Putting Warren Buffet's riches in perspective

I was watching TV yesterday, and the commentator stated the following:

Warren buffet is so RICH that a millionaire would have to work for 50 THOUSAND YEARS to be as wealthy as Warren Buffett.

That is right folks.....a FREAKING rich millionaire....someone making 1 million a year would have to work for 50 THOUSAND YEARS........to be as rich as Warren Buffett.

I will say it again.......50 THOUSAND YEARS............

50,000,000,000 / 1,000,000 = 50,000............WOW...........

Buffett is UBER RICH, yet the current Obamunist administration uses him as an example of the RICH, and then wants to impose taxes on someone making 50 THOUSAND TIMES less...........

How many folks on the left who voted for Obama actually UNDERSTAND this.

I doubt very many, especially those who have limited education.

Later,

Geo

It's Obamconomics it's not meant to be understood by normal people.

And what about right after that speech he went to 20 thousand dollar a plate fund raiser so he can get his happy arse back in office, talk about hipocritical.

THE MAN IS A JOKE IN EVERY WAY!

More Ammo........

[url]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/09/20/irs-data-show-most-millionaires-pay-taxes-at-higher-rate-than-middle-class/.com/politics/2011/09/19/obama-yields-to-liberal-outcry-on-entitlement-reform/[/url]

So, if this is correct, then a millionaire, someone making 1 MILLION dollars is paying 290,000 is taxes.........WOW.

At a time when 42 MILLION American families live off of a government subsidy.

How about we simply do what the Obamunists WANT us to do. How about this guy just adopt 10 families, and pay each one of them 30,000. Have them live in his back yard or something.

THAT is exactly what he is doing anyways.

Just seems like class warfare. He wants folks to rally behind him blaming rich folks(which they turn to mean republicans) so the poor (which they turn to mean democrats) will vote for him and his promises...AGAIN!!

The problem isn't that the rich don't pay enough it's that a huge section of the US do not pay anything. Whats the figure? 45%?? 40%?? I don't know what it is but it's aweful.

So instead of dealing with the fact that people who sukk the gubment teat need to be reduced he attacks the people who provide the money to the gubment teat. That is dumb, reckless and can't work forever.

I 100% cannot stand this guy and really hope he doesn't get re-elected and gets exposed for the poser that he really is.

Why are you guys protecting people who make a million dollars per year? Because they aren't as rich as Warren Frickin' Buffet? Does that mean they are driving a used Kia missing a headlight? We're talking about the RICHEST 1% in the RICHEST country of the world. Nobody's talking about putting them in a 75% tax bracket. Why are you protecting those who can most protect themselves out of everyone in the entire world. That's why they've bought all the politicians. BECAUSE THEY CAN! Who really needs an extra 5%, the richest or someone else? I'm not talking about freebies to the freeloaders, but I'm certainly not talking about buying David Novak (CEO of Humana, $1.4 million salary & $14 million BONUS last year alone; owns $271 million of Humana stock) a new jet so he has one to match every suit in his closet. I hope someone with a normal-sized W-2 can explain to me why this is an important issue to the rest of us.

You may hate Obama for boatloads of reasons, but why prop up the rich off our backs? If you are one of the richest people in America, I accept that you disagree with my opinion.

The CEO of Humana is Mike Mccallister.......and it matters because BUFFETT is the benchmark they used, yet they want to tax folks making 50 THOUSAND times less.

TAX those folks more, WHEN you eliminate things like earned income. It is NOT EARNED.......it is given.

I don't mind paying more in taxes, I DO MIND giving money to folks because they FEEL ENTITLED to it.......

And the whole capital gains issue really CHAPS MY BUTT.......Money I make from MONEY I invest should not be taxed.......or certainly taxed at a very small rate.....I've ALREADY paid taxes on it and I'm RISKING MY MONEY.........

Of course folks who have never taken a risk with money don't understand this. If you RISK money and reap the rewards from that risk the government done NOT have the right to take a portion of it........this is one of the reasons companies don't want to invest right now. NO IDEA how much gains will cost in a few years.

Not only that, but I GUARANTEE folks making money in the market today will DUMP their investments if there is a chance that gains will climb to 39% like recommended.....

Geo, you've completely changed the discussion. We're not talking about capital gains. We're talking about the highest tax bracket. The US has known there were issues with the ultra-wealthy not paying their fair share. This is EXACTLY the reason the alternative minimum tax was written into US law (before anyone says, I understand that the law was written poorly because it was not indexed to inflation and must be amended or updated periodically as inflation causes the alt min tax to affect the middle class, which was not the intention of the law) decades ago.

There is no way to raise the highest tax bracket to get us out of the terrible financial mess we are in. This is not strictly class warfare, though there is certainly some class discrimination in my argument. There will need to be plenty of spending cuts also. I just don't understand why people get so incensed defending the ultra-rich. Why weren't Ronald Reagan's tax brackets fair?

I'm not defending the ultra rich........Maybe we DO need to raise taxes....but before we raise ANY taxes, we need to get our spending issues under control, and that includes entitlements.

AND the whole GAINS issue is not a change in the discussion above.........Warren Buffett doesn't pay as much as his secretary........according to him because he takes his income in capital gains and doesn't pay himself a salary. THIS IS ****..........and needs to be fixed, but not by penalizing everyone who pays gains.

That is the only reason I brought it up in the same sentence as Warren Buffett.

I'd be fine with rolling back the Bush Tax Cuts......but lets be clear........ALL OF THEM. The bush tax cuts like current Obama spending was not paid for.

Later,

Geo

I'm not defending rich, poor, white, black or anyone else. As long as honest dollars are made all is fine by me.

What I want to know and don't fully understand is this tax "bracket" thing....let's say I make $100.00 dollars per year and the rich guy living in the East End makes $100,000.00 dollars per year. My tax rate is 30%, which means I bring home $70.00 dollars per year. My question is, what is the rich East Ender's percentage he has to pay, is it not 30%?

I found this interesting, $200.000, to fed his family, they must eat steak and escargo every night; :eek: Add John Fleming, a Republican congressman from Louisiana, to the growing, bipartisan list of relatively well-off politicians who may want to revisit the way they discuss their income in public.

During an MSNBC interview to discuss why Fleming opposes President Obama's tax increase on those earning more than $1 million per year, host Chris Jansing said that Fleming has an income of more than $6 million. Fleming quickly corrected her, saying he actually takes in a fraction of that gross amount--about $600,000.

"The amount that I have to reinvest in my business and feed my family is more like $600,000 of that $6.3 million," Fleming explained. "So by the time I feed my family I have, maybe, $400,000 left over to invest in new locations, upgrade my locations, buy more equipment."


Fleming owns a string of Subway sandwich shops and UPS store franchises that earned a gross income of about $6.3 million last year, according to a review of the congressman's finances in The Wall Street Journal.

Jansing went on to tell Fleming that his annual personal income of $200,000 from those ventures was "not exactly a sympathetic position" from which to make the case for lower taxes on the wealthy.

"You do understand, congressman, that the average person out there who's making maybe 40, 50, $60,000 out there, when they hear you only have $400,000 left over, it's not exactly a sympathetic position," she said. "You understand that?"

"Class warfare's never created a job," Fleming responded. "And that's people that will not get jobs. This is all about creating jobs, Chris, this is not about attacking people who make certain incomes. You know in this country, most people feel that being successful in their business is a virtue, not a vice, and once we begin to identify it as a vice, this country is going down."

Fleming was merely pointing out a consequence of tax increases--that business owners will have less money to re-invest and hire new workers if they decline to take a pay cut. But his message likely won't resonate, as Jansing said, with "average Americans."

Lawmakers in both parties have long found themselves appearing removed from reality. From pictures of former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry windsurfing off Nantucket in 2004 to current Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich's six-figure tab at Tiffany's in 2011, national politicians can find themselves treading a fine line when it comes to discussing their wealth, especially during tough economic times.

ght.

So does it NOT matter one bit to you that he employees 500 people and RISKED his own money to MAKE MONEY. It is not your money or my money.....it is HIS MONEY. More power to him.

It makes me sick that just because he turned out **** good that you feel ENTITLED to take more of what he CREATED........

How about you take a risk instead of bitching about how much he makes.

YOU WISH you were him, then giving some more of what he makes sounds great, but if you were him you'd want to protect exactly what he is trying to protect.......Instead, since you're NOT him, and will probably never know what exactly went into him being the success he is....you choose to justify your ideas of TAKING MORE from him.......

That, I don't understand.......

What the story doesn't say is exactly how much he already pays in taxes.....that would be interesting to know.....but to you, it is probably not enough.

Later,

Geo

[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Oh my gosh someone making a million dollars a year has to pay 29% in taxes?**** right they should if they cant survive off the other $710000 then I don?t feel sorry for them?Bill O?reily cried on his show a few days ago saying if income tax goes back up to Clinton levels (an increase of 4.5%) he was gonna pack it up and move (we could only hope this comes true)?According to reports ive heard billo makes $6.5 million from fox alone at Clinton level income tax he would still take home roughly $6.1 million?how will he ever survive?maybe he needs to talk to a hardworking middle class family man who supports 3 kids on $40000 a year and pays 40% of that in taxes[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]I keep hearing over and over about how that bottom 50% doesn?t pay any taxes and this couldn?t be further from the truth?they don?t pay income tax because they don?t earn a high enough income to qualify however these folks still pay a variety of other taxes?on average these folks pay around 40% of their annual income in taxes?I constantly hear talk about how these freeloaders are lazy bums living off the government dime and yes I fully realize that there are a few miserable a$$wipes who do take advantage and I would love nothing more than to see everyone of them taken out back to the woodshed for a good beating! The vast majority of folks using government subsidies are good folks who would love nothing better than to have a good paying job and support their family[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Business is not hiring right now because of lack of consumption not taxes or regulation? the right wing continues to spread this lie to continue filling their pockets--lack of consumption comes from the middle class getting hammered over the last ten years due to the bush tax cuts?the inequality gap between the rich and middle class has never been higher?[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]According to the u.s census bureau[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]--when bush left office in 08 the median income for the middle class had dropped 4.2%--median income increased under Clinton by 14.2%[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]--the poverty rate increased 26.1% during the bush term with 2/3 of that increase occurring before the 08 economic mess[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]--the number of children living in poverty increase by 16.2% during the bush years[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]Clinton presided over one of the biggest tax increases in history?23.1 million jobs created[/FONT][/SIZE]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Bush presided over one of the biggest tax cuts in history?1 million jobs created[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorites[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]--a family making between 40-50 thousand a year gained an average of $860 dollars from the 2001 and 2003 bush tax cuts[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]--someone making a million or more gained a $129,000 from the 2001 and 2003 bush tax cuts[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]Tax cuts for the wealthy create nothing but more money for the wealthy?during the Clinton years the wealthy paid more in taxes yet they made boatloads of money because the middle class thrived and consumed which equals wealth for all![/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3] [/SIZE][/FONT]