is president of America, the buck stops at his desk. So frankly, he is to blame for what happens on his watch, just like George W was.

      Laus Deo
      Semper Fi

      • eddie47d

        Heck,were still waiting for G Bush to take responsibility for his share of the economic woes. Ain’t gonna happen!

    • DaveH

      Where did you get the idea that we are Republicans, Gilly?
      And where did you get that we want Buffet to give more to Uncle Scam? We only want him to shut up and donate his own money if he thinks it’s the right thing to do. Warren Buffet is the one who wants to donate other peoples’ money.
      First you put words in our mouths, then you call us Hypocrites. What is wrong with you Liberals. Can’t you make valid arguments without supposing conditions that aren’t true?
      Talk about an armchair expert. We have to listen to your unfounded rant, don’t we?

  • Brenda

    I did not incure the debt and see no reason to contribute more than I already do via taxes.

  • dg

    Why don’t all the billionaires and millionaires and mega corps and banks, regardless of affiliations, pony up to wipe out the debt and balance the books. At their rate of income they will be billionaires again in a short time. The US currency would once again become strong. Prices would drop for gas because the tax on it would not be needed to sustain the unsustainable. And in their service we could put up a statue, face on stamps, a ribbon for their suits and might even put their face on the money. That is what was done for the founding fathers when they went broke funding the Revolution. And they are still respected today. A cheap purchase for immortality.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      If they gave all their money away who would guarantee that they would make their millions and billions again. For them it was all a onetime fluke.
      For all their bluff and hollor Buffett and Gates, and other crony capitalists have no intention of giving their money away. They equate money with power.

  • RichE

    Are Republicans against everything? Sounds like they’re against the debt and against paying it off. Weird.

    • eddie47d

      Bingo!

  • DavidL

    Hey Chip,
    Are kidding me? You write the following:

    “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.”

    If you are rich, Chip, then keep spinning this self-serving yarn. I get it. It’s in your economic interest to do you so. If you are not rich, then maybe you should consider acting in the best interest of you and your family.

    Here is a piece of reality for you:

    1) Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits in 2009. Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings.

    2) Bank of America received a $1.9 billion tax refund from the IRS last year, although it made $4.4 billion in profits and received a bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department of nearly $1 trillion.

    3) Over the past five years, while General Electric made $26 billion in profits in the United States, it received a $4.1 billion refund from the IRS.

    4) Chevron received a $19 million refund from the IRS last year after it made $10 billion in profits in 2009.

    5) Boeing, which received a $30 billion contract from the Pentagon to build 179 airborne tankers, got a $124 million refund from the IRS last year.

    6) Valero Energy, the 25th largest company in America with $68 billion in sales last year received a $157 million tax refund check from the IRS and, over the past three years, it received a $134 million tax break from the oil and gas manufacturing tax deduction.

    7) Goldman Sachs in 2008 only paid 1.1 percent of its income in taxes even though it earned a profit of $2.3 billion and received an almost $800 billion from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department.

    8) Citigroup last year made more than $4 billion in profits but paid no federal income taxes. It received a $2.5 trillion bailout from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury.

    9) Conoco Phillips, the fifth largest oil company in the United States, made $16 billion in profits from 2007 through 2009, but received $451 million in tax breaks through the oil and gas manufacturing deduction.

    10) Over the past five years, Carnival Cruise Lines made more than $11 billion in profits, but its federal income tax rate during those years was just 1.1 percent.

    • John

      Ohh puleeeeze, don’t confuse people with facts…

    • DaveH

      You listed 10 corporations, DavidL, out of thousands in the country. Until you come up with a comprehensive listing of all Corporations’ taxes, your list is meaningless.
      Here are the actual tax receipts which the IRS extracted from the Rich (and the rest of us):
      http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html
      What? Are you going to call the IRS liars also?

      • DavidL

        I gave a sample. There are many many more. Isn’t is bad enough that even one corporation gets away with not paying its fair share in taxes in a time when, because of revenue, schools are being closed, teachers are being laid off, police and fire departments are being closed?

        • DaveH

          I think it’s bad, DavidL, when anybody gets away with taking advantage of other people. That’s why I think only people should be taxed, and taxed equally. And Government should stay out of our voluntary marketplace except in the case of companies defrauding their customers or investors.
          In regards to Corporate Income Taxes, almost all of the so-called Tax Loopholes are really Tax Deferrals, meaning that eventually that tax money will be collected. I sure don’t approve of our Byzantine Income Tax system. I vote to eliminate it.

    • DaveH

      And here are the total expenditures of our Governments in 2011:
      http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1950_2016USb_13s1li111mcn_F0t
      Who do you suppose pays for that over 40% of our GDP spending?
      It certainly isn’t the bottom 50% who only pay 2% of the Income Tax.

    • kkflash

      Nice job of selective statistics to try and prove your liberal point. I didn’t take the time to refute all your BS, but I found this in about 30 seconds of investigation.
      Forbes reports: “We took a look at the 2010 annual reports of the 20 most profitable U.S. companies. Some of the results may surprise you. The average income tax rate within the group was 25.4%. America’s three biggest oil companies, ExxonMobil ( XOM – news – people ), Chevron ( CVX – news – people ) and ConocoPhillips ( COP – news – people ), all endure income tax burdens of more than 40%–higher than the statutory U.S. rate of 35%. Exxon, with a 45% rate, tallied $21.6 billion in worldwide income taxes for 2010. Wal-Mart Stores ( WMT – news – people ) paid $7.1 billion (at a rate of 32.4%) in income taxes.”

      • DaveH

        Good job, kk.

      • smilee

        You are talking about rates he is talking about actual taxes paid, if the taxable income, after loop holes are applied is so greatly reduced the rate really does not give you an accurate picture. His post tells much more of the reality than yours

        • DaveH

          These are the actual taxes paid:
          http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

          The top 1% pays 37% of the Income Taxes. That’s Fair? Only to a Thief.
          We should be grateful they invest much of their money in capital goods to give most of jobs and affordable goodies. Instead the Progressives punish them with a lion’s share of the tax burden.

    • kkflash

      Oh, BTW, whenever you see the word “refund” in a financial report in reference to taxes, that means they paid in too much and are later getting some of it back. It’s not a “tax break”.

      • DaveH

        In fact, most “tax breaks” are not “tax breaks”, the Government is just stealing less of their money.

      • smilee

        not true, when you add on the credits it can be much larger than your withholdings. Earned income credits, child care credits etc. Much of our welfare dollars are included in these credits.

        • DaveH

          Most of the “credits” that I’ve seen are Liberal inventions. I’m all for doing away with the Credits. In fact, I’m all for doing away with the Income Tax altogether, Flat or otherwise.
          The original Constitution called for states to pay for the Federal Government equally based on their population sizes. Although not exactly, it was basically saying every person in each state should pay the same for their Federal Government. That is the way it should be. That is the only “Fair” Tax. As it stands now about 40% of the population gets to vote for a Government that they contribute nothing towards. That is just plain wrong. People with no skin in the game cannot be expected to vote wisely. But they can be expected to vote for Politicians who will give them Freebies taken from other citizens, which is exactly the position Politicians want us to be in.

  • http://cox Kathleen Blanchard

    An interesting theory was heard the other day as to why the Keystone Pipeline is in its “study” phase. Who just happens to own the railroad that currently hauls the crude from Canada to our refineries in Texas? Warren Buffet. If the pipeline were built, Burlington Tank cars would be out of the business of hauling crude from Canada to Texas.
    VERY interesting theory isn’t it?
    Thanks for listening.

    • John

      The question is, why are they hauling it all the way to Texas in the first place? There are quite a few high capacity refineries a lot closer to Canada. Could it be that Canadian oil corporations do not want this oil used in the US and thus bring down prices and profits? And thus they rather spend a lot more transporting it to Texas where the products from the refineries can then easy be shipped to Europe where they can make a lot more profit then in the US?….They are NOT interested to reduce the cost of gas in the US period. High oil prices and wars in the mid east are in the best interest of the domestic oil corporations (US and Canada) as it will result in the world market prices to go up and their profit to sky rocket.

      • DaveH
        • John

          Dave, that’s just part of the story, the other part is look what they do,not waht they say they do.
          They have applied for 6800 temporary work visas for Canadian workers to build the pipeline, there is NO reason to build the line all the way to Texas unless you want to ship the oil of shore. As one example, the Sinclair, WY refinery has ample capacity to refine and distribute the oil, why does the pipe line not stop there? And yes, they have the facilities to deal with the crude from Canada. 100% of the oil products refined in the Sinclair,WY refinery are intended for the US market.
          Bringing the pipeline there would cost billions less then building it all the way to Texas especially since existing pipelines with ample capacity exist throughout much of the region from Montana all the way down to Sinclair.all they had to do is to build a transfer station south of Billings MT and they had all the capacity they ever needed from there on.
          Only, the US market is not as profitable than the European and Chinese markets and thus the pipeline will be build to Texas, there are no overseas shipping terminals in WY lol. Moreover, do you really believe they would tell the public on their news site the truth? The conservatives in this country would hang them out to try.

          • DaveH

            Do you really believe, John, that the Liberals would tell the truthful story, when they have a vested interest in forcing their environmental concerns (really just a power struggle) on other people? Witness the thoroughly discredited Homogenic Global Warming Scam, which they now call “climate change” because too many people have become wise to their hoax. Liberals are dishonest, manipulative, controlling people. If they weren’t, they wouldn’t need to use the Force of Government to push their agendas — People would voluntarily do those things in Free Markets. We can see their Liberal dishonesty and lack of morality right here on this board with people like Flashman and Denniso.
            Back to the pipeline. Oil is a fungible commodity. The price at which we buy is relatively stable across the world (disregarding small relative transportation costs). So it really doesn’t matter where the oil is sold, and in fact due to economies of scale, it is better for us, for them, and the rest of the world, if they run their operation the most cost-effective way possible. If that means selling the excess off portside in Texas, so be it. That’s their business, not yours John.

  • ralph schneider

    I suggest the Treasury issue bonds with typical face value but ZERO
    interest and ZERO redemption on the declining balance after maturity. Buffett can buy billions of them and take a long term capital loss. The gov then gets by with only the printing cost.
    Recently, Buffett alsdso said he would rather give extra money to charity because charity is more efficient than the gov.

  • http://lawren@hannanpak.com lj

    When discussing taxes, it would be much better if we would discuss the actual amount of taxes paid as opposed to what percentage is paid.

    The wealthy business owner may pay 15% taxes and the secretary at the company may pay 25% in taxes. Sounds unfair. The wealthy business owner paid $1,500,000.00 in taxes. The Secretary paid $3,500.00 in taxes. How fair is that? The wealthy business owner will receive no extended benefits for paying over 42,000 percent more money in taxes than the secretary.

    • John

      The amount paid means NOTHING, As a percentage of income is the only fair way. 15% taxes will hurt someone just scraping by a lot more then 15% taxes hurts someone who earns millions of dollars. So what if the high earner pays more? He got a lot more left over then the person making minimum wage. I remember a dear old friend who used to tip craftsmen who come to his home 1000 dollars or more for simple tasks. When I asked him about it he said, one thousand dollars for me is absolute nothing, I pay ten times that for a good steak in some restaurants, but 1000 dollars for that electrician who works for 20 bucks an hour is more then he makes a whole week.

      • DaveH

        The only “Fair” way is that every adult pays the same for general Government services that can’t be addressed easily with specific user fees.

        • John

          So Dave what you are saying is, that everyone should pay say $150

        • John

          So Dave what you are saying is, that everyone should pay say(arbitrary number) $1500 in taxes independent if they make $5000 a year or 50 billion?
          If so, you just lost every bit of credibility you ever had.

          • DaveH

            What do my Moral beliefs, that everybody should pay the same for their received goods, have to do with Credibility?
            Are all you Liberals that Ignorant?

          • Deerinwater

            I believe that David has ran down a rabbit hole and got himself trapped in his own doing.

          • DaveH

            Because that’s what you want to believe, Deer. No big surprise there.

        • John

          Moreover, user fees are taxes.

  • David

    LOL…. Taxes are at 50 year lows and some are still whining.
    Can you imagine if someone was actually proposing going back to the tax rates we had in the 50′s, 60′s and 70′s ? People would be freaking out !!!

    Wait, people already are freaking out.

    And over letting the temporary tax cuts expire as they were supposed to do. Even the CBO projections are based on the fact they don’t think Obama and the democrats will be able to get the GOP to go along with letting them expire.

  • Capitalist at Birth

    Too many of you have much too much time on your hands. Why waste it stroking your keyboards? I for one have more important things to do. Good Day.

    • John

      lol

    • DaveH

      You’re just lazy, Capitalist.
      Just kidding.

  • Steve

    Until Buffett pays the Billion in back taxes that he owes, he should just shut the F up!!

    • DaveH

      Even after. If he wants to give away his own money, that’s his business. But, it isn’t his business to give other peoples’ money away.

  • Joe Joe

    Tell you what; if I can get welfare (corporate) like Buffet, then I’ll go 10 to 1. What a farce, the money just comes right back around to him thru taxpayer funded corporate welfare. It’s a no lose situation for this welfare whore. So your a “sage” if you can make the right connections with crooked politicians in washington, and start collecting welfare? Golly gee, I’m impressed Bob. It’s time to make up a true America’s Most Wanted. Initially it will consist of the puppet politicians selling out/ruining our country, and we’ll use them as stepping stones to get to the “Big Fish”, their bosses (and no, it’s not the American people) the puppet masters. Or vise versa. We have drug dealing, gun running, treasonous dog turds running our country, running America into the ground and bankrupting us, and the sheeple just keep their heads down and keep on grazing as if nothings wrong. WAKE UP AMERICA!!!! Quit being naive, gullible, suckerbob morons! Your kids/grandkids are counting on you and you’re letting them down, BIG TIME! Get involved. It’s time to boycott and punish those companies and government that are not 100% for America.

  • George Nickolas (@BigDealNick)

    Congress (both parties) need to reduce spending and cut waste. Many of the regulations that are imposed by EPA do little to correct major earth problems, but add to loss of revenue for the US Treasury. Medicare requirements imposed on doctors have added to doctor’s cost and increased the cost of medical care and to Medicare Trust Fund.

    Stop the treaties that Hillary Clinton is signing on to impose upon the United States. One will give half of the revenue of our Oil exploration to a world group plus give the secrets of our technology away FREE! Stupid is and Stupid does!

  • Jimmy

    Warren Buffett isn’t worried about taxes or balancing the budget he is only intersted in lining his own pockets and having plenty of pocket change.

    • John

      And? Isn’t that what capitalism is all about?

      • DaveH

        Don’t confuse Crony Capitalism with Capitalism, John.
        Read this book to learn the difference:
        http://mises.org/books/capitalism_kelly.pdf

        Isn’t it great the Mises Institute and their donors provide us with all these Free resources? I love those guys.

  • John

    Interesting how Buffett calls on the GOP members but leaves out those that actually have gotten us into the mess his brother/Sister democrats. Warren why don’t you call out your own party first. I wouldn’t give one penny more than I had as long as there is a democrat controlled senate.

    • Thinking about

      Perhaps Buffett realized the republicans are the holdup in Congress in placing fair tax codes in place. He knows who started the spending fury.

      • DaveH

        If the Progressives (not just Democrats) want to do more reckless spending even in the face of historically high debt, what else should the responsible players in Congress do?
        It isn’t the Taxes, it’s the Spending that is the Problem. Whether the reckless Spenders in Congress pay for that Spending with borrowing or higher taxes, the economy will still suffer.

  • Edna Boddy

    Why doesn’t Obama and family quit taking such expensive vacations and he and Michele quit taking such expensive date? They could just have grandma take the kids and they could sit around the fireplace and have a nice evening. The Chef could fix them a nice dinner, not the really expensive one when they are in New York. That would save us a lot of money.

    • John

      lol, they all did that, why do you expect the Obama’s to be frugal when the rest of the presidents squandered it as if there is no tomorrow? Why should the Obama’s take less vacations then the Bush’s? Any reason besides your personal dislike?

      • DaveH

        Two wrongs have never made a right, John. We have to start somewhere.

  • BillyD

    Giving the Government more money is like raising an unprincipled child’s allowance every time they spend all of it. It only teaches them that no matter how poorly they manage what they are given (not earned) there will always be more.

  • Delilah michael

    Tell Warren Buffet to go into the federal gavernments CAFR reports and he will find enought income to pay off the national debt and totally support the whole country for years to come without charging anyone taxes. I would then suggest that the U.S. account for the import, export and excize taxes and run the country the way it was run for almost 200 years, before the income taxes was ever thrust upon the American people.

