# Warren Buffet weighs in on tax cuts and supply side economics **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 21, 2010, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487 "2010-11-21T23:39:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/101 "2010-11-22T19:39:40Z")
Sandwich–a person can take measures to increase the amount of income tax they pay if they want to. I, for example, choose not to report any charitable contributions even though I could because I want to present a very simple return since I’m in a high audit category. Similarly, Buffett could generally\* pay a higher tax rate than his secretary by simply reporting capital gains as ordinary income or under-reporting his basis. If you want to characterize the additional amount as “charitable contributions to the government” instead of “taxes,” then that’s all well and good, but it doesn’t change the fact that Buffett could personally pay more and chooses not to. \*This would only work for investments held directly by Buffett and not through an entity (eg, a partnership) where character is determined at the entity level. ---
**Author:** ![Ca3799](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9f8e36/32.png) [@Ca3799](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ca3799)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/102 "2010-11-22T19:48:46Z")
I realize IdahoMaeleMan seems to just enjoying being willfully obtuse, but perhaps he can answer this question: If Buffett were to pay off all of the current US debt today, how would that improve our unbalanced tax laws? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/103 "2010-11-22T19:50:25Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Also, the thread where you show you don’t know the difference between a fact an an opinion was my last pit thread, where you said that I disagree with “facts” such as “Keynesian economics” and AGW. Are you saying that you don’t consider AGW a fact? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Finagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b19c9b/32.png) [@Finagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Finagle)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/104 "2010-11-22T20:02:43Z")
> [@Dangerosa](#): > > Well, for one, you can’t write a check to the U.S. Treasury for more than you owe. They send the difference back to you. [Actually, you can.](https://www.pay.gov/paygov/forms/formInstance.html?nc=1270815460952&agencyFormId=23779454&userFormSearch=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pay.gov%2Fpaygov%2FagencySearchForms.html%3FshowingDetails%3Dtrue%26showingAll%3Dfalse%26entryDN%3Dou%253DFA_Department%2Bof%2Bthe%2BTreasury%252Cou%253DFA_Executive%2BBranch%252Cou%253DFederal%2BAgency%252Cou%253DTreasury%2BWeb%2BApplication%2BInfrastructure%252Cou%253DFiscal%2BService%252Cou%253DDepartment%2Bof%2Bthe%2BTreasury%252Co%253DU.S.%2BGovernment%252Cc%253DUS%26agencyDN%3Dou%253DFA_Bureau%2Bof%2Bthe%2BPublic%2BDebt%252Cou%253DFA_Department%2Bof%2Bthe%2BTreasury%252Cou%253DFA_Executive%2BBranch%252Cou%253DFederal%2BAgency%252Cou%253DTreasury%2BWeb%2BApplication%2BInfrastructure%252Cou%253DFiscal%2BService%252Cou%253DDepartment%2Bof%2Bthe%2BTreasury%252Co%253DU.S.%2BGovernment%252Cc%253DUS%26alphabet%3DT%26ascending%3Dtrue%26sortProperty%3DagencyFormName%26pageOffset%3D0%26totalResults%3D1%26nc%3D1270815456914) In 2009, they collected about $3,000,000. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/105 "2010-11-22T20:22:54Z")
Meh. Who cares what Warren Buffet thinks? Dude hasn’t had a hit since “Margaritaville.” You were thinking it too. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/106 "2010-11-22T21:02:16Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > If you want to characterize the additional amount as “charitable contributions to the government” instead of “taxes,” then that’s all well and good, but it doesn’t change the fact that Buffett could personally pay more and chooses not to. The fact that Buffett could personally pay more and chooses not to does not change the fact that his receptionist doesn’t have that choice and as a consequence must pay double what what wealthy investors must. Seriously, not even the most militant flat-taxer would suggest that it’s OK that poorer people must pay a higher tax rate than richer people. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/107 "2010-11-22T22:02:24Z")
> [@Cosmic Relief](#): > > The fact that Buffett could personally pay more and chooses not to does not change the fact that his receptionist doesn’t have that choice and as a consequence must pay double what what wealthy investors must. Seriously, not even the most militant flat-taxer would suggest that it’s OK that poorer people must pay a higher tax rate than richer people. Well, the flat taxers are not the worst of the bunch. There is a group of people who think we should all be on a consumption tax. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/108 "2010-11-22T22:07:46Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Sandwich–a person can take measures to increase the amount of income tax they pay if they want to. I, for example, choose not to report any charitable contributions even though I could because I want to present a very simple return since I’m in a high audit category. Similarly, Buffett could generally\* pay a higher tax rate than his secretary by simply reporting capital gains as ordinary income or under-reporting his basis. If you want to characterize the additional amount as “charitable contributions to the government” instead of “taxes,” then that’s all well and good, but it doesn’t change the fact that Buffett could personally pay more and chooses not to. > > \*This would only work for investments held directly by Buffett and not through an entity (eg, a partnership) where character is determined at the entity level. Rand, you know better than to dismiss an argument for higher taxes by sdaying “well if they want to pay more taxes, then they should go right ahead and give more money to the gtovetrnment and let the rest of us keep our money” Our tax system is little more than the formula that we use to determine how the tax burden should be distributed. With current low levels of taxation we have placed the tax burden on future generations. At these tax rates we CANNOT grow our way out of deficits, we CANNOT cut our way out of deficits unless we are willing to cut medicare/medicaid, social security and the military, and we also CANNOT balance the budget on tax increases. We need to do all of the above, including tax increases. The question is who bears the burden of thsoe tax increases. Buffett is making the argument that these tax increases (iven the current situation) are best borne by wealthier folks. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/109 "2010-11-22T23:01:18Z")
Damuri–where did I dismiss an argument by saying that? I was just pointing out that you and others are wrong when you say that it’s not possble for Buffett to voluntarily pay more in tax. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2010, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/110 "2010-11-23T00:00:39Z")
FWIW my circle of friends and family includes some with high incomes, high enough to be in the current highest marginal bracket anyway. Several of them believe that taxes on their own income group should go up. None of them feels that they should give more in taxes than what the government is asking from them or what they can legally avoid. There is no hypocrisy in that position. On the contrary it does mean something when someone is supportive of that which is against their own self-interest because they believe that if implemented for all in their income bracket it would be more fair and better for society overall. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2010, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/111 "2010-11-23T01:21:42Z")
> [@Ludovic](#): > > You can [donate money to reduce the national debt](http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/gift/gift.htm). Although this seems to take in a whopping 2 million a year, which would seem to hardly pay for the costs involved with keeping this option open, let alone even begin to pay for Congress and the military. > > If everyone prevailed using arguments akin to those in this thread, then I wouldn’t think actual donations to the treasury would rise much above this. And why would they, I don’t feel much like paying for the military and congress and other people’s social security, although feel free to give me mine, thankyouverymuch. Cool, I might have to do this. I do know that if you overpay taxes, they send it back to you. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2010, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/112 "2010-11-23T01:27:05Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Damuri–where did I dismiss an argument by saying that? I was just pointing out that you and others are wrong when you say that it’s not possble for Buffett to voluntarily pay more in tax. He can (I don’t claim my charitible contributions either for similar reasons and pay more in taxes than I would if I minimized my tax burden through legal and ethical means) - but I don’t think what the IRS would let him get away with under audit would be much more than his current burden. Then he could donate to the Treasury. He is not choosing to - that we know of. ---
**Author:** ![SmartAlecCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SmartAlecCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmartAlecCat)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2010, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/113 "2010-11-23T01:29:12Z")
The freakonomics blog discussed this a while back. The problem (lower/middle income people paying a lower rate than upper people) extends below the Buffet level. [Taxes, Warren Buffett, and Paying My Fair Share](http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/01/taxes-warren-buffett-and-paying-my-fair-share/). ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2010, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/114 "2010-11-23T02:02:51Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Any examples spring to mind? I can give you a few common conservative bits of misinformation that people on the right largely believe. Of course not all of them agree. Common misconceptions on the right: The stimulus was a failure, the auto bailout was a failure, AGW is a hoax, HCR will add to the deficit, ACORN was actually guilty of voter fraud, Obama’s is a [Marxist, Muslim, Foreign-Ursurper], Czars are sinister, and so on. I could come up with more, but I was just trying to think off the top of my head. The fact that you consider any of these (with the exception of Obama is a…) to be basic facts that conservatives are wrong about shows how dogmatic you are and how willing you are to march in lockstep with the left. You seem willing to accept these “basic facts” as gospel. Most of your examples are indeed debate-worthy. Oh, and the argument is that ACORN was guilty of voter _registration_ fraud. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2010, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/115 "2010-11-23T03:07:08Z")
That’s not an argument. ACORN wasn’t guilty of anything. Some of its employees were attempting to fraudulently register voters, and ACORN flagged those registrations and fired the responsible employees. ---
**Author:** ![erez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47c2d/32.png) [@erez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erez)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2010, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/116 "2010-11-23T03:33:54Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#): > > Population is 37M or 0.000039% of the population pay 50% of the personal income tax. I could be wrong but this is not passing the smell test? Maybe you need to smell test your own math first. It comes out to 0.39% of the CA population, not 0.000039%. You’re off by a factor 10,000. ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2010, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/117 "2010-11-23T04:20:18Z")
Be that as it may, 0.39% of the California population pays 50% of the personal income tax? Color me skeptical (but willing to look at a real cite) ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2010, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/118 "2010-11-23T04:29:38Z")
(I think I divided the taxpayers by the US population instead of the California population. Brain Fart.) ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2010, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/119 "2010-11-23T05:02:16Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > That’s not an argument. ACORN wasn’t guilty of anything. Some of its employees were attempting to fraudulently register voters, and ACORN flagged those registrations and fired the responsible employees. I wasn’t making an argument. There were plenty of threads on ACORN. ---
**Author:** ![erez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e47c2d/32.png) [@erez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erez)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2010, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487/120 "2010-11-23T06:16:37Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#): > > Be that as it may, 0.39% of the California population pays 50% of the personal income tax? Color me skeptical (but willing to look at a real cite) According to [http://www.ftb.ca.gov/aboutFTB/Tax\_Statistics/Rev\_Est\_Exhibits\_0510.pdf](http://www.ftb.ca.gov/aboutFTB/Tax_Statistics/Rev_Est_Exhibits_0510.pdf), 118,900 highest-earning taxpayers (based on returns, so it could be couples) in 2008 were responsible for 40.6% of the total CA income tax liability. That makes the numbers in the Economist article (144,000 and 50%) seem quite likely to be true. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warren-buffet-weighs-in-on-tax-cuts-and-supply-side-economics/561487.md?page=7)