Gallup: Americans heavily favor the Buffett Rule, 60/37

posted at 7:16 pm on April 13, 2012 by Allahpundit

The U.S. has a fee-vah and the only prescription is more embarrassingly feeble budget gimmicks.

Election status: Over.

I kid, I kid — although those GOP numbers are a bit closer than I would have expected. Anyway, the important data on the Buffett Rule isn’t what people think when asked, it’s how much they care when they aren’t asked. If you missed yesterday’s post about that, read it now. Here are the key numbers to refresh your memory — and remember, this comes from a center-left group (Third Way):

Swing voters don’t care about soaking the rich. They want jobs, and if The One can’t deliver then they’ll roll the dice on Romney. More on that from Jay Cost, who can’t quite believe O thinks class warfare might save him from yet another busted “recovery”:

[T]his is not what swing voters want to talk about. Think of the campaign in terms of consumer economics: Customers want Walmart and Target to stock their shelves with certain items at certain prices, and the purchasing power of their dollars forces the two firms to comply. Well, our parties are like Walmart and Target, the voters are their customers, and the campaigns are like the marketplace. In the competition for votes, the two parties invariably end up talking about what the country, and in particular the swing vote, wants to talk about.

I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that the average swing voter does not want to talk about the “war on women,” the Buffett rule, or whatever else Team Obama is going to throw out there in the weeks and months to come. That voter wants to talk about jobs, the economy, the deficit, gas prices, the health care bill–in other words, all the issues where the president is vulnerable. And the competition of the campaign means that swing voter will get what he wants – Team Romney is more than happy to discuss all those issues, and so Obama will have no choice but to respond.

As if to prove Cost’s point, after a week of Buffett Rule blather and a solid six weeks of “war on women” crapola, Romney has his biggest lead over Obama in Rasmussen’s tracking poll today in more than a month. But wait — what about the actual Gallup data? Sixty percent support is no small shakes. That’s got to mean something, no? Well, maybe not:

In February, the online pollster YouGov asked a representative sample of 3,500 American adults what they thought would be a “fair amount of tax” to pay on lottery winnings. The survey specified different amounts of winnings, ranging from $1 million to $100 million. (The amount shown to each respondent was selected at random from a set of seven possible values.) Respondents gave their answers in dollars, and YouGov computed the implied percentage tax that they thought was fair.

Less than a quarter of respondents chose a tax rate of 30% or higher on any level of lottery winnings. The vast majority thought that a reasonable amount to pay was much lower, with the average being only 15%. Democrats and Republicans differed only a little: The average rate preferred by Republicans was 14%, compared with 17% for Democrats.

There was no evidence that respondents thought rates should be any higher on a $100 million prize than on a $1 million prize.

Not hard to see what’s going on here. People do want the rich to pay their “fair share” but they have no strong feelings about what a “fair share” might be. If you offer them a number that the pollster or Congress seems to think is “fair,” you get an approving response; if you ask them to name their own number, “fairness” starts to look much more conservative. Someone should test Gallup’s method by redoing their poll with two sets of questions. First, ask if millionaires should pay, say, 49 percent at a minimum. You might very well get a majority for that. Then give other respondents a choice of various tax brackets and ask them which is fairest as a minimum for millionaires. I’d be surprised if much more than 10 percent volunteered “49 or above.” But then, that’s no obstacle to Obama’s messaging: As Ben Domenech said, the Buffett Rule is fundamentally a moral argument, not a fiscal one. It just happens to be a moral argument that swing voters don’t much care about vis-a-vis having a steady paycheck. O’s run out of answers on creating jobs and reforming entitlements so now he’s stuck with “well, it’s just the right thing to do” arguments for his budgetary policies. That’s what four years of Hopenchange has come to.

Here’s next week’s talking point, by the way, in case you simply can’t wait until Monday to revisit this subject again.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Should rather be called “The Envy Rule”!

gullxn on April 13, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Michelle loves the Buffet Rule.