  • Jimmy

    Warren Buffett isn’t worried about taxes or balancing the budget he is only interested in lining his own pockets and having plent of pocket change.

    • John

      And? Isn’t that what capitalism is all about?

      • DaveH

        Don’t confuse Crony Capitalism with Capitalism, John.

  • Carol Sowell

    What planet does he think the republicans in Congress are from? It’s the democrats wasteful spending and stubborn refusal to curb same that has put America into a state of near insolvency. If he wants to set up a challenge, make it for everyone, not just the republicans. Then we’ll see the true colors of the democrats who notoriously feign compassion, yet donate very little to charity on their own. Not only that, there are Millions of taxes owed the government by government workers. Remember Little timmy geithner?…and his failure to pay his taxes? He was appointed to Treasury!! I could go on and on about the debacle about Fannie and Freddie and Barney Frank, but what’s the use? Democrats are deaf, dumb and blind when it comes to recognizing their failure to even pass a budget for over 1000 days!!

    • Thinking about

      There must have been a lot of democrats from 2001 to 2006 who was listing their party as republicans. Almost forgot, it was George W Democrat who started two wars we are still paying on presently. It must have been Cheney Democrat who probably assisted in Halliburton to get a no bid contract to assist our troops in Iraq. Guess those democrats spent all the money.

    • Deerinwater

      Short memory? Remind me to not loan you any money. Better then that let me write it down.

      “Do not loan Carol Sowell any money”

      • DaveH

        I would trust Carol a lot more to repay the money, than either of you Liberals, Deer.
        Having said that, it’s not just the Democrats, Carol.

  • duif100

    Warren Buffett should start with paying his own back taxes. That is a worthwhile amount.
    The amount to be raised from Republican in Congress is insignificant relative to the total picture. (Buffett said that for every dollar they (Republicans)will contribute to help reduce the national debt, he’ll match them.)
    I find it amazing that he excluded the Democrats from that offer. He must have realized that Democrats like Biden do not give much to charity or the country. They only take.

    • eddie47d

      Come one Come all there are numerous loopholes for everyone.The rich,poor and all the inbetweeners eat often at Americas dinner plate and for some it’s an all you can eat buffet. I see nothing wrong with the wealthy paying more because they gain more from our tax system through those loopholes. An even better idea is a fairer tax for all without any loopholes.

      • JeffH

        eddie, just an FYI…If it’s the law, it’s not a loophole…a loophole is nothing more than a “talkingpoint” to cover the omission or ambiguity in the wording of a contract or law…just an excuse.

      • eddie47d

        Then you can call it what you want. A scam,having a dirty tax preparer who juggles the books,hiding money off shore,phony deductions,trumped up mileage charges, unproven equipment deductions,false crop claims,claiming home business expenses that are really a part of the residence. Loopholes would be a simpler version of these schemes.

    • DaveH

      Yep. If Warren Buffet were to match with his entire $21 Billion fortune, the Debt decrease would be less than .3 percent.

  • Jay

    Warren buffet obviously drinks his own bath-water. Pay down the national debt? How are we to pay down 200 trillion dollars? All of it BOGUS, btw!

  • Thinking about

    Chip, where is your article challenging the member of Congress who have signed an oath to Norville Norquist? here is the difference in Buffet and Norquist is Buffett is trying to get the debt paid and Norquist is trying to keep it going up. Buffett will be helpful and Norquist is being destructful. It is time to build this country up not tear it down.

    • DaveH

      How is it more helpful to take money from the productive private sector, and give it to the Unproductive public sector?
      I don’t understand you Liberals at all. Here we have the results of Big Government right in your faces and you ignore it:
      http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

      In all your years, you haven’t learned that “experience is the best teacher”? Big Government is NOT the Solution; Big Government is the Problem.

      • Thinking About

        What kind of reply is this? I wanted to know when an article was going to be coming on Congressional members signing oaths with Grover Norquist.

        • DaveH

          Have you not read the news? Buffet wants Congress to increase taxes on the Rich.

          • Thinking about

            Buffett wants a fair tax code which will indeed increase percentages on many such as himself. We have a large debt and if you are truly a finanial person you should be one of the first to know we need to pay down our debt.

  • Brian

    Instead of throwing away their money in the impossible attempt to reduce the deficit, they should donate their cash to a local food bank or other worthy cause.

  • http://yahoo Frank

    You gotta be kiddin me? That is a big ploy on his part to get his name in the headlines. He knows that the “Fatcats” in congress are not going to let go of their money. They simply want to spend more and more of ours and get as much of it as they can for themselves before sinking the ship. I dont trust any of the lying “Fatcats:

  • JeffH

    :)

  • Deerinwater

    “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.”

    Sounds more like putting your money where you mouth is to me.

    and Chip , paying down the national debit and paying Federal Taxes are two separate things, ~ while it’s true there is a common linked.

    But the deal proposed is to match funds to pay down the National Debit. So don’t take liberties with twisting words and changing the proposal. Federal Income Tax has never been a hard figure or the bottom line determined quickly,easily or in timely fashion when so much is required to factor in.

    I know life should be simple, I wished it was but it’s not been for me or anyone else that doesn’t use the “short form”. I spend over $2,000.00 and something around 60 hours just preparing to submit my tax forms for my tiny business. Do you really think Buffett might file a short form?

    When you pay your house mortgage,depending on how your “deal” was crafted, you pay, interest, principal, insurance and at least two or three taxing authorizes all of which comprises your mortgage payment. If just one of them feels slighted a dollar, I will be notified and demanded to pay it.

    Federal income taxes and the National Debit are no different. So why attempt to be so simple minded and act so smart all at the same time?

    • DaveH

      Your comment was “simple minded”, Deer.

  • Andy

    Why doesn’t Buffet challenge Hollywood and the Athletes in the USA? Or, anyone making over $1 million a year? Or, match Obama’s donation five to one! Obama great at spending the taxpayers money, let’s see if he will step up tp the plate!

    • Deerinwater

      we are not talking about Obama here, SIR

      • DaveH

        Andy was.

  • NOBAMA2012

    He will likely claim it as a charitable gift on his taxes and get it all right back and the end of the year. Or Him and Obama got something brewing behind the scenes that will surely line Buffet’s pocket. Government contract with closed bids to guarantee a specific company gets the contract, a company in which Buffet owns or has stock in. He is simply show boating, when a rich person lays down money there is always motivation of some sort of a return for their investment. Seldom do they lay money down just out of goodness of heart without expecting something in return.

  • jopa

    WOW That Warren Buffet guy sure seems like a true patriot.America needs more like him.I also like that song his son Jimmy sings about Margarita ville.He is also pretty cool.That was also a great idea on how he made his money by serving the meals in his restaurant Buffet style.

  • James

    If all of the world’s billionaires gave all their money to Congress, to reduce the national debt, it would still be over $13 trillion.

    • Vigilant

      And you could tax everyone in this country so that they pay 100% of their earnings into the Treasury and it still would not make a dent in the debt.

    • DaveH

      Why would all the Billionaires in the World want to donate their fortunes to bail out the United States?

  • Glenda Miller

    I just wish that Mr. Buffet would decide to help some ordinary folks…like us in Campton,Ky. Wow..what a blessing it would be ..to have such a nice and wealthy man looking our for You..No kidding, Mr. Buffet seems to be such a nice, congenial, and right thinking fellow. It would be such a treasure to be his friend-no doubt!! Best wishes to him…and who could even be jealous that he became rich?? Yahoooo

  • Steve

    If he cares so much why is he not just writing a check?? I will tell you because he is an a*ss wipe.

    And why has he not said he paid tax on the money when he first made it and then pays an additional 15%, or he he could just pay 36% and be done with it.

    What a piece of work he is.

  • JeffH

    ///

  • steve in AZ

    I have a better deal for Mr. Buffet. I’ll pay 100% of my income this year in taxes if he will just pay off all the back taxes he and his companies owe, and shut up.

    Since I know that won’t happen, I’ll pay that rate til I die should he take this deal instead of his.

    If he will just shut up, I’ll even borrow some and pay it in,too. ;)

  • http://all johnson

    nuts

  • Don

    You can’t take away “smart” from Warren Buffet, but, he is also “sly”.Mr Buffet invested a lot of money on the hopes for high speed rail in this country, and that is’nt working out very well (so far). Any raised taxes on him, and others, would certainly be made back triple fold if most goods were delivered by rail.

  • john m.

    Chip, i wonder who in the hell is earning all the interest we pay on our debt. No one ever talks about who this is. Can you let us know who it is getting all that interest??? I believe to reduce our debt we should stop all forign aid, reduce all federal payroll to a level equal to the pay that each job in the country pays, and make all elected people pay the same health insurance we the people pay, and when they retire they should not get a pension for life, and then their wife gets it till they die. Well this is just a few things that should be done, and also made more public so the all citizens in this USA know these things, sinc i feel that most of them have not a clue of all this. JMP

    • Thinking About

      Good comments!!!!

  • PopsinAZ

    The reason the federal deficit continues to skyrocket is NOT because wealthy people do not pay their enough and/or their fair share of income taxes. Once legislated expenditures are included in the budget they never go away. Additionally, the administration. agencies of government, politicians and members of congress SPEND more and more even when expenditures are not budgeted. Increasing income (receiving more money from taxes) is not the recipe for balancing the budget. Anyone who thinks Warren Buffett hasn’t dramatically increased his personal fortune as a result of government tax laws and other ‘special interest’ associations is grossly naive. Obama and the Democrats are attempting to claim left vs. right is “class warfare.” What a cruel joke!!

  • Vigilant

    Flashy’s socialist sympathies are evident in his contention that “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.”

    No one’s arguing your statement that “Such is the way it is,” the argument is that it is NOT the way it should be.

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

    “Social reasons and theories” carry no weight when it comes to the fundamental underpinning of ordered society: it’s called “property.” The concept was so important that Locke claimed that it was the number one reason for government: to protect private property.

    In fact, Locke enumerated some rights of Natural Law when he claimed that those God-given rights were “life, liberty and property.” It was, for your info, the major part of the Declaration of Independence, upon which our Constitutional Republic is founded.

    Estate tax dilutes the very foundation of liberty and property. The decedent under Natural Law has every right to accumulate property, and has also the right to decide how it is disposed upon his/her death.

    • Flashy

      Vigilant…there’s nothing stoppig a person from bequeathing his estate proceeds as they desire. Nothing stopping that at all. I do not know the exact amount, but i believe it’s somewhere in the $5 mil range non-farm, and more for farm families…which is exempt.

      Thus, if an estate had a value of $5.1 mil (if the cap is correct), only the $0.1 wouldbe exposed to any estate tax. Thta’s without estate planning which raises even higher the threshhold. I would say if you have assets over the amount of the estate tax threshhold, and haven’t done estate planning…well…you’ve got the mediun IQ of the modern day GOP voting pool.

      This falls only on the largest of estates.

      Now..here’s the key portion of the tax you miss. The inheritance is tax free. The heir pays zip as it’s gift income. Now, if folks want to exempt inheritance from being considered a gift, and taxed as ordinary income, you could make the case out to erase the estate tax. Though, anyone earning Middle class incomes and inheriting an amount of say …$100,000 is gonna get screwed.

      The dollar passes possession. Who pays the tax. The estate (and then only if it’s in the millions, below which is tax free), or the heirs?

      We won’t even get to the social theories.

  • Rod

    Our current money is only a iou it has absolutely no value. Before President Kennedy was assassinated he went on record that he would pull our advisers out of Viet Nam before the end of 1963 and he would return the country to the silver standard and absorb the Federal Reserve.

  • David

    Buffet doesn’t make his statements without expecting some favors in return. Just like the hard line deals he makes in the private sector that no one else can get, he gets preference from “O and his cronies in Washington. Why do you think the Oil Pipeline from Canada was axed ? Buffet railroads have a monopoly on hauling goods from Canada to almost anywhere in the USA including Canadian oil. If the pipeline actually gets approved and built, he will need some time to unload all that railroad stock !

  • David

    I forgot to add that it would cost him a lot more than matching tax payments of Congressmen and government officials when / if that (the oil pipeline from Canada) would become a reality in short order ! His actions are actually worse than pure lobbying. They are cronyism and hypocrisy at it’s worst.

  • JeffH

  • GeoInSD

    What a pompous *ss Mr. Buffet is. Explain to me why his offer is only directed to Republicans when the Democrats are the ones that so eagerly spend other people’s money?

    • Thinking About

      This is a easy one, the republicans, the party of NO, HELL NO, signed an oath with Grover Norquist not to raise taxes on the rich and bypass their oath of office.

      • DaveH

        If you want their money, TA, instead of stealing it through your Government Gang, why don’t you do it the old fashioned and moral way — earn it from them?

        • APN

          That would require independent “thinking” DaveH, and thinking requires concentration and mental discipline. It also requires self-reliance and hard work.

          I find “thinkingabout” to be an oxymoron. No thinking capacity in that brain. If you could call it that.

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

    Whilst I think the pipeline idea is a good one, it would appear to be strategically and environmentally safer not to have a pipeline above ground and needing to be patrolled every day so that Bu nut case or foreign country decides to blow it up spilling millions gallons of fuel onto productive land or fire explosions along its route. For all the good reasons there are lots other reasons why its also a very bad idea. Who would pay for the wages of thousands of army personnel who would have guard every inch of it every hour of every day to protect it from sabatoueg. What’s the better spending? The oil road tankers OR the people wages to build it and then guard it.?

    • APN

      Boy that sounds logical to me! So let me get this straight, you, the Australian, thinks that it would be a better policy for we AMERICANS to be dependent on foreign oil shipped across the OCEAN, correct????

      Please, stay in Australia, we have enough dumb progressives in our country now!

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

        Unfortunately, APN your a short term thinker and even though you misunderstood my original comment, you have raised another important point and that is that both the USA and Canada should not use most of its oil reserves and you should continue buying from overseas while you can and keep your own avail for reserves for the day when you might need it and wont be able to get it from overseas. Oil is not in abundance as you might imagine and the country holding reserves for essential services such as your military will be in the strongest position. But APN as you value national security at a lower level than curerent comsumption costs…. I’m thinking your not thinking straight or considered all the other aspects of running a country which might explain why you are a commentator but not an OBAMA adviser…thank god.. Your thinking is NQR…meaning NOT QUITE RIGHT in my opinion My original comment related to the cost of securing the pipeline and NOT that i was against you getting the oil transported more efficiently as a pipeline in a perfect world …would indeed be a good idea. And dont worry I’m not thinking of moving to live in your town in the USA to live close to people like you who dont want me there with you… AS AUSTRALIA IS MY PARADISE ON THIS EARTH which might explain why so many people are risking their lives in treacherous seas to get here. Your mexicans just have to walk over the border with no great risk at all…

        • DaveH

          If Australia is doing well, Gilly, it certainly isn’t due to Liberals like yourself:
          http://www.heritage.org/index/country/australia

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

            DaveH, Can you please define your meaning of a Liberal? we seem to have differing definitions in Australia since we have a Conservative party called the Liberal Party.

            Australias great wealth was mainly attributed to our vast rural production of wool, wheat and beef and more recently Mining of our nations great resourves of open cut GOLD mining, Coal, Iron ore, diamonds,Gas,Oil,silver, etc etc earning $billions in revenue from mainly WESTERN AUSTRALIA AND QUEENSLAND. These vast resources earn the revenue for the owners such as BHP Billiton, RIO TINTO and numerous other mining companies in which many USA corporations have an interest or own outright.The richest woman in the world is an Australian and she controls vast iron ore and coal deposits in WA.

            A great Australian one of many people who do things …[the original natives did nothing...and now want it for nil too...thats the nature of all lazy people]
            CHAIRMAN & DIRECTOR
            MRS. GEORGINA HOPE RINEHART
            Born: 9th February 1954, Perth, West Australia

            Educated: St Hilda’s Anglican School for Girls, Sydney University

            Mrs Rinehart joined the Hancock Group initially as a Personal Assistant to her father, the late Lang Hancock, after studying Economics at Sydney University. Mrs Rinehart gained an extensive knowledge of the Pilbara iron ore industry during those years and in particular at Marandoo, for which a bankable feasibility study was undertaken (after intitial exploration by Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd), in conjunction with then partner, Texas Gulf of the USA. Mrs Rinehart became Executive Chairman of Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd (HPPL) and the HPPL Group of companies in March 1992.

            Since becoming Executive Chairman, and after entering the Iron Ore (Hope Downs) State Agreement in December 1992, the Hancock Group has explored and undertaken a pre-feasibility study of Hope Downs, and commenced a bankable feasibility study. Mrs Rinehart was awarded “Deal of the Year” at the 2006 Diggers and Dealers Forum for the 50:50 Joint Venture with RTIO at Hope Downs, which now has two mines in production and a third under construction, and further development work is being undertaken.

            In 1992, after undertaking the first exploration field trip (together with Chief Geologist, Richard Paquay), Mrs Rinehart decided HPPL should apply for the Roy Hill 1 tenements, which were granted in 1993. HPPL has extensively drilled this low phosphorous resource and proven in excess of one billion tons to JORC specification (cut off by 55% FE) and has finalised a positive bankable feasibility study on the Roy Hill 1 project, a project that is potentially the largest undeveloped marra mamba deposit in Australia (outside of the majors). HPPL is currently in the process of seeking partners to develop this major resource.

            In 1996 Mrs Rinehart decided HPPL should apply for the Alpha coal tenements in Queensland. An extensive exploration program, together with completing a positive pre feasibility study and bankable feasibility study has since been undertaken by HPPL, and a JORC reserve in excess of 4 billion tonnes of good quality thermal coal, low in sulphur and low in ash, has been identified. HPPL is currently in the process of seeking partners to develop this major resource, and has nearly completed a value engineering study. Planning (subject to all Government approvals and licences) is for a 30 mtpa mine (which would be Australia’s largest thermal coal mine).

            Mrs Rinehart has also progressed the adjacent Kevin’s Corner thermal coal tenement, which also contains in excess of 3 billion tonnes. A positive pre feasibility study has been completed, a bankable feasibility study commenced and a JORC resource well in excess of 2 billion tonnes of good quality coal, low in sulphur and low in ash, has been identified. Subject to all Government approvals, it is also planned in the bankable feasiblility study that this mine will produce after ramp up at approximately 30 mtpa – again larger than any thermal coal mine currently existing in Australia.

            Exploration work and a concept study has also been progressed at Hancock Alpha West, and this third mine is also planned to produce in the vacinity of 30 mtpa after all approvals, permits and licences.

            In 2007, Mrs Rinehart entered the Jacaranda Joint Venture Alliance, which has applied for additional tenements and holds tenements across Australia (Uranium, Lead, Zinc, Molybedum, Gold, Diamonds and Petroleum), and HPPL manages the exploration. Early indications are showing some extensive deposits.

            Mrs Rinehart continues to oversee significant progress exploring, evaluating and expanding potentially world class mine developments in the Hancock Prospecting Group portfolio, together with an expanding property portfolio, and pastoral interests.

            Mrs Rinehart continues as a director of the Hope Downs Marketing company, a joint marketing company with RTIO.

            In December 2010 Mrs Rinehart joined the board of Network Ten.

            Additionally Mrs Rinehart has been honoured with:

            1991 Commissioned a Kentucky Colonel by the Govenor of Kentucky
            2006 Diggers and Dealers “Deal of the Year”
            2009 Australian Export Heros Award (in recognition to an extraordinary contribution to the growth and development of Australian exports)
            2009 Telstra – West Australian Commonwealth Bank Business Owner Award
            2009 Telstra West Australian Business Woman of the Year
            2009 Telstra Australian Commonwealth Business Woman of the Year (National)
            2009 Telstra Australian Business Woman of the Year (National)
            2010 Non Executive Director SISHA
            2011 100 Year Centenary, Hall of Fame (WA)
            2011 Global Leadership Award (the ‘Masterclass CEO of the Year’
            ———————————-

            The rich revenues into our economy permit the creation of lots of mining jobs ….lots of taxes these workers pay…the corporations who feed off all the economic activity also pay taxes and so down the line everyone benefits ….and so Austtralia IS A PARADISE at the moment. Our countries debts are sustainable due to the vastly huge incomes generated from our mining and rural areas. So if you think…your country has more to offer please advise how so? Why not consider travelling outside your comfort zone and come to Australia and tell me that we are not living in paradise and explain why you are better off in USA….love the hear your arguments for or against…

        • APN

          So once again, let me get this straight. It would be better for us in America to receive oil from the Middle East in the same way it would be better for China to receive oil from Canada, correct?

          Boy, SHAZAAM, higher shipping costs and more likely to have a major oil spill thus contaminating the oceans. Makes perfect sense to me!

          Maybe you should run for President in 2012!

          Beam me up Scotty!

  • gnafu

    Buffett is hot air only. Look how Obama has used his stupid remarks about his secretary paying more taxes than Buffett. Obama isn’t going to get any of Buffett’s money and he knows it. Buffett’s money is well hidden and he intends to keep it that way. If he is so generous, why not give his secretary a huge wage increase? People like that make me sick!

  • james

    Do they have a nursing home for him? Oh wait, he probably owns all of them. I’d love to see his tax returns for the past several years and how he squirrels away millions off shore as to avoid US taxes. And with all his investments, how many have resulted in families losing their jobs. Just shut up and go away or put your money where your mouth is.

  • APN

    Bottom line, who gives a crap what this man thinks?

  • Kris

    Maybe a rich man, like Warren Buffet could be President. We’ve had old men before, remember Ronald Reagan? He was 68, when he became President.

    • Deerinwater

      68 is not old, you Goofy piece of wasted by product of masturbation. It is “prime” for the job at hand.

      • DaveH

        Why the unwarranted over-the-top nasty personal attack, Deer?

  • http://whitestonefoundation.org Tom Mack

    I love how Warren Buffet can lecture the rest of us peons on how to revise the tax code and how we should pay more in taxes. I have a revision: let’s tax Mr. Buffet on his unrealized capital gains. All of the big time investors buy stocks at a low price and carry them on their books at that low price. They do not pay taxes on the gains until they sell that stock. However, if they need to borrow money, the bank will lend Mr. Buffet the money based upon what the stock is worth now, not what he paid for it. My suggestion: if your total net worth is over say 100 million dollars, then you must pay taxes on the capital gains realized in that tax year. Therefore, if you paid $10 a share for 100 shares XYZ Corporation stock (total cost $1,000) and at the end of the year, the stock was worth $20 a share (realized value $2,000), you would have to pay taxes on the $1,000 you made that year. If that idea even got brought up in Congress, the lobbyists for the rich would go crazy. However, if we are serious about taxation, then we need to do this!

    • Donald

      You sound like a democrat!

    • DaveH

      We just need to get the Government out of our Marketplaces, except to enforce against Force and Fraud. That would reduce the Government Spending and our tax bill dramatically.

  • Jay

    The present debt was created for the purpose to enslave, and nothing more! Pay it off? No such luck, or chance of that ever happening, and the Vampires that created it, will make sure it will never be paid off! Rather than talking about paying the debt off, we should be talking about cancelling the debt. End the Fed! Since we, the tax-payers, were not directly involved, nor agreed to the irresponsible borrowing and spending, we tell the sob’s to go —- themselves, and stick the debt where the sun don’t shine!

  • ONTIME

    WB, thinks he is playing poker and wants to buy the pot, so why not let him put up his money and then we will let him have all the glory and fame that goes with being broke….what a hero Warren is.

  • robert c peters

    i am JUST A POOR man. does Mr. buffet think I WILL contribute to this cause ALSO? his contribution to this, is 3 years worth of my wages. And this “proposal”, sounds like it will do NOTHING to change THE SPENDING CRISIS our government has got us into. I am almost glad, as are my folks, our time in this world “is limited ” now. this world , almost DESERVES to go down. I came into this world with nothing, and shall leave with NOTHING also. Those who have gained the most, are most fearful, of what they CANNOT take with them when they leave. A——–…..

  • Jim

    Chip:
    While your statement that “The God of the Old Testament asked His people to tithe 10 percent” is 100% correct, he also asks the same in the New Testament. So a more accurate statement would be “The God of the Bible asks us to tithe 10%”.

  • Fubert Bar

    Why does every solution from the left (even cartoon ones like buffet’s) always entail giving the government more money, rather than spending less? ….. Wish it worked that way for me.

    • Donald

      Because you need to do both to get the National Debt under control.
      It happened on your watch, caused by people you voted into office, whether Republican or Democrat. Check the voting records of those you voted for.

