Warren Buffett - Talking Plain Sense to the Plain Dumb

This is a interview with Warren Buffett.

He has made numerous pleas, public appearances, self-less efforts, a rich man's challenge that has gone unanswered, and campaigned tirelessly to no avail.

Shame on us.

Please allow me to explain.


The Bush tax cuts have been quite a controversy in congress. I have posted on the topic a few times. Just the same the conflict is this.

The Bush tax cuts are set to expire. Obama as well as most of the democratic party have fought tooth and nail to keep the tax cuts for the middle class or 97% of the American people. However the Republican party and the republican voters have been opposed to getting rid of the Bush tax cuts for the very rich.

Despite the very rich, the top 3%, already paying proportionately lower levels of taxes then the poor and middle class, they think the rich deserve to pay less then everyone in our country's time of need.

Here are the highlights of the vid you need to understand.

Buffett Internal Office Poll

Buffett asked the 18 employees in his executive office (assistant, receptionist, janitor, everyone he sees on a daily basis) to partake in a survey of personal tax rates. 15 participated. Including Buffet there was 16.

Out of the 15 participants the mean (average) tax rate was 32.9% of income. About 1/3 of their total income goes to taxes.

Warren Buffett paid a tax rate of 17.2%. Warren admitted that he does not pay a tax guy or accountant.

His employees pay over a 90% higher tax rate. 90 plus percent. There is no one in his office that pays a lower tax rate then the second richest man in the world. It is this privilege that is being protected by the republicans and the republican voters.

Warren Buffett Campaigned for The Middle Class

Warren took an initiative, a self-less initiative to campaign against the current corrupt system. He has made numerous public appearances via interviews, talks, and the like to try and educate the American people of this unjust tax system.

Yet FOX News has got their viewers trained. He was unable to convince the Republican middle class to support a middle class tax break and a wealthy class increase that would barely put them even with the middle class. I just don't get you people. I use to think it was sad.

Now...

I just don't like you guys.

Warren's Challenge to The Rich.

Warren offered a 1,000,000.00 dollar prize to any billionaire that could prove that they paid a larger tax rate then their office assistant.

No one could. NO ONE!

What is it... what is it that you people don't get? Make no mistake... It is you.

97% of us were going to get a tax break and finally make the rich pay at least the same amount as us. They should be paying tons more. But instead you choose to carry this burden on your own back. I wish I could do more to separate myself from you people. You are destroying your own country because you have to watch FOX.

This is what really gets me. After reading this post you will still feel you have made the right decision. I am so upset and disappointed with each and every one of you, me, and the United States of America. We don't deserve to make any decisions. We don't deserve to be a superpower. We are idiots. You people who voted for your republican congress and have given Obama nothing but crap for trying to stick up for you. You are an idiot.

Watch it for yourself. You have nothing to say. It is over. Don't you dare comment here if you are a republican FOX News watcher.

If your in the top 3% then by all means speak your mind. You, after all, are a freaking genious. I have to hand it to the rich, the lobbyist, and the republican politicians. You guys are obviously right. We don't deserve it.

here is the video...






I am so ashamed... I don't think I could look Obama or Warren in the eye at this point.

I am so sorry, forgive us.

- Finance Guy

Obama Suggests Two Year Pay Freeze for Federal Employees

Obama has proposed an idea to aid in America's effort to cut back on spending and to try and tackle this enormous budget deficit.


Obama has suggested a two year pay freeze for all civilian federal employees or civil servants.

I want to be clear to communicate that the pay freeze will not effect the military. So if you are in the armed forces and are expecting a raise, or something of the like, than you can rest assured this fiscal action will not effect you.

Also, because many of my readers are not financial gurus. I want to make clear that a pay freeze does not mean these federal employees will not be paid for the next two years. This simply means that they will not get a raise.

The proposed plan will cut the deficit by almost 30 billion dollars over the next five years.

The average salary for a civil servant that deposits a federal pay check on a regular basis makes around $125,000  dollars. This is about twice the salary of the average American.

I am personally OK with this measure as I don't really think the government needs to be increasing salaries. This move seems obvious. Kinda like eliminating the Bush Tax Cuts.

Republicans seem receptive to this idea from Obama.

I recently posted on the Bush tax cuts and the conflict thriving amidst it's looming expiration.  I have something to add...

I was going to put it right here but I think I will go ahead and just create a new post for it.

Find the new post on some of my additional thoughts on the Bush Tax Cuts and Republican Shame.

Thoughts on The Bush Tax Cuts

The Bush Tax Cuts

If you happen to live amidst any sort of US media than you have no doubt been exposed to the Bush tax cut conflict.

The Bush tax cuts is a heated political issue. Democrats want to get rid of them for those who make more then 250 thousand dollars and keep them for those who make less then 250 thousand dollars.


If I had to pick one of the two choices (keep them or eliminate for 250k and above) I would eliminate them for the 250k income and above and keep them for those that bring home less then 250 thousand.

But if I was able to manipulate the choices a bit I would elect for the following compromise...

