ABC’s Amanpour Trumpets ‘Tax Us More’ Liberal Democratic Quartet
By Brent Baker | November 28, 2010 | 16:02
At a time when the American mood has turned against excessive government spending, Christiane Amanpour devoted Sunday’s This Week to four liberal Democratic billionaires, though she failed to identify their political orientation, who want higher income tax rates on the wealthy.
Unmentioned during the pre-taped interviews with Warren Buffett, Bill and Melinda Gates, Ted Turner and Tom Steyer revolving around their participation in “The Giving Pledge” – the promise to give away at least half their wealth: how they are free now to give all the money they want to the federal government.
Amanpour began by touting: “Warren Buffett has been practically begging the country, begging Congress to tax him more. In fact, many of the richest Americans like Buffett, Bill and Melinda Gates and Ted Turner say that they should pay higher tax.” In between letting Buffett expound at length on why taxes should be hiked, she fretted to Bill Gates: “If people aren't going to pay for the services that they need, how are those services going to get funded, do you think?”
Later, she showcased Tom Steyer, founder of the San Francisco-based Farallon Capital Management hedge fund and, like Buffett, a big donor to Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign when Steyer gave over $100,000 to Democrats, a fact Amanpour ignored which makes his support for higher taxes a lot less surprising and hardly noteworthy. “You said that you would be willing to have your taxes higher,” she cued him up.
A complementary ABC News.com article by Joshua Miller, posted Sunday morning, screamed:
Billionaires Buffett and Gates: Tax Us More! Exclusive: Amanpour Interviews with Two of World's Richest Men
From the Sunday, November 28 This Week with Christiane Amanpour on ABC:
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: I traveled to Omaha, Seattle and New York to talk to each of them and find out what drives them and how they see the future of America and the world. But we began with the issue that will dominate the debate here in Washington when Congress returns this week, and that is tax cuts.
WARREN BUFFETT: There's been this increasing disparity between the rich and the poor, and we found out that a rising tide just lifted all yachts, not all boats.
AMANPOUR: Warren Buffett has been practically begging the country, begging Congress to tax him more. In fact, many of the richest Americans like Buffett, Bill and Melinda Gates and Ted Turner say that they should pay higher tax.
BUFFETT: The rich are always going to say, you know, just give us more money and we'll go out and spend more and it will all trickle down to the rest of you, but that has not worked the last ten years, and I hope the American public is catching on.
AMANPOUR: The debate over whether the rich should pay more taxes takes pace outside Washington, DC as well. In Washington state, for instance, where Bill Gates Sr. has been passionately championing a new tax on the rich.
BILL GATES SR IN TV AD: People say Initiative 1098 is about soaking the rich.
AMANPOUR: Washington is one of seven states with no state income tax.
Story Continues Below Ad ↓
GATES SR: Vote yes on 1098.
AMANPOUR: Proposition 1098, that was in Washington state to try to bring a wealth tax, championed by Bill Gates Senior, supported by Bill Gates. It failed.
BUFFETT: Right. It got beat pretty badly, but I really admire Bill Senior for what he did on this. I mean, there's a guy that’s going out and trying to do something for his state and they, unfortunately, lost.
AMANPOUR: What do you say, though, to the executives, one apparently was even a Microsoft executive, who spent a lot of money trying to defeat that?
BUFFETT: Well, they're not alone in those. Look at who fights in terms of estate tax, in terms of higher tax rates. That's what K Street is all about in Washington, and, unfortunately, politics is a game of push and pull, and you get to push with money.
AMANPOUR: Are you disappointed that it got defeated?
BILL GATES JR: I voted yes and I was hoping that it would pass, but that's done now.
AMANPOUR: If people aren't going to pay for the services that they need, how are those services going to get funded, do you think?
BILL GATES JR: Well, taxes and spending have to match each other in the long run. There's many ways to tax. There's many ways to spend. That's all up to the voters. You know, some states, you rely on your legislators. Some you have lots of referendums.
