Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
He's at it again. Warren Buffett has taken to the op-ed pages of the New York Times today to sound the bugle once again for his raise-taxes-on-the-rich crusade. Buffett writes,
I know well many of the mega-rich and, by and large, they are very decent people. They love America and appreciate the opportunity this country has given them. Many have joined the Giving Pledge, promising to give most of their wealth to philanthropy. Most wouldn’t mind being told to pay more in taxes as well, particularly when so many of their fellow citizens are truly suffering.
...[F]or those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate.
My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.
How noble and generous sounding -- that is, until you realize that Buffett has quite a lot to gain from higher taxes on the super rich. The Washington Examiner's Tim Carney unearths Buffett's suspect motives.
Buffett Profits from Taxes He Supports
Buffett regularly lobbies for higher estate taxes. He also has repeatedly bought up family businesses forced to sell because the heirs’ death-tax bill exceeded the business’s liquid assets. He owns life insurance companies that rely on the death tax in order to sell their estate-planning businesses.
Buffett Profits from Government Spending
Buffett made about a billion dollars off of the Wall Street bailout by investing in Goldman Sachs on the assumption Uncle Sam would bail it out. He also is planning investments in ethanol giant ADM and government-contracting leviathan General Dynamics.
If your businesses’ revenue comes from the U.S. Treasury, of course you want more wealth.
Let's call a spade a spade: Warren Buffett, successful multi-billionaire that he is, is a lobbyist representing himself and his own monied interests. There's nothing wrong with that in and of itself, but let's not let liberals get away with this cunning charade of noblesse oblige when the full picture reveals that they have much to gain from their superficial "generosity."
- Comment (43)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments :
Oct '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
George Soros without the Greek accent !
Jun '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
The day Buffest writes a voluntary $5 billion check to the "Office of Public Debt," I might believe him. Until then, it's all hot air.
May '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
Coddling? As is frequently pointed out, nothing is stopping Warren from cutting a big fat check to the IRS voluntarily, out of civic pride. Lead by example Warren and maybe your tax-profiteering wont seem so opportunistic.
Jun '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
"Don't burn me, I'm a reformed witch. Burn those witches over there."
Jul '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
Lobbyist wasn't the word that came to mind. Parasite or leech is more apt. Pushing for higher taxes so your company can steal family businesses out from under them may not be illegal, but it is certainly unethical.
Mar '11
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
Mr Buffett is free to donate as much money as he likes to the federal government. But he chooses to donate it to good causes, instead. This is fine, but he is a hypocrite... oh, wait, a hypocritical rich liberal - how unusual!
Feb '11
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
Mr. Buffett fails to provide an estimate of the increased tax revenues his tax the rich option would produce. A major failing in his op-ed piece. This makes if worthless.
Sep '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
I'm afraid that Diane's well thought out argument is a distraction, much as the whole Obama birth certificate thing. The previous commenters here are correct -- just let Mr. Buffett cut a check to the treasury. Or to paraphrase Dennis Miller's oft-repeated question -- how can guys like Warren Buffett sleep at night believing they didn't give their "fair share"?
I believe it was Tim Pawlenty that pointed out that Minnesota set up an account for such voluntary donations. To date the balance in that account is $0.
Aug '11
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
The vested interest is bad enough; however, using liberal guilt to sell the idea is what separates those like Buffett and Soros from the rest. The portrayal of a higher moral sense is the kind of class warfare that betrays how the Left imagines it. There is no organic intellectual who descends from on high to deliver the new consciousness to the unaware underclass. Instead, there are those who seek to profit from the existing order by playing off existing sympathies and having the right people in place.
These guys capture the narrative by funding organizations who depend on their support. The organizations amplify the narrative to give the press something they're already inclined to believe. Either dupes or wanting a piece of the action.
Honestly, do people think Buffett got rich from paying taxes?
Edited on Aug 15, 2011 at 2:22pmDec '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
Even more simply, Buffet's competitors are at a relative disadvantage if the "rich" are taxed because he is much richer than they are.
If he's arguing for a Buffet-only Tax, then I'm all for it.
Except for Golden Corral. Keep your hands off them.
Sep '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
George Soros without the Greek accent !
And Britain is Greece without the Souvlaki.
Dec '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
Buffet and Munger are the Grand Marshals of crony-capitalism - they have honed it to an art form. By comparison Jeff Immelt is an apprentice.
