Friday, October 31, 2008

From the New York Times: Warren Buffet Pays 17.7% Income Tax? Wants to pay more.

Let's talk wealth redistribution. There are people who feel that is a bad thing. Do they believe that wealth is being equitably redistributed now? I think that that is the element to the argument that isn't being discussed.

According to this article in The New York Times, Warren Buffett is only taxed at a rate of 17.7%. More surprising than his incredibly low tax rate is his desire to pay more, and his encouraging his fellow billionaires to do the same. I salute you Warren.

The other surprising thing I learned from this article is the results of a poll that Buffett conducted among his employees. He found that they were all paying higher tax rates than he. The author, Justin Wolfers, conducted a similar poll among his fellow employees at the Wharton School of Business. Surprisingly, the pattern is similar. The administrative staff at the bottom of the pay scale were paying higher tax rates than the people at the top.

If the richest people in America are paying roughly half the tax rate that the rest of us are paying, wouldn't it be only equitable for them to pay at least the same rate that the rest of us are?

I think the time has passed for discussing whether wealth redistribution is good or bad. Both candidates support wealth redistribution, it is impossible not to. Only one candidate is looking to move the Warren Buffett bracket towards the tax rates of the rest of the country. That is only fair.

Honestly, I don't understand how anyone can support lowering the taxes for people who make billions when they don't even pay the same taxes as the rest of us. The wealth has been redistributed. A vote for John McCain is a vote to keep the current inequitable system of wealth redistribution. If you aren't in that top tenth of the top percent of the nation's earners, you really should favor Obama's plan.

2 comments:

Brian said...

Sounds like a hypocrite to me. He should fall into the 35% tax bracket but is most likely using loop holes to get to 17%. Maybe he should give that extra 18% to charity.

Brian said...

BTW I fall in the upper 25% tax bracket and I'm no billionaire. I wouldn't mind paying more than 17.7% either. To qualify for that rate his earned income would have to be less that $32,000 a year.

Does the New York Times really have any credibility left? They are just another mouth piece for the DNC.