Conservatives Mock Buffett Rule With Hilarious Results

LOL 35

warren buffetPresident Obama has recently been touting the Buffett Rule, a proposed new tax on the uber-wealthy, named for famed billionaire Warren Buffet. Buffett has been vocal in his support for higher taxes on high-income earners, claiming that he pays fewer taxes than his secretary. 

No word on whether or not Buffett has voluntarily donated to the government.

This is such a dumb idea. First of all, why should we punish people for their financial success? Secondly, the wealthy already pay the lion’s share of the taxes in our country. All of those percentages being tossed around, like Warren Buffett paying a lower percentage than his two hundred thousand dollar a year secretary are skewed numbers, because no one seems to understands what “income” is. 

Super rich people make money from capital gains and dividends, which they then turn around and reinvest into the economy. Raising taxes on capital gains means that rich people employers won’t be able to create jobs.

President Obama turned to social media on Tuesday to promote the ridiculous lie that implementing the Buffett Rule will solve our economic woes. As conservatives on Twitter love to do, we took over the hashtag, and hilariousness ensued. 

Here are some of the best tweets:

Does the #BuffettRule force citizens to use clean plates every time they get more food? Oh, wait, that's the Buffet Rule. -@realleighscott 

the salad bar is only useful for putting bacon and cheese on your baked potato #BuffettRule @mamaswati 

Wear your stretchy pants. (Unless you're a millionaire. Then you should tighten your belt & donate your food to other diners.) #BuffettRule @prosehaikus

Sneeze guards are there FOR A REASON. #buffetrule @NewDealGin 

Sorry, no contraception provided. #BuffettRule  @BobHicks_

Where 30% gratuity is mandatory. And so is picking up the tab for the rest of the party.#BuffettRule @red_red_head 

#BuffettRule Those $50,000 hot lamps over the tater tots? Yep, Solyndra. @CuffyMeh 

Don’t let it be said that conservatives don’t have a sense of humor. 

 

Image via Mario Tama/Flickr

barack obama, economy, in the news, media, politics, taxes

35 Comments

To add a comment, please log in with

Use Your CafeMom Profile

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Comment As a Guest

Guest comments are moderated and will not appear immediately.

nonmember avatar Anon NY

This new rule is an attempt to trick people into thinking this will solve our deficit problem. It won't - $47B over 10 years, with annual spending at $1T plus an existing deficit of $15T. The reality is not everyone is entitled to what the Joneses have. Frankly, the discussion can continue to point to the millionaires but it affects families that make between $75,000-$150,000 the most. That appears on paper as a lot but for a working family with 2 children it's not. THAT'S the middle class - a teacher and a garbageman bringing in $45,000 each. There is definite need for gov't-run social services for those that need it but it's up to individuals to make responsible decisions about their own finances. If our gov't doesn't start showing some real fiscal responsibility and stop spending money indisciminently individuals won't either and personal and financial debt will continue to skyrocket.

LKRachel LKRachel

The wealthy DO pay more than everyone else- like the post says: Warren Buffett pays less percentage wise on his INVESTMENT income (i.e. Money he has already paid probably 40% taxes on already) than his secretary does on her earned income. Big difference.

nonmember avatar Melissa

I'm so tired of Buffett and his hypocrisy! He speaks of increasing his taxes out of one side of his mouth while he sues the IRS over a $643 million tax bill that he doesn't want to pay.

Let's look at some fun facts:
1. If Bill Gates gave every penny of his fortune to the US government, that would only cover the budget deficit for 15 days.
2. You could take every penny earned from every "wealthy" American making above $250,000, and that would fund only 38% of the budget.
3. The true wealthy elite in this country are currently hiding trillions of dollars overseas because of our punishing system of taxation.
4. The US tax code is almost 17,000 pages long.

Obviously, our problems cannot be solved by taxing people to death. We've tried that many, many times in our history and it does not work. We need to cut the huge, inefficient bureaucracy that is our government and lower taxes on EVERYONE!

Also, the reason for companies moving operations overseas has nothing to do with evil, anti-American intentions, and everything to do with the fact that the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world. Would any of you willingly pay 30% interest on your mortgage in the name of "patriotism" when you had the opportunity to pay 3% elsewhere? If not, then you must be a greedy bastard like those corporate CEOs... :)

nonmember avatar Guest

Shocking ignorance. Reagan's policies ushered in one of the largest economic booms of the post WWII era.

If you were to tax the "super rich" at 100%, it would be a drop in the bucket compared to the explosive spending increases of the last few years.

The problem is not a lack of revenue, it is too damn much explosive, out of control, spending!

Buffet should pay the back taxes that he owes, and then if he feels he should pay more, he is free to send in extra if he likes.

Also, it should be noted that the last time the democrats decided to raise taxes on the "super rich", a couple that consisted of a public school teacher married to a fire fighter discovered that they were part of the "super rich".

JAFE JAFE

Nobody should pay more than anyone else. We should all pay the same percent across the board. Why should someone who went to school and worked hard pay more than anyone else? They shouldn't. We go to work everyday. We don't call in sick every Monday. Why should we pay more taxes than those people?

Procr... Procrastamom

The " shocking ignorance " is coming from the Right in this case, from the Reagan hero worshippers who either don't realize or are trying to hide the fact that Ronnie raised taxes at least ten times during his Presidency. Bush Jr cut taxes on the rich (that's why they're named after him) and those cuts were supposed to be temporary. Oh and what did those cuts usher in? What did we all get as a big fat kiss in the ass while George was STILL President? A worldwide economic crisis. Any breaks the rich are getting are being hoarded. Any jobs they are creating are being created in Asia. How's that working out for us in the middle?

nonmember avatar Guest

Procrastamom, Thank you for proving my point about Shocking Ignorance. Bush also inherited a recession, and the economy boomed until the democrats took control of congress. That was 2006, remember? As for the rest of the left wing bleating about "hoarding" wealth, that lower tax rate on capitol gains is the result of doing precisely the opposite, investing that wealth, the process that creates real, private sector jobs, ones that create more wealth; not public sector jobs that are economic "overhead".

nonmember avatar Jessicaj

Rarely do I say this, but I must ask. Is Jenny incredibly gullible, deluded or just plain stupid?

I don't believe the wealthy are evil, but they deserve to pay their share.

We pay our taxes, we work our asses off, but because a select few have deeper pockets, they deserve special treatment?

Conservatives are so hellbent on destroying liberals they forget about the wellbeing of our country.

nonmember avatar Anon NY

@Jessicaj - your comment is not based in fact nor is insulting to someone presenting an opinion opposing yours. How can someone take you seriously if you resort to name calling? Again, the wealthy aren't being treated differently. Higher income is taxed at a higher rate, capital gains is taxed at a lower rate - for everyone - as an incentive to invest in companies. That is the law Obama wants to change - where the proceeds are again taxed at a higher rate. Mathmatically, if the deficit continues to rise at $1T per year and the tax earned from this law is $47B over 10 years, how does this help the middle-class?



Does someone actually want to answer this question or do we all want to start calling each other names?

11-20 of 35 comments First 1234 Last