ignoring the fact that not only does Buffet endorse Obama, he advises him on tax policy.
So what? Buffet doesn't do willingly what Obama proposes to force others to do. This makes Buffet either a double-talker or someone who doesn't agree with Obama to the extent that you would like. But what if Buffet is a Marxist?
So what? How does this make it OK for our President to be one too? You have yet to explain this.
Obama wants to "spread the wealth" in exactly the same way and for exactly the same reasons that Buffet does.
1- Does Warren Buffet believe that the the free market distributes wealth fairly and wisely? (A: No, Buffet thinks the free market distributes weath in a way that is unfair and foolish, and thus needs to be redistributed)
I disagree with Buffet's poor reasoning for maintaining teh estate tax, as do many other educated economists. His reasoning is that he doesn't like the idea that some people will inherit a financial empire. But these people are only a tiny minority of those involved in estate taxes. What about the man who makes less than 100k/year all his life and manages to save a few hundred thousand for his kids and grandkids when he dies.
He pays taxes on all his property and income all his life and then when he dies, the government taxes it all again in one large swoop. Why? Because he died, and it doesn't think it is "fair" for the children and grandchildren to receive the fruits of their father and grandfather's labor.
Buffet's argument makes it sound more "fair" if you keep in mind the picture he is trying to represent as the norm. He's imagining Bill Gate's son inheriting the Microsoft Empire when Bill dies. He argued before the senate that by getting rid of teh death tax, we'd be in danger of creating a "plutocracy." What an idiot.
As that blogger noted, people like Soros and Buffet love the death tax because it allows people like them to come in and buy foreclosed properties at pennies on the dollar.Why? Because Joe Blow, who makes 30k/year, who happens to inherit a million dollar mansion, isn't able to pay the the death tax upon his father's death. So the only winner here is the government and/or other millionares who swoop in and "invest" in these properties at rock bottom prices. Now what seems more honorable? I think it would be more honorable to allow a dying man to provide for his family without having to worry about them getting hit with a whammy of a tax upon his death. There is nothing "fair" about the death tax.
Buffet said, "When you get rid of the estate tax, you’re basically handing over command of the country’s resources to people who didn’t earn it."
By that logic, Buffet has no business giving to the poor since they didn't "earn" it. Buffet and the "sober announcer" create this ridiculous straw man about an aristocracy, seemingly ignorant of the fact that America creates more millionaires than any other country in the world. Buffet appears to be under this delusion that most millionaires today were born with a gold spoon in their mouth.
Buffet: “Not very many billionaires share my views. They have this idea that it’s ‘their money’ and that they deserve to keep every penny of it."
Wow, how dare them! And again, the only other option is to think it isn't their money, but rather money teh government is just letting them use until it decides they've used too much of it, at which point it can arbitrarily take it away. Genius!
He continues, "What they don’t factor in is all the public investment that lets us live the way we do. Take me as an example. I happen to have a talent for allocating capital. But my ability to use that talent is completely dependent on the society I was born into. If I’d been born into a tribe of hunters, this talent of mine would be pretty worthless. I can’t run very fast. I’m not particularly strong. I’d probably end up as some wild animal’s dinner."
Commendable. This is similar to alumni giving back funds and contributions to their alma mater. But this should always be voluntary. If Buffet feels like he benefited from some aspect of his childhood society and if he truly believes it made him the man he is, and shaped him to be the money maker that he became, then fine. Let him give as much back as he wants. But don't pretend the same holds true for everyone who succeeds and creates wealth. The fact is those evil rich people are the ones paying the brunt of the taxes, which pay for roads and public transportation and public education, etc, all of which they aren't likely to use anyway.
Don't pretend the poor pay enough taxes to fund even the most basic of their necessities. They rely on the rich, not vice versa. I remember when Orlando's public transportation was being debated two decades ago. The tax increase was an issue of dispute. The majority of the tax payers didn't want it because they'd never use it. But they went through with it anyway because they were tired of Puerto Ricans stealing bicycles. Nowadays whenever you take the MARTA in Atlanta or the LYNX transport in Orlando, you're likely to be the only caucassian on it.
Last year when I returned from Brasil I decided I would take the LYNX a couple of times to protest the outrageous gasoline prices. Every time I was the only caucassian on the bus. Most everyone else were taking trips to the grocery store or to their job at some fast food restaurant. To be sure, it isn't their taxes that are paying for the system. And to add more insult to injury, the local governments refuse to increase the fare to reflect the increasing gas prices, so the entire project becomes a money pit for tax payers who aren't even using it.
“All knowledge of reality starts from experience and ends in it...Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are completely empty as regards reality." - Albert Einstein