1% of 1% Liberal Democratic Elites

Welcome Lower Merion residents!

We're glad you stopped by. Go ahead and register for a free account to get the benefits of being a member, including:
  • Access to all of our posts and comments
  • Your own profile including an avatar, buddy lists, and other social networking features
  • The ability to send private messages to other users on this site
  • The ability to chat and interact with other citizens and voters in and around Lower Merion.
Creating an account is easy. Register now!

(Don't live in Lower Merion? That's okay. We won't hold it aginst you.)
Tags:
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

                

                Democratic OnePerCenter Anthony Pritzker home in Los Angeles is a 49,300-square-foot building designed by an architecture firm in Paris.

                Owner: Hyatt hotel heir Anthony Pritzker Above Ground: A gym with changing rooms, 'floating pool' and spa, his-and-hers offices, arts-and-crafts room, hairdressing area, detached recreation room Underground: A two-level basement with a game room, two-lane bowling alley, entertainment foyer with bar, media library, staff rooms, a 'project room' and garage

Neighborhood: Saudi Prince Abdulaziz ibn Abdullah ibn Abdulaziz Al Saud is awaiting permits for a 70,000- square-foot compound, downsized from 85,000 square feet

$400,000 Pritzker Family Foundation contribution to Media Matters

1.833335
Average: 1.8 (12 votes)
Your rating: None

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
LexoTime5's picture
Offline
Last seen: 46 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31
Posts:

Envy is an ugly, ugly thing, Bob, get over it.

Why do you try so,so hard to whip up resentment and envy among people?

4.416665
Average: 4.4 (12 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

TaxProfblog brings this NYTimes story to our attention:

Mitt Romney paid 13.9% federal tax rate

Among the 400 Americans with the highest adjusted gross incomes in 2008, 30 of them paid less than 10% and another 101 paid less than 15%

The top 400 paid an average of $49 million, or 18.1% of their AGI, in federal tax — lower than taxpayers in the $200,000 to $500,000 bracket.

They reported an average $14.1 million in state and local taxes, bringing their total income tax level to about 23% of AGI.

And not one of them paid more than 35% of their AGI in federal tax. ...

 

                                               

 

 

23% is quite a bite and I, somehow, think thes 400 will use their wealth more productively than the government. But, when people making hundreds of millions a year are paying a substantially lower rate than others, something is wrong with the tax code. The Redistributionists, Socialists and Democrats will argue for a "soak the rich" tax and others, like me, will argue for a reform of the tax code to a simpler one with fewer, if any, deductions, a flat tax or a national sales tax, lowering the rate and broadening the base. It is obvious from this NYTimes articles that the "progressive" tax code is not working the way many of us thought.

 

Milton Friedman's reply to the woman who makes the common argument  justifying taking money from the rich is worth listening to, in my opinion. Video 4 minutes

 

4
Average: 4 (2 votes)
Your rating: None
politeia's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 weeks 5 days ago
Joined: 2008-07-30 :00
Posts:

The problem for these hyper-rich is not tax deductions. Taking away deductions would harm middle to upper-middle earners.

The problem, as I have pointed out before, is the 15% capital gains taxes.

Most of these hyper-rich (unless they inherited it or are Wall Street parasites who have always just pushed money around) at one point paid much higher taxes as they grew a job creating business.

However, once they sold the business interests (like Romney), all they do is invest their fortune with hedge funds and quant traders on Wall Street, they get 10,15, 20% investment returns and only pay 15% capital gains taxes while not working .

Taxes on capital gains for those with large investment holdings and for those who don't create jobs but push money around on Wall Street do need to go up.

For those who make millions creating a product, creating jobs and creating economic growth, I prefer their taxes not go up.

=================

Brotherhood of Thieves ~ As we must account for every idle word, so must we account for every idle silence.

4.714285
Average: 4.7 (7 votes)
Your rating: None

 

 

LexoTime5's picture
Offline
Last seen: 46 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31
Posts:

Agree.

For so long we've been sold the myth that if only the rich were taxed less then they'd create jobs for us. Well, it's been over 30 years of plummeting taxes for the rich but apparently they don't see fit to create jobs here in the US.

If the same logic about "not taxing the job creators" is going to continue to be perpetuated, there ought to be some way to only cut breaks for wealthy people  if they are actually creating jobs and investing here in  the US.

4.714285
Average: 4.7 (7 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

I am surprised at politeia's comments because, I think, taxing capital can only mean  less productive growth, fewer jobs, fewer goods and services and a lower standard of living.I would be surprised if this is Ron Paul's view but maybe it is. Ron Paul may be less a Free Market proponent than I think.

Patrick Barron, an Austrian Economist: "The only means of increasing prosperity is to apply more capital goods to the production process. Taxing capital away makes us poorer than we would otherwise become. The US government is ignorant of this basic law of economic science, choosing instead to kill the goose that lays the golden egg in the name of...what?...it isn't a more prosperous future."

Capital production needs to be financed. To use  the tax code to manipulate the people's incentives supposees a Collective of Educated, Disinterested, All-Knowing Experts, "Philosopher Kings",  smart enough to predict the consequences of the interaction of many conflicting policies. The economy is deceptively complex and it is, in the view of many, counterproductive to attempt to engineer it by a centralized command and control.

   I, Pencil is a dramatic example of the coordinated coopertive complexity and spontaneous order of the Free Market. Milton Friedman explains the phenomenon as well "There is not a single person whi could make this pencil." (video 2:40) Milton Friedman uses a pencil to explain how the operation of the free market promotes harmony and world peace. (1 of 30) http://www.LibertyPen.com

                              

Killing the Golden Goose Aesop's Fable (6th century)  and some background

 

1.333335
Average: 1.3 (3 votes)
Your rating: None
politeia's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 weeks 5 days ago
Joined: 2008-07-30 :00
Posts:

I agree with the general Austrian economic principle that true capital (something that has been produced, created from scratch, and increased economic output) should not be taxed any more than necessary (our current system does require taxes to keep Big Government afloat). That's what I posted above.

The hyper-rich who are making tens of millions a year on investments each year and only paying 15% capital gains taxes are for the most part not creating capital that is growing the economy.

They are moving money around on Wall Street and reinvesting their investment gains to make more money via hedge funds and quant trades.

The only way they grow the economy is by spending on luxury goods (which is a minimal portion of the economy). Otherwise, they pocket tens of millions a year in investment income, only pay 15% in taxes, and they reinvest it and keep getting richer.

If Joe Rich Guy had invested the tens of millions he made last year in investments (which he makes every year while paying less than 15% in taxes) in business start-ups that would create jobs and grow the economy, I'd be happy to tax him more modestly.

However, Joe Rich Guy does not want to take that chance. Why should he when he is only taxed 15% on capital gains from non-capital producing investments where he makes money by just moving money around? Why shouldn't he just reinvest it and live like I king? A 15% capital gains tax incents him to do so. Why take chance on investing in businesses (like Joe Rich Guy probably once did to make his money in the first place, which was as a good thing back then where I would tax him more modestly if he is creating jobs and growing the economy).

Raise capital gains taxes on investment income but keep taxes low if Joe Rich Guys invests in business start-ups that would grow the economy.

The current tax code and capital gains tax system for the hyper-rich disincents them to take the risk to invest in business start-ups or other more risky ventures that create capital and grow the economy.

The tens of millions Joe Rich Guy made last year did not help the companies (for the most part) he invested in.

The hyper-rich make their money these days via professional traders. They get in and out of a stock fast and cash in. They short-sell stocks if need be to make money. This does not help those companies or the economy.

It would be another story if they were investing in a company stock long-term and reinvesting their profit/dividends back into that company. That's how it used to be. That would grow that company an create jobs.

Those days are gone for the most part so it is not as simple as a general economic theory - which I agree with in general from what the Austrian school says, but not given how things work on Wall Street these days.

However, it is different for the middle class. They do not have more money than they know what to do with and they are the engine of the economy.

Since the middle class does not already own everything they can possibly own, keep capital gains at 15% for them. Then, when they make some money in the markets (not so easy when you don't have access to hedge funds and the best money managers like the hyper-rich, though) they will reinvest less than the hyper-rich. They will buy things like a new car or remodel the kitchen, etc. When you have millions of people doing this in the middle class, it grows the economy. The 1% does not grow the economy much at all with their wealth these days.

It's a new paradigm that requires going beyond general economic theory that has not caught up to how things are operating on Wall Street - at least IMHO.

=================

Brotherhood of Thieves ~ As we must account for every idle word, so must we account for every idle silence.

4.25
Average: 4.3 (4 votes)
Your rating: None

 

 

bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

TaxProfblog, also, brings to our attention Steve Roth, the Angry Bear, FAIR SHARE TAX REFORM

TaxProf                    Steve Roth FAIR SHARE TAX REFORM

 

 

Note: a wealth tax is problematic for many reasons but this is one place to start.

2
Average: 2 (2 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

Selfless President Obama and his Democrats portray the budget and tax arguments as a partisan contest between Democrats and Republicans about differening policy priorities. In fact, as can be seen below,it is an Marxist Alinsky Redistributionist plan taking from the Haves to give to the Have-Nots and enriching and empowering Obama's Elite Network of Insiders.

.While aggregating power and wealth to himself and those connected to him, Obama and the disingenous Democrats characterize themselves as  Selfless and Noble Protectors Who Care About the Weak, the Poor, the Disadvantaged Minorities against Heartless, Cold and Greedy, Profit Made Republicans. In fact, these power mad wolves will eat sheep they claim to be protecting while enhancing thier own power. Classic, as inevitable as human nature,  Animal Farm Reified    

President Obama's Budget Aims At InvestorsNot Just Super-Rich INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY 02/13/2012

                                   

 "[President] Obama had telegraphed his so-called Buffett Rule to impose a minimum 30% tax rate on million-dollar earners. But his new thrust also aims at investors with incomes well below the stratosphere — $200,000 for singles and $250,000 for couples. The proposed increase would boost the top rate on dividend taxes from 15% this year to 43.4% next year. That includes a new proposal to tax dividends at the same rate as regular income — 39.6% if Obama succeeds in ending the Bush tax cuts that dropped the top rate to 35%. It also includes a 3.8% tax on nonwage income that officially goes to Medicare but was really passed to help pay for Obama's signature health law."

READ MORE

1
Average: 1 (3 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

Federal Workers - Not Sharing the Sacrifice 02/15/201 Investor's Business Daily

 

                  

Campaigning: The Obama budget is a miserably flawed document in so many ways. But it's more than a mere toxic spending package. It's also a political compact the president is hoping will generate support.

Included in President Obama's 2013 budget is a pay raise for federal workers. Yeah, it's only a 0.5% increase. But the federal work force is not one that deserves a raise. It's a work force that needs to be cut.

Government workers, we are told, are civil servants. But the nation's roughly 2.1 million federal civilian workers live more like masters. Their average compensation is twice that of private sector workers (see chart), and in terms of only wages, federal employee pay is about 60% higher — $50,462 per year in private industry compared to $81,258 when working for Washington .

1.25
Average: 1.3 (4 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

Michelle Obama has embarked on a skiing vacation with her daughters in Aspen, Colorado, according to the Aspen Daily News.

The first lady, who just returned last month from 17 days of relaxation in Hawaii, is skiing in Colorado on Presidents’ Day Weekend for the second year in a row.

Last year she went to Vail.

READ MORE Michelle Obama Decides to Ski Aspen by Keith Koffler on February 18, 2012

                             xx    

“Just last August, she sojourned on Martha’s Vineyard, and the month before she travelled to southern Africa for a trip that mixed official business with tourist outings like an African safari. In July 2010, she took an exorbitant excursion to the southern coast of Spain, flying out with friends and family on a large jet that often serves as Air Force 2 and then staying at a ritzy hotel.” READ MORE at Aspen News

 

  

Obama2012: Barack Obama, defender of the poor and the middle class against the “One Percent”.

1
Average: 1 (5 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

                                  

Obama Valentine’s Day Splurge Priced at Up To $300 by Keith Koffler on February 15, 2012

“ It’s a fairly safe bet to assume the Obamas went for the wine, which would bring the tab to $110 per person. Add in a nine percent sales tax and 20 percent tip and we’re up to $288 for dinner. Carfare was all taken care of, courtesy of the taxpayers.”

 

                                            

                               Obama2012: Barack Obama, defender of the poor and the middle class against the “One Percent”.

1
Average: 1 (6 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

Please refer to my posts at State of the Union for more on OnePerCenters President and First Lady Michelle Obama

Look at me

       

 

 

1.4
Average: 1.4 (5 votes)
Your rating: None
LexoTime5's picture
Offline
Last seen: 46 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31
Posts:

Look at me

What mean spirited childish mockery you've stooped to.

And  you continue your campaign to sow envy, distrust, and dislike. What's it like being that guy?

4.555555
Average: 4.6 (9 votes)
Your rating: None
carla's picture
Offline
Last seen: 12 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 2008-01-03 :36
Posts:

Bob - this is a community blog that is privately owned by the webmaster. Perhaps you could kind of consider that you are at this point going overboard with your anti-left rhetoric? Free speech and all considered, this is not just your website. You still have a dedicated blog, right? Maybe if you are going to be posting so much you could put up posts here that are summaries in a collective of what you are doing on your stand-alone blog? http://thelibertyblog.org/ ? I missed along the way that I am not the only person to ask you to consider this? http://www.saveardmorecoalition.org/node/5472/bob-guzzardi

I realize that asking you to do this will open up your version of the hounds of hell on me, but I would just appreciate it if you could be considerate of the diverse readership and the people that no longer feel they can come here and post about local issues.

Thanks

5
Average: 5 (8 votes)
Your rating: None

"Well behaved women rarely make history" - Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

politeia's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 weeks 5 days ago
Joined: 2008-07-30 :00
Posts:

I'll second that.

I respect all views being heard, but there needs to be a reasonable limit.

Note what I posted in reference to you, Bob, just about one year ago in starting my big Ron Paul Thread.

As I mentioned to one blogger recently, if you have topics that are not directly related to local issues, and may relate to a particular political ideology, instead of inundating the SAC blogs with blog posts on those topics, why not combine them into one substantive post every now and then instead of providing for “blam” - blog spam?

I would suggest readers don't feel overwhelmed with my posts in support of Ron Paul.

I keep it primarily to one thread, I don't post more than a few times a week, and people can ignore that one thread if they don't like the topic.