• Keep the tax cuts for 350 thousand and below.
• Keep half the tax cuts for 350k - 700k.
• Eliminate the tax cuts for 700k and up.

To me this is the way to do it.

It protects the life style of the folks who are wealthy but part of the "income elite".

I can see how the tax cuts may be important to those whom are not millionaires. This is why I propose a sliding scale. This seems like a good compromise.

Also I am forced to give much consideration to what buffet has said on the matter which is that he thinks that rich need to step up and pay more taxes.

How can you argue with that?

I want to hear from you so tell me what you think and how you have come to that conclusion by leaving a comment.

- Finance Guy


Related Articles

Sex Sells - Republicans Sticking with What Works

Warren Buffet - Passing the Torch

Hire Finance Help

Tax Flaw with American Tax Law

Sex Sells - Republicans Reverting to What Works - Watch Out Palin - Nikki Haley is Turning Heads

 Republicans Sporting Old Fashioned Sex Appeal

Republicans and the rest of the political world are still not quite sure what they uncovered when they brought Sarah Palin to the presidential race. I say the republican party is really on to something here.


Sarah Palin is an icon to many, and a bloggers wet dream.

How can you resist a gun stroking brunette in a red, white, and blue bikini.

She has stars and stripes in all the right places.

The idea of Sarah Palin having anything to do with the type of decision making, authority, or fiscal responsibility that comes with the oval office is scary.

But just the same, I think the republicans are on to something with this new trend of campaigning with a few good looking policy makers.

There are now two of these brunettes running loose amidst the political right.

Introducing Nikki Haley

Nikki Haley of North Carolina has won the support and backing of Sarah Palin and all her facebook.com friends.

But I don't really care about the endorsement, I care about the ratings that this new one could represent for politics as a whole. Perhaps this political publicity boost is what America needs.

Perhaps this is what the people need to start looking, to start caring, and to finally give a damn.

True, there may be some danger in just looking for a pretty face. Maybe sticking her in a skimpy outfit and placing her on a vanity fair cover for all the boys and girls to see is arguably inappropriate.

But hey sex sells.

I guess what we all have to ask ourselves is what the hell this new gal is all about?

Does she have a real agenda?

Can this one actually be a politician?

Will she shorten her life from stressing over what is wrong with this country?

Will she step in political harms way to address issues that are going to make a difference like President Obama has as a democrat?

I hope so.

This country needs to put political hype to use towards getting the average 26 year old blogger, construction worker, college freshmen, 16 year old cheerleader, and those poor home schooled kids that are just plain weird to pay attention to politics. What are we going to do as a country when all the voters die? They are a dieing breed.

We all need to pay attention and care about the issues that are country has to deal with. If not our country may diminish into the bunch of commission breathing, interest serving, numskulls that we truly are.






Related Articles

Financial Reform Passes With 3 Republican Votes

Diaz - Sexy Block Buster Performance - Knight and Day Review

Facebook - Bending Over the Porn Industry

The Fox Hole - Strippers Protest Church Member Harassment

Reform or Refrain - What Will Become of the Push to Reform the Financial Markets

It is no secret that the financial markets have not performed at there best. The free market by default will always be on the move, sometimes up, and sometimes down.

The last few years has been a bit skewed if we go by the history of the financial markets. We have not seen performance this low since the Great Depression.

Should the government reform the financial markets and current regulatory practices?


The federal government has already stepped in and bailed out or contributed to the financial stability of most of the large financial institutions and banks who are in large part the reason for the economic down turn of the economy. Just as the the government has reasoned that they needed to step in and aid the financial institutions so to do they believe that they need to step in and take a bigger presence as a government regulatory force in the broader financial markets and financial services industry. However as one might imagine there has been some negative feedback from the financial institutions and from many politicians.

Shouldn't the government step in and play a larger role given the fact that they already have stepped in the form of financial aid to these very same institutions? Many say yes. However just the many say no. The argument and rebuttal to this proposal is that regulators and the government will have a negative impact on the markets as they will increase artificial constraints and will increase the degree of uncertainty for investors.

This seems a fair argument as regulatory bodies will make mistakes as they are only human in the end. plus there is also room for the unseen and unintended consequences that seem to always pop up when Uncle Sam gets in the way and these blunders are not easily changed if they don't work. Plus it is arguable to say that the regulatory bodies have done a mediocre job thus far in enforcing the current line up of rules and regulations that are already in place for financial markets and the business world.

On the other hand there does seem to be a obvious problem with the markets at this given point and time. Also to be fair to the regulatory bodies such as the FED and the FDIC there are some loop holes that need to be fixed so that these guys can have the control they need over non bank deposit financial institutions whom leverage up to obscene levels and add systemic risk to the downside for everybody. Such institutions are not subject to the same liquidity or capitol levels that the typical savings and loan bank is held to. Thus these guys potentially can take things to far and as of now it seems as if they have.

Given these above notions I would like to hear what people think. Should there be added regulation to the world of finance?

If yes what do you think should be done?