As most of you I’m sure realize, today marks the 50th anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
I know some of you are old enough to remember, and it’s long been an axiom that everyone recalls where they were when they got the news that terrible day. I wondered if some of you might want to share your experience and your thoughts in the comment section below. I’d be so interested to see it, and I know many of our readers would too.
And Warren Buffett is a poopoo head. There, I said it. He’s figured out how to pay less taxes than his secretaries. What a jerk.
Most rich people that I’ve known didn’t inherit their money – or if they did they’ve grown their bequest – work constantly, and incur damage to relationships with friends and families to achieve their goals.
And they pay their taxes.
President Obama Monday in the Rose Garden launched the class warfare element of his political campaign with a deficit reduction/economic rescue proposal most likely crafted by those eminent economists, David Plouffe and Jim Messina (the chief White House political adviser and the manager of Obama’s 2012 campaign, respectively).
This particular proposal, with its attack on the rich, seems designed to fire up Obama’s liberal base, which just eats this stuff up for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
Obama served up the erroneous – actually, to say this is an error is charitable – impression that the wealthy pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes than the middle class
Any reform plan will have to raise revenue to help close our deficit. That has to be part of the formula. And any reform should follow another simple principle: Middle-class families shouldn’t pay higher taxes than millionaires and billionaires. That’s pretty straightforward. It’s hard to argue against that. Warren Buffett’s secretary shouldn’t pay a higher tax rate than Warren Buffett. There is no justification for it.
It just isn’t true. A “fact check” run today by the Associated Press – not really a foaming den of libertarianism – tells a very different story.
Buffett wrote in a recent piece for The New York Times that the tax rate he paid last year was lower than that paid by any of the other 20 people in his office.
This year, households making more than $1 million will pay an average of 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes, including income taxes and payroll taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank.
Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will pay 15 percent of their income in federal taxes.
Lower-income households will pay less. For example, households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will pay an average of 12.5 percent of their income in federal taxes. Households making between $20,000 and $30,000 will pay 5.7 percent.
What’s more, the top one percent actually pay about 40 percent of all federal income taxes.
Keith Hennessey, George W. Bush’s top White House economic adviser, has a good rundown of the actual numbers behind Obama’s massive tax increase proposal.
If Obama wanted to courageously lead on the deficit, he’d take a political risk and tackle entitlements. Instead, he does nothing to reduce the growth of Social Security, and his limited effort to restrain Medicare includes almost no cuts to the growth in spending on beneficiaries. Instead, he mostly hits providers, whose lobbyists will assuredly have these reductions rescinded.
If you are wondering why there is no bipartisanship today, let me transport you to another time when there was more cooperation, and to another Democrat who sounds today like SOME CRAZY TEA PARTY SUPPLY-SIDING REDNECK BEER-GUZZLING IGNORAMUS.
John F. Kennedy.
Pretty stunning, isn’t it? H/T to Ace of Spades, where I saw the Kennedy video.