Warren Buffett is a Hypocrite

Whatever you think of Pat Buchanan, he eats Buffett's lunch on this issue:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s...-set-example-and-send-check-5-b#ixzz1V6SASwqF

Put up or shut up, Warren.

yeah right. he won't even buy decent computers for the employees at berkshire.

Seriously?

How's this any different from the righties that support wars while refusing to enlist?

I get amused by all of the tools who quote Buffett calling for new taxes. He knows whatever will come down the pike, he will still benefit from.

Seriously?

Really?

Did I stutter?

Buffett has more integrity in his farts than 99% of Wall Street.

I don't dispute that one bit. But, it really says more about most of Wall Street than it does about Mr. Buffett. I say that because the height of hypocrisy is claiming to be a Free-Market Capitalist when you're privatizing profit but publicizing losses.

No, we just couldn't figure out if you farted or talked out of your ass.

There's a difference?

No he doesn't. Buffet is a self serving crapweasel.

I think Buffett should be taxed at 100%. Is that high enough for him?

You stupided.

If you're going to start a topic on this, at least include the Op-Ed that sparked Buchanan's comments.

As for Buchanan's comments, he COMPLETELY ignores the fact that Buffett is one of the most giving philanthropists out there. He's even working on donating 99% of his wealth to charity before he dies. Warren Buffett is far from being a hypocrite.

Anyway, here's his article:

This was the most important part of the article to me:

It's 1% higher than he'd like, but you might be able to haggle that last percentage point out of him.

Way to miss the point Timmy. We are not talking about philanthropy. We are talking about taxes. No one has any moral authority to say that another that he isn't paying enough taxes. What right does Buffett have to say that someone should pay more taxes?

The point remains that Buffett is a hypocrite unless he does what Buchanan suggests. If he's so anxious that others pay more taxes, why doesn't he take the lead and voluntarily over pay his own?

He won't. They never do. Liberal do-gooders never put their money where their mouth is. There is nothing stopping him from writing out a check for a billion dollars or so and sending it in to the Treasury.

Irrelevant.

Good for him donating so much money.

But he is still a two faced hypocrite.

They don't do it out of the goodness of their hearts.

Buffet and others WORK with legislators to write those laws to "protect" Buffet and others.

Again he is free to:

#1 Cut a check for whatever amount he wants to give to the Feds.

#2 Refuse to take any deductions or loopholes and in effect raise taxes on himself.

Going off the $90.9 billion number here.....

How much is our Federal Debt? $14 Trillion

How many billions in one trillion? 1000

That $90.9 Billion is .65% of the $14 Trillion.

You could confiscate all $90.9 billion dollars and not even make a dent in our debt.

What is the Federal Budget for 2011? $3.8 Trillion

That $90.9 Billion is 2.39% of the $3.8 Trillion.

You could confiscate all $90.9 billion dollars and not even make a dent in our 2011 Federal Budget.

But I'll guarantee that next year you won't even get half of that $90.9 billion.

And I'll guarantee that the "middle class" will still suffer.

Lies.

How do we know?

The rich work hand in hand with their friends in politics to write the finance laws to protect themselves.

And it's still not enough for the government.

The amount of money the government is demanding is so high that even out right confiscation of all the rich peoples money and other assets will not be enough.

Well call your friends up in DC and tell them what to do. Just like you've done in the past.

Haven't many on the right/at this board argued that charitable donations are in fact preferable to paying taxes?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Given his philanthropic efforts, I strongly disagree, but whatever. By focusing on calling him a hypocrite because you disagree with his position you sidestep the issue entirely, without actually giving it any thought. He backed up his opinion with facts and a well structured argument. You've backed up your opinion on the issue with a quote from Pat Buchanan and repeatedly calling Buffett a hypocrite. So far, Buffett has made the more compelling argument against his own supposed hypocrisy.

You're right, nothing is stopping him. However, it's been less than a day since his op-ed was published and Buchanan made his comments. Give it some time before rushing to call him a hypocrite, Jesus fucking Christ. There is also no guarantee that others would follow if he took the lead, which is why he is appealing to government to raise taxes on that 0.3%.

