True, but that is not how we play the game. We play to win, so it is acceptable and preferred to pay as little tax as possible in our competitive and adversarial society. We only give something away when there is a tax deduction.

 

This is what I was trying to get at, what is Buffett trying to win ?

I don't think what I am smelling in the yard is Kimchi, even though it smells rotten.

 

Here's the problem. Wealth redistribution in this country is counter productive to "playing to win". The basic wealth redistribution thought process is the poor are poor because they have been harmed by our society, so we have to take care of them. Myself and most people I talk to have no problem taking care of those who are UNABLE to care for themselves. Many or most people don't have too many issues with helping on a short term those who need a hand up, but most have issue with taking care of people long term who are able to care for themselves but are unwilling to do so. I can't count the number of times I've seen the poor welfare moms with 5 or 6 kids running around. I did the math one day because I was bored and figured out why they have so many. Figuring the mom had her first somewhere around 16 years old and there is a 12 year spread from the first kid to the last. The mom will receive benefits for about 30 years assuming she didn't have anymore kids (which is doubtful). In the state I worked that meant she had a free apartment (as long as nobody reported her for violating the program rules), reduced food costs, free health care, and free child care. As long as she maintained a minimum wage job her benefits would not be reduced. The people I dealt with normally didn't maintain any job, they resorted to theft, drug dealing, finding a sugar daddy, or some other criminal activity for tax free money. What all of this meant is she could act like she was in high school or college for almost 30 yeas or until she grew tired of it, without too many worries.

If some wealthy socialist (for lack of a better term) wants to give more to the government then give more. Don't make the wealthy capitalist who is playing the US game the way the US game was set up pay more to ease the minds of the guilty feeling socialist. If the socialist doesn't want to provide their money for the government to use, maybe they can start their own charity and take some of the burden from the US government. Perhaps they can talk other charities into working together for a united cause. Every year I look through the Combined Federal Campaign booklet and see hundreds of national charities. Many provide duplicative services. If these charities would combine efforts and work together then less money would be wasted, and more people would be helped.

Sorry for the rant.

 

I have been saying for years, why doesn't everyone just pay 15-20% of their income? A same percentage for everyone.

That would be too much like common sense and actually fair.

 

I kind of like the federal sales tax idea. Tax every retail sale. Provide tax exemption cards (roughly equal to the amount of tax due from just buying essentials at the poverty level) to everyone who applies, that way if people want to eat beans and rice their tax exemption will go farther, but if they decide to eat fillet mignon every night it will be gone in a couple weeks. It could also include clothing, again if someone goes to the second hand store no tax would be due to their exemption could go to food. If the person can't live without Guicie purses or designer clothing then their tax exemption will be exhausted in one or two sopping sprees. A consumption tax also is self regulating to make the wealthier people pay more than the poorer people. A consumption tax increases the tax base, so illegal immigrants pay taxes as well as people working for cash. All but a few states have a sales tax so the infrastructure is already in place and a large reduction of the IRS workforce can be cut or shifted to another agency.

 

I'd vote for it. It could probably be implemented with very little overhead. I'd tie the tax in food to "luxury items" though, like fillets, ice cream, crab legs, and so on. NO tax on fresh vegetables, milk, eggs, juice, probably meats like chicken, "ordinary fish". and maybe hamburger. No tax on clothes from resale stores sounds good too, since we think nekked people are sinful!

- Jack

 

Turns out Warren's company owes money to the IRS.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion...QVE38q2Woq9yjJ

 

Nice one, maybe we should fine his company 100% per month.

That will help.

 

Typical .......do as I say-not as I do.

 

I wonder if Buffet is Tax Cheat Tim Geithner's daddy.

 

how many problem would be solved ( personal, business, government policy, personal responsibilty) if everyone came to terms with that.

 

More hope and change: http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local...128802718.html

 

Remember, Steve Forbes proposed (and continues to push) a 17% "flat tax" for everyone on everything. I've always liked the idea because it's so simple. No more tax loopholes for those that can afford to use them.