Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

The “Buffett Rule” is just more Obama buck passing

The “Buffett Rule” is just more Obama buck passing

When an administration has completely botched handling of economic issues during its first term, how does it go about seeking reelection where the economy is the most important issue? Somehow, the logical thing to do is talk about raising taxes. Ordinarily, this would be political suicide, but the Obama administration has found a loop hole.

The old expression goes, “When your neighbor loses his job, its a Recession. When you lose your job, its a Depression.” With just a little tweaking, this is a fitting blue print for Obama’s campaign tactics: “When you’re getting taxed, its evil. But when someone else is getting taxed, its a necessary evil.”

This level of thinking is exactly what Obama has pinned his hopes on when focusing pseudo campaign speeches around advocating for the “Buffett Rule.” By any measurement, with the exception of currying political favor, the Buffett Rule is a completely inconsequential and irrelevant tax. It is estimated to net just $5 billion per year over the next 10 years. By contrast, Obama’s proposed 2013 budget contained a $3.8 trillion spending plan. $5 billion is not a drop in the bucket, its a drop in the ocean.

So why is Obama bringing back the “Buffett Rule” now, when it has been proven to be little more than useless political rhetoric? Simply put, its because it sounds good to the voters Obama is trying to win over.

President Obama knows that he has not improved the economy, that people are still struggling to find work, and that because he has done such a poor job, people are fleeing the workforce in record numbers. So what’s the solution? Distract the voters and shift the blame to the millionaires, the irresistible scapegoat for all the world’s ills to any self-respecting Liberal Democrat.

This is not the first time the President has eluded blame for his myriad policy failures. Cases in point:

The debt ceiling debacle wasn’t his fault, it was the Republicans in the Super Committee he appointed.
If the health care law doesn’t pass, its not his fault, the Supreme Court is abusing its Constitutional authority.
The first stimulus would have worked, if only Republicans had allowed the followup stimulus.
And, of course, we can’t properly frame any conversation of Obama Administration buck passing without their long time favorite: Blame Bush.

President Obama is serial buck passer, but its finally an election year, Mr. President, and the buck stops here.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Of the active Republicans it seems to me that Paul Ryan is the most likely to have the fortitude and ability to articulate these dynamics.

[…] The “Buffett Rule” is just more Obama buck passing (legalinsurrection.com) Share this:ShareDiggTwitterLinkedInRedditStumbleUponFacebookPrintEmailTumblrPinterestLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. Posted in government, politics, scams, silly laws, taxes and tagged Barack Obama Warren Buffett, Berkshire Hathaway, Buffet Rule, Buffett owes one billion, Buffett rule, evil rich, Obama Buffett Rule, Politics, tax on millionaires, taxes, Warren buffet, Warrenn Buffett […]

What’s high-Larry-ous is that Buffett will not be affected by an increase in income tax rates.

Smart republicans will reframe the debate since Obama persists

First a 1984 quote since it came up in another thread:

“The essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty.”

Obama needs to be confronted with calling for punitive tax legislation directed at a minority.
He’s admitted the net result of these increased taxes are minimul so we have to assume they arent a rational answer to some legitimate issue. The Buffet rule is an emotional response….gloved as “fairness”.
I might ask Obama if this is the sort of “fairness” he teaches his children…that when dining out..the tab is automatically pushed in the direction of the individual who other diners feel is best equipped to pay the bill.
Strikes me as a rather skewed definition of fairness.

As an argument Id avoid the standard “leave the job creators” alone enterprise. Its too easily confused.
Its a basic issue. Keep it basic.

Obama makes a Euclidean point: all position and no magnitude.

5 billions? On 3.8 trillion, that’s a freaking rounding error.

“….its finally an election year, Mr. President, and the buck stops here.”

Oh no you d’int?

(Byproduct of a dirty mind!)

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | April 11, 2012 at 3:37 pm

It occurred to me yesterday that maybe a Republican who is already planning to retire in November should introduce the “Buffett Rule” and make the Democrats vote for, and Obama sign into law, a tax increase in an election year.

Then I thought about it some more and maybe the Republicans should introduce the “Buffett Rule” AND provide the votes to pass it in the House. If the “Buffett Rule” polls so well that Obama and the Democrats are willing to campaign on the issue in an election year, then why don’t the Republicans take it away from them? Besides, no matter who wins in November, there’s almost certainly going to be a big tax reform/spending bill coming down the pike in 2013 (if not the lame duck session). So even if the “Buffett Rule” passes this year, it’s probably going to be replaced with something else next year anyway. Obama is using it to play political games, so why don’t the Republican’s turn it to their advantage?

But even if it does go into effect, sucking $5 billion of new taxes out of the economy will not harm the economy. And they can insert language that says that every penny of the $5 billion collected will go toward deficit reduction. But the biggest advantage is that it will take a campaign issue away from Obama that he’s currently demagoguing on a daily basis.

Here’s a good read, by no less than the NYT, called A Tax Code of Politics, Not Reason

    tsr in reply to tsr. | April 11, 2012 at 6:28 pm

    Initially I skimmed this article. But upon a thorough read, it wasn’t what I originally thought it was. Scratch reading it.

the ‘Buffet Rule’ is simply Class Warfare, nothing more, nothing less.

Response to ‘Buffet Rule’ should be go ahead we’ll support it 4 a balanced budget amendment. because ‘Buffet Rule’ will pay for what maybe 1 month of Debt interest

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend