Seeking Alpha

So it turns out one-percenters are already satisfying Obama's 30% fairness rule. And while their...

So it turns out one-percenters are already satisfying Obama's 30% fairness rule. And while their effective tax rates have fallen since 1979, so have those of all income classes. Which has Barron's Gene Epstein wondering whether the real remedy lies in cutting federal spending.
Comments (47)
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3868) | Send Message
     
    Just an example of more Pro-Wealthy Political "spin".

     

    Obama's "fairness doctrine" was referring to those earning over $1,000,000. The top 1% refers to those with AGI's over about $350,000. Why not compare the "fairness doctrine" to caterpillars?

     

    Now, if these $1,000,000 earners are already satisfying the rule, then what is all the fuss about?

     

    The simple fact is that they are not satisfying the "fairness doctrine" and we all know that.

     

    Whether we cut spending or raise taxes are two sides of the same coin and just determines WHO the money flows to, not IF or HOW MUCH flows. So let's stop hiding behind all these smoke-screens and start working together to reduce CORRUPT, WASTEFULL spending and STUPID, AVARICOUS tax breaks. There is plenty there.
    8 Apr 2012, 09:51 AM Reply Like
  • coddy0
    , contributor
    Comments (1182) | Send Message
     
    Reel Ken
    Obama's "fairness doctrine" was referring .................
    ======================...
    This is the last year outdated issue.
    Everybody and BO, excluding you and Sarah Palin, are not expected to have any hard recollections regarding this doctrine

     

    current focus is on women ballot in swing states as a part of broader issue of admitting women to the all-male Augusta National Golf Club
    8 Apr 2012, 11:20 PM Reply Like
  • Reel Ken
    , contributor
    Comments (3868) | Send Message
     
    Hi CoodyO,

     

    I have to laugh, this is certainly the first time I've ever been grouped with Sarah Palin in the same sentence.

     

    I was simply responding to a CURRENT SA article. In that regard, I don't understand the relevance of the rest of your post.

     

    That said, the syntax of you last sentence seems backward....the broader issue is women in swing states and the current focus Augusta.
    9 Apr 2012, 08:04 AM Reply Like
  • Neil459
    , contributor
    Comments (2644) | Send Message
     
    Duh? Gene E., what planet have you been visiting for the last 20 years.
    8 Apr 2012, 10:09 AM Reply Like
  • Mike Maher
    , contributor
    Comments (2616) | Send Message
     
    Simplifying the Tax Code would go a log way to ending this debate. Less loopholes, tax breaks, and deductions would make everything much more clear. Typical government though: why clarify and simplify current laws to make them less costly and harder to circumvent, when we can just make new laws? IF the governments' goal in taxation is to collect the most amount of money in the most effective way, I think the fact that an entire industry has sprung up to do peoples taxes is a sign that they have failed drastically.
    8 Apr 2012, 10:51 AM Reply Like
  • SoldHigh
    , contributor
    Comments (1013) | Send Message
     
    Given the unsustainable rate at which federal spending increased under Bush and now (even worse) under Obama, yes cutting spending is a large part of the solution.
    8 Apr 2012, 10:57 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    I think 'the fairness doctrine'('fairness' is the word used most often by dictators) should apply to the poor and middle class. They should pay more to be 'fair' since they are by far larger recipients of all the programs as a percentage of income.

     

    The 'rich'(whoever they are) pay the most in relation to whatever they receive out of it. And also to what they don't.

     

    Please, let's stop discriminating against those with higher incomes. Its nauseous.
    8 Apr 2012, 11:00 AM Reply Like
  • surfnspy
    , contributor
    Comments (415) | Send Message
     
    +1!
    8 Apr 2012, 11:45 AM Reply Like
  • Rich in Quebec
    , contributor
    Comments (4566) | Send Message
     
    Obama's reference to Social Darwinism is demonstrated as relevant by Wyatt's unashamed espousal of a greater class divide. Perhaps if the U.S. had a Paris Commune or a Bolshevik Revolution in its history, it would not seem so easy for some of the privileged to wish to return to a Gilded Age attitude.
    8 Apr 2012, 12:24 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Ah, not true. Today's 'rich' are the public sector collective in their entirety and their unsustainable growth rate along with the SOEs. Whatever carcass is left after that feeding blood orgy is 'old wealth' created before the bloat via the trust fund baby racket. New wealth is becoming harder and harder to come by for that very reason, ie public sector debt overhang.
    8 Apr 2012, 12:50 PM Reply Like
  • TakeFive
    , contributor
    Comments (5204) | Send Message
     
    Wyatt....
    Please try to be more precise. What you are speaking of is INCOME taxes. If you include the whole basket of taxes then the poor far and away pay a higher percentage of their income.

     

    Over the last decade plus. the income and especially wealth accumulation at the top has grown exponentially while the middle class, especially the lower half of the middle have had stagnant income.

     

    Remember, a lot of the accumulated wealth doesn't come from "income" as defined under the code but rather from appreciation.

     

    For example, hedgies may make billions annually for their efforts of moving money around based on algorithms. Thanks to the fine print for the privileged that ain't income baby, that's capital gain.

     

    Same for Romney's "carried interest," privilege as another example. We cherish/reward passive income, but the guy who's busting his ass on the assembly line pays through the nose (in comparison).
    8 Apr 2012, 06:18 PM Reply Like
  • kcr357
    , contributor
    Comments (560) | Send Message
     
    There's nothing stopping the assembly line guy from making passive income as well, other than our middle class's obsession with ridding themselves of their money the moment they receive it on the latest tech. fad.
    8 Apr 2012, 08:28 PM Reply Like
  • D_Virginia
    , contributor
    Comments (2280) | Send Message
     
    > There's nothing stopping the assembly line guy from making
    > passive income as well

     

    Except for the fact that, regardless of tech fads, he has a MUCH larger percentage of his income going to the necessities of life like groceries, housing, and utilities.

     

    Also, he can't research stocks all day because he has a REAL job doing REAL work that props up the REAL economy which provides the basis for the stock market that fund managers and other leeches make fortunes on -- but by all means, let's all keep pretending that he doesn't contribute anything to society.
    8 Apr 2012, 09:14 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Indeed, let's try to be more precise. What I am speaking of is income taxes, of which, the rich pay unfathomably more. The poor pay zero. The rich pay damn near all of the government's irresponsible tax receipts(ie, now it is called 'debt'). None of this is good. The poor need to pay more, even if it is a small amount. At least then they would realize the idiocy and stop contributing to the delinquency of an entire derelict political class re the DNC which milks them for their vote.

     

    Hedgies comprise a very small percentage of 'the rich' and John Kerry who parks his wife's money in munis, also small.

     

    The large amassed wealth comes from small and private businesses, which thanks to the change in the tax code(now more complex than ever before), their business revenue is now called 'income'. This is the lie of the left that is never told.
    8 Apr 2012, 09:26 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    For anyone still confused on the matter, this should clarify the issue.

     

    From the WSJ.

     

    The Real Causes of Income Inequality :

     

    http://on.wsj.com/HtUIm2
    8 Apr 2012, 09:29 PM Reply Like
  • D_Virginia
    , contributor
    Comments (2280) | Send Message
     
    > The Real Causes of Income Inequality

     

    Consider the source.

     

    I'm not sure that an opinion piece, in a wildly biased publication, written by the mastermind behind repealing Glass-Steagall (Phil Gramm), is worthy of consideration for "clarifying" anything.

     

    But, even if the author wasn't a treasonous plutocrat, his arguments are all based on correlation (with no evidence of causation) and false analogies (the economy of Sweden is most certainly the orange to the U.S. economy's apple).
    8 Apr 2012, 10:16 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Consider the article.

     

    His arguments are all based on the current tax code period compared to what it was long before.

     

    Nice try.
    8 Apr 2012, 10:19 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    That's nutz! You must be loaded -- hovering over your piles of $$$ -- blaming the poor for the condition of the country. Happy Easter!
    8 Apr 2012, 10:20 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    People spending their meager paychecks is what keeps the economy humming. Supply and demand -- you know. Not everyone has the wherewithal to invest and be able to wait for gains; most need to spend immediately for food, housing, gas, insurance, child care, healthcare, etc. People who spend on the "latest tech fad" are more than likely buying on credit. Not desirable, but some (AAPL owners all) are not complaining, I am sure.
    8 Apr 2012, 10:30 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    D_Virginia,

     