AMANPOUR: Do you agree with the former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan that all Bush era tax cuts should come to an end?
BUFFETT: No, I think actually you might extend them further for the lower class, middle class, maybe upper middle class, but I think that you should raise taxes on the very rich. I lived in periods where capital gains taxes were 39.6 percent and earned income taxes were 70 percent and our economy did just fine.
AMANPOUR: Why do you think there isn't more of that kind of debate?
BUFFETT: I think that it hasn't been to the interest of the people in Washington to get as riled up about that as they get riled up about other things. You know, we're going to raise $2.2 trillion this year or something like that. $900 billion will come from individual income taxes. $900 billion will come from payroll taxes, so the payroll taxes become 40 percent of our total revenue just like the income tax, and people that talk about how the rich pay their share and that sort of thing, they totally ignore the payroll tax. You know, I did this little survey in my office a few years ago, and there were 16 people responded, and I had the lowest tax rate of the 16. I didn't have any tax shelters. I didn't have any tax planner. It was all courtesy of the U.S. Congress. I mean, they did my tax planning for me, and literally the average for the office, counting payroll taxes, was 32 percent and mine was 16 and a fraction percent.
AMANPOUR: Their rationale is that by giving you a tax break, so to speak, which is what it amounts to, you help all the others, that it trickles down.
BUFFETT: Yeah. Well, I guess it hasn't trickled. As I said, a rising tide has lifted all yachts but the row boats have been left behind.
TED TURNER: I still pay quite a bit of taxes, but not as -- not as much as I would if I didn't give so much money away. I get a lot of deductions.
AMANPOUR: So what do you think about the prospects of cutting Social Security and means testing it for people like you?
TURNER: I don't like it. I paid for Social Security. I mean I'm -- it's my own money I'm getting back in my opinion. I think Social Security -- once you -- since you paid for it, it's yours, and you're entitled to get it.
AMANPOUR: But each of these multi-billionaires sees needs that are not met, thus, their call to others like them to join the giving pledge....
AMANPOUR: Do you see austerity necessary like Europe is doing, deep cuts, rising taxes?
TURNER: Yeah, yeah, yeah. We were spending too much, and that's what the conservative movement has said, we've spent too much. You know, I'm not exactly sure where it's too much but some places.
...
AMANPOUR: You said that you would be willing to have your taxes higher. Many Americans, particularly those who are successful, say hang on, I did this work. This is a capitalist society. This is my just reward. You disagree with that notion.
TOM STEYER: I certainly do.
AMANPOUR: Because?
STEYER: I think anyone who doesn't give credit to the system that they are born into is taking an awful lot on to themselves. I mean I really think that people have sacrificed a lot more than a little tax money to make that system available for all of us, and I would be ashamed of myself if I didn't give some credit to them.
AMANPOUR: It's emotional for you....
— Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center. Click here to follow him on Twitter.
- Brent Baker's blog
- Login to post comments








CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: I traveled to Omaha, Seattle and New York to talk to each of them and find out what drives them and how they see the future of America and the world. But we began with the issue that will dominate the debate here in Washington when Congress returns this week, and that is tax cuts.
AMANPOUR: Are you disappointed that it got defeated?
BUFFETT: I think that it hasn't been to the interest of the people in Washington to get as riled up about that as they get riled up about other things. You know, we're going to raise $2.2 trillion this year or something like that. $900 billion will come from individual income taxes. $900 billion will come from payroll taxes, so the payroll taxes become 40 percent of our total revenue just like the income tax, and people that talk about how the rich pay their share and that sort of thing, they totally ignore the payroll tax. You know, I did this little survey in my office a few years ago, and there were 16 people responded, and I had the lowest tax rate of the 16. I didn't have any tax shelters. I didn't have any tax planner. It was all courtesy of the U.S. Congress. I mean, they did my tax planning for me, and literally the average for the office, counting payroll taxes, was 32 percent and mine was 16 and a fraction percent.
