Rich Germans Demand Higher Taxes
- Thread starter Netphase
- Start date
I think you guys are missing the point. There are 2.2 million Germans with more than a half a million Euros burning a hole in their pockets.
That's a lot of people to sell shit to.
That's a lot of people to sell shit to.
Businesses are only efficient at lowering costs which often comes at the expense of workers' pay, but more often than not the way they lower costs is by letting some one else foot the bill. The reason governments seem so bad at managing money is because big business interests rule in most governments. So money that should go to building schools, roads, or maintaining any service the government should provide goes to big business. Because if we don't keep the rich happy the world stops turning.
So when Bank of America is given $25,000,000,000 billion dollars and that doesn't trickle down to you don't cry that government is inefficient. It is working very much efficiently for those who run it.
Governments exist, supposedly, to serve the needs of the people that they themselves cannot individually. So the only body it makes sense to give money to to solve problems like social inequality and poverty is the government, but a real working government.
So don't freak out at how ludicrous it seems to you that people trust government (and should we be surprised that it is the rich in this case who trust the government). But do ponder on the fact that your instant reaction to this was that government cannot be trusted. Why is that?
So when Bank of America is given $25,000,000,000 billion dollars and that doesn't trickle down to you don't cry that government is inefficient. It is working very much efficiently for those who run it.
Governments exist, supposedly, to serve the needs of the people that they themselves cannot individually. So the only body it makes sense to give money to to solve problems like social inequality and poverty is the government, but a real working government.
So don't freak out at how ludicrous it seems to you that people trust government (and should we be surprised that it is the rich in this case who trust the government). But do ponder on the fact that your instant reaction to this was that government cannot be trusted. Why is that?
networks, we need berriez for the German fat petition signer family members! oh, yeah, packaged in golden bottles, so they can keep souvenirs of their weight loss struggle! k, thanks, bye.
And this is why you sound like a mental primate who's never visited a library or read the world wealth report. But then again, WHAT DOES THE WEALTHIEST CAPITALIST IN THE HISTORY OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION (even adjusted for inflation) KNOW ABOUT WEALTH, BUSINESS OR MAKING MONEY??
Buffett Slams Tax System Disparities - washingtonpost.com
Buffett Slams Tax System Disparities
Speech Raises at Least $1 Million for Clinton Campaign
By Tomoeh Murakami Tse
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
NEW YORK, June 26 -- Warren E. Buffett was his usual folksy self Tuesday night at a fundraiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as he slammed a system that allows the very rich to pay taxes at a lower rate than the middle class.
Buffett cited himself, the third-richest person in the world, as an example. Last year, Buffett said, he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent.
Buffett said that was despite the fact that he was not trying to avoid paying higher taxes. "I don't have a tax shelter," he said. And he challenged Congress and his audience to see what the people who "clean our offices" are taxed, to loud applause.
A populist tone permeated the 70-minute talk with the billionaire investor and philanthropist in Manhattan on Tuesday night. The talk, given to about 600 Wall Street bankers and money managers, raised at least $1 million for Clinton's presidential campaign, the Associated Press reported.
The event comes as public frustration has grown over executive compensation and disparity in pay. It also comes as Congress debates changes to the tax code that would decrease take-home pay for managers of private-equity firms and hedge funds, pools of money for wealthy families and institutional investors. The rich can take advantage of tax loopholes, including one that allows those managers to pay the capital gains tax rate of 15 percent instead of the ordinary top income tax rate of 35 percent.
Buffett said that he and other privileged Americans must do more to help the less fortunate.
"We have the chance in 2008 to repair a lot of damage," Buffett said.
"We have a wonderful economy. . . . Our problem is how we conduct ourselves in the world." Buffett, the chairman and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway in Omaha, has not endorsed Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.
But he has already donated the maximum $4,600 allowed by an individual to Clinton's presidential campaign. Buffett called Clinton "the person to run the country." He has not donated to any other candidate, according to public records, although he has said he would also support Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in a similar event.
Buffett is on the board of directors of The Washington Post Co.
Clinton acted as moderator. Topics included Buffett's views on the impact of the real estate slump on the economy (he doesn't see it spilling over to the broader market) and how to get started in investing (you are more likely to find diamonds in the rough among small companies).
Clinton finished by asking Buffett, "Why are you a Democrat?"
Buffett said he thought Democrats would do a better job in evening out the field for those who had drawn the unlucky tickets in life.
You better hope like hell someone shows compassion for you when the colon cleanse fad runs out and you are back to eating spam pate (my bad, Pâté ) and working at walmart....
...Every now and then the Germans' pure Aryan blood rushes to the right parts of their brain and cause them to put logic ahead of rhetoric - mycket bra....
So you're against supporting private charities, and for letting more money be controlled by inefficient bureaucracies?
First off, by no means is Warren Buffett the "wealthiest capitalist in the history of Western Civilization". Ever heard of John D. Rockefeller? In 2007 dollars, his individual wealth would be valued at $318.3 Billion. How about Andrew Carnegie? William Henry Vanderbilt? Their philanthropic contributions to society (not in the form of taxes, but charitable giving) are more than Buffett's entire wealth! I'm sure you've heard of Carnegie Hall and the Carnegie foundation. Or maybe Vanderbilt university?
Wealthy historical figures 2008 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Buffett isn't even the wealthiest today, Bill Gates is:
List of billionaires (2009) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
After Berkshire Hathaway's stock took a major dive. Buffett's wealth was artificially inflated during the bubble.
Not only that, but ONE person out of all of the world's billionaires does not make a statistical norm. You were knocking on the Germans for rhetoric, but all you've done is provide one lone example and used it in your rhetoric.
But hey, continue looking down on people who you think aren't as educated as you ("mental primate", seriously? What a joke you are, you elitist cunt), and continue pulling things out of your ass and being wrong.
Well, you've just proven the good breeding your parents gave you - Q.E.D.
FYI, when you let someone else so easily control your emotions, it makes you look weak.
Your devoted cunt friend,
/Riddar
(hee hee)
FYI, when you don't address any of the points I countered with, it makes you look even more wrong. Also what a nice improper use of "Q.E.D" in an attempt to look intelligent.
Government supports leeching off the system.
Many charities on the other hand exist to help people earn a living and become better individuals. Why these 44 people don't just develop a charity is beyond me........that is unless they really don't exist and are pulling some sort of govt scam (Which happens at least in the US.)
Take for example a local foodbank I worked with based out of my church. We fed approximately 2,000 families per month on a budget of only $1,000. While we ran our foodbank , the local government run foodbank was trying to get more money becuase they had a hard time feeding the 500 families that came to them PER YEAR. Their operating budget was around half a million dollars per year. We fed more people in one week than they did per quarter, off of 2.4% of the money they get. Their organization had 4-5 full time employees, all with pensions , health insurance ,ect , our foodbank had 3 volunteers and then about 6 more whenever there was extra work needed.
I've seen it many many times with local organizations, private charity is ALWAYS better than their government run counterparts. Government SUCKS at running business because in the end, they're usually corrupt and ruled by people who only want power (You keep saying that the rich are the elitist types, but in reality , politicians and the government are FAR worse).
Many charities on the other hand exist to help people earn a living and become better individuals. Why these 44 people don't just develop a charity is beyond me........that is unless they really don't exist and are pulling some sort of govt scam (Which happens at least in the US.)
Take for example a local foodbank I worked with based out of my church. We fed approximately 2,000 families per month on a budget of only $1,000. While we ran our foodbank , the local government run foodbank was trying to get more money becuase they had a hard time feeding the 500 families that came to them PER YEAR. Their operating budget was around half a million dollars per year. We fed more people in one week than they did per quarter, off of 2.4% of the money they get. Their organization had 4-5 full time employees, all with pensions , health insurance ,ect , our foodbank had 3 volunteers and then about 6 more whenever there was extra work needed.
I've seen it many many times with local organizations, private charity is ALWAYS better than their government run counterparts. Government SUCKS at running business because in the end, they're usually corrupt and ruled by people who only want power (You keep saying that the rich are the elitist types, but in reality , politicians and the government are FAR worse).
This is pretty dumb. I don't understand how they're smart enough to get rich but not smart enough to see that increasing taxes makes everyone worse off.
I think they inherited their wealth.
or this is just political posturing.
I think they inherited their wealth.
or this is just political posturing.
HarveyJ
He is - THE CACTUS!
Has anyone thought that perhaps these top 5% income bracket types are actively lobbying so that the government goes on nation building and national infrastructure programs?
Seriously, most of that is shit a private company or individual cannot, and it's not just about the money.
Considering there's a massive amount of detail lacking from the article, I somehow get a feeling that these guys are wanting the German government to spend that money on shit that is simply not possible without government mandate.
Things like transport infrastructure upgrades come to mind: You want to build a nation wide train network? Money's not your only problem.
You want people trained and accredited? Charities don't really work, but state accredited tertiary institutions do.
You want massive atom smashing machines that could implode the world? Most companies aren't going to put money into something that won't be directly applicable to making more money in a short period of time.
There are some things that only government's can do, because not every major project is about having the funds to do it.
It seriously fucking amazes me that the only things you guys seem to think governments actually do is take in taxes and hand out welfare... Good luck getting private companies to do shit like build the Hoover Dam, or set up orbital research stations and lunar missions without those things being able to show a near immediate ROI.
Seriously, most of that is shit a private company or individual cannot, and it's not just about the money.
Considering there's a massive amount of detail lacking from the article, I somehow get a feeling that these guys are wanting the German government to spend that money on shit that is simply not possible without government mandate.
Things like transport infrastructure upgrades come to mind: You want to build a nation wide train network? Money's not your only problem.
You want people trained and accredited? Charities don't really work, but state accredited tertiary institutions do.
You want massive atom smashing machines that could implode the world? Most companies aren't going to put money into something that won't be directly applicable to making more money in a short period of time.
There are some things that only government's can do, because not every major project is about having the funds to do it.
It seriously fucking amazes me that the only things you guys seem to think governments actually do is take in taxes and hand out welfare... Good luck getting private companies to do shit like build the Hoover Dam, or set up orbital research stations and lunar missions without those things being able to show a near immediate ROI.