    Sorry, I should have read further down to see your comment. On same page :-) --- DITTO!
    8 Apr 2012, 10:32 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    So, you must be for the healthcare mandate, Obamacare? Since you believe the poor shouldn't be given a free ride!
    8 Apr 2012, 10:38 PM Reply Like
  • kcr357
    , contributor
    Comments (560) | Send Message
     
    Last I checked, the workweek was 40 hours, more than enough time left over to research the market. The passive income mentioned would be a buy and hold to roll over the earnings for the tax benefits, so it's not like the guy is gonna be day trading and has to know what the market is doing every second.
    "but by all means, let's all keep pretending that he doesn't contribute anything to society."
    What the hell does this mean? Who ever said the working class didn't do real work/contribute? Did you feel the need to interject some kind of dem talking points for extra credit?
    8 Apr 2012, 10:38 PM Reply Like
  • kcr357
    , contributor
    Comments (560) | Send Message
     
    "People who spend on the "latest tech fad" are more than likely buying on credit"
    And this isn't relevant to someone not having $$$ to invest how?
    I get it, you think poor/working people, through no fault of their own, can manage their money correctly and achieve wealth; but somehow taxing the rich more and giving it to them will cause some sort of transformation and everyone will benefit. Not gonna happen. Look at all the rappers/football players/lottery winners who are broke.
    8 Apr 2012, 11:06 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Obamacare was a trojan horse to bail out medicaid (which is welfare). It also robbed half a trillion from medicare, so uh... no.
    9 Apr 2012, 01:10 AM Reply Like
  • johnyaya
    , contributor
    Comments (106) | Send Message
     
    The "most progressive income tax system in the world?" This is an outright lie. Any number of analysis refute this kind of silliness. Such as http://aol.it/HrU87h Most countries top tier income tax is over 50%.

     

    Plus, ordinary income is not really the issue. It is the fact that un-earned income is typically taxed at a lower rate than earned income in the U.S. This is where "the rich" make their money anyways, and, once again the U.S. is in no way "the most progressive" in this regard either.

     

    Regardless of anyone's opinion about who should be taxed what, this article is based on blatantly false premise that Americans pay more taxes than anyone else, which the Republicans have been able to imprint on the nation's psyche, but is simply not true.
    9 Apr 2012, 01:02 PM Reply Like
  • DaLatin
    , contributor
    Comments (1522) | Send Message
     
    WJ, the owner of the rubber company that makes Trojan is a Dem contributor... Will they be free like the contraceptives ? If so there ya go ! Crony ruberism !
    9 Apr 2012, 05:48 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    Too much generalizing! and your inference is way off.

     

    Just curious. Did you, while working your minimum wage job, suddenly decide out of nowhere to call ETrade, start an account and invest $30 in a share of Starbucks? How did that work out?
    9 Apr 2012, 10:02 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    Just spoke to my friend who is a medical administrator in Kansas. Said the Affordable Care Act has been working fine, and in fact, they like aspects of it! Hasn't taken full effect yet, so decide afterward. Since you hate welfare so much, you should like the fact people will have to pay for it.

     

    Spouting GOP/tea party spin doesn't make it true.
    9 Apr 2012, 10:26 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    Affordable Care Act pairs up nicely with the record breaking, budget busting Affordable Food Stamps Act at 48 million strong. We just suffered from the Affordable Home Ownership Act (*ahem*, low rates) and that didn't work out all that well either now did it? They tried the Affordable Air Care Act (*ahem* cap-n-trade). It failed but the EPA just silenced coal... probably for good. How about the Affordable Solar Care Act? Yeah, not good. The Affordable Car Act? GM. It was a bailout of VEBA. So, you pay for it(taxes) but don't get a free whip.

     

    The next bubble?

     

    The Affordable Government Care Act. Oh, don't worry, that bubble is about to blow too.

     

    Aren't all these things just wonderful? The way government gets so involved in all of our lives?

     

    At this point, we make Hugo Chavez look like Ronald Reagan.
    9 Apr 2012, 10:32 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    President Obama tried to keep his promises on issues he ran on. Guess you didn't vote for him -- thus didn't want this promise kept. There were those who hated FDR and fought to prevent social security from being passed also. Do you collect or intend to? Do you have Medicare? Seems those who have don't want anyone else to.

