• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Obama's Share

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
3,960
33
91
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:

Chuck
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.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
Really, I could care less, so my outrage isn't outrage...it's more like amusement of Obama supporters who are making excuses why a very rich family (by societal standards) who essentially is the head of the country, and who uses that position to advocate on higher taxes for "the rich", isn't stepping up to the plate and leading by example.

Obama doesn't need to live by the Buffet rule btw, Buffet does. And, you can see how he has: He hasn't.

What does that tell you about their sincerity?
 

IBMer

Golden Member
Jul 7, 2000
1,137
0
76
How much did he pay compared to Romney who made over 4 times what he did?
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
3,960
33
91
Really, I could care less, so my outrage isn't outrage...it's more like amusement of Obama supporters who are making excuses why a very rich family (by societal standards) who essentially is the head of the country, and who uses that position to advocate on higher taxes for "the rich", isn't stepping up to the plate and leading by example.

Obama doesn't need to live by the Buffet rule btw, Buffet does. And, you can see how he has: He hasn't.

What does that tell you about their sincerity?
So what would be a acceptable % of AGI that he should be paying in taxes then? I think the biggest problem is I have seen this a lot people way over estimate the % of income they pay in taxes. They think just because they are in the 25% tax bracket that all their income is taxed at 25%. For most people payroll taxes are more than Federal income tax. One of the positions that Obama has proposed for higher taxes for the rich is for incomes over $1 million a minimum % tax on income over $1 million. Did Obama have a AGI over $1 million? No he didn't so once again I don't see a lack of sincerity on his part for paying a 18% tax rate on less than 1 Million in income. It was like he used a off shore account in some shell company in the Caribbean to hide income.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
How much did he pay compared to Romney who made over 4 times what he did?
Romwho? Who gives a F about Romney, he's a rich boy who's against being taxed anymore than he already is. Obama and the Dems want to boost that Fed gravy train at the expense of "the rich", and, Obama is without a doubt, rich. Not just well off - rich.

Why all these deflections? Does or does Obama not want higher taxes on the rich? Is Obama rich? If Obama does want the higher taxes and he is in fact rich, then, there is zero need to wait for it officially to be law: He can give the Fed Gov the extra share of gravy he feels it needs right now.

What is the problem here?
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
So what would be a acceptable % of AGI that he should be paying in taxes then? I think the biggest problem is I have seen this a lot people way over estimate the % of income they pay in taxes. They think just because they are in the 25% tax bracket that all their income is taxed at 25%. For most people payroll taxes are more than Federal income tax. One of the positions that Obama has proposed for higher taxes for the rich is for incomes over $1 million a minimum % tax on income over $1 million. Did Obama have a AGI over $1 million? No he didn't so once again I don't see a lack of sincerity on his part for paying a 18% tax rate on less than 1 Million in income. It was like he used a off shore account in some shell company in the Caribbean to hide income.
Beats me, again, I'm not the one advocating for higher taxes on "the rich" so the Fed Gov can gulp down some more funding gravy. I'd leave those amounts to be set by the left most Progressives...I'm quite sure I've seen here on this P&N board posts up to 70%, 80%, 90%. I mean, really, does already rich Obama who has so much already really even need a salary? Exactly what do they need all that money for?

Chuck
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
3,960
33
91
Beats me, again, I'm not the one advocating for higher taxes on "the rich" so the Fed Gov can gulp down some more funding gravy. I'd leave those amounts to be set by the left most Progressives...I'm quite sure I've seen here on this P&N board posts up to 70%, 80%, 90%. I mean, really, does already rich Obama who has so much already really even need a salary? Exactly what do they need all that money for?

Chuck
Once again Obama is advocating a minimum 30% tax on income over $ 1 million taxable income. Considering his income was under $ 1 million I don't find a issue with him paying 18% Federal Income tax. So basically Obama is advocating higher taxes on taxable income over $ 1 million. No outrage found. You can complain when his income is over $1 million and he is paying less than %30 tax on the income over $1 million.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
But Obama is only advocating that for it to have a prayer in getting any votes to pass. Don't you think if Obama had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate and controlled the House, that the numbers would be very different, such as, what his base yearns for?

Don't you find it odd that Obama is beyond well off and can easily afford to set "the rich" tax rate example, even, like a true leader, when he doesn't have to, yet, doesn't?

If Obama is truly not a hypocrite, I find that amazingly strange...
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
3,960
33
91
But Obama is only advocating that for it to have a prayer in getting any votes to pass. Don't you think if Obama had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate and controlled the House, that the numbers would be very different, such as, what his base yearns for?

Don't you find it odd that Obama is beyond well off and can easily afford to set "the rich" tax rate example, even, like a true leader, when he doesn't have to, yet, doesn't?

If Obama is truly not a hypocrite, I find that amazingly strange...
No I really don't because I don't see him advocating for what you think he is advocating for. He actually has to be doing this for you to call him a hypocrite. You might have a case if he was stashing dollars in some off-shore tax shelter but he isn't. I think overall people just have a big misconception about what they pay in Federal Income tax. Right now people are just using these numbers with a axe to grind about Obama. For everyone that I have talked to they usually way over-estimate what they pay in taxes. What the tax bracket shows for % and what you actually pay are two very different things.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
We can just agree to disagree. Each year I see this as a Leadership exercise that Buffet and Obama could undergo to lead by example on what their side both officially wants, and unofficially (and with some still officially) really wants if they could get their way, and each year I get excuses why they're not doing it.

