- Dec 18, 2001
I don't even see where Obama's income would even fall within the Buffet rule his proposing(1 million plus). So I am trying to understand your moral outrage. It isn't like the guy took in $25 million in income and paid out 8% tax rate.Er, what? It's quite simple: Obama feels that "the rich" need to be paying far higher Fed tax rates - regardless of what their charitable contributions are. 'The rich" who have income at far greater levels than Obama and give far greater amounts in charitable contributions are the same "rich" that Obama wants to tax at a higher rate.
Given that the Obamas are not destitute, that they have quite a nice house over their heads, quite nice and reliable (when someone doesn't misfuel it that is) transportation, a quite generous food allowance, a very nice healthcare package, oh, and are, you know, pretty rich by our societal standards...
...it would seem to me that a.) giving up a (meaningless 5%) pittance of your salary as a meaningless gesture, and b.) not voluntarily choosing to give to the IRS the amount of money you feel "the rich" should be paying (you know, leading by example, not by excuse, especially when you can easily afford to like the Obamas can), would not make one a dictator as you allege, but rather, a hypocrite. A cheap hypocrite more accurately.
I mean, the Obamas feel the rich need to pay more because the Fed Gov needs mo munney. The IRS has a mechanism that lets them do exactly that. They're rich. Shouldn't they be showing the other rich how its done? No need to wait for the other Politicians to pass a tax raise, Lead! Hmmm.....now, why would 'Ol Warren and Obama want others to pay more but won't ante up themselves and lead by example... :hmm: