November 27, 2012

Quote of the Day: Mark Steyn on Warren Buffett

Filed under: Economy,Quotes, Etc. of the Day,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 6:44 am

As Warren Buffett engages in his annual exercise of volunteering “the rich” for a minimum tax they couldn’t escape unless they decided to stop earning reportable income (which many would do), Mark Steyn, guest hosting for Rush Limbaugh yesterday, pointed out how futile the exercise would be:

If you took every single penny that Warren Buffett has, it’d pay for 4-1/2 days of the US government. This tax-the-rich won’t work. The problem here is (that) the government is way bigger than even the capacity of the rich to sustain it.

Estimates for how much “the Buffett Rule” requiring a minimum tax on incomes above certain levels would raise about. Six months ago, a Washington Post item cited a Joint Committee on Taxation estimate of $5.1 billion in the first year and $47 billion over ten. Steyn’s post at Rush Limbaugh has an estimate of $3.2 billion.

Using a $4 billion midpoint and an estimate of the current fiscal year’s budget deficit coming in at $1 trillion, the Buffett Rule, if enacted retroactive to October 1, would reduce the deficit by 0.4%. And this assumes that “the rich” would just keep on generating reportable income as always, which simply would not be the case.



  1. While we are quoting opinion pieces, how about this one written in Pravda:

    Recently, Obama has been re-elected for a 2nd term by an illiterate society and he is ready to continue his lies of less taxes while he raises them. He gives speeches of peace and love in the world while he promotes wars as he did in Egypt, Libya and Syria. He plans his next war is with Iran as he fires or demotes his generals who get in the way…

    …Let’s give American voters the benefit of the doubt and say it was all voter fraud and not ignorance or stupidity in electing a man who does not even know what to do and refuses help from Russia when there was an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Instead we’ll say it’s true that the Communists usage of electronic voting was just a plan to manipulate the vote. Soros and his ownership of the company that counts the US votes in Spain helped put their puppet in power in the White House. …

    Other people have noted outside the US that whatever Obama says he does and means the exact opposite.

    Comment by dscott — November 27, 2012 @ 11:04 am

  2. Speaking of tax expenditures, ObamaCare now estimated to cost 3 x more than originally predicted…

    Disgusting! Obama White House Continues to Mislead on Cost of O-Care & Media Continues to Give Them a Pass

    The chart says it all.

    Bottom line, any tax increase on the so called rich will not even pay for the spiraling ObamaCare program. ObamaCare is nothing more than a bureaucrat jobs program. All of this being the cover for debasing the Dollar so that the Fed can indefinitely buy Treasuries with electronic ones and zeros. Because to liberals, government spending money to pay bureaucrats is a net positive to the GDP. The country can never be in recession if the government simply spends an amount of money equal to the private sector loss from the baseline GDP. This is what they call sustainable spending…borrowing money that never existed in the first place. See, there is no problem, move along folks, nothing to worry about.

    Comment by dscott — November 27, 2012 @ 12:00 pm

  3. One final thought on the election determined by takers out numbering the makers. While it should be obvious to all that every penny of benefit the government hands out has to come from somewhere, those who personally gain from receiving Food Stamps and the like never really connect the dots that their activity is actually serving to keep themselves poor and beholding to those who run such programs.

    From personal experience when I use to pay child support, the ex was always benefiting herself as the giver to the kids. You see, without mentioning the actual source of the funds the gifts and goodies came to the kids, they were falsely left with the impression that she was the generous one while I was having to watch every penny due to her confiscation of my after tax earnings. The only time when the kids became angry with her over this financial arrangement was when they perceived she was withholding a substantial portion of the money intended for them for herself. At that point she ceased to get credit for handing out goodies because the kids realized they were not getting EVERYTHING I gave to her for their expenses. Now while they didn’t consider my economic distress of having to live off credit cards and living extremely frugally to make those monthly payments they did take exception to being denied what they knew should have been coming to them. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

    This would suggest a means to break the relationship of false generosity between the greedy, the corrupt politicians and the takers. The point of corruption is to take what you shouldn’t have from others by abusing your standing in the community. Obama is a millionaire beyond what his wages and expenses would indicate and wouldn’t have been without becoming into a position of authority. Most if not all of the Democrats like Harry Reid have become quite wealthy because of the their so called public service in spite of what their wages/salary would dictate. While not all of the government spending can be characterized as graft to Obama and his cronies, the point is when the cut backs come as they surely must, any cut back in social services is strictly due to Obama and his Democrat crony supporters choosing their profits over that of what some individual is getting in government benefits.

    I suggest the GOP agree to whatever cuts the Dems want, even in the military budget. This in turn should be characterized as greedy Democrat politicians keeping their ill gotten gains at the expense of everyone who loses their job and loses any government benefit. Remember the point of corruption is to get what you don’t deserve and it becomes glaringly obvious who is greedy when you don’t get your fair share… For the 47% who are feeling entitled to something when a few greedy people are getting so much in a time of distress something has to be sacrificed. This in particular is what is driving much of Obama’s support from the Black voter, it’s the Chicago way, they expect their fair share of the cut. The entire Democrat coalition is built around the idea of corruption, that is since everyone is doing it, I’m being generous by giving you a little piece of the action.

    Cynical you say? Shrewd says I.

    Comment by dscott — November 27, 2012 @ 2:11 pm

  4. Here’s an example of what I suggest. Democrat cronies in the wind industry are demanding $12 billion for a one year extension of the wind energy (Production Tax) credit. Their claim is 37,000 jobs will be lost if Congress doesn’t extend.

    $12 billion divided by the $50k median household income in America comes out to 240,000 families (2 or more people per household) being denied full government benefits of Food Stamps, HOC, Medicaid, etc. Sacrifices are expected so who gets shoved off the cliff?

    Question for liberals to answer: What makes 37,000 people more important than over 500,000 to 750,000 people, most of them being children???? Because they contributed to your election campaign? Go ahead, explain this to millions of people who voted for Obama because they expected income inequality to be addressed. Go ahead, let’s see you explain how some people are more equal than others.

    Comment by dscott — November 27, 2012 @ 3:52 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.