• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Buffett Lies

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Warren Buffett and President Obama have a better idea than taxing the rich.

They just want to start with a tax on the “mega-rich” and see how it goes.

Look, I’m an admirer of Warren Buffett’s investment accomplishments. But he should have stayed out of politics. A guy can be good at one thing and not so admirable at others.

I always think that it’s a mistake for someone to borrow their expertise from one area and try to leverage that into moralistic homilies on tax policy for the rest of us.

Especially when that guy won’t come clean about his motives for the homiletic or his tax-return.

Because as the character Aaron Altman in the movie Broadcast News observed about his nemesis, I believe that Buffett, while a very nice guy, is the Devil.

“What do you think the Devil is going to look like if he's around?” said Altman in the pivotal scene, “Nobody is going to be taken in if he has a long, red, pointy tail. No. I'm semi-serious here. He will look attractive and he will be nice and helpful and he will get a job where he influences a great God-fearing nation... he will just bit by little bit lower standards where they are important.”

Because Buffett has lowered the standard when it comes to truth.
In short, Buffett’s not telling the truth.

Buffett via CNN: I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone -- not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 -- shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain.

Investors make investment decisions all the time on the basis of total return after taxes. Anyone figuring out the rate of return without taking into account what they have to pay in taxes is not really figuring out their rate of return.

Want proof? Ask any investor why municipal bonds have lower rates of interest than taxable bonds. It’s because taxes make a difference.

The tax rates of the rest of the world are going down, not up. Raise tax rates here and watch money go to other countries. A trillion in U.S. cash is already sitting in foreign accounts legally. That money won’t come back to the U.S. because were it to be invested here it would immediately be subjected to higher U.S. corporate taxes.

It’s staying offshore for one reason, and it isn’t financial. The Democrats’ ideology of “fairness” prevents them from allowing them to bring tax rates in line to capture the extra revenue these foreign profits would add.

We know from experience that when we lower tax rates to be competitive with the rest of the world, money comes back here.

“Back in 2004, Congress passed a bill that allowed corporations to bring back to the United States after-tax dollars earned in other countries relatively tax-free,” writes the Daily Caller. “This ‘repatriation holiday’ was in effect for all of 2005. The result was that at least $320 billion of money was brought back to the United States. This increased corporate tax revenue by nearly $17 billion — tax revenue that otherwise would have been indefinitely deferred into the future. The money was used to fund pension plans, raise wages, create jobs, and invest in new plants and equipment.”

None of that money would have come back if what Buffett said about tax rates being of no consequence to investors was true. Oh, and unemployment dropped from 5.4 percent in 2005 to 4.4 in December 2006.

Buffett via CNN: To those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what's happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.

Is Buffett really trying to make the argument that lower tax rates equal fewer jobs? Because job creation and tax cuts correlate pretty well on a timeline. When Reagan cut taxes, jobs were created; when Clinton cut taxes jobs were created, when Bush cut taxes, jobs were created. When taxes went up? Not so much.

And there was a lot more going on than lower tax rates after 2000. The Twin Towers came down, the Pentagon was attacked and we’ve been involved in a war on a few fronts. I bet the global war has a lot more to do with job creation than the government not collecting enough in taxes.

For those who would argue that peace would be a better policy, I say, great. Bring it on. But first, maybe you should talk to your Prince of Peace. Perhaps you can get him to undeclare his undeclared war in Libya.

Or does he have to declare war first before he can make peace?

Add to the litany that we hit 3.8 percent unemployment in April 2000. Ask Mr. Buffett how we create jobs when we were already at full employment? The fact that under Bush the economy created 3 million jobs net while unemployment rose to 9 percent by April 2009 is vindication of the tax cut policy.

Lastly, Buffett is advocating tax changes that will largely subject him to no additional taxes.

As our colleague Greg Pollowitz at NRO observes, Buffet’s money is already tax sheltered as unrealized capital gains and “Buffett has committed the bulk of his fortune – these billions of dollars in unrealized capital gains to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, among other foundations, upon his death.” Thus none of that money will be taxed.

In all, the tax-the-mega-rich tour is a shameful performance by Buffett because he knows exactly what he’s talking about. But for reasons of ideology or pride or passion or moral penury he has decided to lower his standards just enough to become at least a demon of the Democrat wing of the Democrat Party.
Better for his reputation, and for truth, if he had died years ago. At least his soul would still be free.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
1
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
Lastly, Buffett is advocating tax changes that will largely subject him to no additional taxes.

he had the same argument over the death tax.. a tax that is easily proven he has already made plans to avoid paying..

he wouldn't be as rich if he was stupid.. the guy is sharp.. gotta give him that..

used car salesman everywhere must worship him in secret shrines..
 

lightninboy

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
691
Reaction score
0
Location
NE South Dakota
Warren Buffett used to be kind of a poor man's hero from Omaha, but now the more you hear about him there is less reason to like him, I am afraid.
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
29,603
Reaction score
769
Location
NE WY at the foot of the Big Horn mountains
Not that I'm a fan of the man, but we have a train track near our
place and it hasn't been kept up very well. Now that Warren
Buffet bought the RR, it's a different story. Lots of maintenence
going on. The guys working on it said he was putting a lot of money
into the tracks, something that needed done as they had been
so neglected. I see some nice RR ties by the crossing which
is in bad need of being replaced. The crossing in town was a
bugger and that's all been redone. So it's not like he isn't taking
care of business. FWIW

I guess I'm posting this to show that no one is totally bad or
totally good, I guess. :?
 

lightninboy

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
691
Reaction score
0
Location
NE South Dakota
The meatpacking business gets controlled by a few interests. The fertilizer business gets controlled by a few interests. The railroad business gets controlled by a few interests.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
lightninboy said:
The meatpacking business gets controlled by a few interests. The fertilizer business gets controlled by a few interests. The railroad business gets controlled by a few interests.


so?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Faster horses said:
Not that I'm a fan of the man, but we have a train track near our
place and it hasn't been kept up very well. Now that Warren
Buffet bought the RR, it's a different story. Lots of maintenence
going on. The guys working on it said he was putting a lot of money
into the tracks, something that needed done as they had been
so neglected. I see some nice RR ties by the crossing which
is in bad need of being replaced. The crossing in town was a
bugger and that's all been redone. So it's not like he isn't taking
care of business. FWIW

I guess I'm posting this to show that no one is totally bad or
totally good, I guess. :?

lightinboy:
The meatpacking business gets controlled by a few interests. The fertilizer business gets controlled by a few interests. The railroad business gets controlled by a few interests.

Yep-- he's investing heavily in Montana- and the BNSF railroad and the holdings which included thousands of acres of land with coal deposits under them... He believes that is Montanas future-- either with our own modern clean coal plants- or shipping coal to the west coast and on to China (which the greeny weenies have seemed to not oppose)... Buffet is far from controlling the railroad business- but he is tying up the unlimited amount coalfields and the tracks/railroads that run from those coalfields- and on to the west coast....

And like Faster Horses said- he is putting maintenance into the rail tracks that hasn't been done in years...Putting numerous more maintenance crews to work...

BNSF has hired 100's of employees in MT already this year- and he just announced that BNSF will be hiring 3500 additional employees nationwide this year...And most those are top dollar jobs- with great benefits/insurance and retirements... Last time they hired here- they had over 300 applicants from all over the country show up to test and interview for 15 jobs.....
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Oldtimer said:
Faster horses said:
Not that I'm a fan of the man, but we have a train track near our
place and it hasn't been kept up very well. Now that Warren
Buffet bought the RR, it's a different story. Lots of maintenence
going on. The guys working on it said he was putting a lot of money
into the tracks, something that needed done as they had been
so neglected. I see some nice RR ties by the crossing which
is in bad need of being replaced. The crossing in town was a
bugger and that's all been redone. So it's not like he isn't taking
care of business. FWIW

I guess I'm posting this to show that no one is totally bad or
totally good, I guess. :?

lightinboy:
The meatpacking business gets controlled by a few interests. The fertilizer business gets controlled by a few interests. The railroad business gets controlled by a few interests.

Yep-- he's investing heavily in Montana- and the BNSF railroad and the holdings which included thousands of acres of land with coal deposits under them... He believes that is Montanas future-- either with our own modern clean coal plants- or shipping coal to the west coast and on to China (which the greeny weenies have seemed to not oppose)... Buffet is far from controlling the railroad business- but he is tying up the unlimited amount coalfields and the tracks/railroads that run from those coalfields- and on to the west coast....

And like Faster Horses said- he is putting maintenance into the rail tracks that hasn't been done in years...Putting numerous more maintenance crews to work...

BNSF has hired 100's of employees in MT already this year- and he just announced that BNSF will be hiring 3500 additional employees nationwide this year...And most those are top dollar jobs- with great benefits/insurance and retirements... Last time they hired here- they had over 300 applicants from all over the country show up to test and interview for 15 jobs.....


and if his name was Koch and had done the same thing, you'd be complaining about it.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Oldtimer said:
Faster horses said:
Not that I'm a fan of the man, but we have a train track near our
place and it hasn't been kept up very well. Now that Warren
Buffet bought the RR, it's a different story. Lots of maintenence
going on. The guys working on it said he was putting a lot of money
into the tracks, something that needed done as they had been
so neglected. I see some nice RR ties by the crossing which
is in bad need of being replaced. The crossing in town was a
bugger and that's all been redone. So it's not like he isn't taking
care of business. FWIW

I guess I'm posting this to show that no one is totally bad or
totally good, I guess. :?

lightinboy:
The meatpacking business gets controlled by a few interests. The fertilizer business gets controlled by a few interests. The railroad business gets controlled by a few interests.

Yep-- he's investing heavily in Montana- and the BNSF railroad and the holdings which included thousands of acres of land with coal deposits under them... He believes that is Montanas future-- either with our own modern clean coal plants- or shipping coal to the west coast and on to China (which the greeny weenies have seemed to not oppose)... Buffet is far from controlling the railroad business- but he is tying up the unlimited amount coalfields and the tracks/railroads that run from those coalfields- and on to the west coast....

And like Faster Horses said- he is putting maintenance into the rail tracks that hasn't been done in years...Putting numerous more maintenance crews to work...

BNSF has hired 100's of employees in MT already this year- and he just announced that BNSF will be hiring 3500 additional employees nationwide this year...And most those are top dollar jobs- with great benefits/insurance and retirements... Last time they hired here- they had over 300 applicants from all over the country show up to test and interview for 15 jobs.....


and if his name was Koch and had done the same thing, you'd be complaining about it.

All I've seen Koch's do in Montana is play the government subsidized entitlement program of cheap grazing leases... And fight the MT Dept of Natural Resources when they want to raise the amount of those leases to get the Montana citizen/taxpayer their money's worth....A rate that is still about 1/2 what the going rate on identical private and tribal leases is...

Is that an investment in MT's future...Sounds to me more like trying to screw Montana/taxpayers for their own greed...
 

lightninboy

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
691
Reaction score
0
Location
NE South Dakota
hypocritexposer said:
lightninboy said:
The meatpacking business gets controlled by a few interests. The fertilizer business gets controlled by a few interests. The railroad business gets controlled by a few interests.
so?
So? Well, this meatpacking business and this fertilizer business getting controlled by a few interests is something which should have never happened.

Agree with that?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Oldtimer said:
All I've seen Koch's do in Montana is play the government subsidized entitlement program of cheap grazing leases... And fight the MT Dept of Natural Resources when they want to raise the amount of those leases to get the Montana citizen/taxpayer their money's worth....A rate that is still about 1/2 what the going rate on identical private and tribal leases is...

Is that an investment in MT's future...Sounds to me more like trying to screw Montana/taxpayers for their own greed...


and when they get the pipeline from Hardisty, Alberta built?

Remember all those jobs that "are available for anybody that wants to work"?

Maybe you should go back to this thread http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=289481&highlight=keystone#289481 , that you started, advocating the benefits of said pipeline.

and then check out this link http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/10/idUS292515702420110210


I wonder how you will talk about all the oil money, when the Koch Brothers get to town.


edited to add: Do you have any idea why the left is demonizing the Koch Brothers? It might just be that the "greeny weenies" are behind it, because of the involvement of the brothers in bringing jobs and energy security to Montana and many other states.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
lightninboy said:
hypocritexposer said:
lightninboy said:
The meatpacking business gets controlled by a few interests. The fertilizer business gets controlled by a few interests. The railroad business gets controlled by a few interests.
so?
So? Well, this meatpacking business and this fertilizer business getting controlled by a few interests is something which should have never happened.

Agree with that?


How did it happen?

Regulatory Capture is a detriment to any free market system.
 

lightninboy

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
691
Reaction score
0
Location
NE South Dakota
hypocritexposer said:
lightninboy said:
hypocritexposer said:
So? Well, this meatpacking business and this fertilizer business getting controlled by a few interests is something which should have never happened.

Agree with that?


How did it happen?

Regulatory Capture is a detriment to any free market system.
I said "Agree with that?"
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
lightninboy said:
hypocritexposer said:
lightninboy said:
So? Well, this meatpacking business and this fertilizer business getting controlled by a few interests is something which should have never happened.

Agree with that?


How did it happen?

Regulatory Capture is a detriment to any free market system.
I said "Agree with that?"

If you understood what I said, you would know that I agree and I also let you know why.
 

lightninboy

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
691
Reaction score
0
Location
NE South Dakota
hypocritexposer said:
lightninboy said:
hypocritexposer said:
How did it happen?

Regulatory Capture is a detriment to any free market system.
I said "Agree with that?"

If you understood what I said, you would know that I agree and I also let you know why.
You said "How did it happen?