Again, he wrote the op-ed so as to affect bigger change. The purpose was not just for him to pay his fair share in taxes but for his billionaire peers to do so as well. He also published the article less than 24 hours ago, so again give it some time.

Interesting. So what you're saying is that higher taxes on the upper brackets actually don't have a negative impact?

No, he knows that however the tax laws will be rewritten, he will still work it out in his favor. But then you knew that already, you were just trying to be clever.

And this applies only to Warren Buffett and not to other high-income individuals because...?

They need to just eliminate all these tax loopholes and go to a flat tax system. That will simplify the tax code immensely (and save money) and ensure that no one is cheating the system.

On an unrelated note, I can't even imagine what it'd be like to make a million dollars a year.

Completely relevant.

Irrelevant.

Certainly I agree that the rich work with legislators to protect the rich, but what evidence do you have that Buffett has done this? (I ask not because I know the answer, but because you should be able to back up such claims with reputable sources)

Perfectly true, but it's too fast to be calling him a hypocrite within 24 hours of publishing his op-ed piece, especially given his willingness to give up large shares of his wealth. (That is why his philanthropic efforts are relevant to the discussion) And who knows, maybe he is waiting for better budget cuts before sending in his fair share of taxes?

Certainly yes, even raising taxes on those thousands would not raise enough revenue to cut deficits, but that's why raising taxes is just part of the solution. Cutting the budget is the other equally important part of reducing the deficits and overall debt.

From history. "I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off."

Even the not-rich have said they'd accept increases in their taxes over the last several months, granted the rich might be greedier and definitely exert more influence. Certainly not EVERYONE in a group agrees with the majority of the group, which is why they are free to present their own arguments or compromises. And certainly not every rich person "works hand in hand" with the government.

I thought that's what this article was, or did I miss the point of a political op-ed?

Former Tampa Congressman Sam Gibbons was a long time proponent of the Value Added Tax. I'm sure our Euro friends know a lot more about it than I do, but I'm beginning to believe that a system based on production and consumption makes more sense in the real world than one based on income.

He may have written that less than 24 hours ago, but he's been on about this for quite a long time. Regardless, like many very wealthy people who have the spotlight, or who can focus it in their own direction, I'm betting that he's trying to offset guilt for being the very hypocrite Bulldog is accusing him of.

He's got more money than God. He could divest himself of that today, and do a lot of good, but he hasn't, nor will he. The fact is, there are hordes of "immorally rich" people who do this self-same thing: They decry other wealthy people while possessively clutching their own money, mansions, limousines, expensive clothes, red-carpet photo opportunities and all of the trimmings of a life of abundance. If you asked why, I'd be they couldn't give you a good answer, or maybe they'd rationalize, "Well, I have to retain my wealth in order to secure visibility so that I can do more good."

Buffet is simply the lead hypocrite. On a smaller, but equally repugnant scale, you've got moralizing, loudmouthed airheads like Matt Damon yammering about greed and the fiscal depravity of CEOs while he pockets multiple millions of dollars for for a few months work at a time. I'd bet that his agent (acting by proxy for Damon, with his knowledge and consent) would justify his salaries because he's a name that draws at the box office, making him worth that kind of money. No doubt, when it comes to his own work, the free market argument is a key bargaining chip in securing those multi-million dollar salaries (as I'm sure it is with any of the moralizing, loudmouthed airheads who happen to be box office draws).

It's all the same. If you're an apologist against the free market, and an advocate of the sanctioned mugging which we've euphemistically called "taxes" and "revenues", you should be the first in line to bleed yourself out of the bourgeoisie and into the ranks of the proletariat, with no excuses or holding back.

And that greedy SOB Warren Buffet?

What a hypocrite. Why can't he part with even a small amount of his vast fortune?



Oh, wait.

Actually, he has pledged to donate 99% of money.

Aw.... Peter/Jamey/Wil got caught spewing nonsense, so now he's back to hiding behind rep comments.


It's just like old times!

Matt Damon still makes millions for what he does.

I'd figure you leftists would be up in arms over someone making so much. After all he's just an actor. Not somebody important.......

And Buffet didn't donate anything yet. He's pledged it. If he actually had physically given them the $37 billion I'd be impressed and it would have been all over the news but he hasn't.