     

    Healthcare costs are the biggest drag on the economy and increases debt. Unfortunately the "Public Option" is not an option due to lack of preparation by Dems to define, as much as GOP misrepresentation generating angy mobs at town halls, boosted by Dick Armey's FreedomWorks. And now we learn about ALEC(American Legislative Exchange Council) which since exposed Pepsi, Coca-Cola, Kraft and others are leaving. http://bit.ly/IwBOcY
    Suppose you prefer corporations running the country rather than our elected representatives.

     

    P.S. You denigrate my favorite author, EAP!

     

    P.S.S. Elizabeth Warren 2016!!
    10 Apr 2012, 10:38 AM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    heh

     

    Nice try.

     

    http://bit.ly/IBcKo2
    10 Apr 2012, 12:07 PM Reply Like
  • Wyatt Junker
    , contributor
    Comments (4503) | Send Message
     
    http://bit.ly/y5oYPy
    10 Apr 2012, 12:29 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    Guess we will see some interesting debates! Store up on popcorn!!
    10 Apr 2012, 01:13 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    My hopes just got dashed late yesterday; VVUS's PDUFA date 4/17 got pushed to 7/17, and now it's tanking. So I'm not in a very good mood!!!!
    10 Apr 2012, 01:18 PM Reply Like
  • TakeFive
    , contributor
    Comments (5204) | Send Message
     
    What is all that mess? Let a real man set the record straight.
    http://bit.ly/HHBgns
    11 Apr 2012, 12:09 AM Reply Like
  • stacks2012
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    I actually would not mind my federal income taxes going up... say another three or seven percent. I know this is not a very popular stand to take but the U.S did pay for my schooling from 5th to 12th grade and put me through community college, the U.S also provided me with medical care up until I was 17. I OWE THIS COUNTRY and so do a lot of you. rich, poor or middle class. I'm indebted to uncle Sam, I wouldn't be in the tax bracket I am if it wasn't for his aid, I don't mind paying up if my extra taxes will provide the same opportunities that i was able to take advantage of, for our children
    8 Apr 2012, 03:40 PM Reply Like
  • Alex T
    , contributor
    Comments (281) | Send Message
     
    Stacks: I went to public school from 4th to 7th grade, but guess what, my parents still had to pay property taxes which are local taxes that fund public schools. When I went to private school, they still had to pay those public school taxes. I also went to community college in the mid 70, but continued to pay the Alamo Community College Tax until 2006 when we moved to another neighborhood.. Both my kid were going to private school until 2010 and we still had to pay property taxes which funds public school.
    I am middle class ($100,000) and not only seeing my local taxes going up but the cost of living is increasing due to inflation as the result of all the printing of paper. A major tax credit no longer applies resulting in us paying more Federal Income Tax for . Don't want more taxes.
    8 Apr 2012, 08:46 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    Sounds like your state taxes are what you should be complaining about. My income taxes have declined twice since Pres. Obama took office, and I don't see higher prices for groceries other than produce out of season. Guess it depends on how you eat.

     

    A plus for New York: As of April 1st clothing and footwear under $110 are tax free! To me the glass is half full, not half empty!
    8 Apr 2012, 10:48 PM Reply Like
  • stacks2012
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    i would like to add to my prior comment that there is a lot of wasteful spending that i would like to see vanish from the income statement of our government. i usually don't speak negatively about our government i just study the candidates which i never really completely like any of them but i go with the one that closely resembles my views and i VOTE. i would like for all of us to stop the political circus in its tracks by going out to VOTE. I don't care who you vote for, but don't complain about our current leaders if you didn't vote against them! i would like to go back to the regulation levels of the 1940's. sure the economy will bear a bit of a burden to begin, we won't have massive booms and growth but we won't have mass recessions and huge market "corrections"
    8 Apr 2012, 03:43 PM Reply Like
  • DaLatin
    , contributor
    Comments (1522) | Send Message
     
    Just by reading what is written on SA you can see the US is not capable of governing itself and the people in Congress are SAers on steroids.

     

    There is no need for Congress or the Legislature at this point and we have a great American company that has offered to help on Medicaid on other management weaknesses in the US.. That company is IBM

     

    IBM will lend the country Watson.. I say turn the governing over to Watson and just keep the Supreme Court,but, keep the voting # of Justices at 8...

     

    One is an alternate if one gets sick or dies !

