Yeh for comparison purposes, the 'upper' rate for tax in the UK kicks in at £34k (about $50k). Above this you're charged 40%. Then there is a newish tax rate above £150k (about $225k) that you'r charged at 50% above (dropping to 45% next year - good old Tories!).

In Canada, the rates increase at $42k, then $84k then $130k.

So basically above $50k in the UK, you are considered a 'high earner' and above $225k you are considered a 'super high earner'; in Canada above $84k you are considered a 'high earner' and above $130k a 'super high earner'.

The income tax rates you pay in America are just unbelievably low in comparison, especially for those earning >$50k. Basically the rate Obama wants to put in at $250k is what we pay in the UK at $50k and Canada pays at $84 (slightly depends on Province in Canada though).

And what makes it worse is that it is a FIGHT for Obama to get it as 'high' as $250k!!!!

Let me be the second to welcome you to CW.com!

And, that is a great idea about the adding some numbers.

But, even without the number, this was an excellent column by Chris and I was happy to see you write that he is on to something - I thought exactly the same thing after I read it.

Maybe what we all need to do is cut and paste the link and, along with a brief explanation, send it to wherever it may do the most good to get this piece out there and into the national conversation.

Any suggestions?

First off, welcome to the site! Sorry for the delay in posting your first comment, from now on you'll be able to post instantly here, as long as you don't post more than one link per comment (these are filtered automatically to avoid comment spam).

You raise a good point. I don't have the resources available to calculate the numbers on my own, but most of these proposals are already out there, and with a little online research I could probably at least come up with rough numbers which showed the magnitude of each suggested change.

Let me look into it. I can't promise a column with all the numbers before the fiscal cliff, but you do indeed have a great suggestion, worth following up on.

-CW

OK, sorry for hijacking your comment. I'm still having computer problems occasionally...

Which reminds me, our pledge drive shot up immediately to over half our goal, but has since stagnated, no new donations in a week. Hint, hint. Sigh.

Your point about $100-250K is a good one. The link I pasted in your comment traces the origins of this pledge. The article's a bit long, was reviewing the final debate in the primary season of 2008 between Hillary and Barack, and I am more interested in ripping a new one in the idiocy of the moderators, but still...

Anyway, at the time I predicted "this pledge will come back to bite them" meaning Obama and Clinton, whichever won.

Since this time, though, it's been pointed out to me that the $100-250K income range is exactly the fattest target of politicians seeking donations. Over that range, they're in a small and very exclusive category, but from 100-250K are folks who have the resources (and the motivation) to drop the maximum campaign donation of a few thousand bucks, each and every election cycle.

This may be over-cynical, but this may be one reason why Obama joined Hillary's pledge to draw the "we won't tax anyone below this" line at $200K (individual) and $250K (married). And why, ever since, it has stood for the limit on "the middle class".

Obama even once advocated changing the cap on SS income. His plan? Keep the 6.2 percent up to the current cap, then have a 0.0% rate for 100K-250K, then after $250K return it to 6.2%. You can see how slanted this is towards a very specific group of people, no?

Anyway, follow that link, scroll down to the second (I think) interview quote section, and my relevant comments are below it. Sorry for the piecemeal nature of my response, too.

-CW

I completely and unequivocally agree with CW and the title of this commentary..

Tax ALL the rich...

NOT just the rich that have the '-R' behind their name...

Prosecute ALL the rich...

NOT just the rich that have the '-R' behind their name...

Democrats start doing that and they might be worthy of my vote...

Michale
0345

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/jon-corzine-will-not-only-not-face-prosectuion-may-be-launching-hedge-fund-imminently

He is free to start a NEW Hedge Fund!!

So, tell me again how Democrats will clean up their own house and we can trust them with our money....

Michale
0344

Why hasn't Jon Corzine been hauled away in chains??

Why isn't the IRS crawling up Corzine's ass???

Oh that's right...

He has that '-D' after his name and he is an Obama supporter...

So, of course, he goes free..

What was I thinking......

Michale
0343

Why aren't any of the MSM reporting of the Union violence in Michigan???

Michale
0341

"Look, I know that five million a year sounds like a lot of money. But I gotta pay ten percent to my agent, five percent to my lawyer, plus alimony, child support...."
"You got any idea what insurance on a Ferrari costs, motherfu...."
-The Replacements

:D

Michale
0340

- Tax avoidance/evasion is huge all over the world (see 47%-guy), including America obviously. In fact, it is so huge that all this $ in lost taxes is worth almost as much as ALL ENTITLEMENT SPENDING PUT TOGETHER. Think about that in the context of the current deficit discussions and Republican's laughable attempts to construe entitlement spending as your nation's problem.

- Obama wants to raise taxes only on those earning $250k. So basically if you're earning $100-250k you are deemed to be 'struggling' and in need of a tax break. LOL. Again, not something that I see being discussed anywhere. As someone who knows quite a few tax systems, you'll find it hard pressed to find a country where their income tax rates are so low on people earning $100-250k.

[Ed. note: I'm having problems replying on this thread, but wanted to paste this link in:

http://www.chrisweigant.com/2008/04/17/debate-observations-what-exactly-is-middle-class/

Comment to follow. -CW]

Little Jimmy's Letters To Santa

Dear Santa,
How are you? How is Mrs. Claus? I hope everyone, from the reindeer to the elves, is fine. I have been a very good boy this year. I would like an X-Box 360 with Call of Duty IV and an iPhone 5 for Christmas. I hope you remember that come Christmas Day.
Merry Christmas,
Jimmy Jarvinen

Jimmy,
That’s what I thought you little bastard.
Santa

:D

Michale
0340

Abso-tively and posit-loutly it will..

When I see Democrats acting like civilized human beings in condemning the actions, such as illustrated in comment #23, when I see Democrats applying their rules FAIRLY to everyone, regardless of their political affiliation, then I will gladly support their efforts that are in the best interests of the country..

But I refuse to support "leaders" who's FIRST allegiance is to Party and all other considerations are secondary...

This "Party Uber Alles" mentality has GOT to go..

Period.

I'm just glad we all seem to agree that there shouldn't be special tax breaks (or special anything for that matter) for the wealthy. Buffett is the last person who needs any help :)

Exactly.. And same with Adelson..

So, when Obama has Buffett and Soros in front of a judge in court rather than at the White House for tea, I'll believe he and the Democrats are serious about their desire to help the Middle Class...

Michale
0339

Let's be honest. Seeing Democrats applying "the standard fairly" wouldn't change your mind about helping.

But that's ok. We'll fight for you without you. You'll be missed and I mean that sincerely because I'd much rather fight with you.

I'm just glad we all seem to agree that there shouldn't be special tax breaks (or special anything for that matter) for the wealthy. Buffett is the last person who needs any help :)

-David

As California goes, so goes the rest of the country..

Under Democrat "leadership", that is...

The evidence is clear. The Democrat way does NOT work...

Michale
0338

Hmmmmmmmm

That seems almost as funny as a Republican filibustering himself..

"Laugh it up, Fuzzball(s)"
-Han Solo, THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK

:D

Michale
0337

"Strange Times"
-Dean Winchester, SUPERNATURAL, Appointment In Samarra

:D

Michale
0335

Yea??

And prosecuting Black Panthers for voter intimidation SHOULD be prosecuting..

But we know how THAT turned out, right?? :D

I'll only hold you to sending a letter to your Republican representative stating your support for returning tax rates on the wealthy to more equitable levels.

Not until I see Democrats applying the standard fairly.

Until then I won't lift a pinky to help them screw over the middle class...

AGAIN...

Michale
0334

The one thing we do see eye-to-eye on when it comes to the general subject of torture is that punctuation, syntax, and grammatical rules-for-the-sake-of-rules are fair game to be tortured here.

Heh.

-CW

Treating all income as the same would seem to be a no brainer, especially if the first X dollars were exempt to protect the moms and pops.

Taxing programmed trading is another easy one. It is destabilizing and the whole idea of giving a select few even a 5 millisecond advantage de-ligitimizes the market. The churning of the market at increasingly unprecedented level benefits only the few and contributes nothing but instability.

Please Chris, do a follow up with credible numbers on your proposals. You are on to something and now is the time to get the ideas out there.

Hmmm ... It looks more like suing Buffett is the same as suing Buffett.

And you're bailing on your word that you'd follow Democrats if they'd lead.

Just sayin' :) Man up, man! I'll only hold you to sending a letter to your Republican representative stating your support for returning tax rates on the wealthy to more equitable levels.

-David

That should read 'NOW more famous host'..

Sorry for the tortured punctuation... :D

Michale
0333

That's pretty impressive, at least to me...

It is, indeed...

Congrats, CW... It is well-earned..

Maybe your manner of holding BOTH SIDES of the aisle accountable will catch on...

Gods know it's needed!

Michale
032

Now I thought, according to you, the federal government under Obama wouldn't "go after one of it's own".

SAYING they are going after Buffett and actually GOING AFTER Buffett are two distinctly different things...

When Obama's DOJ hauls away Buffett in chains... Come talk to me.. :D

Obama and the Democrats give GREAT lip service....

But when it's time for the rubber to meet the road???

Joe and Jane Sixpack are still getting screwed while the Soroses and Buffetts and Adelsons of the country get to sit back in their penthouses and drink pina coladas..

You want to apply the standard fairly, then apply the standard fairly... Don't demonize the Adelsons and the Kochs and give the Buffetts and the Soroses a pass...

That's all I ask...

Michale.....
0331

It was relevance to the blatant double standards that chaps my ass... :D

as for democrats on the tax issue, certainly they don't have any semblance of moral high ground;

Too troo.... The problem is you are (with the exception of our illustrious (and not MORE famous) host) the only one who acknowledges this...

i don't think it's necessarily racist to enjoy being in a film that reverses those antiquated cultural norms. on the other hand, it is almost certainly racist to explicitly advocate their return. different context, not hypocrisy.

No, but it IS racist to articulate such enjoyment in such blatantly racist terms...

At least, IMNSHO

they've been just as guilty as republicans of shafting the middle class and labor, all while preaching what big supporters they were of the middle class and labor.

Yea, but to hear the rank and file tell it, Democrats are pure as the driven snow and it's all
the fault of the evil and soulless Republicans.

A little intellectual honesty goes a LONG way...

whether or not they happen to have the stones to practice what they preach, the democratic position on progressive taxation is the right one for our country.

Perhaps it is... But until, as you say, they have the stones to actually LEAD on the issue.... Well, we'll likely never know...

Michale
0330

Me too! When I saw it, I about flipped. Well deserved!

-David

Aha! That explains a lot. Thanks for the screen shot, too!

I got a call from my ISP at 8:00 at night, saying "your site is consuming 99 percent of all of our traffic right now, we're going to temporarily disable it."

I talked to the guy and we figured out it was coming from HuffPost, and wasn't a hack attack on the site or anything, but until I saw your comment I didn't really know what had caused it.

Thanks for pointing it out! They said they're going to move my site to a beefier server, in case it happens again.

That's pretty impressive, at least to me...

:-)

Thanks for clearing up the mystery!

-CW

My mistake.

From TheBlaze

Bloomberg News reports that Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, owns an airplane company that has been sued by the Federal Government for no less than $366 million in back taxes.

Now I thought, according to you, the federal government under Obama wouldn't "go after one of it's own".

So you'll be willing to follow now right?

-David

i don't get the relevance to the topic of taxing the rich.

historically in movies the black person was among the first to die, and that stood in stark parallel to the real life marginalization and murder of african-americans, especially in the south. although the sentiment is not exactly original and at this point is somewhat outdated, i don't think it's necessarily racist to enjoy being in a film that reverses those antiquated cultural norms. on the other hand, it is almost certainly racist to explicitly advocate their return. different context, not hypocrisy.

as for democrats on the tax issue, certainly they don't have any semblance of moral high ground; they've been just as guilty as republicans of shafting the middle class and labor, all while preaching what big supporters they were of the middle class and labor. but you don't have to be honest or courageous to be right. whether or not they happen to have the stones to practice what they preach, the democratic position on progressive taxation is the right one for our country.

Somehow, I don't consider, "Yer not beating up enough on the Republicans!!!" or "Why do you always give in to the Republicans!!??" taking Democrats to task..

Why don't you slam them for their violence, their hypocrisy, there out and out meanness, corruption, bigotry, racism and all those other fun things ya'all just LOVE to slam the Right for???

NO ONE here even APPROACHES the condemnation towards Democrats that I do towards Republicans.

This is undeniable fact that NO ONE can argue...

For instance, Chris here on tax breaks. As I've done on healthcare. As I've done on Obama's negotiation tactics. As I've done on his campaign. As we all do pushing Democrats to act more like ... well, liberals ... Etc, etc.

Exactly.. You slam Democrats for not sticking it to the Right they way the Right sticks it to the Left..

Have you ever condemned Democrats for being BAD people, BAD Americans, BAD human beings!???

Nope...

Lets see you condemn Democrats for that YouTube video above...

Don't tell me.. Let me guess. Those weren't REALLY Democrats... :^/

Michale
0329

Democrats at their finest.....

Makes me embarrassed to be an American...

Michale
0328

Yes. We know. You want all rich people to have special privileges and exemptions. You are the Robin Hood of the rich.

Just once I would love to see rank and file Weigantians slam the Democrats as much as I slam Republicans.

Really, Michale. Just once? Can you maybe stop making things up? People here take Democrats to task all the time.

For instance, Chris here on tax breaks. As I've done on healthcare. As I've done on Obama's negotiation tactics. As I've done on his campaign. As we all do pushing Democrats to act more like ... well, liberals ... Etc, etc.

We just don't do it with made up Limbaugh birther, Benghazi, Buffett, Beck, DailyBlaze nonsense.

So you can check that one off your bucket list. Also, I have to say you need a new bucket list if this is on it :)

-David

Do you HONESTLY consider TheBlaze to be MSM???

Using those standards, we would have to start adding HuffPo, DailyKos, FireDogLake, etc etc etc to the standards of MSM..

Then, the Leftist Bias of the MSM becomes even MORE pronounced.... :D

Michale
0327

It does indeed...

Or does this only apply to certain people?

In a way... I always assume that the grotesquely rich have HAD to have screwed SOMEONE over on their way to the top...

The difference between me and everyone else here is I apply that FAIRLY to all rich people..

Ya'all only apply to Republican rich people..

Just like I slam ALL politicians at one time or another..

Ya'all only slam Republicans and, by and large, give Democrats a pass...

Our illustrious host, of course, is the exception that proves the rule..

Now, pardon me while I wipe this brown stuff off my nose.. :D

Just once I would love to see rank and file Weigantians slam the Democrats as much as I slam Republicans...

Consider that on my bucket-list :D

Michale
0326

Making stuff up.

But it DOESN'T chap yer ass when Leftist news makes stuff up..

How come??

:D

Taxes aren't voluntary. You don't "lead". But I'll tell you what, Michale. The minute conservative politicians start saying that they will be the first ones on the front lines in a war, I might consider your view anew.

It's not the Conservative Politicians agenda...

Democrats are the "taxes will solve all the problems"animals in this..

So, let them lead...

Why do you have a problem with Democrats practicing what they preach???

Michale
0325

Doesn't this contradict your previously stated conviction of innocent until proven guilty?

Or does this only apply to certain people?

BTW- Consider the source. If any of this has any merit beyond pure made up BS, why isn't any of this in actual news?

-David

p.s. Oh yeah ... right. Square one. The "liberal media".

Isn't it great that you can make up anything in conservative news and then when people ask why no real papers are reporting on it, you can just claim the media is "liberal"?

Ya know what really chaps my ass about conservative news?

Making stuff up.

Have them blaze the trail so that others will follow.

Taxes aren't voluntary. You don't "lead". But I'll tell you what, Michale. The minute conservative politicians start saying that they will be the first ones on the front lines in a war, I might consider your view anew.

-David

Besides, Buffett IS guilty....

Like most rich people, Buffett games the system right up to the border of illegality and sometimes crossing the border...

"Peter?? Oh, he was borderline for a while. Then he crossed the border."
-Egon, GHOSTBUSTERS II

:D

Yer hearts in the right place, David. Of that I have absolutely NO doubt...

The problem is that the leaders you put your faith in are as corrupt and soul-less as those you oppose.. Difficult to win...

"If you storm in there and a hostage get's killed, yer damned. If you storm in there, free the hostages and kill all the terrorists... Yer damned... Difficult to win."
"Nature of the beast"
-THE FINAL OPTION

Michale
0324

"If they feel they should pay more in taxes, they can always right a check."

And THAT is what leaders do.. They LEAD...

If they feel that it's the right thing to do, then why aren't they doing it??

Because they are not leaders..

Like I said.. Clean the Dem House first.. Have them blaze the trail so that others will follow..

Until then, they have NO MORAL foundation to preach to the rest of us...

Michale
0323

The blatant double standard...

Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor
http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2515629#.UMdotKweUs-

If a Republican had stood up and declared there will be violence if they don't get their way, the Left (including everyone here) would have gone utterly batshit.

You want another example??

Imagine if Bruce Willis had said on SNL, "I am in a great movie!!! I get to kill all the black people. How awesome is that!??!"

Once again, the Left (and everyone here) would have gone ballistic...

Yet, that's EXACTLY what Jamie Foxx said about white people and no one said dick...

It's pure, unadulterated and totally blatant hypocrisy...

And from the Left???

{{{{chiiirrrrppppp}}}} {chiirrrrppp}

Michale
0322

BTW, this comment is targeted at the NY Post. Not you, Michale. Sorry if taken otherwise. It just makes me angry when people who should know better publish stuff.

Could you be a little more specific? All I could find were some rants from right wing blogs without any insight into this accusation.

I did, however, trace the history of this accusation. It seems to date from a New York Post article.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/warren_buffett_hypocrite_E3BsmJmeQVE38q2Woq9yjJ#ixzz1WRoIlYSf

Note the unbiased approach: "Warren Buffett, hypocrite"

Here's how the story is "cooked".

The Post cites tax issues from an annual report. It never specifies what these issues are.

Then it claims that Buffett should be paying 35% instead of the 15% on capital gains.

Ummm ... the law is 15% on capital gains. Which is why Buffett's tax rate is so low. Which is what he is arguing: it's too low.

But they try to make him look crooked like you're trying to make him look crooked. Because you have no argument so you attack the man.

I believe the truth is he would have owed $1 billion if he had to pay at a 35% rate instead of the current US rate of 15% on capital gains.

He hasn't broken any law or dodged any taxes. He simply would have owed $1 billion if the rate were higher. So would a lot of people if capital gains were taxed higher.

Compare this to Sheldon Adelson who is being investigated for actually avoiding current tax law.

Bullshit ... debunked

-David

Why is Buffett allowed to get away with oweing over a billion in back taxes and Adelson have the IRS crawling up his arse???

The reforms proposed don't target any specific billionaires. Not Adelson. Or Buffett.

Yea, in theory..

But, as we have seen, in actual practice Democrats favor those who vote Democrat...

This has happened much MUCH too often for it to be mere happenstance...

So, while I completely agree with you in principle, we have seen how the Democrats put it in play...

So, unless you can guarantee me that Democrats will apply these new taxes fairly, I will oppose their agenda as much as humanly possible..

Michale
0321

Glad to hear it!

But the difference is, I am for it as it applies to Buffet AND Adelson.

The reforms proposed don't target any specific billionaires. Not Adelson. Or Buffett.

They eliminate previous breaks given to all the wealthy.

Is there a reform you're seeing that somehow favors one group of wealthy over another?

-David

Let's start with a simple question: Are you for or against this?

I am COMPLETELY and 1000% for it...

But the difference is, I am for it as it applies to Buffet AND Adelson....

Democrats are only for it as it applies to Adelson...

Which is why I can't support the Democrats in their endeavors.. Because they refuse to clean their own house first, they show me that they are not sincere and are only looking to further their own agenda at the expense of the middle class...

But in answer to your question, I am unequivocally FOR it...

I simply prefer leaders with more integrity to lead on the issue..

Yea, I know.. A pipe dream...