In 2009, Munger even wrote an opinion piece in the WSJ championing the bail out of the "big guys" (Buffet and Munger) as not only necessary but actually an entitlement - in his opinion, the "little guys" had no such claim or entitlement . Geez, talk about the need for entitlement reform.
Edited on Aug 15, 2011 at 11:24amJun '11
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
He write the op-ed to urge the government to raise taxes.
If he is such a genius, why doesn't he offer his managerial and executive experience and offer advice on reducing spending and increasing efficiency?
Had he not been bailed out by the government, Buffet would have gone the way of Jesse Livermore.
Apr '11
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
Thanks for this posting. One of my LA liberal friends posted a link to the NYT editorial this morning! It's nice to see a concise rebuttal.
Nov '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
I'm finding Buffet to be tiresome at this point. I would like him to actually put out a Buffet plan which states clearly which taxes he'd increase and how much revenue he expects the government to get from it. If he isn't willing to do this then please be quiet and get on with the business of using your money to invest in real businesses that create real jobs. This is what America needs right now. Not silly self indulgent pieces like this.
Aug '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
Giving money to charity is called philanthropy and it is a fine and noble thing.
Giving money to the US government is called involuntary taxation and the ways in which the money is spent include some that would curdle your blood, endanger your children, and enrich your mortal enemies.
So there is a difference Warren. Quit being so damned disingenuous. People in the Midwest are embarrassed by your sophist philosophy. The same way we were embarrassed by your living with your mistress while your wife languished alone.
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
Jack Warren: I'm afraid that Diane's well thought out argument is a distraction, much as the whole Obama birth certificate thing. The previous commenters here are correct -- just let Mr. Buffett cut a check to the treasury. Or to paraphrase Dennis Miller's oft-repeated question -- how can guys like Warren Buffett sleep at night believing they didn't give their "fair share"?
I believe it was Tim Pawlenty that pointed out that Minnesota set up an account for such voluntary donations. To date the balance in that account is $0. · Aug 15 at 10:42am
See, I agree with you, but the problem with this "If they believe they should contribute more, they should just voluntarily give more to the Treasury" line of reasoning is that it can come back to bite us in the butt. For instance, I think it's fine to be opposed to the mortgage interest deduction in principle, but to still claim the deduction while it exists. And it's fine to want to eliminate the government's role in student loans, but to take advantage of them so long as they're available. Why deliberately put yourself at relative disadvantage?
Sep '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
Mr. Buffett is both friendly with establishment Republicans and liberals. After all it was Bush who facilitated his profit on GS. It should also be noted that government borrowing is a form of taxation (M.Friedman) and it may prove to have more severe consequences than higher taxes. This is the third time Buffett has made this proposal and each time it is followed by the same rant. There is approximately 8 times the amount of debt (public and private) as there was in 2000. A sizeable amount of this needs to be extinguished before growth can be expected. Inflation and deflation are two ways of accomplishing this. The Fed and Bush’s and Obama’s economic advisors believed that converting a sizeable portion of the private debt to public debt would allow it to be written off over time without causing catastrophic economic disruption . It is not working. The Fed tried and couldn’t spur inflation. That leaves deflation which will prove to be unpleasant and possibly destabilizing. Speculating as to Mr. Buffett’s motivations might be entertaining. I think his idea has little merit, but at least he seems to be aware of how serious the problem is.
Oct '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
Isn't it important for us to point out that they are not saying they want to pay more taxes so much as that they want everyone else to pay more taxes? That is, it's one thing to say that you're okay paying more and it's another to say that I should pay more.
Jun '10
Re: Warren Buffett Stands to Gain from Higher Taxes on the Rich
Perhaps, as I have written here on several occasions, I can help Mr. Buffet out a little (presumptuous am I not?). The total income of M's and B's in this country is about 930B annually. We presume they already pay 36% Federal now or about 350B. How about we just take the rest? We are still left with Trillion dollar deficits thanks to his clan of political operatives. It really astounds me. Was there even one sentence in his essay on cutting spending? I hope so, but I wouldn't bet on it. Henry Bloch of HR Bloch and Co wrote a similar editorial only he mimics Obama's talking points like a parrot. He believes everyone making 250K in this country have it so good they should pay more in taxes. He mentions spending cuts in one sentence of the article. Does anyone really believe that if the citizens pay more Washington will spend less?