     

    Like we say in Hawaii ........Nuff redy !

     

    Comment by " soap box communications"
    8 Apr 2012, 06:54 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    Just saw on Fidelity:

     

    Small business groups back Buffett Rule
    UPI 12:46 PM ET 4/10/2012

     

    Three alliances representing small U.S. businesses urged passage of tax code that would embrace the "Buffett Rule," the groups said in statement Tuesday.

     

    The American Sustainable Business Council, the Business for Shared Prosperity and the Main Street Alliance put their collective weight behind the controversial tax proposal named for one of the country's richest men, investor Warren Buffett, who revealed last year that he pays less in federal income tax than his secretary.

     

    Buffett, in a commentary on the tax code, said many of his "mega-rich friends" would be willing to pay more in taxes, especially while others are suffering.

     

    President Barack Obama is scheduled to speak on the issue at an event in Boca Raton, Fla., Tuesday afternoon.

     

    Despite the president's entreaties, the U.S. Senate, which will debate the matter Monday, is not expected to pass a procedural vote on closing tax loopholes for the wealthy, as it is not likely to pass with the necessary 60-vote majority, The New York Times(NYT) reported.

     

    There have been various proposals on where to draw the line in the sand separating the middle class from the wealthy. The small business groups urged the Senate to legislate a "Buffett Rule" by passing the Paying a Fair Share Act (S. 2059), assuring that households with incomes above $1 million don't pay lower tax rates than middle-income taxpayers.

     

    "I could have all the South Carolina small business owners making more than $1 million a year over for a backyard barbecue and have plenty of room left over. It's time for the real millionaires club -- chief executive officers of big corporations, hedge fund managers and corporate lobbyists -- to pay their fair share," said Frank Knapp, president of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce and vice chair of ASBC.

     

    In a letter to the Senate, the small business groups noted that a national poll indicated 57 percent of small business owners support the tax increase included in the Buffett Rule.

     

    "The scientific poll revealed that only one of the 500 small business owners surveyed reported an income above $1 million," the trade groups said.

     

    Republicans have claimed that shutting down loopholes for the wealthy would stymie business innovation and hobble job growth.

     

    To many others, shutting down the loopholes is about fairness.

     

    "I've been in business 33 years, and I'm appalled that my customers, who worry about scraping up enough to pay for their next tank of gas and groceries, pay higher tax rates than some oil and food executives. The Buffett Rule is the right step in bringing more fairness to the tax system and supporting the public investments and job creation we need for a healthy economy," said Lew Prince, owner of Vintage Vinyl in St. Louis, Missouri, and a BSP leader.
    10 Apr 2012, 01:24 PM Reply Like
  • kcr357
    , contributor
    Comments (560) | Send Message
     
    I just can't take seriously a person owing the IRS billions in back taxes whom then proceeds to argue for higher taxes. I would just as soon listen to those crazy people in New York with "The end is nigh" signs. The guy is senile.
    10 Apr 2012, 01:35 PM Reply Like
  • Rich in Quebec
    , contributor
    Comments (4566) | Send Message
     
    kcr357 - I would rather take economic advice from the average octogenarian billionaire investor unless a self serving attitude might make one question it. Buffett plays the game by the rules. It doesn't mean he approves of the rules.

     

    As to the possibility of irrationality, given the choice, and from the information I have on both, I would take my chances and go with the opinion of the octogenarian rather than that of the South Florida sled dog owner.
    10 Apr 2012, 02:19 PM Reply Like
  • kcr357
    , contributor
    Comments (560) | Send Message
     
    Did you miss the part about him owing back taxes from over a decade's worth of income? That's playing by the rules?
    And yeah, huskies don't belong in S fl., but they were rescued from a breeder; I imagine they prefer the heat over being put to sleep ;).
    10 Apr 2012, 02:27 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    Who? Buffett? You must be thinking of Jimmy Buffett!
    10 Apr 2012, 02:04 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    OK, I just googled it and you're right -- but I'm sure it was not intentional --- Warren lives in la-la-land! Wouldn't you? I forgive him.
    Leave it to the NY Post, Newmax to try to muddy him. Only makes them more despicable.
    10 Apr 2012, 02:18 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2833) | Send Message
     
    Anyone catch this yet?

     

    http://huff.to/HthclN
    10 Apr 2012, 03:03 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector