Obama Lays Out Fairness Argument of Buffett Rule
April 10th, 2012
06:11 PM ET

Obama Lays Out Fairness Argument of Buffett Rule

BOCA RATON, Fla. (CNN) – Without mentioning the names of his Republican rivals, President Barack Obama took his ideological opponents to task on Tuesday during a speech on Tuesday at Florida Atlantic University. Trumpeting themes of fairness and equal sacrifice, the president used facts and figures to argue that a continuation of current tax breaks to the nation’s top-earners would be the wrong way to tackle the country’s mounting debt.

“A lot of the folks who were peddling these trickle-down theories, including members of Congress and some people who are running for a certain office right now who shall not be named- they're doubling down on these old, broken down theories,” the president said, pointing to the budget recently passed by House Republicans as an example.

In Obama’s description, the budget “showers the wealthiest Americans with even more tax cuts and then pays for these tax cuts by gutting investments in education, in medical research, in clean energy, in health care.”

The president warned his young audience that if the plan’s proposals became law, many of them would lose $1,000 each in financial aid funding for college, and by the time they retired Medicare would have been replaced by a voucher system, the value of which would be quickly outpaced by rising health care costs.

“Now, this is not an exaggeration, this is math,” Obama said. “And when I said this about a week ago, the Republicans objected. They said we didn't specify all these cuts. Well, right, you didn't because you knew that people wouldn't accept them. So you just gave a big number, and so what we've done is we've just done the math. This is what it would mean.”

He challenged Republicans to “show us specifically where they would make those cuts,” and went on to outline what he saw as the fundamental flaw in the Republicans’ math.

“You can't give over $4 trillion worth of additional tax cuts – including to folks like me who don't need them and weren't asking for them – and it just comes from some magic tree somewhere,” Obama said.

Often interrupted by shouts of approval and chants of “four more years” from the enthusiastic audience of more than 2,000 in the university’s basketball arena, Obama spoke for more than thirty minutes, laying out arguments that will surely be central to his reelection campaign.

While acknowledging that the country’s “deficit is too high,” Obama took on Republicans who’ve proposed drastic cuts in government spending while simultaneously demanding a continuation of Bush-era tax cuts that would reduce government revenue projections.

“Their argument might actually have a shred of credibility to it if you didn't find out that they wanted to spend $4.6 trillion on lower tax rates,” Obama said of GOP deficit reduction proposals. In the president’s calculation, such a move would give Americans making more than $250,000 a year an average of $150,000 each.

But to make his argument more poignant, the president quickly shrunk that pool to millionaires and billionaires in order to explain what this money could buy the country.

“$150,000, this is what each millionaire and billionaire would get, on average,” he said, listing off seven things that this pool of money could otherwise provide for students like those at FAU and their families, including a college tuition tax credit, financial aid funding and a new computer lab for their school.

It wasn’t until the very end of his remarks that Obama finally got around to explaining the reason for his visit to the Sunshine State.

“In the next few weeks we're going to vote on something we call the Buffet rule,” Obama said, going on to sketch out the details of the rule. “I'm saying you're bringing in a million bucks or more a year then what the rule says is you should pay the same percentage of your income in taxes as middle class families do.”

As he has in the past on issues like his American Jobs Act and the controversial debt ceiling compromise, Obama closed his speech by urging listeners to pressure their members of Congress to support the rule, which will come to the floor of the U.S. Senate for a vote next week.

“I want you to call your members of Congress, I want you to write them an e-mail, I want you to tweet them, tell them don't give tax breaks to folks like me who don't need them,” Obama said. “Tell them to start investing in the things that will help the economy grow. Tell them if we want to bring down our deficit sensibly, then we're got to do it in a balanced way that's fair for everybody. Remind them who they work for. Tell them to do the right thing.”

soundoff (67 Responses)
  1. scott

    It amazes me, this guy really does not get it, does Obama actually thinks before he engages his mouth?