TURNER: I don't like it. I paid for Social Security. I mean I'm -- it's my own money I'm getting back in my opinion. I think Social Security -- once you -- since you paid for it, it's yours, and you're entitled to get it.
TOM STEYER: I certainly do.











Comments
JUST PAY MORE, YOU IDIOTS
Submitted by ConservaSerb on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 4:11pm.
If these wealthy-beyond-imagination folks want to be taxed at a higher rate, why don't they just PAY IT VOLUNTARILY? Oh. Wait. That would mean . . . they'd actually have to . . . pay it.A wise & frugal government, which shall leave men free 2 regulate their own pursuits of industry & improvement, & shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. T. Jefferson
Dittos
Submitted by kch50428 on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 5:04pm.
They're free to cut a check in any amount they choose, anytime and send it in. Someday, a real journalist will ask these people why they don't just do it.
Absolutely
Submitted by Galvanic on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 9:15pm.
The answer is obvious.
I would also ask these folks just how much of their wealth is offshore.
Or how many tax attorneys and accountants they hire?
Submitted by drsamherman on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 9:35pm.
It is easy for detached billionaries to say the wealthy should be paying more taxes because they have zero idea of how much they really do pay. They are surrounded by a virtual army of tax experts whose sole job is to figure out how they can pay LESS taxes.
Do they even realize how much they sound like Leona Helmsley?
Ditto! Ditto!
Submitted by B_Brian.B on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 11:10am.
Didn't Harry Reid say the tax system is voluntary?
Ditto Ditto etc
Submitted by m1xram on Tue, 11/30/2010 - 12:16am.
In addtion to them sending in their money I would like to add...
Then leave us the eff alone! As someone who makes less than poverty level I must insist that these thieves stop stealing from the "rich" who employs us.
The opposite of Left is Freedom.
It is funny (sad)
Submitted by Model850 on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 4:14pm.
It is funny in a sad kind of way that none of these billionaires advocating higher taxes ever declares "I'm just gonna send a lot more to the government whether they raise taxes or not!"
I heard that someone did ask one of those rich guys who signed that letter pleading for higher taxes why he just didn't pay more on his own, and his response was something along the lines of "Well, I'd be a chump if I just did it alone, wouldn't I?"
And a real laugher is Ted Turner: "I still pay quite a bit of taxes, but not as -- not as much as I would if I didn't give so much money away. I get a lot of deductions."
Um, Ted, no one is forcing you to claim those deductions, pal. You only do it because -- Surprise! -- it reduces your tax liabilty!
Blessed are those who expect nothing, for they shall not be disappointed.
Model850, Excellent Point
Submitted by mom_rox on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 6:35pm.
Taxes are required, while deductions are optional.
I was amused (and heartened) by Ted Turner's comment about Social Security - He still sees it as a government controlled personal retirement account, rather than a charity for unaffluent seniors.
I also wonder
Submitted by SamC on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 9:25am.
I also wonder just how much Ted would be 'giving away' were the Dems to get their way and charitable deductions go by the wayside. I believe Ted would be keeping a lot more of his money to himself. Typical liberal hypocrite.
These guys remind me of the
Submitted by BD on Tue, 11/30/2010 - 9:28am.
These guys remind me of the types fom the 80's who said they wanted to serve in the military and demanded that we institute the draft to do away with the all volunteer force. But they somehow never enlisted, in some peculiar manner they needed to be forced to do what they wanted.
Guys, if you want the federal treasury to have more of your money, send them a check for it TODAY! Don't wait til you die or are too old to use it yourself. Send it now so you can experience poverty like the rest.
I want to know
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 4:20pm.
which if these four refused any of the standard deductions for their personal return?
This is what I ask
Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 8:58pm.
of anyone that says Americans aren't taxed enough. I'll usually ask if they file a 1040EZ. When they say no, because they itemize deductions, I ask why they don't pay Uncle at least what is asked of them.
I usually get looked at like that possum at night that just really doesn't understand why those bright lights are getting closer.
mzk1
Submitted by mzk1 on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 6:24am.