So, it’s all good, aight?

Key West Reader on April 13, 2012 at 7:19 PM

The Ignorance of the Masses.

singlemalt 18 on April 13, 2012 at 7:20 PM

Here’s next week’s talking point, by the way, in case you simply can’t wait until Monday to revisit this subject again.

I’d rather have another beer thread…..

ted c on April 13, 2012 at 7:20 PM

You mean people like it when “other” people get taxed more? People are so gullible. If they were smart they would demand the same low tax rate. Never underestimate the stupidity of more than half the American people.

CW on April 13, 2012 at 7:21 PM

How about all those grungies on the welfare start paying Obama with their welfare swipe cards!

/Oh. Wait.

Key West Reader on April 13, 2012 at 7:23 PM

Only in America – a place where nearly half the country pays no income taxes – is 3 million dollars not paying one’s “fair share”.

Envious leeches make me sick.

Scrappy on April 13, 2012 at 7:24 PM

Look at how much smaller this is than his idiotic jobs bill from the fall. After this gets shot down, what’s his next big idea? Taxes on luxury zeppelins that raise $10,000 per year?

Chuck Schick on April 13, 2012 at 7:25 PM

You know, I just don’t trust an unfettered Mitt Romney to not try and pass a sort of Buffet Rule if it meant he got something out of it, too.

The Nerve on April 13, 2012 at 7:25 PM

If Obama’s big idea is to ask the rich to pay 30% of their income in taxes, shouldn’t he be leading the way? What’s with the measly 20%, especially since he’s probably not declaring all the free (to him) transportation on Air Force 1, etc.

talkingpoints on April 13, 2012 at 7:26 PM

But do these idiots know that only $4 billion a year will be generated from this Buffet Rule and that it will 250 years just to cover the 2011 deficit that King Obama created?

Facts and figure courtesy of Dr.K.

JPeterman on April 13, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Michael Moore was against this, but he thought Obama was trying to tax buffets.

Chuck Schick on April 13, 2012 at 7:28 PM

This poll is also a poll of “adults” without providing any sort of partisan breakdown. It may very well be true but to me not providing partisan breakdown makes it suspect.

MFn G I M P on April 13, 2012 at 7:28 PM

I propose a double vision tax on everybody with more than one eye.

NullUnit60 on April 13, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Here’s next week’s talking point, by the way, in case you simply can’t wait until Monday to revisit this subject again.

So out Buffett Rule and In Obama Rule?

It’s always been Obama’s Rule.

Dr Evil on April 13, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Ask how many people approve of a president spending all of his time pushing a meaningless bill that will raise taxes on 400 people – including his opponent – rather than doing his job.

forest on April 13, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Taxes on luxury zeppelins that raise $10,000 per year?

Chuck Schick on April 13, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Don’t tell Ron Paul.

JPeterman on April 13, 2012 at 7:32 PM

As if Buffet will actually pay the new taxes he supposedly supports…

obladioblada on April 13, 2012 at 7:35 PM

This poll is also a poll of “adults” without providing any sort of partisan breakdown. It may very well be true but to me not providing partisan breakdown makes it suspect.

MFn G I M P on April 13, 2012 at 7:28 PM

I’m starting to think MFn GIMPs is an apt name for most American voters. :)

arnold ziffel on April 13, 2012 at 7:36 PM

People do want the rich to pay their “fair share”

Somehow the language got away from us there. The word “their” should be “Obama’s”. Obama is getting that share. It’s Obama’s cut of our sweat.

Run a poll asking “What is the government’s fair share of a citizen’s yearly earnings?” and maybe you’ll get a different response.

Buddahpundit on April 13, 2012 at 7:37 PM

I am detecting a slightly lower “Eeyore” tone from Allahpundit these days. I am starting to feel a teeny bit hopeful even.

Is it me or does next week’s talking point reeks of desperation?

msmveritas on April 13, 2012 at 7:38 PM

As if Buffet will actually pay the new taxes he supposedly supports…

obladioblada on April 13, 2012 at 7:35 PM

They could always sue him…oh wait….

CW on April 13, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Any poll results about how the 1%– you know, Obama’s well-heeled supporters– feel about the class warfare?

obladioblada on April 13, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Next question: Should any American workers not pay any income tax at all?

slickwillie2001 on April 13, 2012 at 7:39 PM

I am detecting a slightly lower “Eeyore” tone from Allahpundit these days. I am starting to feel a teeny bit hopeful even.

Is it me or does next week’s talking point reeks of desperation?

msmveritas on April 13, 2012 at 7:38 PM

he has been a little better this week, some good snark in his posts, a lil’ sunlight and pep here and there. Some desperate comment quota hunting–particularly with the Palin thread, but yeah….I agree, a wee bit more hopeful.

ted c on April 13, 2012 at 7:40 PM

Such a tremendous tragedy that the Class Warrior-in-Chief is only too willing to lie to the masses to win re-election. Equally tragic that the masses can be so f___ing stupid as to believe him.

Dopenstrange on April 13, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Barry’s fantasy to do list:

Increase taxes on the rich– X

Win reelection– X

Raise middle class taxes…

obladioblada on April 13, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Non-political junkies just do not really care.

Of course they think millionaires should pay their fair share. How could you not?

30% sounds fair because everybody, on whatever level, finds tax breaks. So they’re reasoning “if you raise it to 30, then they’ll pay between 20-25% at most”. That’s why when asked for a number, “fair share” becomes 15-20%. People put themselves in the place of the millionaire and say “what would I want to pay”. 15-20% of a million is a helluva lot more than 100K and under.

Also, people are going to assume millionaires have solid CPA’s, financial managers and even their banks working to help them.

So no one is going to give them a pass unless they can show how the money flows.

“Job Creators” is such a generic, bull$hite term, and here’s the proof.

<a href="http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/pauly_sued_for_percent_of_his_earnings_vG4Fk4RDjqJmQ1V9xlnMQK"&gt;

This asshat is a legit millionaire. More average people know who this clown is than 90% of non-entertainment millionaires.

Do you really think anyone looks at him and thinks “Job Creator”?

Please.

Actual job creators who are worth 500K or more need to be more visible. But they don’t and won’t because they’re afraid of the perception change and loss of anonymity in their communities.

As the saying goes, ya can’t have your cake and eat it, too. If job creators are not willing to distinguish between those who actually worked for their wealth, and those that hit the lottery known as celebrity, than they’re going to pay about 10% more for the privacy.

budfox on April 13, 2012 at 7:43 PM

He looks like a dolly-man.

/Oh, wait.

Key West Reader on April 13, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Gallup: Americans heavily favor the Buffett Rule, 60/37

There Fixed!!!

It’s dinner time

not-ur-avragejoe on April 13, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Such a tremendous tragedy that the Class Warrior-in-Chief is only too willing to lie to the masses to win re-election. Equally tragic that the masses can be so f___ing stupid as to believe him.

Dopenstrange on April 13, 2012 at 7:41 PM

The real tragedy was thinking that perhaps everything he said he’d be was real.

America is going to divorce Obama.

Key West Reader on April 13, 2012 at 7:45 PM

I wonder if Allah is going to weigh in on that scandalous story about those NC Democrats. It turns out that a “DNC party member” was sexually assaulting/harassing some NC staffer and paid her/him off to keep their yap shut.

It is key to note that the DNC convention is in, you guessed it, North Carolina this year and one email stated, “If this leaks out, we’re doomed.”

popcorn YO!

ted c on April 13, 2012 at 7:45 PM

he has been a little better this week, some good snark in his posts, a lil’ sunlight and pep here and there. Some desperate comment quota hunting–particularly with the Palin thread, but yeah….I agree, a wee bit more hopeful.

ted c on April 13, 2012 at 7:40 PM

I always like his snark even with a lil’ sunlight shooting out here and there. He is one of my favorite people to read actually. Can’t blame him for quota hunting either, it’s a business after all.

msmveritas on April 13, 2012 at 7:47 PM

So we have just certified, (based on the internal weighting), that 60% of Americans are stupid. Hech – we are suffering from Omamalamadingdong.

mouell on April 13, 2012 at 7:48 PM

“O’s run out of answers on creating jobs and reforming entitlements so now he’s stuck with “well, it’s just the right thing to do” arguments for his budgetary policies.”

Too bad this isn’t an election year…

Seven Percent Solution on April 13, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Think you have to deal with this poll straight up. The average American isn’t “rich.” They hear the lies said over and over and it’s no skin off their back to be “for” taxing “rich people” more. The only hope is to trim down the Indy gap on that issue and hope it isn’t a big deal and overplayed around election day.

AYNBLAND on April 13, 2012 at 7:50 PM

ted c on April 13, 2012 at 7:45 PM

The D party is a machochist party. They treat their women like they treat themselves.

And then there is the sadist… CoughObama. Yes, that.

/Rush or Hannity will pick up on this

Key West Reader on April 13, 2012 at 7:50 PM

So we have just certified, (based on the internal weighting), that 60% of Americans are stupid. Hech – we are suffering from Omamalamadingdong. Oh – it is Gallup! Couln’t they find a NYT/MSNBC/CNN poll?

mouell on April 13, 2012 at 7:51 PM

I think the Republicans should just pass the dang bill and shove it down the American’s throat. It won’t take them long to realize the bill will do absolutely nothing for the debt or the economy. Make Obama and the dems own it, all of it. Period.

dddave on April 13, 2012 at 7:52 PM

Michelle loves the Buffet Rule.

So, it’s all good, aight?

Key West Reader on April 13, 2012 at 7:19 PM

She is the Lucius Licinius Lucullus of lobsters.

Schadenfreude on April 13, 2012 at 7:53 PM

SoundByte Americans headed to gas fill ups of over $125 to fill up their vans are in no mood to hear about millionaires and their tax breaks,

Well played by the Marxist in chief.

PappyD61 on April 13, 2012 at 7:54 PM

The Buffett Rule is a joke. It’s just another intended-to-fail-so-we-can-blame-somebody-else measure.

Obama is beginning to look like a big loser to a lot of people.

Curtiss on April 13, 2012 at 7:54 PM

I have read that 48% of the working population doesn’t pay federal income taxes. How much would we gain annually if that 48% had to pay $100. And those reduce the Earned Income Credit by $100 annually. Fair is fair everyone needs to have skin in the game. Everybody!!

Cindy Munford on April 13, 2012 at 7:56 PM

So we have just certified, (based on the internal weighting), that 60% of Americans are stupid. Oh – it is Gallup! Couldn’t they find an NYT/MSNBC/CNN poll?

mouell on April 13, 2012 at 7:57 PM

Will millionaires get 10 years to pay their taxes like Warren Buffett?

Resist We Much on April 13, 2012 at 7:58 PM

The worst outcome for Obama would be that the Buffett Rule somehow is passed by Congress, he signs it and then has to explain how now that millionaires are paying their fair share, gasoline still costs $4.00 a gallon, the deficit is still growing and the unemployment rate is still above 8%.

Curtiss on April 13, 2012 at 7:59 PM

I know gifts are well within the tax code, but…http://freebeacon.com/obama-family-tax-shelter/

And then how about all those necessary government employees being paid by us, who decide they can’t be bothered or held accountable for notPaying their taxes…http://news.investors.com/article/599002/201201260818/obama-white-house-staff-back-taxes.htm?Ntt=obama

FLconservative on April 13, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Will millionaires get 10 years to pay their taxes like Warren Buffett?

Resist We Much on April 13, 2012 at 7:58 PM

The IRS is suing Buffett for almost a billion dollars in back taxes and the Buffett Rule will collect only 4 billion in new taxes.

This is how preposterous Obama’s economic view is.

Curtiss on April 13, 2012 at 8:03 PM

Did we really need this survey? Did anyone doubt that the White House’s actions on this are entirely poll-driven? No one seriously thought this was a principled policy position, did they?

Chuckles3 on April 13, 2012 at 8:04 PM

A reminder from “Nightmares from Obama’s Past”:

CHARLIE GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased. The government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down. So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?

SENATOR BARACK OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.

MR. GIBSON: But history shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up.

SENATOR OBAMA: Well, that might happen or it might not. It depends on what’s happening on Wall Street and how business is going.

Canada cut its CGR to 10% this year. Why would anyone invest here when they could go across the border?

Resist We Much on April 13, 2012 at 8:04 PM

America has the leadership it deserves. Unfortunately, the ones who see Obozo for what he is are being taken down with it.

Cicero43 on April 13, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Buffet owes the government a billion dollars from his business, and has been fighting it. Why isn’t THAT in the news? I think people will see why Buffet lets Obama use him for this cause.

Fleuries on April 13, 2012 at 8:08 PM

The only fair thing is to vote Obama out of office. Can’t wait!

EMD on April 13, 2012 at 8:09 PM

FAIR TAX,now.
Everybody pays.
The 49% that don’t pay anything.
The trust fund babies.
The Gateses.
The Rangels.
EVER BODY.

OkieDoc on April 13, 2012 at 8:11 PM

That voter wants to talk about jobs, the economy, the deficit, gas prices, the health care bill–in other words, all the issues where the president is vulnerable.

Yeah. You might say WHERE THE PRESIDENT AND HIS PARTY SCREWED UP!

GarandFan on April 13, 2012 at 8:13 PM

The media could also, stop telling the voters that millionaires and up are not paying their fair share, they should add up all the taxes they do pay. When you pay capital gains or investment income in many states, they take a bigger percentage there than from ordinary income.

So, say, Mitt or John Kerry, but HE files in Pennsylvania to avoid this,and still represents us her in MA, pays 15% on investments and 12.5% to the state of MA, which is almost 30%. Then there is the regular taxes, sales taxes and property taxes. I would bet the house Mitt used to live in paid $30K per year in property taxes in Belmont, who knows what the property taxes they pay are now.

Fleuries on April 13, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Of course, everyone with the IQ higher than a squirrel has ready the hilarious analysis of O’Bozo’s tax on The 400. But in that 60% you have the Democrats, half of which cannot read.

Jaibones on April 13, 2012 at 8:21 PM

Gallup: Americans heavily favor the Buffett Rule, 60/37
=======================================================

Pure Crazy talk,er,polling dat is!!

Speaking of Crazy,er,Rant OverLoad/OverDrive,Santelli goes to town
on Buffett Rule!

Rick Santelli Criticizes Buffett Rule
*************************************
(Video-3:16)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=859_1334262034

canopfor on April 13, 2012 at 8:25 PM

I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that the average swing voter does not want to talk about the “war on women,”

I won’t take that bet, given that a dollar isn’t worth a donut anymore.

HitNRun on April 13, 2012 at 8:27 PM

The worst outcome for Obama would be that the Buffett Rule somehow is passed by Congress, he signs it and then has to explain how now that millionaires are paying their fair share, gasoline still costs $4.00 a gallon, the deficit is still growing and the unemployment rate is still above 8%.

Curtiss on April 13, 2012 at 7:59 PM

You think that by getting what he wants we can run him out of excuses?

slickwillie2001 on April 13, 2012 at 8:38 PM

That picture is so “in yo face” it mekes me ill.

Key West Reader on April 13, 2012 at 8:44 PM

If one starts out with 50% who pay no income tax, it is easy to get to 60%.

galtani on April 13, 2012 at 8:48 PM

Buffet owes the government a billion dollars from his business, and has been fighting it. Why isn’t THAT in the news? I think people will see why Buffet lets Obama use him for this cause.

Fleuries on April 13, 2012 at 8:08 PM

…because the news media does not want to make a fool out of JugEars by sharing the hypocrisy of Buffett, or letting us know of the economic circumstances of his poor tax abused secretary.

KOOLAID2 on April 13, 2012 at 8:50 PM

I am all for the Buffett Rule…

Buffett, since he wants to be taxed more, should have a special tax created for only him…..I say we should make it 50% of his total wealth….

There is nothing more dangerous than rich old geezers like Soros and Buffett who lived lives of wealth and comfort built in the capitalist system, but now are using their wealth and power to prevent the rest of us from enjoying that system and getting wealthy. They are like the nobility of old….trying to keep the peasants working in their fields, poor and stupid. They want to freeze the social ladder…

William Eaton on April 13, 2012 at 8:57 PM

Why not strike a compromise? Tax a more limited group: hedge-fund types. Tax carried interest at ordinary income tax rates, rather than capital gains rates. It may put Romney in a bad light, but he didn’t put the system in place; it has been around for years. I suspect that it would do less damage to investment without dividing the country along the lines of the Buffett Rule.

I was watching Special Report last night, and they had a Fox Business News personality named Liz Klaiman (sp?), who sounded to some extent like someone from MSNBC. She and others seemed to be talking past each other on the issue of taxing the rich. Seems to me that you have three issues–aside from fundamental tax reform–floating around.

First, whether to increase top ordinary rates. I say no because many successful small-business owners run their businesses as S corporations or LLCs. Though there are differences between the entities, for the most part, the entities income is taxed on the owner’s individual return at those high rates. That’s not smart tax policy.

Second, whether to increase capital gains rates to 30%. This is idiotic. Tax revenue will drop and investment will flee the country.

Third, whether to subject income from a carried interest to ordinary income tax rates rather than capital-gains tax rates. It’s a limited universe of taxpayers. I’m sure it’ll have some negative effect on the economy, and it won’t generate that much money. But maybe it’d satisfy the public’s bloodlust for the very wealthy.

Anyone with a decent knowledge of the issues surrounding the taxation of carried interest should chime in.

BuckeyeSam on April 13, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Oh please, enough of polls. The great majority are mathematical garbage and are designed to influence and not to inform. The Buffett rule is a leftist maneuver to redistribute the wealth and is fundamentally un-American. This poll obviously leaned heavily on the parasitic class in this country and is an affront to most Americans.

rplat on April 13, 2012 at 9:04 PM

If that rule were actually enforced, half of the people it would apply to are sitting Congressmen and the other half of people it would apply to own the other half of Congress.

Ergo, this law will never actually be enacted as it has been described. It will, however, be part of the smoke screen for the biggest middle-class tax increaase America has ever seen.

logis on April 13, 2012 at 9:09 PM

Flat tax.

That is all.

Spliff Menendez on April 13, 2012 at 9:14 PM

If you want to send all the wealthy Buffett-tax supporters into hyperventilation, let’s suggest an annual 1% tax on the value of any family trusts over $10m.

Next, how about those fat bulging college endowment funds? Shouldn’t Uncle Sam get some of that too? Just a taste, just enough to wet his beak.

slickwillie2001 on April 13, 2012 at 9:32 PM

They want jobs, and if The One can’t deliver then they’ll roll the dice on Romney.

Good bye America, it was nice while it lasted…..All Hail Diversity. Seems thats all that matters, where can I get some black face?

dmann on April 13, 2012 at 9:45 PM

What do we expect after 50-60yrs of unrestrained marxist claptrap in our education indoctrination centers?

rayra on April 13, 2012 at 9:54 PM

then they’ll roll the dice on Romney

Wow, that assumed alot didn’t it……Thanks for showing your true colors AP, nice to see the mask slip off the face of a coward.

Enjoy serving your Messiah!

dmann on April 13, 2012 at 10:08 PM

This so-called tax increase on the rich is really a stealth capital gain tax increase which would destroy 401 K and pension plans as investors would take their money offshore.