      • Fubert Bar

        That is certainly the logic currently employed in DC … the real answer is to spend less than you take in. Why is that such a difficult concept for people like you to grasp?

        We are already bear a horrendous tax burden, increasing it will only do more to weaken the economy, and lessen government revenues. … Perhaps you should do a little investigation before parroting the drivel you hear nancy pelosi and her cohorts (on both sides of the isle) spew.

      • DaveH

        No we don’t, Donald. Every dollar taken from the Private Sector would have been spent there much more productively than it will get spent in the Public Sector.
        Cutting the Spending is the only way to go.
        http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/ron-paul-plan-to-restore-america/

  • LoneStar

    If you took all of the Republicans money they have Mr Buffett, and paid 3 dollars for every dollar they had, you would not even put a scratch in the debt the obuma admin have got us into.

    • Thinking About

      I like your thoughts, let’s just forgive all past debts along with the $700 billion voted on in W administration and the cost of two wars started by W and go forth. Now this would solve all the problems.

  • Donald

    There was no debt when George Bush came into office. Bush and Obama are birds of a feather.

    • Deerinwater

      Here’s your bird, you don’t know $hit from $hoe polish. It’s a shame you have the right to vote and that I would defend that right to the very core of my conviction.

    • Fubert Bar

      There has been a national debt for as long as i can remember … But never to the magnitude of the last two presidents. Bush added some 4 trillion over eight years, and obama has added another 5 trillion in his first three years. Get a clue, this isn’t a debt that can be paid off by more taxes, we have to cut expenditures significantly.

      http://www.skymachines.com/US-National-Debt-Per-Capita-Percent-of-GDP-and-by-Presidental-Term.htm

  • Deerinwater

    goofy bunch of ba$tard here.

    I’ve nothing to share with this bunch, snake bite one and all.

    • JeffH

      …speaking of goofy…after reading your last 3 posts, you’re either drunk, on drugs, looney or all of the above…a real piece of work you be…

      • DaveH

        That’s what I’ve been thinking, Jeff.

        • APN

          Seems to be chemicals more than alcohol. My opinion of course.

  • Marty S.

    The guy has lost his mind.

  • Seek Wisdom

    It is hard to believe Chip is critizing Buffett & Rigell for their contributions,but it seems he is. And Chip’s math is fuzzy,to say the least. Is he saying that if one can’t manage to pay 50 or 60% of the debt,they are wasting their time? PLD,you need an editor badly.
    “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.” I notice it is considered normal and natural that the very wealthy search every loophole they can find to pay as low a % of their income in taxes as they can (hopefully) get away with.

    • DaveH

      Chip is not criticizing Buffet for his giving. He’s criticizing Buffet for lobbying to Force others to give.
      You’ve got a long way to go to seek that wisdom.

      • Seek Wisdom

        I don’t have as far to go as Chip and,apparently,you do. How is Buffett ‘forcing’ anyone to give? The case might be made to say he is shaming them to give,with good reason.
        Think before you post,dave.

        • JeffH

          …and you should seek wisdom…

        • DaveH

          I think, therefore I know you’re ignorant, Seek.
          http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/58129-buffett-to-meet-with-senate-dems
          From the article “Warren Buffett, the renowned investor and the world’s second richest man, told Senate Democrats that wealthy Americans need to pay higher taxes”.
          Government is Force. Taxes are Force. Have you ever tried telling them ‘no thank you, I don’t want to pay’?
          Good grief, Seek, this is old news. Do all you Liberals live in caves?

          • Seek Wisdom

            The sad truth is that right-wingers want everything from gov’t but don’t want to pay for it.
            Put another way,Freedom isn’t free.
            This is a long-standing truth. Are you new?

          • APN

            Seek Wisdom said: “The sad truth is that right-wingers want everything from gov’t but don’t want to pay for it.”

            Speak for yourself you little pathetic dependent liberal. All I want the government to do is follow the constitution and stay the hell out of my business. I don’t need you, Obama or anyone else for that matter looking out for MY best interest. Mind your own damn business and either work for a living or starve. I personally don’t care which you choose.

            Wisdom my arse….

        • Nadzieja Batki

          What do you call shaming someone to give? It is force.

          • APN

            Well sure it is! That’s how this Marxist BS works!

  • http://PersonalLibertyDigest Mariana

    Is Warren Buffet going to match donations before or after he pays the millions he owes in back taxes which he has been fighting in court?

  • http://PersonalLibertyDigest Mariana

    The financial problems of this country are not the result of the rich not paying enough taxes,but of uncontrolled government spending: No budget, no limits on spending, baseline budgeting for all government agencies and programs, regardless of whether or not the increase is needed, abuses by members of Congress such as Nancy Pelosi’s extravagant travel requirements, Barack & Michelle Obama’s extravagant travels, Obama’s wasteful spending on his own political campaign (million dollar buses), remodeling Air Force One to convert it into his ‘personal’ plane, not useful to another President, unnecessary bail outs, unnecessary loans to bogus ‘green industries’, WASTE, WASTE, WASTE, AND MORE WASTE!!! Enough is enough!

    • Thinking About

      And let’s add Stuntman W Mission Accomplished, cost of cutting trees In Texas and all of the mountain bike riding. Oh forgot how much it cost to read a book to a classroom in Florida. Check how many days W took off and holding hands.

  • dhellew2

    Every government employee is responsible for their part in the national debt. The national debt was authorized by congress and many presidents but it is government spending as a whole that cause the debt. Government generates no income only expense. Government spending shrinks the economy two ways, one; it takes taxes from the private sector that creates and is the economy, making the economy smaller two; every new government employee means one less person to pay taxes to support the expense only government. Government payroll is taxes and you cannot pay taxes with taxes.

    • Deerinwater

      We would not be having this discussion about Federal Spending if “W” and the people he listened too had not drove US off in a ditch, started two unfunded wars with long term commitment that continued long after he una$$ed the property and gave away tax cuts away without placing the Federal Government on a restricted diet.

      Now, 8 years later, you want to blame every Government employee, Fireman and School Teacher, Women Wellness Centers and Labor Unions as the nation finds itself short on loot today?

      It is true , that we are paying for “BAD GOVERNMENT”, bad leadership, but some of that “leadership” has since been 4 years removed.

      If you wanted to declare war on ALL Federal Government, you should has started that war no later the 1992. Many here would want to go back much farther.

      Ron Paul is your only hope for some correction, offer him to the American people and give the American people two sound option to select from as they cast their vote in November 2012.

  • ranger hall

    NICE TRY, SAFE BET. CONGRESS sure is not going to Give one Penny of their ill gotten Gains, Safe bet BUFFET.Congress ONLY knows how to waste TAXPAYERS Money.
    ALSO the States Politicians ONLY know how to Waste TAXPAYERS Money, Balanced Budgets ONLY a word to Politicians. Americans are getting stupid.

  • ranger hall

    Now do you wonder why we have so many TAX LAWS and deductions. Simple these laws are designed to protect the RICH.
    NOW suppose every wage earner, and money earner PAID a Flat 10%, CORPerations included. WITH no DEDUCTIONS of any kind allowed Earners earning less than 12,500. Would be excluded. wonder how much money would this bring in ea. year. Well we could save Millions and Millions BECAUSE we would not need SO much of the IRS, we could save millions on Buildings and property no longer needed. People would no longer have so many tax Laws to worry about.
    Also we could REMOVE all The PERKS the Politicians now enjoy and take advantage of, Like NOTHING Free, Pay for food,Drive their own cars,pay for their on gas,Pay Half of their Ins.While in office. AlLow no RETIREMENT Until they have reached 20YRS Service. Like most of us People, PAY for their own SECURITY People.aND I COULD GO ON FOREVER. hECK THIS ALONG COULD SAVE millions EA yr. get A pRESIDENT AND politicians IN oFFICE THAT DO NOT NEED TO SPEND millions AND mILLIONS to tRANSPORT AND pROVIDE sO mUCH sECURITY FOR. hECK IF ONE GOT KILLED we COULD REPLACE HIM OR hER IN 5 MIN. no REAL lOSS.
    yOU KNOW ITS AMAZING WHAT THE pEOPLE could do IF THEY JUST GOT OFF THERE LAZY buttts AND DID SOMETHING ABOUT THIS mAJOR pROBLEM
    aMAZING HOW MUCH MONEY COULD BE SAVED IF WE JUST TOOK ALL THESE USELESS LAWS OFF THE BOOKS AND GOT DOWN TO BASICS.
    BUT IT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

  • ranger hall

    a FLAT TAX RATE WOULD BE FOR EVERYONE, AND IT WOULD BE FAIR. THE SAME FOR EVERYONE. wOULD ALSO BRING IN MORE FUNDS, EQUAL TAX FOR ALL.
    but THIS WILL NOT HAPPEN, FOR THE LAWS ARE WRITTEN FOR THE RICH. AND THE WORKING CLASS PAYS FOR IT. gOVT IS CONTROLLED BY THE RICH NOT THE PEOPLE.