Michale....
0320

Actually, it's simply repealing all the huge tax breaks the rich have won for themselves.

Capital gains ...
The social security tax cap ...
The Bush tax cuts

CW makes some great points in this article about how much the tax system has been skewed over the years to benefit the wealthy.

Why not reform it so that it's fairer and not skewed towards the wealthy?

Let's start with a simple question: Are you for or against this?

-David

Which is NOT to say that I now think that taxes is the way to go..

I still maintain that taxes won't do diddley squat unless it is coupled with some real spending discipline.

And here again is where the Dems are found wanting..

Why won't Democrats put some real and defined spending cuts on the table??

The Left is demanding specific taxes from the Right...

Yet, the Left is not willing to get specific about what spending cuts will be made..

Ya'all go on and on about "fair" yet ya'alls idea of "fair" is that the GOP make all the compromises and the Democrats make none..

How is that "fair"??

Answer: It isn't...

Until such time as specific spending cuts are put on the table, the GOP is fully within their purview to tell the Dems to go pound salt...

The Dems don't mind. It's been their intention to push the country over the cliff all along..

Dems are hoping that the GOP gets the blame..

I think the Dems are in for a very rude shock...

2014 is shaping up to be a good year for the GOP..

But what do I know.. I thought 2012 was going to be a good year.. :D

Michale
0319

And I don't..

*MY* beef has always been that Democrats are saying that "the rich" include a portion of the middle class..

David and I even came to some sort of agreement about this a while ago..

Rich = Any person/business/family that makes over $1,000,000 a year...

I simply CANNOT support ANY tax action against those who make LESS than 1 mil a year..

If Democrats were to go solely after the rich, rather than the upper levels of the middle class, they would find a LOT more sympathy for their cause.

Of course, they would also find a lot more sympathy for their cause if they actually went after ALL of the rich, instead of just those who vote against Democrats..

But that's another rant.. :D

Rich = Entities Making More Than 1 Mil

If the Dems did that, I could almost be on board with them...

But the Dems won't do that..

As CW said, they would just rather go hand in hand with the GOP and say what fine livery the emperor is wearing.

Michale
0318

I tried to post last night to see if you'd heard the good news (about the explosion of interest in this article) and the site was down.

Here's part of what happened. When I pulled up Google News last night, I thought I recognized the title of an article on the front page and then realized where I recognized it from.

Here's the picture from the Google News front page last night ...

http://www.thereckoner.com/wp-content/uploads/cw_tax_the_rich.tiff

Well done ... excellent article!!!!

-David

That being letting the Rich get away with NOT paying any taxes at all, to the tune of (in Buffett's case) over a billion dollars...

Which is why I simply CANNOT support the efforts of the Democrats..

Oh, they talk the talk just fine.. But when it comes to actually sticking it to the rich???

Well, it's obvious that the Dems are only interested in sticking it to the rich that vote GOP...

It all goes back to what I said in a previous commentary and what I have said over and over and over ad nasuem...

CLEAN YOUR OWN HOUSE FIRST!!

Ya'all claim that the Dem way is better, that the Dem way works??

Prove it!!

Get your Dem leaders to walk the walk, rather than just talk the talk..

Then, and ONLY then, will you have the moral highground from which to ethically preach to others..

Michale
0317

My ISP almost went down from the amount of traffic this article generated when it appeared over at Huffington Post. This caused momentary interruption of service here at CW.com, but everything should be up and working now. Interruptions may be possible for the next 18 hours or so, I will keep everyone posted. We'll keep an eye on it, just wanted to offer an explanation for anyone who had site problems in the past half-hour or so.

-CW

SS was never supposed to be a general source of revenue. It was intended solely to ensure people save something for retirement. Since SS benefits are capped its entirely appropriate for the taxes to be capped as well. Your argument is only true if SS is simply a general revenue tax, a claim conservatives have been touting by way of avoiding responsibility for repaying all those SS dollars they've looted over the years to pay for tax cuts. I'm all for raising taxes on the rich to a more reasonable level, but not by stealing from them the same way they've stolen from us. SS is about funding individual retirement not raising general revenue. It should be regressive. The more money one has the less need there is for SS.