If you mean exemptions, I think they are eliminated at that level.
Regarding deductions, they should, as others mentioned, take the standard deduction. Then send a huge check to the Bureau of the Public Debt, as described in the tax booklet. And bring it with you to the interview. Otherwise, they can shut up.
What we should really do, is make them do their own taxes....
Hypocrites
Submitted by ThatDude on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 4:39pm.
This should be a simple thing for them to understand. If they so believe in government, then they are absolutely free to give their money to the government as charity. As it is, they do nearly everything they can to hide their wealth from the greedy hands of government.
If they want to sit here bragging about having so much extra money, then I have some ideas for them. They can invest in their own business while turning the profits towards others within the business. They can give charity to any number of other causes or institutions they believe in. If our government is what you believe in and government is who you'd like to give your money to, then by all means, do so. The funny thing about freedom is that it allows you to do such things. Imposing your will of forcing others to invest or give charity to the same matter that you are passionate of is antithesis to freedom. The bottom line is that they have every right to do what they want with their money so long as they aren't infringing upon the rights of others. Attempting to push the government into confiscating more of another's property is the same as encouraging robbery.
I can't believe it: some folks want to pay more taxes!
Submitted by Mary Louise Turner on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 4:46pm.
It does seem outrageous, but there actually are Americans who want to be taxed more - witness all the nitwits who voted for Ears in 2008, including those in the mega-millionaire set. I ask them: how stupid can you be? Apparently, very stupid.
Wealth and
Submitted by Clutch1956 on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 12:04am.
Wealth and smarts/intelligence are not mutually inclusive terms, as evidenced by this pack of overpaid buffoons. They may have had business sense, but lordy have mercy, they don't have the common sense that the good Lord gave an ameoba.
Income tax
Submitted by dmaley1714 on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 4:56pm.
They don't care about an income tax, lets declare any wealth over a billion dollars will be taxed at 100% and see their faces go white.
mzk1
Submitted by mzk1 on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 6:23am.
What a great idea! :-)
These dopes want to pay
Submitted by killa37 on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 4:58pm.
These dopes want to pay more.................hell, here I am!!! I can hire some employees, some subs, buy materials, goods, services, etc.................contribute to the economy, be a good citizen, and maybe even make an evil profit. They give it to the Fed. Gov't???? They might as well take it out to the dumpster and burn it...................
I keep hearing Buffet talk about how his secretary pays more in taxes than he does!!! Hey Warren, maybe you should give her a raise??? And.........who's stopping you from writing some 7 or 8 figure check to Uncle Sam????
Buffet
Submitted by gfrrman on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 7:00pm.
doesn't pay a payroll tax and "pays" less in taxes than his secretary because his income comes from his investments not earned income... Slick bs from Buffet. If these idiots want to pay more then just cut a check to the Feds. This whole charade from Amanpooor is pathetic.
"Socialists eventually run out of other peoples, money"....Margaret Thatcher
G
Mr. Gates, Mr. Buffet & Mr.
Submitted by Agnostic on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 7:12pm.
Mr. Gates, Mr. Buffet & Mr. Turner how about we tax your wealth and not income?
These 'filthy' rich are not targeted by income tax anyway.
Submitted by Apache on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 7:57pm.
Exactly. The reason the "rich" are demonized is that we have these guys held up as examples of "rich" people. These people are beyond the point of needing income to tax. They could just stop earning any income and pay zero income tax. I think Buffet tried to articulate that point once. But apparently he is addicted to the populist nonsense and the free camera time it provides. But these guys are not the "rich" that would be targeted by a tax increase on that group.
Excellent!!!! The want to pay more????
Submitted by NC Cop on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 5:06pm.
Outstanding gentlemen!!!! How does 85% sound? After all, as Obama said "There comes a point when you've made enough money".
An 85% tax rate on these guys could wipe out much of the damage that Obama has already done.
85% it is!!! Thanks again, fellas. Now, who else wants to come forward to pay more taxes???