Incidentally the capital gains tax is on invested income which has already taxed as ordinary income and may be taxed later a THIRD time as an estate or inheritance tax-the final at an up to 55% rate.

Everything Obama does is bent on destroying this country. But I guessed you noticed.

MaiDee on April 13, 2012 at 11:18 PM

Flat tax.

That is all.

Spliff Menendez on April 13, 2012 at 9:14 PM

Yep, but whenever you talk about eliminating the child tax credit or mortgage tax deduction, you get flamed on this site and called a troll. People….I don’t care if you buy a house or have kids, I just don’t want to pay for it.

Can’t have it both ways. FLAT TAX!!!

nazo311 on April 14, 2012 at 12:15 AM

I read somewhere that the Obama admin believes the $47 billion or so that the Buh-fay rule would raise to be a significant amount of money. Yeah, it’ll probably just about cover the tab for the numerous extravagant vacations I’m sure Lady Mooch is planning for herself, Baraka and the girls for their dreamed-of second term.

stukinIL4now on April 14, 2012 at 2:42 AM

Well, let the famn dool thing pass if the people want it. Then when it takes away all their jobs, “It’s Obama’s Fault!”

{^_^}

herself on April 14, 2012 at 3:36 AM

Not a word about the 50% of households who pay no taxes, but everything about the 10% who pay 73% of all taxes.

Redistrubtion of wealth at any coast, the Chicago way !

BillyPenn on April 14, 2012 at 10:55 AM

The important thing is for Romney and the Repubs to reduce that stupid Buffet gimmick down to percentages and numbers the common folks understand.

One thing I always find interesting is if you run into a group discussing class warfare and the topic veers to “the rich don’t pay enough”, the whole talk changes when the rich soakers are asked just what percentage they think people should pay of their incomes.

Funny, the percentages drop low, often lower than is currently taxed now in many cases.

It’s darn difficult for someone to say out loud that they think even the evil rich should be forking over 50% of their earned money to the gubmint.

Cause even the dopes amongst us know there is nothing fair about that.

I suspect that 30% Buffet percentage, if push ever came to shove, would not be something most folks would go for all that quickly either.

We all get paychecks, we know that a third of it is damn big, and even the dumbest know that soon they’ll be coming after us.

patfish on April 14, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Gallup: Americans heavily favor the Buffett Rule, 60/37
…ignorance is bliss !

TeaPartyNation on April 14, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Don’t tax me, tax the man behind the tree.

Government needs to get spending under control and Obama needs to end his class warfare rhetoric.

SC.Charlie on April 14, 2012 at 3:07 PM

What we need is some sort of Minimum tax rule that affects you if you make “too much” to force a minimum tax; some sort of Alternate Tax setup to enforce this.

But don’t worry anyone, this Alternative Minimum Tax won’t ever affect the middle class, or spread down the income ladders; nope this Alternative Minimum tax rule we’re working on will only be fore the rich… you can trust us.

How is anyone anywhere buying this drivel?

http://themiddleclass.org/bill/alternative-minimum-tax-relief-act-2008

Guys, we already tried this… and we’re passing waivers every year to avoid our current “only on the rich” tax from hitting 25 MILLION middle class families.

But let me guess, this time will be different?

Some days I think I’m a crotchety old man (because I am) and then I see this and realize I’m not cynical enough for reality yet.

gekkobear on April 15, 2012 at 3:52 AM

Just on pure numbers without accounting for the so called Laffer curve effect, the Buffet rule would produce 3. 2 billion in revenue. Could someone possibly explain just how this would have ANY significant impact on the budget deficit as Obama has claimed ?

It must be getting dicey for some when they have to produce an article for a blog that is as insignificant as the amount of tax revenue this so called Buffett rule would produce.

I would have preferred if you had invoked the Jimmy Buffett rule~ Cocktails @ Five.

DevilsPrinciple on April 15, 2012 at 5:10 AM