Warren Buffett is a Hypocrite

Interesting. So, a problem which the government is, at the very least, exacerbating if not outright enabling is justification for further action on it's part.

It's classic Fed: The government creates a problem, then creates an enormous, wasteful, this-won't-end-well bureaucracy to solve the problem it caused.

This type of language is standard in virtually all gift agreements for major charitable gifts. Donors want to make sure their gift is used for the purpose they want it used for. It has nothing at all to do with tax avoidance.

At the risk of seeming insincere about asking the question seriously, I figured out the answer: because like dividends, the income has already been taxed via corporate taxes. This also explains the discrepancy between short-term and long-term capital gains taxes; the former is gambling as the company hasn't announced any profit between the purchase and the sale. So, IMO, long term capital gains taxes should probably go to 0 along with dividends, while short term go to income-tax levels.

Oh really? You've had a lot of dealings with private charities and have seen these types of documents?

I do, actually. Four years working in the donor relations department of a major research hospital in Southern California, which I recently left because my writing is taking off. I've looked at dozens of these types of gift agreements, and saw language like the above in all of them.

Anything else?

Try to guess who said the following statement.

Trying to avoid paying taxes? Oh my. I thought he wanted to pay his fair share?

Hypocrite.

Yes, just a suggestion, you might want to be careful with your declaration for absolutes like the above. All "agreements" are not written the same, and can vary.

You might want to take a zucchini and shove it up your bunghole. Just a suggestion.

Here's a clue for you Mikee. There are a variety of forms for various types of gifts and charitable gifts. Oh and that is from my experience doing development work in the non-profit field for nearly 10 years.

Maybe this should go here.

Careful, KIRK.

He isn't lying about his experience.

Tamar knows my name. Google my name and my LinkedIn profile shows up. Soon I'll link my Twitter feed to it. Pretty standard stuff.

Shhh...don't ruin my delightful mystique!

I've never done nonprofit development work, but I know a lot of people who do ... and they all know how to use commas.

Those two statements are completely contradictory. He pays a lower effective tax rate and is in favor of raising his tax rates to meet with national average.

I already addressed that in the second section of this post.

Careful Tamar, I am not lying about my experience. Mikee made a statement as if something is absolute. It doesn't recognize or account for differences for other area's.

He said "virtually all." That's not an absolute.

And besides commas, most of the nonprofit development professionals I've met know how to use apostrophes as well.

the biggest, and most important, thing I got out of what he said was, "taxes have never scared away investors from investing."

therefore: if you tax them, they will still invest, still help the cash machine run.
don't worry about the wealthiest people surviving taxes.

Exactly.

"Oh dear Jeeves, my tax rate has been increased by 2-3%. You'd better start buying the store brand caviar."

Actually, I think Pat can shove it up his ass given the amount of money Buffett has (and has pledged to) given away in recent years.

The information I've seen indicates that, historically, it's virtually impossible to sustain a revenue stream greater than 18% of GDP - in essence, they CAN'T substantially raise revenues.

So they have to operate within that context if they are to succeed, whether it's good politics or not.

Of course, i expect they will continue to choose failure they can sell at the ballot box over success.

Are Republicans hypocrites for opposing the payroll tax cut?

I'm not disagreeing, I'm saying that an increase in revenue will make the situation easier. But you're right, nothing substantive will happen. The majority of Dems and Repubs will continue to fight back and forth, treating the governing of this country as a game in which you win by keeping the opposing party from accomplishing their goals.

So Warren Buffet continues to be a morally bankrupt douchebag. As you'll remember from this thread, he wails and complains that he isn't taxed enough--all while devoting considerable resources to manipulating the tax code to ensure he pays as little tax as possible.

When someone points out that he is perfectly free to contribute what he thinks is his "fair share", after mulling it for months, he comes back and says "I'll match, dollar for dollar, any voluntary contributions the GOP makes."

Fucking douchebag.

1) Show me where anyone in the GOP has been wailing and gnashing their teeth about not being taxed enough.
2) If he feels like he's not paying enough taxes, the solution for Buffett still comes down to demanding someone else pay more taxes.

Okay, let me try to use an example so we can put this bullshit to rest.


Let's say Ford buys the Winston Cup. Over time, Fords start doing better and better. Eventually almost all the cars in the top ten in most races are Fords. Yes sometimes a few Chevys and Pontiacs make the top ten, and there are some Fords that don't make it. But they are exceptions. And even those exceptions are getting less and less common over the years.

Well a owner of a Ford team notices this, and also notices that as Fords have gotten more and more dominating, people have stopped watching as much. While Ford owners are doing all right now (b/c they are winning more and more) as a whole the league is doing worse. He sees that if this trend continues, the league as a whole will collapse.

So he argues that the league shouldn't give Fords an extra advantage over Chevy and Pontiac.

The league tells him that if he doesn't like that Fords have an advantage he can feel free to switch to Chevy or Pontiac, and that if he doesn't switch he's a hypocrite.



That makes about as much sense as your critique of Buffet.

What happened to that fag Timmah?