I'm not sure what's in this for Warren Buffet, but he's lying, and he knows he is. Of course, he's a Democrat (most Wall Street moguls are), so that may have something to do with it. Perhaps he's playing politics and trying to cover for the mistake he knows he made in voting for Barack Obama.
Obama: "It is wrong that in the United States of America, a teacher or a nurse or a construction worker who earns $50,000 should pay higher tax rates than somebody pulling in $50 million." It may be "wrong," but it's also not happening.
"But Buffet's only paying 15% tax rate," is the demogoguery, "and his secretary pays a higher rate than that." The deomoguery comes from the fact that the comparison is of income tax rates versus capital gains tax rates. When Buffet invests his money in a stock or something, and then shows a profit on it, he pays 15% as a capital gains rate. But the money he's investing is after-tax dollars. In other words, he's already paid taxes on that money, and at a higher rate than his secretary is paying. The idea that a secretary, making $40,000, is paying a higher income tax rate than Warren Buffet, who's making gazillions, is just flat false.
Does Obama know this? I don't know. If he doesn't, he should, he's supposed to be the leader of the Free World. If he does know it, then he's being diningenuous at best, lying at worst. But it's the same thing Democratic Marxists have been doing for generations now--playing class warfare, class envy, creating resentment, division, and hatred among Americans--and this from the man who was supposed to "unite" us. And it's not going to help the poor. How is taxing somebody else, the only people who can provide you the job you need to get out of poverty, ultimately going to help you? It might make you feel better that the rich, greedy so-and-so's are getting it stuck to them, but that's not going to put food on your table. And again, all it is doing is preying upon the dark, seedy side of man--envy and jealousy. Is this really the way to bring the country together, to create more jobs, to reduce unemployment, to encourage the innovation and initiative necessary to produce wealth and build a strong economy? This is horrible. But, it's the Democratic Party, it's what they believe, and it doesn't matter that it never has worked, and that it cannot work, because it violates every economic law regarding wealth and job creation. There is no excuse for anybody preaching this any more since there is an overabundance of evidence now in of its utter failure. I now live in a country that is unequivocal proof of that. I just moved from a country, the northern half of which continues to flounder in abysmal human misery because it hangs on to Obama's "the government can solve every problem if you'll just give us your money" doctrine. Obama is basing his whole re-election hopes on ignorance--the ignorance of enough American people--and on a slimy news media that will do everything it can to cover up the truth and keep it from being widespread.
Why? Why are they doing this? I've written it many times before but I'll keep doing it. It's about power and freedom. Free people, people who can take care of themselves, don't need government, and freedom is the greatest enemy of those who love power. And thus the people who have created wealth, the innovators, the achievers, those who have succeeded via their own ability, initiative, and the personal use of private property--these are the enemy. They are the enemy because they don't need government--except to protect them from thieves, a great number of which go to work in government. Our Founding Fathers well knew this and tried to create a system to protect the industrious from the thieves, outside and inside government. Unfortunately, they didn't succeed, but that's much of what the fight is all about today.
One thing Obama DOES know, and that's that he's not going to get $1.5 trillion in new taxes. He couldn't even get that when he had a dominant Democratic Congress, he certainly isn't going to get it when the Republicanss control the House of Representatives. But that doesn't matter to him. He doesn't care if he gets that tax increase or not, because he's not trying to help the country, he's trying to win re-election. And he's already sounding his theme: the Republicans favor the "rich" over "the little guy." Have you ever heard that one before?
Hey, Obama, IF it's true (and it's not), but if it's true that Buffet's secretary is paying taxes at a higher rate than Buffet himelf, then the answer is to lower her tax rate, not raise his! Actually, the best answer would be to completely abolish the Marxist progressive income tax, but that thought will have to wait for another day.
**********
Addendum: I just finished the above article and happened to run across something interesting. I bash the media a lot, and make no apologies for it, but when they do something good, they deserve accolades. An AP writer named Stephen Olemacher has just published a piece entitled "FACT CHECK: Are Rich Taxed Less Than Secretaries?" He runs some pretty good numbers. Here's the URL if you'd like to read the article:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44589727/ns/business/
I've noticed a couple of times recently that AP, normally so sycophantic towards Obama, has been getting on his case some, i.e., telling the truth. Let's hope it continues, and I'll give credit where credit it due.
We need to abolish, completely abolish, the current tax code system to end the inequities that are indeed there--from the "looopholes" the "rich" can find to avoid paying taxes (I look for them, too), to the 46% of Americans who pay no federal income taxes. It's obscene both ways.