Perhaps you can have one thread with the political issues you wish to address - and honestly, and respectfully, I think the amount you post and the names you call the party/ideology you post against not only turns people off in general (and particularly those who feel directly insulted), but it gives a bad name to those who may support some or even most of your views.

I'd respectfully suggest more moderation and fewer caustic comments on those whose political views you disagree with.

=================

Brotherhood of Thieves ~ As we must account for every idle word, so must we account for every idle silence.

5
Average: 5 (8 votes)
Your rating: None

 

 

bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

Liberal Democrat 1% of 1% CBS Corp. CEO Leslie Moonves' 2011 Compensation Jumps 21 Percent to $69.9 Million

But Disney CEO [Liberal Democrat]Robert Iger's pay rose 12 percent to $31.4 million, and Discovery Communications CEO [Liberal Democrat] David Zaslav's compensation rose 23 percent to $52.4 million. READ MORE Hollywood Reporter April 13, 2012

Liberal Democrat Leslie Moonves, 1% of 1% House Brentwood CA

2
Average: 2 (6 votes)
Your rating: None
LexoTime5's picture
Offline
Last seen: 46 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31
Posts:

Sowing envy and distrust since the year 0! That's some work.

4
Average: 4 (6 votes)
Your rating: None
Dr. Bob's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 2009-08-23 :16
Posts:

there was never a "year 0" as evidenced by the fact that this millennium started in 2001.

2.5
Average: 2.5 (4 votes)
Your rating: None

 


LexoTime5's picture
Offline
Last seen: 46 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31
Posts:

You got me there. I retract the invocation of the year 0.

3.5
Average: 3.5 (2 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

President Obama earned $789,674 in 2011, the White House announced on Friday. However, with this income, he does not even qualify for the so-called Buffett Rule that he has promoted relentlessly and the Senate will take up on Monday.

The Buffett Rule calls for those making over $1 million a year to pay a minimum tax rate, named after billionaire Warren Buffett. The president did earn over $1 million in previous years--$1.7 million in 2010 and $5.5 million in 2009.   READ MORE  The Washington Times 24/7  April 13, 2012 

  1% of the 1% It's what they do...

Obama Family Tax Shelter  President Obama and his wife, Michele, gave a total of $48,000 in tax-free gifts to their daughters, according to tax records made public on Friday.  READ MORE Washington Free Beacon April 13, 2012

Joe and Jill Biden and daughter Ashley

Bidens Donate 1.5 Percent of Income to Charity in 2011 Obamas give 22 percent.

According to the White House, "Together, [the Bidens] reported adjusted gross income of $379,035. The Bidens paid $87,900 in total federal tax for 2011. They paid $13,843 in Delaware income tax and $3,614 in Virginia income tax. The Bidens contributed $5,540 to charity in 2011." In other words, the Bidens donated less than 1.5 percent of their adjusted gross income to charity.

According to the White House, "[Obama] and the First Lady filed their income tax returns jointly and reported adjusted gross income of $789,674. ... The President and First Lady also reported donating $172,130 – or about 22% of their adjusted gross income – to 39 different charities."

READ MORE WEEKLY STANDARD April 13, 2012

2
Average: 2 (3 votes)
Your rating: None
LMT Observer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 2009-04-25 :31
Posts:

Bobguzzardi didn't mention how much federal income tax the Obamas paid:  $162,074.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/13/obama-tax-return-2011_n_1423352.html

"About half of the first family’s income is the President’s salary; the other half is from sales proceeds of the President’s books. The Obamas paid $162,074 in total tax."

More to the point, BobG makes a claim about the President that bears closer consideration:  

However, with this income, [the President] does not even qualify for the so-called Buffett Rule that he has promoted relentlessly and the Senate will take up on Monday.

 

Below are some perspectives that relate to BobG's claim that the Obamas' tax 2011 return shows that the President "does not even quality for the so-called Buffett Rule" and BobG's inferential suggestion to readers that, therefore, the return exposes the President as a hypocrit by supporting the Buffett Rule, instead of being willing to walk the walk while talking the talk. 

 

1.  BobG, you said that the President made over $1,000,000 in 2009 and 2010.   Doesn't that indicate that he must be aware that he and his wife can make over $1 million/year and would be affected by the Buffett Rule and related 30% tax rate if it is passed?   

 

2.  BobG, you didn't note that, in fact, the Obamas brought in well over $1,000,000 in 2011.  See below comments at Huffington Post.  His Nobel prize alone was associated with $1,400,000 million.   (The Obamas gave all of it to charity.) 

The President's tax returns for the past 3 years, including 2011, indicate that it must be assumed that he and his wife know that they are among the Americans who would be affected by the Buffett Rule.   They know that they will be affected like Republican Mitt Romney and Democrat, Anthony Pritzker, whose use of his enormous wealth you thought it was important to showcase in your opening entry in this SAC blog, 

 

3.  Regarding charitable contributions the Obamas gave another $172,130, in addition to the $1,400,000 Nobel prize money,  to charities.  The $172,000 was "about 22.5% of their adjusted gross income."    

 

4.   While some say the Obamas paid 20.l% in federal income tax, another view is that is that their effective tax rate was 32.6%, consistent with the Buffett Rule. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/13/obama-tax-return-2011_n_1423352.html  David Lambertson

"For God sakes' will you please start accurately reporting his tax rate is 32.6%. You calculate tax rates on taxable income (i.e., after deductions). His was $496K."

 

5.  Here's a description of the intent of the Buffett Rule.  

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/13/obama-tax-return-2011_n_1423352.html

 murphthesurf3 Proud to be an independent progressive 

18 hours ago ( 3:16 PM)

"The President believes we must reform our tax system which is why he has proposed policies like the Buffett Rule that would ask the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share while protecting families making under $250,000 from seeing their taxes go up. Under the President’s own tax proposals, including the expiration of the high-income tax cuts and limitations on the value of tax preferences for high-income households, he would pay more in taxes while ensuring we cut taxes for the middle class and those trying to get in it."

 

6.  Below is a series of comments at Huffington Post website from which some of the above was drawn. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/13/obama-tax-return-2011_n_1423352.html

22 hours ago (11:04 AM)

OBAMA'S INCOME: 20.1% IN FEDERAL TAXES; 22.5% TO CHARITY
Plus $1.4 Million Nobel Prize Money To Charity

$5.6 million in income and $1.8 million in taxes..
20.1 Percent in Federal Income Tax
The average top One Percent Income Earner pays 21.8 percent.

The Obamas' overall rate was still much higher than that of most middle-income Americans. Households making between $60,000 and $100,000 paid on average 8% of their income in federal incomes taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center.

The Obamas donated $172,130 to charities in 2011, or about 22.5% of their adjusted gross income. The largest beneficiary was the Fisher House Foundation, which received $117,130 — the after-tax proceeds of the president's children's book, "Of Thee I Sing: A Letter to My Daughters."

In addition, there was that $1.4 million in Nobel Prize money not included on the form because President Obama turned it entirely over to charity

WHY WASN'T ALL OF THIS IN THE HP ARTICLE?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/murphthesurf3/obama-tax-return-2011_n_1423352_148001159.htmlDavid Lambertson 18 hours ago ( 2:45 PM)For God sakes' will you please start accurately reporting his tax rate is 32.6%. You calculate tax rates on taxable income (i.e., after deductions). His was $496K. Please, it is not that hard to report this correctly. You are helping in perpetuating mis-information. 

HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR

murphthesurf3 

18 hours ago ( 3:16 PM)

Take up your complaint with the White House:

"The President’s effective federal income tax rate is 20.5%. The President believes we must reform our tax system which is why he has proposed policies like the Buffett Rule that would ask the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share while protecting families making under $250,000 from seeing their taxes go up. Under the President’s own tax proposals, including the expiration of the high-income tax cuts and limitations on the value of tax preferences for high-income households, he would pay more in taxes while ensuring we cut taxes for the middle class and those trying to get in it."he would pay more in taxes while ensuring we cut taxes for the middle class and those trying to get in it."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/04/13/president-obama-and-vice-president-biden-s-2011-tax-returns

 

4.333335
Average: 4.3 (3 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

Are you claiming that the Obamas are not 1% of the 1%?

2
Average: 2 (2 votes)
Your rating: None
LMT Observer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 2009-04-25 :31
Posts:

Bobguzzardi asked: "Are you claiming that the Obamas are not 1% of the 1%?"

This observer's comment that seems to have prompted BobG's nonsequitur question was focused, as explictly said in the comment, on BobG's assertion based on the Obamas' 2011 and prior tax returns: 

. . . with this income, [the President] does not even qualify for the so-called Buffett Rule that he has promoted relentlessly and the Senate will take up on Monday.

BobG's question suggests that he wants to ignore the content of this observer's comment on his assertion and now refocus on the title of this blog that he started:  "The Democratic OnePerCenter - How They Live."

BobG, since you want to talk about the 1%ers again can't it be reasonably argued that  the photo of Pritzker's house in your initial post supports the Buffet Rule and its rationale?     Out of curiousity do you have a photo of 1%er Warren Buffett's house that you could post?  

4.5
Average: 4.5 (4 votes)
Your rating: None
LexoTime5's picture
Offline
Last seen: 46 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31
Posts:

Are you claiming that the Obamas are not 1% of the 1%?

You're claiming the Obamas are in the top 0.01%? That's pretty rarified company. The smallest bracket at the top I can find is 0.1%, and that's incomes greater than $1,600,000. You're saying the Obamas in in the top tenth of the over $1.6 million range?


3
Average: 3 (1 vote)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

Does this prove that Barack Obama is ONLY in the 1% and not the 1% or 1%, If so, I am corrected.

3
Average: 3 (1 vote)
Your rating: None
LexoTime5's picture
Offline
Last seen: 46 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31
Posts:

Yes, Bob, it shows they are "only" in the 1%.

And according to you, people in the 1% are the enemy, and we should envy them? That seems to be what you're trying to convince us of.

4.333335
Average: 4.3 (3 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

exactly the opposite. I admire the accomplishments of the 1% as I do Mitt Romney's accomplishments. It is undeniable that the Alinski Obama tactics are to demonize the 1% which is a phrase from the Obama endorsed Occupy Wall Street. Success is demonized as "unfair".

3
Average: 3 (1 vote)
Your rating: None
LexoTime5's picture
Offline
Last seen: 46 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31
Posts:

Who is "demonizing the 1%" besides you!?

4
Average: 4 (2 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

Occupy Wall Street, ACORN, Barack Obama and the Democrats.... more later

2
Average: 2 (2 votes)
Your rating: None
LexoTime5's picture
Offline
Last seen: 46 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31
Posts:

Demonize them how? By saying they should pay at least as much as the rest of us in taxes?

There's a very basic failure to understand one another lurking here somewhere...

4
Average: 4 (3 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

The Huffington Post is Progressive Left Wing Redistributionist and even the Huffington Post can't change the fact that President Obama does not do what he wants the rest of us to do.

1
Average: 1 (3 votes)
Your rating: None
LMT Observer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 2009-04-25 :31
Posts:

Bobguzzardi criticizes the President and his wife for contributing "a total of $48,000, in tax free gifts to their [two] daughters."

Obama Family Tax Shelter President Obama and his wife, Michele, gave a total of $48,000 in tax-free gifts to their daughters, according to tax records made public on Friday

Assuming what BobG posted is accurate, do the Obamas deserve public reproach for trying to sequester some funds for their daughters? 

1.   Both of the Obamas are at risk for being killed or disabled by crazed zealots who are fueled by the type of intentionally and irresponsibly incendiary political rhetoric that abounds now and that has for some time (e.g., 'lock n load' Sarah Palin's now infamous cross-hairs map targeting Congressional Districts, a map  that preceded the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords). 

2.   According to the 2011 tax return, the Obamas gave over $1,500,000 of their 2011 income to charity, nrather than sequestering some of it in some way that it could contribute to their daughters' college education or safe keeping if something happens to their parents.

 

 

 

4
Average: 4 (2 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

Liberal ABC NEWS Apr 13, 2012 reports:  President Obama’s Secretary Paid Higher Tax Rate Than President Barack Obama Did
  The Buffet Rule - Pay Less than Your Secretary  

2
Average: 2 (3 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

  1% of 1% Not Stay At Home Mom Pamela "Baywatch" Anderson reportedly owes $524, 241 in back taxes

 

   as does 1% of 1% Barack Obama Hollywood supporter Lionel Richie

3
Average: 3 (1 vote)
Your rating: None
LMT Observer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 2009-04-25 :31
Posts:

Bobguzzardi,

What is the take away message that you hope SAC readers will get from your comment on Pamela Anderson and Lionel Richie? 

Why does that information merit your and SAC readers' attention?

1% of 1% Not Stay At Home Mom Pamela "Baywatch" Anderson reportedly owes $524, 241 in back taxes

as does 1% of 1% Barack Obama Hollywood supporter Lionel Richie

4.25
Average: 4.3 (4 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

When one starts demonizing innocent people who have, legally and productively, made a lot of money in the name of 'social justice' and 'paying fair share', one needs to remember that some of one's own allies, despite the fact that they are 1% pf 1%, are not paying what the law requires and far less than fair share. A Double Standard is being applied to one's supporters and to one's political opponents.

It would be best if Class Warfare and poisonous racial rhetoric were avoided but that does not appear as if thet is to be.

 

  “It’s the economy, stupid?”James Carville was right in 1992 and he is right in 2012.

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs and the cost of living The U.S. economy supports 740,000 fewer jobs today than when Obama became president Gas prices are up more than 200% since Obama took office. US Taxpayer government debt is up FIVE trillion dollars since the Obama Administration took charge.

Who can say we are better off after three and half years of the Obama Administration?

The Social Issues, Class Warfare, Race baiting rhetoric  are a distractions in this election. The Liberal Media raise these issues to distract from the core issue of the economy.

3
Average: 3 (1 vote)
Your rating: None
LexoTime5's picture
Offline
Last seen: 46 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31
Posts:

A Double Standard is being applied to one's supporters and to one's political opponents.

No it not. The people you're talking about should also pay a minimum millionaire tax, should it come to pass. I don't think anyone on earth ever suggested otherwise.

4.5
Average: 4.5 (4 votes)
Your rating: None
LMT Observer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 2009-04-25 :31
Posts:

 LexoTime5 commented to Bobguzzardi after reading Bobg's initial post in this thread: 

Envy is an ugly, ugly thing, Bob, get over it. Why do you try so,so hard to whip up resentment and envy among people?

 

One reason is evident:   BobG is zealously motivated to get his Republican candidates elected.   BobG has demonstrated in SAC posts repeatedly that to further his political agendas he is willing to use the public influence techniques of spreading intentionally incendiary rhetoric, and distributing and perpetuating misleading information.

BobG already was asked to cut it out, at least at SAC.  For example, see Carla's post in this blog thread, Mon, 2012-02-20 14:30 # 14

Bob - this is a community blog that is privately owned by the webmaster. Perhaps you could kind of consider that you are at this point going overboard with your anti-left rhetoric? Free speech and all considered, this is not just your website. You still have a dedicated blog, right? Maybe if you are going to be posting so much you could put up posts here that are summaries in a collective of what you are doing on your stand-alone blog? http://thelibertyblog.org/ ? I missed along the way that I am not the only person to ask you to consider this? http://www.saveardmorecoalition.org/node/5472/bob-guzzardi

I realize that asking you to do this will open up your version of the hounds of hell on me, but I would just appreciate it if you could be considerate of the diverse readership and the people that no longer feel they can come here and post about local issues.

Thanks

3
Average: 3 (1 vote)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

I think it Obama 2012 that is using Class Warfare as its campaign tactic to distract from disastrous economic performance, more people out of work than ever before, rising gas prices because of "no drilling" energy policy.

The Lower Merion community votes. Commenting on upcoming elections, where the Obama Adminsitation, and its allies, will be using the Marxist Alinsky Class Warfare exploitation of greivance, resentment and envy as a campaign tool is highly relevant. Combining this with the poisonous and incendiary racial rhetoric  inciting race hatred of Rev. Al Sharpton Rev. Jesse Jackson and Louis Farrakahn  to enrage the Black Voter against any white candidate is something we have to discuss as unpleasant as it is.

     

The Tea Party and 912 Patriots are, routinely, characterized as racist, homophobic, misogynist chauvinists ... who  are, also, stupid. and even accused of promoting political assasination, a bit over the top, even some liberals think.

Sorry. people who want to engage in Class Warfare shouldn't...

2
Average: 2 (2 votes)
Your rating: None
LMT Observer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 2009-04-25 :31
Posts:

Now BobG wants to move onto the intentionally hot button, incendiary topic, "class warfare."

 

Sun, 2012-04-15 13:1 bobguzzardi:

"I think it Obama 2012 that is using Class Warfare as its campaign tactic to distract from disastrous economic performance, more people out of work than ever before, rising gas prices because of "no drilling" energy policy."

(Attributing a "no drilling" energy policy" to the Obama administration is a misrepresentation, by the way.  Another discussion.)

 

Below is an alternative to Bobguzzardi's wish to introduce and apply the frighting, all patriots rise up and bear arms "Marxist Alinsky Class Warfare" spin to tax reform and other important campaign issues facing our country,  as BobG just did: 

Obama Adminsitation [sic], and its allies, will be using the Marxist Alinsky Class Warfare exploitation of greivance [sic], resentment and envy as a campaign tool . . ..

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-18-2011/world-of-class-warfare---warren-buffett-vs--wealthy-conservatives Thursday August 18, 2011

World of Class Warfare - Warren Buffett vs. Wealthy Conservatives

Warren Buffett's op-ed is a thoughtful treatise on the advantages the super-wealthy currently enjoy at the hands of the tax code, or to put it another way, "class warfare."

3
Average: 3 (1 vote)
Your rating: None
LexoTime5's picture
Offline
Last seen: 46 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31
Posts:

rising gas prices because of "no drilling" energy policy.

We've all tried to educate Bob on this point many times, but he refuses to learn it. Production does not appreciably effect gas prices. Demand does.

The only way we could lower gas prices through increasing production would be to not put it out for sale on the global market, and not subject domestic energy production to global demand. This is the way several Latin American countries keep their domestic gas prices low. Is Bob suggesting we do that?? That's highly unlikely that he would suggest this in any way other than naively or cynically.

4.5
Average: 4.5 (4 votes)
Your rating: None
LMT Observer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 2009-04-25 :31
Posts:

Bobguzzardi's link in his comment Sun, 2012-04-15 12:53 to what BobG calls, "Liberal ABC NEWS . . . " has this information: 

President Obama’s secretary, Anita Decker Breckenridge, makes $95,000 a year. White House spokeswoman Amy Brundage tells ABC News that Breckenridge “pays a slightly higher rate this year on her substantially lower income, which is exactly why we need to reform our tax code and ask the wealthiest to pay their fair share. ”

 

 

BobG what tax rate did the Secretary to the President pay?    

While some conclude that the Obamas paid a 20.l% i federal income tax rate in 2011, another view is that is that their effective tax rate was 32.6%, consistent with the Buffett Rule.   http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/13/obama-tax-return-2011_n_1423352.html  David Lambertson

"For God sakes' will you please start accurately reporting his tax rate is 32.6%. You calculate tax rates on taxable income (i.e., after deductions). His was $496K."

 

As a very financially savvy Republican, compared to all those Democrats, including the President, whom your SAC comments have informed us don't know how to handle money, what do you regard as standard practice for calculating tax rate? 

3
Average: 3 (1 vote)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

Is this how the Left wing media reports tax rate of the 1% ? I think the calculation was consistent with other calculations by Leftist media.

3
Average: 3 (1 vote)
Your rating: None
Dr. Bob's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 2009-08-23 :16
Posts:

@LMT

Quoting Carla as a resource for asking Guzzardi to "cut it out" fails on two levels.  First, he doesn't limit himself to attacking D's [when faced with R-corruption, such as Perzel] and, second, she is hardly an avatar of good-taste [recalling her divergent review of a certain fire-closed Italian eatery].

1.75
Average: 1.8 (4 votes)
Your rating: None

 


LMT Observer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 2009-04-25 :31
Posts:

Yikes!   The reinforcement troop, the other part of The Bob, has arrived on the scene.   Too much for this observer--best run along now.

1
Average: 1 (1 vote)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

“The choice in this election is between an economy that produces a growing middle class and that gives people a chance to get ahead and their kids a chance to get ahead and an economy that continues down the road we’re on.”  David Axelrod to Chris Wallace Sunday of Fox News Sunday, today.

This is real, not an Axelrod impersonator. I expect Mitt Romney to be saying exactly the same thing.


 Here's is the Video of David Axelrod     

mischeiveoulsy, Red State Erick Erickson characterizes this as an endorsement of Mitt Romney and James Carville's characterization is a classic.

and here is a more cerebral Charles Krauthammer Free-lunch egalitarianism  Washington Post April 12, 2012

and even Leftist Dana Milbank thinks President Obama's Buffet Rule is a gimmick Washington Post April 11 2012 Rebuffing Obama’s gimmicky ‘Buffett Rule’

2
Average: 2 (3 votes)
Your rating: None
LexoTime5's picture
Offline
Last seen: 46 weeks 2 days ago
Joined: 2009-04-01 :31
Posts:

If Mitt Romney is elected president, will he be the first president in history to have had Swiss, Cayman Islands, and other offshore holdings? If that happens then this country will truly be down the cwazy wabbit hole.  The president who offshores his money to avoid taxes in his own country!!  I can't even think of an appropriate metaphor right now.

4.4
Average: 4.4 (5 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

You have made my poiont.

This is the class warfare that I have been referring to. What is the point that he is rich. Good on him and his family.

Mitt Romney invested in businesses that created jobs and he profited. And Mitt Romney has created more jobs than  Barack Obama who has never had a productive private sector job.

Without profits, people don't get paid, goods don't get produced and taxes don't get paid.

What is the relevance to the core issue of economic growth if Mitt Romney does or does not invest outside the US.

Class warfare, envy, resentment, greivance are ugly. Remind me who said that.

Why do you resent Mitt Romney's success?

2
Average: 2 (2 votes)
Your rating: None
Hugh Gordon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 weeks 4 days ago
Joined: 2009-10-24 :58
Posts:

Dana Milbank is not a leftist.  He is a professional ass.

4
Average: 4 (2 votes)
Your rating: None
bobguzzardi's picture
Offline
Last seen: 43 weeks 3 days ago
Joined: 2006-01-13 :07
Posts:

Centrist TaxProfBlog brings my attention to this WSJ article about the Buffet Rule legislation that acutally increases the anti-growth, anti-productive, joc crushing   multi-year deficits and the debt on ALL Americans:

                                                                  

The case for the Buffett tax keeps eroding. When President Obama announced the idea, he said it would help "stabilize our debt and deficits over the next decade."

Then came the inconvenient revelation that the new 30% millionaire's tax would raise only $46.7 billion over 10 years. ...

                         ...

The Joint Tax Committee—the official scoring referee on tax bills—calculates that the combination of AMT repeal for the middle class and the Buffett tax would add $793.3 billion to the debt over the next decade. As Mr. Obama has said, "This isn't politics, this is math." (emphasis added) READ MORE TaxProfBlog April 16, 2012

 

Facing the debt and deficit, the clear conclusion for me is that the Federal Government ( as well as Pennsylvania) needs to cut expenditures. The political issue is Who Will Get Less Federal Money.

 

 

See also links at TaxProfBlog:

  Boston Herald editorial, Buffett Rule Demagoguery

  Charles Krauthammer, Buffett Rule Redistributes Chairs on Titanic

  McClatchy, Exaggerations Abound on Both Sides of ‘Buffett Rule’ Debate, Experts Say

and even the incompetents at the Inquirer has figured it out   Philadelphia Inquirer, Buffett Rule Is Politics Over Policy

2
Average: 2 (2 votes)
Your rating: None

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.