What a bunch of idiots.
Warren Plans to Give it Away
Submitted by libBuster on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 7:27pm.
Warren Buffet doesn't plan on leaving much to his children. Apparently there is no way he thinks they can run his business as well as he can.
Instead of waiting, why doesn't he just turn over his Berkshire Hathaway stock to Obama to run right now. He will get a lot of media praise and he can feel even better about himself.
I think Buffet is a greedy
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 7:50pm.
I think Buffet is a greedy old guy who wants to take it with him, and since he can't, won't give it to his kids. Fine by me, but if I want to leave my money to my kids and not the government (who will give it to people I don't know and don't want to work), I should be able to give it to my kids.
We all know why these guys don't give their money away now. They like the private jets and special treatment they get. They just don't want anyone else to be able to enjoy the fruits of their own labor.
Self Righteous Sanctimony
Submitted by libBuster on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 9:08am.
Buffet once complained that his secretary was paying taxes at a higher tax rate than he was. He could have easily fixed that by giving her some stock options. I think his main concern now is self agrandizement.
Hypocrites
Submitted by Tenebrous on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 5:08pm.
If they want to pay more, then PAY MORE by sending Uncle Sam a check. Leave me out of it.
Visions and Principles blog
Hey Christiane how about
Submitted by Barack_must_go..... on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 5:16pm.
Hey Christiane how about having us poor ( compared to today's guests ) people on so we can tell the Federal Government and Barack Obama to kiss our collective ass?
That would be more productive and entertaining than those sorry asses you had on today.
Barack_Must_Go.....
Okay, Warren, Bill, Melinda,
Submitted by MikeB on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 5:31pm.
Okay, Warren, Bill, Melinda, and Ted, how about changing the tax rates? Instead of brackets and rates based on wealth, how about having 2 rates, 10% for conservatives and 95% for liberals. That way, you get to check a box on your tax form and, if you so desire, you CAN pay more in taxes without screwing over the rest of us.
Simple solution...
Submitted by retrocon on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 5:36pm.
Next time one of these super-wealthy folks say higher taxes (which, BTW, they are pretty immune to, whether because they won't feel it, or because they don't pay "payroll taxes"), simply propose this:
How about a "net worth tax," suggest to them that they should pay 1/4 of their net worth to the government every year until they reach less than 1 billion dollars. Certainly 1 billion is more than enough for them to live the rest of their lives? And certainly, they don't "need" control of all those companies, right? Can't the government do it as well? I mean really, they want to give the government more power over us with higher taxes anyway, right?
Bet they don't like that idea... even though that would affect them less than 3-5 percent tax increase on a small business making $500K a year, but hey.
Christiane, spending an hour
Submitted by Captain Repus on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 5:36pm.
Christiane, spending an hour with you every Sunday helps me gain a much better understanding why some men turn gay.
... or just plain celibate.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 6:12pm.
In addition to that bizarro accent and the furry eyebrows, the Men's Wearhouse wardrobe doesn't help either.
I hear
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 11:10pm.
"You're gonna like the way you look."
So they say...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 9:23am.
Several months ago my wife bit [with my credit card] on one of those two-for-one deals for my son and me. I tried on virtually every suit in the store in my size but finally gave up and let my son have the second one also. I just didn't like the way I looked.
Jer
flat tax
Submitted by sarge329 on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 5:57pm.
Didn't Steve Forbes suggest a flat tax? As in everyone pays the same percentage regardless of the income? If I made $ 35,000/year ( God I wish ) and the tax rate was 5% , my tax bill would be $1750.00 . If I made, oh say, $ 14,000,000 ( another fantasy ) , I would owe $70,000. Simple, huh? That would also make filling out a tax form a 5 minute task, at most. Of course, this would be presuppose the idea that EVERYONE, billionaires and politicians included, would not scour the earth looking for any and all possible loopholes to get out of paying any taxes at all. Wishful thinking, right? After all, ASSUME = ASS of U & ME. As far as politicians go, I refer to all politi-cians of every ideology. And, unfortunately, politicians have shown an unfortunate willingness to forego any and all desires to be " one of the common people " . Don't they vote themselves pay raises when they want? They don't have to deal with Obamacare. They basically have carte blanche to live in their own world, and will do all they can to stay there, as well as keep us out. Am I venting enough? Doubtful.
Actually Sarge I believe that
Submitted by Captain Repus on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 6:04pm.
Actually Sarge I believe that would be 700,000, not 70,000 (rounding error).
Buffett complaining that he only pays a 16% tax rate suggests to me that he is obviously taking advantage of every tax loophole available, so I think he should push for getting rid of the ridiculous loopholes before suggesting raising taxes on others.
It is so typical of these mega-rich jerks who have already made their fortunes wanting to keep others from doing the same.
That's right, Captain
Submitted by Galvanic on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 9:32pm.
People like Buffet usually stash large amounts of income in tax-exempt foundations, which they also serve on as officers. The officers then receive perqs from the foundation.
Multi-millionaire trial attorney Jerry Spence did this in Colorado. He created a foundation with himself at the head, and put all his vast real estate holdings under the foundation's ownership. Instant real estate tax savings.
I did stomach my way through
Submitted by msh1973 on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 6:05pm.
I did stomach my way through this interview, I wanted to hear it with my own ears. I almost put my shoe through the screen, sigh....
How about starting an ad campaign
Submitted by gwalt on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 6:28pm.
We'll use these clips and tell them to Western Union their cash to the IRS . Start putting them on the defensive. Why wait for some Journolista to ask a hard question? CNBC asked Buffet why he just doesn't give his fortune to the government--- he stated that charities would do a better job than government. Huh? We ought to find that clip 2007 March I think----and start circulating. Can NB find it? It is damning and I'm surprised it hasn't been found yet. The question of why was e-mailed in from a viewer and he brushed it off."A lot of briefing for a 2 hr. special with Dan Rather. Saw the show & wonder why we bothered". Ronald Reagan
These peopel must think the
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 6:36pm.
These peopel must think the public are idiots. Perhaps they are right.
Not just taxes*
Submitted by cajun2 on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 7:14pm.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1110/IRS_to_Jewish_group_Does_your_organization_support_the_existence_of_the_land_of_Israel.html?showall
This administration wants more than just your taxes. People like these useful idiots live in a bubble being moved around by people like Amonpour. Read this article and tell me that the definition of "paranoia" is obsolete.
To all who say, "These billionairs want to pay more"
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 7:27pm.
I see a lot of posts in this thread from people saying that these billionairs want to pay more taxes. There is absolutely no rational for saying that! If they wanted to pay more taxes, they would be doing so!
What they want to do is sound magnanimous vis a vis their "taxed benevolence", while at the same time, paying as low a tax rate as they can get away with! They are hipocrits of the first order.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
I saw the whole sickening
Submitted by ant on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 7:43pm.
I saw the whole sickening segment and, yes, they do want to sound magnanimous but they aren't out to really sacrifice. Like has already been said, nobody's stopping them from donating their money to a government that will burn through it in a few days. 7 billion for Pakistan, 300 million for the Palestinians, millions for foreign oil companies, a little more for Santa Claus.. and poof!.. gone. It's the usual BS. Ted Turner went on to talk about his position in the UN to save the world from Nukes and violent tendecies (oh, can't we all just get along?!). I believe his official position is Secretary of Unicorns and Rainbows.
Pocket change
Submitted by Jerry Mack on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 7:38pm.
A perfect example of super rich people that only associate with other super rich people. Too them $200,000 is pocket change. None of these types ever disclose how much they donated or gave away when they were making the equivalent of todays $200,000 or $250,000 a year when their businesses were getting off the ground.
If they publish their tax
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 8:40pm.
If they publish their tax returns for the last 10 years then I will believe them.
Jeff Foxworthy's next TV gig will be called...
