President Obama says his “Buffett Rule” — which imposes higher taxes on wealthy Americans and job creators — will help “stabilize our debt and deficits for the next decade.” But if you compare how much money his policy raises with how much he’d like to spend, you get a much different picture.
The Buffett Rule would impose a minimum 30 percent tax on businesses and families earning $1 million. That would bring in $47 billion in revenue in ten years. Next to the President’s budget, which adds $6.7 trillion to the national debt, you can see that Obama’s answer to America’s budget woes isn’t much of an answer at all. Do the math, and you’ll find that the Buffett Rule would cover just 0.7% of all of Obama’s debt and .1% of Obama’s spending.
As you can see, that’s a small drop in a very large bucket.
Have you incorporated the savings from letting the Bush tax cuts expire, savings from Obama's healthcare reform, and reductions in military spending?
Healthcare reform doesn't save anybody any money. it doesn't claim to, nor is it able to. It costs money – more and more all the time. The CBO just doubled their projection the other day…
I love how liberals think a "Tax Cuts" expiring is a savings.. True the government might get more money (if people don't stop spending) , but to the typical taxpayer it means a "TAX HIKE", which means less money in the pockets of those that grow our economy.. The Government Consumes, not adds to the economic growth..
Support the Buffett rule…..or just let the Bushie tax rule expire…Let it go back to 2000 or 1950
Obama Sec. pays more than President who made $789,000. She made $95,000. so maybe it should be called," The Buffett and the Obie Tax Rule."
"will help stabilize our debt and deficit in the next decade?" How can that be when the conduct of Obama's leadership and his followers in this government is without discipline, accountabilities or respect to the American peoples' Constitution in 4 years!!! This isn't trusted! It's entrapment!
Proper governing with ethics of integrity and dignity standing against opposing forces, wouldn't have gotten us here to begin with! How about the people running government be held to the standard of their wage which their current content of character doesn't amount to! The more government publically addresses personal concerns they aren't constitutionally obligated to, the less to no pay is deserved!
The only idea the democratic limited thinkers come up with? They're not even big enough to see their unconstitutional faults no matter how many times the people being governed by their democratic dereliction, address them?!
The distortion evolving this trap is undermining Americans potential. The only role of the democratic regime without a conscience has become entrapment. More money in the earners control keep people employed in the services the rich afford. Taking anything away from earned pay going into government pockets, only leads to higher unemployment crisis!
They're distorting personal morals by exemplifying morals be taken advantage of in support of the lesser!
Anyone that suggests their morals come from the bible are sinners to support government control on people! The bible teaches freedom from control outside a persons own and to help people help themselves. No government control involved but this controlling government isn't supporting morals, they're challenging them with vengeance and abuse!
The Buffet Rule is nothing more than politics and class warfare … get a clue people. It doesn't help anything, but it does encourage division in the people of this country.
So if something only brings in 47 billion, then it is not worth doing? The surely it's not worth cutting SNAP 33 billion as the Ryan budget reconciliation instructions present, correct? what is heritage's cut off for something worth doing? I also wonder if heritage minds the Republican house to pass a deeming rule of the ryan budget in a sportsmen heritage bill tomorrow. First time egver in history of congress reconciliation passes through a deeming rule…and in a sportman heritage bill…the ryan budget? wt…?
still ignorant eh, steve? haven't brought yourself to read your constitution? what amount of money is worth it when you have no idea where its going when government takes as much cut from all the dollars they take in? The republic is discipline to know the difference between freedom and government control. Learn your responsibility to your personal freedom and live it!
It's not worth doing because it takes wealth away from the job producers who grow our economy.. Penalizing success with Class warfare will only show investors, businesses, and the rest of the world that America will tax you to death.. Any money that would be invested in America will go elsewhere, thus reducing the tax revenue of our Federal, State, and Local governments to support the services that you have become "entitled" to. The way to pay down our National debt is thru economic growth, which is only accomplished when you reduce taxes which incentivise the wealthy to invest in our country. Taxes always have a negative impact on growth.
Savings in the health care bill?? Are you delusional?!
Kala, it isn't the government's role to take from the work of others to support citizens of the government's choosing who can work for themselves! Military benefit's all of us! government picking and choosing and obstructing our right to live free is dangerous!
how dare they consider increase on capital gains! some with family and income under $40,000 live with less to put away for retirement whereby government controlled costs of government unconstitutionally controlled burdens causes early TAKE OUT just to pay for them. WITH PENALTY THAT ALSO GOES TO THEM!! REDUCE IT ON LOWER INCOMES AND DO WITH LESS GOVERNMENT!!!!
Nice selective facts there Heritage. I guess its the only thing conservatives are good at (other than just lying)
truth isn't selective, novenator. your confusion between lies and truth is your problem. fix it if you can or give evidence to your false claim!
What part of 6.7 Trillion don't you understand? It is more then 4.7 Billion.. Your share if the current national debt is projected to be north of $50,000 at the end of this year.. http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Kala – "Savings"? "SAVINGS"?
Sure, let the Bush tax cuts expire if you enjoy paying more taxes. The Buffet rule doesn't accomplish anything other than hindering the rich from hiring more people since the poor can't pay salaries anyway.
From the Master of the Short Essay Sydney Harris… "The poor magnify the opulence of the rich; and the rich minimize the squalor of the poor." When a government sets out to reduce the opulence of the rich, where will it find another source to reduce the squalor of the poor?
Bear in mind that whenever US personal income and capital gains taxes have been reduced the amount of revenue collected by the Treasury INCREASES!!! This was true under Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush. If the desired result is is to get more revenue into the Treasury then (backed by historical results) we should be reducing taxes…not increasing them.
Also, if more government spending helps the economy then why is isn't ours ROARING with the actions of our Democratic (liberal) friends. Face it…the only way we came out of the Great Depression of the 30's and 40's was WWII….not from the tremendous deficit spending of the Democrats.
I am more than willing to admit that the Republicans under GWB spent way too much and ran up the deficit. They were wrong and BHO and the Dems are wrong for doubling down on massive spending designed simply to buy votes. The only way we come out with our country still intact is by REDUCING government size, spending, and scope while we instigate term limits (this has to be done at the state level) to keep our elite professional politicians from ruining us all!. Remember, a government that can give you everything can demand everything from you.
1. Any step towards a balanced budget is the right one.
2. (and most important) We have a regressive tax rate in this country. That means we take more surplus value from the middle class than the rich. I'd like to see some conservative discourse that defends regressive taxes for what they are.
The tax system we have is a "progressive" tax system.. Named after the group of liberals that's ideology is for complete Statist Top-Down Government.. "progressive" punishes those with more income by taking a larger percentage of their income in taxes, then those with less income.. A real solution would be a flat tax or fair tax that would remove the class warfare political factor, and put everyone on a level playing field..
Empirical facts please?
The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 percent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes.
So the middle 40% pay 29% of the tab.
1st 50% = 3%
2nd 40% = 29%
3rd 10% = 68%
How is that regressive?