    April 10, 2012 at 6:29 pm |
    • cole

      If you actually read the article and want America to move forward,your hate for Obama won't be your focus. It amazes me how a lot of people talk about this president policy as if he is trying to destroy America but he has strengthen it. If you stop listening to republican talking points then you will understand how American economy works. All the policy Obama administration put in place is what a republican or any one would do to move American economy forward. I am not even an American and don't live in the US and understand how his policy works. What a shame.

      April 10, 2012 at 7:54 pm |
      • Bill in STL

        Do a little research, the problem is not the taxes on salaries, the problem is the taxes on investment income. To raise taxes on those that make more than 250k in salary is a drop in the bucket. Warren Buffet is a fine example... HIS salary is appx 450k. HIS income on his investments is in the millions. To raise his taxes on his salary is chump change as compared to what he gets taxed on his investments... the tax rate on investments is 15%,,,, So raise his taxes on the 450k to 50% and the government will get 225k more from him ... while his investments continue to make millioms. Change the tax rate on investments and watch how loud Warren will shout!

        April 10, 2012 at 9:07 pm |
      • John

        I see no hate in his statement only from you because someone disagrees with you. He openly states he wants to CHANGE America to something else. The American economy is not working. The stimulas just ended. We will see.

        April 11, 2012 at 7:18 am |
    • Howard

      GOD helps those who help themselves ... not those who help themselves to other people's hard earned money ... like Barack Obama. America needs a commander and chief ... not a liar and thief, like Obama. Obama's m.o. has always been to blame, smear, humiliate, demonize, and discredit his opponents ... because he can't run on his own failed record. In November. SAVE AMERICA ... DUMP OBAMA !!!

      P.S. Only the wealthy One Percenters can afford to purchase even a single share of Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway stock !!! ... More Hypocrisy from Obama.

      April 11, 2012 at 1:12 pm |
    • RealityBites

      Obama and his democrat majority had a chance to update the tax codes in 2009 and 2010. What stopped them? Bush??

      April 11, 2012 at 1:54 pm |
    • rightytighty

      Obama: Divider and Chief.
      Another broken promise washed over by a collaberating media.

      April 11, 2012 at 1:56 pm |
  2. Patrica

    Only ( if ) Obama was a white man and a republican !!!!!!!!!!!!

    April 10, 2012 at 6:30 pm |
    • John

      The policies would still be idiotic. It doesn't matter who is pushing them.

      April 10, 2012 at 7:57 pm |
    • Angus

      You racist! You libs step into that one all the time.

      April 10, 2012 at 10:41 pm |
    • John

      Would he have been elected if he was?

      April 11, 2012 at 7:21 am |
      • jerry


        April 11, 2012 at 10:16 am |
    • Howard


      Berkshire Hathaway class A stock (NYSE symbol BRK.A) is the highest-priced stock in the world. As of January 25, 2008 one share of that stock will only set you back a cool $139,100. On the other hand, shares of Berkshire Hathaway class B stock (NYSE symbol BRK.B), or "Berkshire Babies" as they are often called, currently cost a paltry $4,630!

      April 11, 2012 at 3:54 pm |
  3. Jake

    We all need to seriously rethink this whole issue. Republicans and Democrats differ only in how they want to distribute the tax load. Saying that taking money from the very rich is fair implies that the government taking money from its citizens in any form is also fair. Have we considered that instead of constantly arguing about how to divvy up the "loot", we eliminate the income tax completely? The fact is, we are forced to perform slave labor for the federal government for a significant portion of every year. Rich people have just as much right to their money as the poor. Stealing from ANY citizen and justifying it as "for the common good" is utopian at best, and tyrannical at worst. How would you feel if you were Warren Buffett? "Well, youre rich so its not a big deal for you..." Not a big deal? I would be LIVID if the government took millions of dollars from me every year and used it to enforce such policies as "preventive war" (a joke of a euphemism), welfare, and legislative morality such as the war on drugs – yet ANOTHER never-ending war started by the feds to continually rob us of our money and civil liberties. The debate about how to steal, or who to steal from needs to end NOW. We've only had the income tax since 1913, and its existence has been repeatedly utilized to fund programs and wars that most common people detest, or only support because they are uninformed or propagandized on the issue. I close on this note: people say that abolishing the income tax and there's no way our government could survive without a third of its income. Well, if there was ZERO income tax, government spending would have to only return to year 2000 levels to balance it out! Surely we can manage that. Instead, were being enslaved by our government on average 3 months out of the year to pay for mostly post-9/11 programs such as bank bailouts and the DOHS, which do nothing but invade our privacy, diminish our personal liberties, and even jeopardize our national security by many experts opinions (talk about a boondoggle....) We need to take an entirely new approach to this debate. There IS a third option besides this way to divvy up the loot or this way. Supporting the federal income tax is, morally, no better than advocating blatant theft from your next-door neighbor, and giving the money/goods to someone else who the government deems "fit". Abolish the IRS and END THE FED!

    April 10, 2012 at 6:44 pm |
  4. WDinDallas

    Math? 2012 Revenues $2.5 Trillion...2012 Budget $3.6 Trillion.....

    It appears to me his math is $1.1 Trillion off.

    April 10, 2012 at 6:48 pm |
    • Jake

      i said year 2000. learn to read.

      April 10, 2012 at 6:51 pm |
    • Ryan

      Wouldn't be $1.1 trillion off if Republicans would make the rich pay more. Then again, the President doesn't set taxing and budget policy. He merely proposes it.

      April 10, 2012 at 11:03 pm |
      • Jt

        Your statement is a joke. Republican ore democrat, LEADERSHIP comes fromthe whitehouse. Try to be a real American instead of a propagandist and hold you LEADER to account for his time in office.

        April 10, 2012 at 11:14 pm |
      • Hannibal7

        Tax everyone at 100% of their income and you can't cover the shortfall. The problem is the spending and the entitlement gang who want their happy world for free.

        April 11, 2012 at 6:32 am |
      • John

        More class warefare. We see billions and billions wasted by THIS ADMINISTRATION and their only answer is tax and spend, tax and spend....

        April 11, 2012 at 7:22 am |
    • sonnie3

      This is the type of brain death politicians we have these days. Let move a bunch more out the door in 2012

      April 11, 2012 at 12:06 am |
  5. Don

    With all the discussion about people paying their "fair share" of income taxes, why do nearly half the people in this country pay no income taxess at all? Is that their "fair share" or is creating more recipients of government handouts simply a strategy to gain more votes.

    April 10, 2012 at 7:25 pm |
    • Angus

      Obama wants more poor people dependent on the government. It's call buying votes and ensuring no one is wealthy enough to present competition.

      April 10, 2012 at 10:43 pm |
      • Bill in STL

        Correct... Look up Keynesiam Economics ... and how FDR used it to buy votes.

        April 12, 2012 at 9:10 pm |
    • J.V.Hodgson

      IThe problem is most people confuse SORRY DONT GET IT!! " Incomes meaning." it means only salary and wages, bonuses and commissions or tips and gratuities and fees earned by working for said Bucks.
      Investment income like dividends and interest on bonds is taxed at 15 % irrespective of whether it adds to your more than $1m salary etc "earned income."
      This 15% rate also applies to Capital gains with some exceptions where it can be higher or in other cases where Hedge funds have managed to get such gains ( subject to the higher rate) classified as interest!!
      Internationally in most other western economies Dividend income is added to and considered part of earned income and would be taxable at the current top rate of 35 % previously under Clinton 39.6% in USA.
      Capital gains tax is 30 %.
      This 30 % on Income of those over $1M is pandering to a complete misunderstanding by most Americans and generates on y $57bn in additional tax revenue over 10 years that's about $5bn pa and peanuts debt wise is of course fairer but a lousy compormise and solution.