Submitted by Dave. on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 8:55pm.
...Are You Stoopid Enough to be a Billionaire?
-Dave
Let's lead by example, not tax write off
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 11:07pm.
Why don't all you big boys with big bank books donate say 95% to America and let's see how that feels for a start? I mean you really don't require all that wealth do you? Let's spread all of that for a start.
Not such a good idea? Ah the crickets...
Is AMANPOUR even an American Citizen?
Submitted by Indie Dude on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 11:53pm.
No rich Billioniare would ever decalre themselves as a conservative, even tho that's who they had to be, to make that kind of money. Now that they are rich beyond rich, they (now) pretend to be "compassionate". They truly believe they are accepted by their peers as some sort of Gandhi of the business world. But the reality is that these Billionaires are cut-throats with a slight of hand and they will do everything they can, to getting-out of paying their fair share of taxes every year. They can Bite me!
Indie Dude
Submitted by MrShy on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 11:56pm.
Exactly!
Sorry, that's all. Just a spot-on post. :)
- Shy Vinyl
Join Mr. Shy and The 1* Percent
Take 99% of what they have...
Submitted by Clutch1956 on Sun, 11/28/2010 - 11:59pm.
...and pay it to the Governent that you love so much. Fungible property, cash, stocks, investments, property (except for a small home worth no more that 1/10000 of your current wealth, with a maximum value of $300K) everything that they have goes to the government and sign over all future gains also.And you do this voluntarily, becuase it is "the right thing to do". Since you high muckety-mucks like to tell us little people what's good for us, us little folks should be able to tell YOU what we think is good for US. Fair is fair, after all, and there are a lot more of us than there are you so our will must be done, since we used the democratic process to determine it. Pay up, suckahs...
When did 3 people become 'Many?'
Submitted by ChrisNH on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 12:00am.
Three cherry-picked Lib elites 'agreeing' to pay higher taxes doesn't constitute 'many' people agreeing to pay higher taxes.
Chris these people are super
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 12:12am.
Chris these people are super rich, they must know better than we do. Right?
Three’s a crowd
Submitted by needle on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 10:22am.
ChrisNH, media elitist and class warrior Christiane Amanpour is tipping her hand a bit. I suspect for her any billionaire is many
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
MRC Should Petition Fox News, NY Post, Wall St. Journal, ETC...
Submitted by Ogundipe S.O. on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 12:02am.
I think the MRC should petition the conservative leaning media outlets to question some of these so called billionaires who simply want their taxes raised and ask them to mail in large checks to the IRS, maybe $5B each for instance??. Why do liberals always want to legitimate anything they voluntarily want to do even though the vast majority don't share the same view with them? I think it's because they know it's not possible to be legislated upon, so they're just parroting it and some people will think they really mean it. If the MRC could actually do this, then we will get a decisive response. Hopefully.
I agree let's tax the rich
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 1:45am.
Anybody that has a net worth of over 10Billion dollars must pay 50% Tax. No deductions No loopholes.
As for the rest of us.....
We Are The 53%
i'll make it really easy for
Submitted by ONUV on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 5:40am.
i'll make it really easy for them...
https://www.pay.gov/paygov/forms/formInstance.html?agencyFormId=23779454
mzk1
Submitted by mzk1 on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 6:35am.
Beautiful!
I would love to see an "ambush interview" where the interviewer hands them a laptop at that screen, and asks them to fill it in on the spot.
There must be some
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 11:53am.
There must be some unsuspecting true believer out there who actually does contribute using this form. I personally cant see it, the government takes out too much as it is.
Raging "Lib" Scarborough slams Dem billionaires
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 9:08am.
blubbering about being undertaxed.
Easy for these wealthy titans to make "sacrifices" they won't even notice while those making far less will be burdened by higher rates.
Joe calls the dog and pony show by Buffett, Gates, and Turner pathetic and "stupid".
NB bloggers sit astride horns of dilemma: How to bash Scarborough while agreeing with him
Jer
Good point, Jer.
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 12:28pm.
Ever heard the nugget about the blind squirrel eventually finding an acorn once in a while? But, I do agree with the Scab on this one, this dog and pony show was pathetic.
Scarborough
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 8:55pm.
Jer's "Conservative" Hero!
:-)
"Lib free or die"
We Are The 53%
"horns-dilemma"---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 10:01pm.
Au contraire, Jer.
We conservatives can sit comfortably between the horns of this dilemma, and rationally make a decision whether to ignore the Scab, based on the Scab's past statements or pronouncements, or ignore him because liberals like you insist that he is a conservative.
Unlike you libs, who must balance on the single horn of a unicorn.
Ouch!
No wonder liberals make such rash decisions, then gnash their teeth and dash off to either bash conservatives or clash with them.
MD
Putting their mouth where their money is
Submitted by needle on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 10:03am.
I think we should keep the income tax levels where they are, or reduce them.
However, just to satisfy these guys and some other people I think we should have a national discussion about a 1% national property tax on people whose net worth is over a billion dollars. These hypocrites out of Aesop’s fables are not personally concerned about additional income taxes; they are all about accumulating wealth –and I mean inordinate wealth – where income qua income has practically no relevance.
So for every $100 Billion of billionaire wealth $1 Billion would be contributed to offset the national debt every year. How does that sound?
Let see if these billionaires are willing to put their mouth where their money is. I would be especially interested to watch George Soros embrace this proposal.
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
Translated -
Submitted by RealVet on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 9:46am.
Translated: Sure, tax us more. We shelter most of our income anyway, a good bit is hidden, the rest is invested, and we have so much we can live off the interest. The cleanup comes in April with the tax loopholes.
What is really preposterous
Submitted by Boudin on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 10:24am.
Is that because these leftist billionaires want to raise taxes, that somehow translates that we all want higher taxes. Truly amazing
A net worth tax.
Submitted by phryingphish on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 1:55pm.
A net worth tax = to 5% on individuals with a net worth over 100 million, no deductions. Including any monies held off shore, any stocks held, any trust funds any other tax loopholes. That would help close the debt and not impact their lifestyle one whit. This would be on top of any income tax, which they can fiddle any way they want.
If Forbes can figure out their net worth, so can the government.
Why not just cap net worth at $100 million?
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 11:57pm.
When an individual's net worth hit's $100 million, they need to earn more then 5% on their assets in order to get ahead, and that's not counting taxes. So if capital gains are taxed at 20%, their capital would have to grow at a rate of 10% in order to achieve and after tax rate of growth of just 3%. So why invest in the United States if you need a 10% growth rate to achieve a 3% return. No one would. There goes job creation.
Well, I guess there's always muni-bonds. Oh wait! Most of those returns are under 5%. Forget the muni bond market. Government bonds? Oh wait, negative return on those too. Any other type of investment? Vegas? The horses?
And when we ring out all the excess net worth over $100 million, we're going to need to drop that to....where.....$10 million?
Hello great depression. Scratch that......Hello, Zimbabwe!
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
So why don't they just give
Submitted by Thoreau on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 2:02pm.
So why don't they just give the Federal Government their money and shut up? All I've seen thus far is them begging, like little girl's, for bail out's for their investments. Now that they have the bailout money, they want to kill every other animal in the forest. It's the Communist way.
So, let's get this straight. You want all of your rich friends to be forced to pay the Federal Government oppressive amounts of money. Yet you get their money on the backend through TARP. Nice scam.
The lower class need to actually pay taxes!
Submitted by Mr_Priest on Mon, 11/29/2010 - 2:24pm.
Soooo “If people aren't going to pay for the services that they need, how are those services going to get funded, do you think?” First of all, people who need the services can’t pay for them, that’s why they’re on welfare. Why didn’t she just say “If you rich people would just pay more taxes, then people who live off government welfare won’t have to find jobs!”?
"The trouble with quotes on the internet is you never know if they are genuine" —Abraham Lincoln