  • dick douglas

    how warren pledging to match cuts?

    the problem isn’t income for uncle sam, it too much spending.

    keep focused warren. stop trying to confuse the issue.

  • dick douglas

    correction. note to self. proof read. proof read

    how about warren pledging to match cuts?

    the problem isn’t income for uncle sam, it too much spending.

    keep focused warren. stop trying to confuse the issue.

  • baker john

    Just collecting more taxes is not going to help a bit that would be like putting water in a frying pan full of hot oil. It’s time those numskulls on the hill use their brains CUT the Government Spending will do more to correct the problem than raising taxes only. CUT and Close LOOPHOLES that way you’ll be spending LESS and Making more with the holes closed.

  • baker john

    Why does Warren not make that call for ALL SITTING MEMBERS, House, Senate, W.H. aslo including all the Carz why be picky

  • Deerinwater

    “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.”

    I agree with you Chip, get out of debt as fast as you can, spend you money among LOCALs so the money circles inside a closed loop, spend money on things that have intrinsic value or things you use and need often. Live below your means and stockpile your resources.

    but I don’t think Continental Script was backed by gold or silver.

    Continental currency

    Continental One Third Dollar Note (obverse)

    A fifty-five dollar Continental issued in 1779.
    After the American Revolutionary War began in 1775, the Continental Congress began issuing paper money known as Continental currency, or Continentals. Continental currency was denominated in dollars from 1/6 of a dollar to $80, including many odd denominations in between. During the Revolution, Congress issued $241,552,780 in Continental currency.[9]
    Continental currency depreciated badly during the war, giving rise to the famous phrase “not worth a continental”.[10] A primary problem was that monetary policy was not coordinated between Congress and the states, which continued to issue bills of credit.[11] “Some think that the rebel bills depreciated because people lost confidence in them or because; they were not backed by tangible assets,” writes financial historian Robert E. Wright. “Not so. There were simply too many of them.”[12] Congress and the states lacked the will or the means to retire the bills from circulation through taxation or the sale of bonds.[13]
    Another problem was that the British successfully waged economic warfare by counterfeiting Continentals on a large scale. Benjamin Franklin later wrote:
    The artists they employed performed so well that immense quantities of these counterfeits which issued from the British government in New York, were circulated among the inhabitants of all the states, before the fraud was detected. This operated significantly in depreciating the whole mass….[14]

    • DaveH

      You say this, Deer — “but I don’t think Continental Script was backed by gold or silver”, in a way that makes it sound like Chip said it was.
      Was that intentional or just inadvertant?

  • HB

    The corporate tax should be zero, and dividends and interest should be taxed as ordinary income.

    For capital gains, I’d preserve the distinction of short-term vs. long-term we have now, where long-term capital gains have a special low tax rate.

    Carried interest on the other hand should be taxed as ordinary income.

    The replacement of corporate taxes should not be more income taxes, but instead a national sales tax, just like all of our competitors, so that imports pay the same tax as American goods.

    That would put you, an American worker, on a level playing field with foreign competition.

    To cut government spending, we should set our current defense spending, as we face No Warsaw Pact and No Equivalent (no standing armies arrayed against us in those old, huge numbers)….at pre-cold-war levels of GDP, such as during the 1930s. Medicare will also need radical reform.

  • DJ

    The only source of new money entering our economy is for the Fed to lend it through its member banks or back to Uncle Sam thus creating debt for which the citizens are responsible. While it may be reasonable to expect us to pay back the amount that was borrowed, the money required to pay the interest can only exist if additional money is loaned into the economy therefore creating additional interest due which is alse owed to the Fed. If that’s not a Ponzi scheme then they had better apologize to Bernie Madoff.

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

    I have not seen a reply yet on how much your federal and your 50 plus States hold in total tangible assets against which they have liabilities. National debt is not just government debt, its debt oweed by individuals, corporations and government . Asssets 9include overseas assets. So please does anyone really know what the true picture is before everyone gets upset and think it is the end of the financial world.

    • DaveH

      It’s your question, Gilly, why don’t you look it up?

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

        I;m asking you because you should know better than me if the sources are reliable.

        • DaveH

          All you can do is find various sources, and use your life-experience to decide for yourself if human biases are tainting the figures. I would try to interject a little Praxeology into the equation in order to determine the best I can if any biases might be present in the figures. If, for instance, you read CPI (consumer price index) figures from the Government, consider the fact that since Social Security and other Government payouts are adjusted by the cost of living, that they would therefore have a bias towards keeping the CPI low. In fact, in that case, there is an accountant that attempts to adjust for that and give what he believes are the true CPI figures (shadowstats.com). But I would be pretty confident that the actual CPI figures (coming from Government) are certainly no higher than reality.
          Here is an article, Gilly, to help you better understand the concept of Praxeology:
          http://mises.org/daily/1351/Psychology-versus-Praxeology

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

    Does anyone know what proportion of GNP or GDP is generated by your Federal and State governments? Then how many people and businesses rely on that govt expenditure for their livelyhood and or investment asset values to be sustained?

    • DaveH

      Are you trying to make the case that Government controls much of our economy, Gilly? Yes, the do. Thanks for pointing that out. Now, what is our current economic condition?

      • APN

        Excellent DaveH!

  • Robert Hamilton

    Interesting Buffet did not challenge the Democrats.

  • Charles

    As I have already pointed out, Buffet didn’t challenge Democrats because he knows that they will never agree to his proposal.

  • ranger hall

    1- Congress CONTROLS SPENDING. This has Got to Happen.
    2- Flat rate Tax for all. Earners and Corporations.
    3- Need to bring back jobs to this Country.
    People cannot pay their fair share if they have NO JOBS.
    4- CONGRESS MUST BE HELT ACCOUNTABLE.
    5- WHY wait 4 years to get crooks out of Office, Then we need to put them in Jail for violating the Peoples Trust.
    6- Insider Trading is againest the Law, But we need Congress to pass a 2nd Law that say congress cannot do insider trading..What a Waste, They will still do IT.And Not be Punished. Congress and the Other club Members KNOW ahead of time what will take Place, World News,Corporation News. There trust funds then Buy or Sale based on this news, WELL a hesd of the Gen Public.
    PEOPLE the Only suckers are the american People.
    ALL POLITICIANS, FED and STATE. ONLY KNOW HOW TO SPEND THE TAXPAYERS MONEY. LAWS ARE NEEDED FOR BALANCED BUDGETS.
    The national DEBT. Interest on this DEBT. WE pay to Other COUNTRIES,BANKS, BANKS YES BANKS.AND the RICH. People the Govt. Makes IT so these People get your TAX Money. Best form of their Money Protection.
    Govt People have got there own CLUB, And we are not Members. YET this has been going on for many, Many Years and all WE Americans can DO is BITCH. Politicians and Crooks Only FEAR the People if they are UNITED. Thats why they keep us Seperated. End of Story

  • ranger hall

    Banks use our Deposits to buy Govt Bonds, Which is Loaning Money to the Govt.They the Govt then uses Your Tax Money to Repay the Loan with Interest. An easy way to make Money with NO RISK.
    The Gen Public do not have enought Money to reap good Profits,Savings Bonds Pay Less then Banks. The more MONEY Makes more MONEY. The Rich get Richer and The Poor get Poorer.

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

      Ranger Hall, your statement is rather simplistic. I’ll give you a slightly longer version of mine, but still wont be comprehensive an answer…. The banks have shareholders who put in some capital. They raise funds from depositors [at a cost] from a whole spectrum of small and large depositors in order to lend money in bulk to a range of borrowers at a higher interest rates [sale price of money] and other terms and conditions. This process only works if the depositors have confidence they are going to be able to withdraw their money without loss of capital at any time or at the end of the maturity of their deposit. The bank hopes to make money by borrowing at a lower cost than they receive in return on the stock of money they are lending to borrowers. All banks need to have a range of very liquid funds to be in a position to repay those various depositors who withdraw their money on a daily basis, if cleared deposits are less than daily withdrawals and that is why they buy and sell highly liquid government bonds which they hope will also earn them interest along the way.

      Banks also have exposures with other banks when cheques are changing hands or they enter into joint funding arrangements to lend to mainly larger corporations, or when they buy securities originally funded by other banks.

      The government bonds which are traded daily are loans made to your federal government during previous bond raisings and are no different than any other borrower except that government bonds tend to be more secure than mortgage backed securities backed by a variety of generally property securities owned by individuals and corporations. Having said that, banks can still lose money on government bonds if the capital value goes down if interest yields go up between the time they buy them and the time they sell them even though the bonds are earning interest on the maturity value.

      The bond markets are a very important part of helping to maintain bank liquidity to enable repayment to depositors. If depositors lose confidence in their ability to get their deposits back…we get a run on the banks and the banks go bad and depositors may lose some or all of their money or their ability to access it immediately..

      Im not sure what happend in the USA during the GFC in 2007, but in Australia, our Reserve Bank of Australia decided to help the banks by buying various mortgage backed securities when the public became jittery about all the money they had just lost in the USA Prime Loan funds scandal. Our RBA and the Federal government offered to help the banks by offering to guarantee bank deposits of up to $100,000 per customer in the event the banks failed, but the banks had to pay for that guarantee with a fee which i believe was something like 1%. Our banks entered into these arrangements with the government to ensure there was not going to be a run on the banks which would destabalise the economy which was very insecure at that time , very much as is now the case in Europe.

      This forum seems to want to bash all the banks when it appears that some banks behaved VERY BADLY after your government helped them out with funds to help stop a run on all the banks. In hind sight, your govt should have put stricter conditions on the bailouts so the big bonuses could not be paid to those rogues, but at that time the federal reserve and government had a much bigger calamity to deal with and they acted in haste to save YOUR money from being lost, as indeed if LEHMANs and others had gone bust, so would have the rest of your savings and loans gone bad and your whole economy would have been frozen dead, similar to what is happening in Greece now.

      I should mention that many Australian local government Superannuation funds lost $billions in the USA because those investment managers where too lazy to do the REAL research when attempting to make higher returns in foreign lands like USA. They gambled and the lost because many of those managers working for government departments where employed by beauracrats and relied on their Investment Managers scholastic university credentials as the main basis of their appointment. Their investment policies where flawed but that is what they teach in University these days. They rely on the research of others who claim to conduct indepth research but DO NOT because they are lazy and its supposed to be illegal to gain inside information. HOW SILLY IS THAT?

      Now, can any of your readers advise if you would have lost any money if your government had not saved those banks you love to hate. ???

    • vicki

      Ranger hall writes:

      The Rich get Richer and The Poor get Poorer.

      I think your conclusion is in error. The poor are actually getting richer (In the US)

      http://www.learnliberty.org/content/are-poor-getting-poorer

      • Deerinwater

        That was interesting, “dealing with absolutes” made a lot of sense.

        However this ‘studies” that he referred to were not indicative of what I seen or witnessed in those time periods.

        It seems to make sense a young man or woman or couple would start off poor, leaving house and starting off on their own, the only direction to go would be “up”.

        But that is not the “poor” must of us think of when we apply the term “poor”. Family is usually assisting in all the many ways they can, It takes years for many or should I say most to be completely independent. I find myself, assisting my girlfriends 30 year old children still today, long after me raising my own.

        The “poor” I think of when I say poor, is the ones that have no family support and relies on good will , good luck and a government social net.

        They’ve been abandon by friends and family usually for good reason, they uncontrollable, insane, lacking in social skills to cope.

        Or the one’s that just a notch or two better off, suffered from bad health, or just poor judgment in company or a long run of bad luck. It is this second group of “poor” that I think of as been “POOR”

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

    Can anyone define the status of a poor person in the USA please?

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

    Ranger Hall…you stated ..”the Govt then uses Your Tax Money to Repay the Loan with Interest”…..I suggest that your federal government cannot raise enough taxes to pay any capital of the Bonds they have issued. They would be lucky to just pay the interest I would imagine. Any capital repayment would usually be sourced by re-issuing more bonds…and manybe that is what is happening with interest payments…may i be so bold to assume. A giant PONZI SCHEME…by another name…to buy more time. Be warned and look at whats happening in Greece today. USA is in a better situation as you have vast industry…greece has little or none…just tourism which now no one will want to go during the current riots…

  • Rose

    Republicans just don’t want to pay taxes with all the money they have. They want us little people to pay taxes instead. How could that be right.

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

      Rose, I’d love to know how many little people like you are in number and I bet there are more little people than Republicans who are under the wrong impression that they made their money/wealth by using their brains and hard work and dont want to have to pay their share of taxes. They would rather your country go broke like the Greeks should, because they too dont like to pay taxes, but still like to enjoy the good life. The GREEKS continue to belive that its unfair that they should economise and dont believe that they WILL go broke, prefering to blame the frugal Germans for not giving in to their demands? The Greeks are still living in a dream world created by their own politicians who wanted to be voted in time and time again by giving them what they wanted by borrowing more and more…and NOW crunch time has come and they dont want to drop their fake won stardard of living…the Unions in concert with the current government have been joint partys to this great national fraud and in my view they must be cut off the Euro currency.

      I have already reminded the many non-democrates some of which dont claim to be republicans that many of the people who have been affected by silly political antics of the Republiocans are going to remember next time they vote, and im guessing more people will vote for OBAMA next time.

      Many forum contributors are lambasting Warren Buffett for expressing ideas, one of which was that taxes should be increased to help balance the federal budget and I agreed with him despite me being a supporter of Dr Ron Paul. However many so called Ron Paul supporters and other republicans who appear to be copy cat Paul policy followers ..are just plain liers and like things to remain as they are…and I speak of people like Trump, Mit Romney, Gringrch, Santorum to name a few…having said that whilst i fully agree with RON PAUL idealls and foreign policy, any new government cannot just simply reduce taxes and spending overnight without total dislocation of your economy and most already know it..but dare not admit it.

      I sense that many in these forum contributors are simply just greedy and like the greeks dont want to pay any tax because they claim they did not support the expenditure decisions…i say you cant be a part time Citizen of the USA…only when it suits you.?.. Your are a citizen for better or worse ..in my opinion. If OBAMA wants higher taxes…you need to pay and shut up until you get DR RON PAUL in, not before he arrives in the Whitehouse.

      Its the ANTI OBAMA voters who need to find convincing arguments to convince others to vote/support for the only honest politician RON PAUL. Some people reading my support for two opposites confusing…it is easy for me because i believe in the free enterprise promotion of each product i call ‘POLITICAL VIEWS’ whatever they may be even if i dont agree with them. Its up to the various candidates and their supporters to convince others to their way of thinking using honest means. If your voters want less services and less taxes..then they will vote accordingly at your next election. Once decided…its the responsibility of ALL citizens to obey your law makers and taxation laws even if the increase taxes and you dont like it. To do ottherwise is in my view an act of Treason. If you dont agree, you need to start on your next election campaign immediately for the next election in 5 years time, all the while supporting the mojority voters decision….but obviously many of you may just continue to be just plain subversive renegades and cant take direction from anyone.

      If you cant take directions from a boss or President you dont like…then you will never be able to lead or gain the respect of the people your trying to convince to your way of thinking.

      As far as I am concerned as an observer of what the Republicans have been getting up to in Congress since OBAMA won office, my view is that they have stupidly shown the world that they are unworthy to be leaders by showing complete disregard for those workers who needed Christmas pay and complete disregard to the financial world by leaving interest payment approvals to the last minutes. A total disgrace and I would never employ such foolhardy smart-asses for playing such stupid games in the full view of the financial markets.

  • Frank Grabowsi

    simple solution to tax the rich. A 90 percent tax on all political contributions. It is a fair tax because it is a voluntary tax. Also, it helps remove the corruption from campaign financing. Ask Buffet if he would support that idea or would he support exemptions for the wealthy.

  • 45caliber

    Despite his money, he really doesn’t expect Congress to do much, does he? Any real attempt to pay off the loan would bankrupt him.

  • Brandon

    Buffet hasn’t paid his taxes in years and there is proof. The guy is a idiot

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.