Warren Buffett Calls For Tax Cuts -- For Almost Everyone Except The Rich

[GladiatoRowdy]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1...860,b=facebook

Warren Buffett proposed a further tax cut for the middle class, upper middle class and lower middle class -- essentially, everyone except the wealthy -- in an interview Tuesday with CNNMoney's Poppy Harlow, at Fortune's Most Powerful Women Summit in Washington, DC (Check out more clips atFortune).

The billionaire investor, who, with a roughly $45 billion net worth, is the country's second richest person (behind Bill Gates), also said the government should raise taxes on the richest 2 percent of the country. That particular message was nothing new: He's been saying for years that the rich need to bear a greater share of the tax burden. Buffett reiterated Tuesday that he has the lowest tax rate of anybody in his Omaha office, even despite the fact that he doesn't have a tax shelter. But his tax cut proposal was new.

"I think maybe we should cut taxes for the middle class," he said. "Upper middle class [and] lower middle class."

Taxing the rich, he said, is the best way for the government to boost its income.

"The question is, Do we get more money from the person that's gonna serve me lunch today, or do we get it from me? I think we should get it from me," he said.

Those who want to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy, which will expire at year's end, say heavy taxes will hurt small businesses, many of which are run by wealthy individuals. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) have said tax hikes for the rich would affect half of all small business income. Of course, that depends on how you define "small business."

Buffett responded to that argument by saying the government needs to close the deficit somehow, and if it doesn't tax the rich, it will have to delay paying back its debt -- which amounts to borrowing from the larger economy.

"If you get a hundred billion more of taxes -- just pick a number -- from people like me at the top, it means you borrow a hundred billion less out of the economy. Somebody's gonna come up with a hundred billion," he said. "You're taking the money from the economy either way. The only question is if you take it by borrowing or by taxes."

In August, Buffett joined Gates in asking billionaires to give at least half their wealth to charity.

[juicystream]

This is nothing new. He has been saying these types of things for years.

[DonnyMost]

Wealth inequality and debt is killing this country.

And it will eventually kill the uber rich, too.

Buffy gets it.

[slcrocket]

I love Buffett.

[Depressio]

Socialist.

[Qball]

Will there be another rich guy fighting for the non-rich when buffy kicks the bucket?

[edwardc]

Maybe he's right everything else hasn't work tax the rich more and lets see what happens .

[ling ling]

Originally Posted by DonnyMost Wealth inequality and debt is killing this country. And it will eventually kill the uber rich, too. Buffy gets it.

except, the rich doens't include him.

[robbie380]

we need new tax brackets and we need to reduce the taxes on corporations that want to repatriate overseas funds back to the u.s.

[Phillyrocket]

You gotta love Buffett, he's just pure common sense. Didn't get burned by the tech bubble because he refused to invest in areas that were too complicated. He waits until the smartest people in the room blow everything up and then sweeps in and makes a fortune.

This is just common sense as well but one party seems to be lacking it.

[Mr. Clutch]

I wonder how much the rate on the top 2% would have to increase to "raise a hundred billion dollars."

[robbie380]

Originally Posted by Phillyrocket You gotta love Buffett, he's just pure common sense. Didn't get burned by the tech bubble because he refused to invest in areas that were too complicated. He waits until the smartest people in the room blow everything up and then sweeps in and makes a fortune. This is just common sense as well but one party seems to be lacking it.

lol @ one party. try all parties.

[TreeRollins]

Originally Posted by Qball Will there be another rich guy fighting for the non-rich when buffy kicks the bucket?

Soros

[Phillyrocket]

Originally Posted by Mr. Clutch I wonder how much the rate on the top 2% would have to increase to "raise a hundred billion dollars."

Someone is probably going to smack me around with these numbers and point out something obvious I have probably ignored but what they hey that is how we learn.

I come up with 8.13% increase on the top 3% of earners using 2006 numbers.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/06in23ar.xls

This is taking the $200k and up crowd who earned 1,230,529,694 in 2006 and paid 273,682,831 in taxes. Thus a blended rate of 22.24%. To get another $100B from them you would need to tax those earnings another 8.13%.

The $200k and up crowd made up 2.95% of all earners for 2006.

[Phillyrocket]

Originally Posted by robbie380 lol @ one party. try all parties.

I disagree, Obama wants to allow the tax cuts for rich to sunset while the GOP does not.

[SamFisher]

Originally Posted by Mr. Clutch I wonder how much the rate on the top 2% would have to increase to "raise a hundred billion dollars."

Not much - the Bush tax cuts caused an extra 3 or 4 hundred billion per year to be added to the deficit, with by far the biggest slice of that going to the top end (soemthingl ike 25-40% depending on who you ask).

So, basically their expiration for the top marginal rate would generate at least $100 billion within 1 or 2 tax years.

[Steve_Francis_rules]

Originally Posted by Mr. Clutch I wonder how much the rate on the top 2% would have to increase to "raise a hundred billion dollars."

I've seen several sources indicate that extending the Bush tax cuts on the top 2% would cost about $700 billion over the next decade. So it would only take raising those highest rates by a few percent to "raise" about a hundred billion dollars more per year.

[robbie380]

Originally Posted by Phillyrocket I disagree, Obama wants to allow the tax cuts for rich to sunset while the GOP does not.

obama's people also feels comfortable projecting deficit spending for the U.S. of nearly a TRILLION dollars a year for the next decade. what is your point?

[Phillyrocket]

Originally Posted by robbie380 obama's people also feels comfortable projecting deficit spending for the U.S. of nearly a TRILLION dollars a year for the next decade. what is your point?

That extending the tax cuts would make the deficit much much worse.

[robbie380]

Originally Posted by Phillyrocket That extending the tax cuts would make the deficit much much worse.

that doesn't address the point i made.