Regulatory Capture is a detriment to any free market system."

That would lead me to believe that you do not agree or else you would have simply said that you agree.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Oldtimer said:
All I've seen Koch's do in Montana is play the government subsidized entitlement program of cheap grazing leases... And fight the MT Dept of Natural Resources when they want to raise the amount of those leases to get the Montana citizen/taxpayer their money's worth....A rate that is still about 1/2 what the going rate on identical private and tribal leases is...

Is that an investment in MT's future...Sounds to me more like trying to screw Montana/taxpayers for their own greed...


and when they get the pipeline from Hardisty, Alberta built?

Remember all those jobs that "are available for anybody that wants to work"?

Maybe you should go back to this thread http://ranchers.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=289481&highlight=keystone#289481 , that you started, advocating the benefits of said pipeline.

and then check out this link http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/10/idUS292515702420110210


I wonder how you will talk about all the oil money, when the Koch Brothers get to town.


edited to add: Do you have any idea why the left is demonizing the Koch Brothers? It might just be that the "greeny weenies" are behind it, because of the involvement of the brothers in bringing jobs and energy security to Montana and many other states.

Kochs don't own the pipeline- Trans Canada Corp. does... Kochs only own some (25%?) of the Canadian oil that will be transported thru it... The pipeline would not have even been that long term a benefit to MT if our Governor hadn't blackmailed TransCanada and required them to allot room for MT/US/Bakken Field oil to be carried on the line...(They wanted to just carry Canadian oil)...
Kochs just stand to make more money off their Canadian investments if the pipeline is built to transport oil to their refineries- but aren't the ones building it...

This article sums up the feelings of many in Montana who pay taxes (except maybe some of those that have cheap government grazing leases- and whine about them constantly--but never let them go :wink: ) about the Kochs contribution to MT...


The Koch Brothers are part of the Socialist Stockgrowers Association!
by: Kevin
Mon Jul 18, 2011 at 17:27:07 PM MDT

( - promoted by Rob Kailey)

The Matador Ranch Company, owned by Koch Industries (yes, THOSE Koch Brothers), sent a representative to the Montana Land Board meeting today to protest a proposed increase to the state grazing lease rate. This rate is what the state charges ranchers who lease state-owned land for cattle grazing. The money earned from these leases helps fund schools in Montana.
The average state grazing rate is currently about $6 or $8 per month for each animal, or Animal Unit Month (AUM). The new rate being proposed is around $12 per month. Everyone recognizes that this rate has been set too low for some time, especially with cattle prices way up. The reason for proposing a new rate is that the market demands it; the average grazing rate on similar private land is $20 and higher!

But the point is, it turns out that the Koch Brothers--the supposed "defenders against socialism"--are some of our most prominent socialists! In fact, they are the state of Montana's biggest lessee. Their 300,000 acre Matador Ranch operation contains over 80,000 acres of state land. The Koch Brothers have been enjoying their subsidized rate, and they want to keep it! They don't want to pay something closer to the market rate, despite claiming to be defenders of free markets. This is "corporate welfare" in its most hypocritical form.

It's widely known that state and federal grazing rates are a subsidy to ranchers. Federal grazing rates are worse. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management rates in Montana and other western states are set at only $1.35 per AUM! The Koch Brothers cash in on that giveaway too, because another large portion of their 300,000 acre ranch is federal land.

So it turns out that the Koch Brothers are not against socialism after all. They're just against socialism for anyone but themselves. And the schoolkids of Montana can go to hell!

And in this area- those state leases that Kochs get for $6-8 an AUM go for $30+ an AUM for identical type private/tribal leases adjacent to the cheap government leases....
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
and like I said, if you understood what I wrote.

I asked a question that I answered in the next sentence and that sentence states that the "how it happened" is a detriment.

was it not you that wanted to have an intelligent discussion the other day?

I guess I proved my point about you not being able to keep up.
 

lightninboy

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
691
Reaction score
0
Location
NE South Dakota
hypocritexposer said:
and like I said, if you understood what I wrote.

I asked a question that I answered in the next sentence and that sentence states that the "how it happened" is a detriment.

was it not you that wanted to have an intelligent discussion the other day?

I guess I proved my point about you not being able to keep up.
I interpreted your answer as being pro-monopoly. But now I see that you meant your answer to be anti-monopoly.
 

lightninboy

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
691
Reaction score
0
Location
NE South Dakota
You did not answer Yes or No.

You said "How did it happen?"

You said "Regulatory Capture is a detriment to any free market system."

"Regulatory Capture" could be interpreted as being either "captured by monopoly" or "regulated to prevent a monopoly."
 

Latest posts

Top