      April 11, 2012 at 3:40 am |
    • Brian Dodge

      Because there are about 155 million with jobs, out of more than 300 million population. I'm retired, but pay taxes on my retirement and investment income, but many people don't have that.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:33 am |
  6. B Ammon

    This is so much political foolishness. FAIR???? these people don't understand except as a ote getting spin.

    April 10, 2012 at 7:27 pm |
  7. king

    The repubs give to rich austerity policies will destroy America and the globe. Have they looked at how great the austerity movement in Europe is working so far. Lesson the rich is getting richer and the middle class and poor is getting poorer. This we're the same elements, that brought forth the great depression and the great recession. The repubs want to go back to those same policies, and by golly there are gullibles out there that will go back there. Corporations exist to make money if there isn't a market in the America they will quickly go to China. When bush did this trickle down crap last decade, corporations exedus was unprecidented. Now Obama pushed back the power to the spenders in our economy, and now big corporations and some international ones are coming to our shores again. Lesson folks if you go back to the trickle down austerity policies of the bush era, you cannot expect nothing different. C

    April 10, 2012 at 7:30 pm |
    • Steveo

      What chased corporations overseas was not trickle down. It was a 35% corporate tax rate, the highest in the world. Even Obama's Job Czar is moving a portion of his company (GE) to China! It is not trickle down! you want to know were corporations are going in the U.S.? The SOUTH! You want to know why Boeing is in SC, Toyota is in Tenn, Mercedes Benz in Alabama, BMW, in SC? NO UNIONS! Yeah some are coming back but to the SOUTH!

      April 10, 2012 at 7:43 pm |
      • cole

        Reason they move to the south is cause its the poorest area in America and they need to keep them busy there before they start clinging to the confederate flags. That's the way its done in other countries even Canada,most companies go to Quebec so they can keep them in Canada. The way politics works is not what you read in the news. One more point i need to make to you is reason jobs are coming back is cause wages is on the rise in china.

        April 10, 2012 at 8:01 pm |
      • Steveo


        I agree that wages are rising in China! Good for them! What you are saying is it is NOT Obama policy that is driving business back but instead higher workers wages? OK! Your confederate flag comment is ignorant! Again, it is because of Right to Work states that don't go union! For your info, I'm black and live in the south! You do the math! I would say I am surprised that you would turn this discussion racial with the flag remark, but I can't, cause I'm not!

        April 10, 2012 at 8:20 pm |
      • Bill in STL

        The next thing you know Cole will mention Brown-s-hirts

        April 12, 2012 at 9:07 pm |
  8. Jerry

    Mr. Obama, unfairness and stupidity are more correct. You yourself know that your so called Buffet Rule will NOT work or help the economy! You and your lap dogs need to stop lying to the faces of the American people.

    Smoke and mirrors ain't gonna cut it this time. You need to show a little (a lot more) more respect for the American populace.

    Oh, one more thing. THANK YOU sooooo much for putting muzzles on Bobble Head Pelosi and Senile Reed.

    April 10, 2012 at 8:26 pm |
    • Angus

      Obama and the republicans know that if there is only one lawyer in a town he will starve, but if there are two then they eat like kings.

      April 10, 2012 at 10:45 pm |
      • Bill in STL

        Perhaps that is because of the stupidity of the people that feel the need to hire the lawyers,,,, trying to get something from their fellos townsmen... Perhaps???

        April 12, 2012 at 9:06 pm |
  9. FIELD1stSGT

    What'd I say. "Just plain stupid."

    April 10, 2012 at 9:34 pm |
    • J.V.Hodgson

      Yes, Field 1st SGT " just plain stupid."
      You are demonstrating said stupidity. You clearly like most Americans HAVE NO IDEA OF THE TAX SYSTEM AS IT APPLIES TO MULTI MILLIONIAREAS AND BILLION AIRES.
      Dividends, Interest income and capital gains will remain taxed at 15% max.
      check it out before you write "JUST PLAIN STUPID"
      PS I'M A CPA.

      April 11, 2012 at 3:51 am |
      • John

        So when we hear these rich people are double hit on their investment income what does it mean exactly?

        April 11, 2012 at 7:19 am |
      • FACTS speak louder than POLITICS

        To answer John's question on double-taxation:

        Income is taxed once at the corporate rate of 35% and again when it is passed through to the individual as a capital gain or dividend at 15%, for a highest marginal tax rate of about 44.75%. Capital gains also aren't indexed for inflation, so a lower rate is intended to offset the effect of inflated gains. If you buy coke stock in 1950 for $10 and it rises to $20 by 2012 when you sell, you pay taxes even if inflation has double prices for everything – you paid taxes even though you had no REAL return.

        Nearly every study estimates that the revenue-maximizing tax rate from the capital gains tax is between 15% and 28%. Nearly every study estimates that the revenue-maximizing tax rate from the capital gains tax is between 15% and 28%. Bill Clinton agreed to cut the rate back to 20% as part of the balanced-budget deal and capital gains revenues soared, helping to balance the federal budget.

        This CPA must not prepare returns for small business like the ones I work with daily; otherwise, he or she would realize that small businesses income is at risk here at being taxed at higher rates and that these companies, which are vital to job growth, are taxed on income that doesn't even flow to the owners.

        April 11, 2012 at 12:21 pm |
      • Bill in STL

        Thanks for letting me know that you are a CPA... I don't entirely trust you statements and it seems you might have a slightly shaking grasp on logic here ..... I won't be using your services

        April 12, 2012 at 9:04 pm |
  10. Al Dente

    The proposed Buffett rule sparked a violent riot in Florida today: http://www.spnheadlines.com/2012/04/riot-rocks-restaurant-over-buffet-tax.html

    April 10, 2012 at 9:54 pm |
  11. sonnie3

    Obama is trying to cut down the cherry tree with a tooth pick. He need to present bold new tax loop hole reforms and entitlement reforms and smaller less bloated government. It is the Government that is the problem afterall.

    April 11, 2012 at 12:03 am |
  12. John

    WHat haven't we seen the story on Buffet fighting against paying taxes he owes?

    April 11, 2012 at 7:20 am |
  13. jerry

    call it anything you want obama... but its just vote pandering and we all know it will not solve our problems.

    April 11, 2012 at 10:15 am |
  14. hurryup 2012

    The great divider dividing again. Instead of talking about job creation, decreased spending and debt reduction, he decides to tell us how evil the rich are. You all forget that Obumma is a rich man himself.

    April 11, 2012 at 11:25 am |
  15. jack

    Will this rule make investment in stocks which produce capital gains and dividends less attractive? If so, will it cause the average person's 401(k) to drop? Could be the law of unintended consequences about to work.

    April 11, 2012 at 11:30 am |
  16. george of the jungle

    again with the uncalled for remarks by the repos that post. Our presdent has been called a lier and idiot,stupid and worse by the repo clowns.And any comment he makes they are ready to jump like he has offended them. Never has he used any of the terrible remarks that they have to discribe a repo. As for being rich nowhere near as rich as most of the repos running. The Bufet rule is a start to making taxes more fair. The revenue is not great but the idea of people paying their fair share is. I don't understand why the poor repos that post don't understand this. And I can tell you are poor by the uneducated nasty remarks you make. Obama 2012

    April 11, 2012 at 11:49 am |
    • hurryup 2012

      How is it fair, George, to take more money from those who pay all the taxes in the first place....what exactly does fair share mean, when we are all equal? Those who work hard for a living should not be obligated to take care of those who sit on their butts all day smoking crack and pot.

      April 11, 2012 at 12:11 pm |
    • hurryup 2012

      And you know what else, George? I am sick of this joke of a president using MY tax dollars to campaign....he is a rich man......use his own money

      April 11, 2012 at 12:16 pm |
    • Bill in STL

      The word you were looking for was LIAR George....

      April 12, 2012 at 8:59 pm |
    • Bill in STL

      There are more rich democrats in congress than republicans George

      April 12, 2012 at 9:00 pm |
  17. Mark

    Obama says, " ... some people who are running for a certain office right now who shall not be named ... " Uh, he just identified them, did he not? He WANTS them known, doesn't he? Then why not name them? There's a word for that, Mr. President; it's called cowardice.

    April 11, 2012 at 11:53 am |
  18. FACTS speak louder than POLITICS

    Facts from an independent:

    (1) TAXES ARE ALREADY (UN)FAIR: According to IRS data, a median-income household ($35,000) in 2008 paid about 4% of its income in federal income tax. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has found that middle-class households paid an average of 14.3% of adjusted income in federal taxes in 2007, the last year for which data is available. The highest effective federal tax rate was 29.5% – nearly the same as Obama’s Buffett rule – but only the richest 1% of American households fell in that category.

    IRS data for 2008, for example, show that households in the top 10% of earners (above about $114,000) paid 19% of their income to the feds. Those in the top 1% (above $380,000) paid 23.3%.

    Demanding more seems like basic envy to me. We need to grow the economy.

    (2) TAX HIKES WILL HAVE VIRTUALLY NO BUDGET IMPACT: The Obama Treasury's own numbers confirm that the tax would raise at most $5 billion a year—or less than 0.5% of the $1.2 trillion fiscal 2012 budget deficit and over the next decade a mere 0.1% of the $45.43 trillion the federal government will spend.

    This smells like politics to me – not a credible plan.

    (3) TAX RATES IMPACT SMALL BUSINES: In the U.S., small businesses typically report their income through the owner's individual tax return. According to IRS data, fully 48% of the net income of sole proprietorships, partnerships, and S corporations (small businesses) reported on tax returns went to households with incomes above $200,000 in 2007.

    It's hard for small businesses to grow when they are taxed on income that is not even distributed to the owners!

    April 11, 2012 at 12:12 pm |
  19. Stella

    What is fair about trying to extort another $47 million out of taxpayers who already pay 70% of ALL taxes–while the bottom 50% of ALL wage earners pay ZERO TAXES?

    A year's worth of receipts for this tax hike wouldn't even pay for ONE DAY of operating Obama's hyper-inflated government.

    We can't sustain the SPENDING, Mr. President. These gimmicks won't solve our problem, or even get you reelected.

    April 11, 2012 at 12:13 pm |
  20. Reason (Voice of)

    Dear Congressman,
    I am writing to request that you support the Buffett Rule to require a minimum tax on the highest earners among us.

    With the federal deficit that we are currently trying to deal with, we need the help of all Americans. The United States needs to work as a team to raise the bar for all Americans. To do this, we need everyone to do their fair share. The Bush-era tax cuts continued to widen a divide between the haves and have-nots which perpetuates a downward spiral for our society. This new law will help to bring balance back to the American economy.

    Help all Americans by supporting the Buffett Rule and reject failed trickle-down economics that are creating a 2nd rate America. Let's prove to the world that our brand of socially-responsible capitalism is the key to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all!

    April 11, 2012 at 12:37 pm |
    • Bill in STL

      you forgot the closing part

      Something like this

      that was we can all say we did something at set it aside.... We can all look in the mirror the next day and smile... Pat each other on the back and tell each other what a great job we did... While it all falls apart around us... then we can swoop in and declare ourselves royalty...

      April 12, 2012 at 9:13 pm |
      • Reason (voice of)

        @Bill – Well things were sure falling down around us under the previous administration. Things are looking better every day, and things would be improving much better if everyone dropped the doom and gloom attitude. You may not be one to jump on board and have a positive attitude - i get it. But when the economy can grow or fall on consumer confidence, it sure seems like there is something to be said for a little positivity.

        April 12, 2012 at 9:24 pm |
  21. Rsprings

    Top 1% pays 40% of Taxes
    top 5% pays 61%
    top 10% pays 73%
    Just what is the definition of fairness?

    April 11, 2012 at 1:08 pm |
    • Steveo


      April 11, 2012 at 1:14 pm |
    • Bill in STL

      Funny.... here in CNN you figures seem to have been disputed.... 25% of millionaires pay less than the common.. that means that 75% of them pare a fair share ..... and that was how it was stated. All this buffett rule yelling is nothing more than a way to organize the community into supporting more bad policies

      April 12, 2012 at 8:56 pm |
  22. mike

    The Big lie, “Raising Taxes hurts the job market”. History has proven the opposite. 1960's had the largest tax rate in history= the lowest unemployment rate in history, along with the lowest bankruptcy rate, #1 in Education, #1 Healthcare, and business grew faster and stronger. The 1960’s most prosperous time in US history. Today the lowest tax rate= depression, failure. Instead of giving the profits to Uncle Sam they reinvested as a write-off, businesses grew. Corporate America lobbied for low taxes and look where their greed got us. The policies of the 1960’s were a proven success. The policies of the GOP have been a failure and a lie. History has proven what works.

    April 11, 2012 at 1:43 pm |
    • Reason (voice of)

      I completely agree! Trickle-down economics does not work for the American people.

      April 12, 2012 at 5:09 am |
      • Bill in STL

        Reason, back then people were interested in a reaonable profit... a dollar on 1 million sales (profit) makes more money that a thousand dollars on a 5 thousand.... Greed has taken over. Both within the government and coorporations... the citizen is caught in the middle.... Keynesian economics don't work either ... but our President is using that theroy for all its worth... Just like FDR

        April 12, 2012 at 8:53 pm |
    • Bill in STL

      That was not the reason Mike... those were different times with different values... Those values were what made the difference..... not the tax rate....

      April 12, 2012 at 8:48 pm |
  23. Fairness Smairness

    If we want fair, let's have a flat tax, same % for everyone, no deductions, not exemptions...

    April 11, 2012 at 6:04 pm |
  24. Michael

    hahaha apparently obama mentioned his policy being supported by reagan today. No comparison. It's like comparing Debbie Wasserman Schultz to Miss America-its just silly.

    April 11, 2012 at 10:11 pm |
  25. giangho

    All this talk about Buffet rule is not good for the country. All it does is taken time away from addressing the major problems: a 15+ trillion debt, a bad economy with high unemployment, and high gas price that can get much worse if the Middle East implodes.

    I don't get why the president is spending so much time talking about tax fairness – that maybe catchy and an easy sell (we have 50% paying little or no tax – guess how those folks would vote) but how does that help with the problems above.

    As for this Buffet rule, did anyone even talk about what we will use the collected taxes for? Seeing how the government wastes money, the estimated 5-6 billions/year (compare to a trillion/yr deficit) will be spent before it is collected. And then where would that leave us – tax the 2% next? or maybe 5%? or better yet, the top 50%.

    Speaking of wealth distribution and how fair that is, consider these scenarios:

    1. How about the richest persons in a family giving 5%-10% of their income monthly to their poorest relative. Since we want to ask strangers to give their money away, we certainly would be willing to give our money to relatives right?

    2. How about the 1% CEOs and executives of all corporations give back 10%-20% of their income back to the company – and divide that money to the poorest in the company. Surely, giving to your employees is better than giving to strangers – happy employees will work harder and all.

    The point here is that wealth distribution – or socialism is not what makes this country strong. Look at Europe and see how well things go there. Right now it is just Greek and Spain, before long, even the often compared France will collapse under their own tax and spend. France has lousy growth and high unemployment – France averages around 9% for the last 10 years. We have +8% for 2-3 years and we can feel how badly it impacts the country – now imagine having 9% unemployment for 10 years straight – and this is a stronger country in Euro.

    Bottom line, if the president wants Buffet rule, then get Congress to pass. Meanwhile, let's talk about what we are going to do get the country moving in the right direction.

    April 14, 2012 at 4:36 pm |