If they couldn't afford to pay their fair share I could understand, but, I think there's little disagreement they're beyond well off. One has to wonder what it stopping them from setting the example they wish to see implemented...

Chuck
 

sunzt

Diamond Member
Nov 27, 2003
3,079
3
76
so instead of paying 15% (after charitable deductions) Obama raised his taxes to 18% and you guys are mad at that? Or maybe you're saying he shouldn't be able to deduct charitable expenses?
 

Pr0d1gy

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2005
7,776
0
76
I am saying maybe we should all be paying more than 25% if all the poor people are paying that much. A shocking concept I know, but Obama is not impressing me with these moves.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,182
7,997
136
Can we use the same argument for politicians who are against socialized healthcare then they should deny their government funded healthcare? Where are all those threads calling out that hypocrisy?

You still think its a good argument?

What about those that think we should cut Medicare and social security? Are you guys demanding those politicians give up their ss and Medicare?
What about those that are calling for budget cuts are you guys demanding those politicians cut their budgets? Where are those posts?
 

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
So I take it if you are consistently paying in the 20's you are making over six figures then? For 2012 the 25% bracket didn't kick in until your income got over 70k. I just hit up a estimated Federal Income Tax estimator for 2012 and basically single $100k standard deduction and I am seeing around 18% in taxes. I ran the numbers for a $200k income single and standard deduction I got around 23% federal income tax rate. So what you are single and getting around $200k a year in income?
Was there a point to this post other than to display your math skills?
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
Really, I could care less, so my outrage isn't outrage...it's more like amusement of Obama supporters who are making excuses why a very rich family (by societal standards) who essentially is the head of the country, and who uses that position to advocate on higher taxes for "the rich", isn't stepping up to the plate and leading by example.

Obama doesn't need to live by the Buffet rule btw, Buffet does. And, you can see how he has: He hasn't.

What does that tell you about their sincerity?
Same here, no outrage, just amusement that he talks the talk, but never walks the walk. Just another typical Democrat hypocrite that wants the laws/rules to apply to everyone except themselves.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
Liberal hypocrisy at its finest. These guys and obama are full of shit. Always advocating for policies they wont follow.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
Did you vote for Romney? Did you vote for any republicans?

Only one party was against raising taxes on the top earners. Only one presidential candidate said he should pay more in taxes.

It's good that you see the issue with taxes and income levels, the question then becomes what are you doing about it? Are you voting for those that agree with you or are you voting against them.
Should, but doesn't.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
Once again Obama is advocating a minimum 30% tax on income over $ 1 million taxable income. Considering his income was under $ 1 million I don't find a issue with him paying 18% Federal Income tax. So basically Obama is advocating higher taxes on taxable income over $ 1 million. No outrage found. You can complain when his income is over $1 million and he is paying less than %30 tax on the income over $1 million.
I believe last year Obama made under $1 Million was 2006.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
We can just agree to disagree. Each year I see this as a Leadership exercise that Buffet and Obama could undergo to lead by example on what their side both officially wants, and unofficially (and with some still officially) really wants if they could get their way, and each year I get excuses why they're not doing it.

If they couldn't afford to pay their fair share I could understand, but, I think there's little disagreement they're beyond well off. One has to wonder what it stopping them from setting the example they wish to see implemented...

Chuck
That's a straw man argument. What they want is NOT to pay more personally, but rather for wealthier Americans collectively to pay more. As part of this, they are then willing to pay more themselves, to contribute their fair share. They want this because they are responsible, intelligent adults who recognize that society collectively has bills to pay. America must be financially sound if we are to continue to offer the extraordinary opportunities for success that enabled our wealthier people to become wealthy in the first place.

Suggesting they should lead by example, that they should individually pay more or else they are hypocrites, is nonsense. It's an absurd diversion now, and it was absurd the last 50 times it was raised. It only works if it is a collective effort; it is pointless individually.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
Saying that since Obama wants higher taxes for the rich that he should just volunteer to send in extra dollars now is like saying that Republicans who want us to get rid of social programs should voluntarily stop using them now. Both arguments are identically fallacious. Of course, this point will go over the head of people more interested in ranting than thinking.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
That's a straw man argument. What they want is NOT to pay more personally, but rather for wealthier Americans collectively to pay more. As part of this, they are then willing to pay more themselves, to contribute their fair share. They want this because they are responsible, intelligent adults who recognize that society collectively has bills to pay. America must be financially sound if we are to continue to offer the extraordinary opportunities for success that enabled our wealthier people to become wealthy in the first place.

Suggesting they should lead by example, that they should individually pay more or else they are hypocrites, is nonsense. It's an absurd diversion now, and it was absurd the last 50 times it was raised. It only works if it is a collective effort; it is pointless individually.
Oh bullshit. That's the equivalent of trying to make beating your wife illegal but until it is you are just going to continue to beat her.

Saying that since Obama wants higher taxes for the rich that he should just volunteer to send in extra dollars now is like saying that Republicans who want us to get rid of social programs should voluntarily stop using them now. Both arguments are identically fallacious. Of course, this point will go over the head of people more interested in ranting than thinking.
This is also true.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Oh bullshit. That's the equivalent of trying to make beating your wife illegal but until it is you are just going to continue to beat her.
No, sweetheart, paying your dues is nothing like beating your wife. It takes a special breed of imbecile to conflate the two.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY