Highbrow Magazine - warren buffet https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/warren-buffet en Tax Justice: Democrats’ Plans to Make the Wealthy Pay More https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/12584-tax-justice-democrats-plans-make-wealthy-pay-more <div class="field field-name-field-cat field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/news-features" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">News &amp; Features</a></div></div></div><span class="submitted-by">Submitted by tara on Mon, 09/20/2021 - 15:49</span><div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/1taxes_donkey_hote-flickr.jpg?itok=ZuMZIXNS"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/1taxes_donkey_hote-flickr.jpg?itok=ZuMZIXNS" width="480" height="360" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">Demanding tax increases on the rich is back in fashion – both in the corridors of the House of Representatives and on the red carpet of the Met Gala.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">The House Ways and Means Committee outlined plans on Sept. 13, 2021, to move the top marginal income rate up a couple of notches to 39.6 percent and to introduce a 3 percent surtax on incomes above $5 million. That proposal would fall short of calls to really “tax the rich,” as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s dress demanded at a glitzy New York bash just hours later.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">Tax policy is deemed progressive if the chunk of income taken increases with the income of the individual – so wealthy Americans would pay a larger proportion of their income than poorer ones. With a regressive tax policy, lower earners pay a larger percentage of their earnings in tax than wealthier ones. The committee’s plan would roughly put tax progressivity back to where it was just before President Trump signed off on Republican tax cuts in 2017.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">That would still be far below the level of progressivity the United States embraced in the middle of the 20th century – when wealthier individuals paid a much higher share of their income in taxes than the poor.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><img alt="" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/2tax_philip_taylor-flickr.jpg" style="height:450px; width:600px" typeof="foaf:Image" /></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">In 1950, when looking at all federal, state and local taxes, the top 0.01 percent of earners paid almost 70 percent of their income in taxes. In the postwar decades, corporate profits – the main source of income for the rich – were subject to an effective corporate tax rate of 50 perent. Meanwhile, the rich were subject to high tax rates on wages, dividends, interest and income from partnerships.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">The progressivity of the U.S. tax system has dramatically declined over the past seven decades. The upshot is that for most income levels, the U.S. tax system now resembles a flat tax that becomes regressive at the very top end, meaning the super-rich pay proportionately less. Today, virtually all income groups pay roughly 28 percent of their income in taxes – except for the 400 richest Americans, who each own more than $2 billion in wealth today and pay around 25 percent in taxes.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">Working-class and middle-class Americans pay a substantial amount of taxes because of payroll taxes, which are high and barely affect the rich, and state and local sales taxes, which are regressive – they take a bigger chunk out of a smaller wage than out of a large income. Even households that pay no federal income tax because of low earnings hand over a percentage similar to that of wealthier households, because of these other taxes.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">The super-rich’s low tax rates of today are in part aided by the collapse of federal corporate taxation. In the 1950s, 5 percent to 7 percent of national income came from corporate taxes. By 2018, that figure had fallen to just 1.5%.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">The effective tax rate collapses for billionaires further because they can avoid reporting individual income by instructing their companies not to pay dividends and holding on to their shares without realizing their gains.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif">The proposal unveiled by House Democrats would increase taxes on millionaires significantly. But it would largely leave billionaires off the hook, despite the explosion of their wealth during the pandemic. More ambitious proposals in the Senate would tax their unrealized capital gains. In our view, this would be a bold addition that would help the United States reconnect with its tradition of tax justice.</span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong><em>This article was originally published in <a href="https://theconversation.com/tax-the-rich-democrats-plans-to-make-the-wealthy-pay-a-little-more-will-barely-dent-americas-long-slide-from-progressive-taxation-168057" style="color:#0563c1; text-decoration:underline">The Conversation</a>. It’s republished here with permission under a Creative Commons license. </em></strong></span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong>Author Bios:</strong></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong><em>Gabriel Zucman is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of California, Berkeley.</em></strong></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong><em>Emmanuel Saez is a Professor of Economics at the University of California, Berkeley.</em></strong></span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong>Highbrow Magazine</strong></span></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><strong><em>Image Sources:</em></strong></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><em>--Donkey Hotey (<a href="https://search.creativecommons.org/photos/7180006d-b416-47b6-9987-74903a8dbd5b" style="color:#0563c1; text-decoration:underline">Flickr</a>, Creative Commons)</em></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><em>--Philip Taylor (<a href="https://search.creativecommons.org/photos/63567eef-80a4-4c92-aad4-a7939b73fcbb" style="color:#0563c1; text-decoration:underline">Flickr</a>, Creative Commons)</em></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:18px"><span style="font-family:Times New Roman,Times,serif"><em>--Steve Jurvetson <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/44124348109@N01/5129303018" style="color:#0563c1; text-decoration:underline">(Flickr</a>, Creative Commons)</em></span></span></p> </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/taxes" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">taxes</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/taxing-rich" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">taxing the rich</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/personal-income" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">personal income</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/democrats" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Democrats</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/tax-cuts" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">tax cuts</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/tax-law" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">tax law</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/wealthy-americans" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">wealthy Americans</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/tax-cuts-and-jobs-act" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">tax cuts and jobs act</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/jeff-bezos" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">jeff bezos</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/warren-buffet" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">warren buffet</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/bill-gates" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">bill gates</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/mark-zuckerberg" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">mark zuckerberg</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/billionaires" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">billionaires</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/paying-taxes" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">paying taxes</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Gabriel Zucman and Emmanuel Saez</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pop field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Popular:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">not popular</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-bot field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Bottom Slider:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Out Slider</div></div></div> Mon, 20 Sep 2021 19:49:16 +0000 tara 10635 at https://www.highbrowmagazine.com https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/12584-tax-justice-democrats-plans-make-wealthy-pay-more#comments Why the Wealthiest Demographic Groups in the U.S. Should Vote for Obama https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/1703-why-wealthiest-demographic-groups-us-should-vote-obama <div class="field field-name-field-cat field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="/news-features" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">News &amp; Features</a></div></div></div><span class="submitted-by">Submitted by tara on Sun, 10/21/2012 - 13:29</span><div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/mediumobamaclinton_0.jpg?itok=q0o5xX1O"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/mediumobamaclinton_0.jpg?itok=q0o5xX1O" width="480" height="268" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>  </p> <p> From <a href="http://newamericamedia.org/2012/10/part-2-seeing-through-the-myths.php">New America Media</a> and <a href="http://www.khabar.com/">Khabar</a>:</p> <p>  </p> <p> <strong>Commentary</strong></p> <p>  </p> <p> Remember the Atkins diet? At its peak, there were legions of dieters worshiping the Atkins god, singing praises of the promised land of slim waistlines and good health. Alas, the reality about the Atkins diet was far removed from its aura. Researchers later revealed its many hazards, and many even pronounced it downright dangerous.</p> <p>  </p> <p> Like the Atkins diet, we have our share of myths in politics. One that Indian-Americans may find particularly seductive is the perception of the Republican Party as pro-business, and hence the party of wealth creation.</p> <p>  </p> <p> Historically, though, this myth has no basis in fact.</p> <p>  </p> <p> It was precisely at the end of eight years of the most recent Republican presidency that the country was brought down to its knees financially. How can a party take a healthy budget surplus, and in just eight years, convert it into the most disastrous financial meltdown seen in over 70 years—if indeed it were the party of wealth creation? (A blind worship of tax cuts even through a costly preemptive war was one factor.)</p> <p>  </p> <p> Wealth and enterprise are synonymous with Indian-Americans. Ditto for Jewish Americans, another very prosperous and enterprising community. If the Republican Party were truly the better choice on these counts, why have these two—the wealthiest demographic groups in America—consistently aligned with the Democratic Party? Why do Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, and a majority of billionaires prefer Democrats?</p> <p>  </p> <p> Could it be because these wealthy individuals see that what is good for the 99 percent is also good for the 1 percent, and not the other way around?</p> <p>  </p> <p> Take, for example, Republicans’ overzealous emphasis on tax cuts as the foundation of their economic policies. Tax incentives, the argument goes, help businesses, and so they hire. But would companies hire if no one is buying? It stands to reason that companies don’t make hiring decisions based so much on the tax structure, as they do on whether business is booming or not. To the extent there is a robust demand for their product, companies will hire—tax incentives or not. Conversely, no amount of tax incentives will make companies hire—if there is no demand for what they are selling.</p> <p>  </p> <p> At best, the tax structure can serve as a catalyst or a drag, but in either case, it is far overshadowed by consumer demand—the lifeblood of capitalism. And consumer demand is a function of the 99 percent, not the 1 percent. When the masses are well off, economies expand; when they are hurting, economies contract.</p> <p>  </p> <p> Not surprisingly a study by McGraw-Hill, a leading global financial information company, shows that markets have performed better in Democratic administrations. Since 1901, S&amp;P 500 has averaged an annual growth of 12.1 percent in Democratic administrations versus just 5.1 percent during Republican ones. The same is true for corporate profits. Since 1932, the earnings per share of the S&amp;P 500 climbed a median of 10.5 percent per year (Democrats) versus 8.9 percent (Republicans).</p> <p>  </p> <p> Like the Atkins diet, the myth that Republicans are the champions of business and the economy, stands in stark contrast with ground realities.</p> <p>  </p> <p> So does the myth that Democrats perpetuate the “freeloaders”—the 47 percent who don’t pay any personal income tax. Kyle Wingfield, the conservative columnist at the <em>Atlanta Journal-Constitution</em>, admits, “Conservative policy created much of the 47 percent.” He adds, “The child tax credit is a social-conservative initiative. The refundable Earned Income Tax Credit is largely based on the ‘negative income tax’ proposed almost 50 years ago by conservative economist Milton Friedman.”</p> <p>  </p> <p> Undoubtedly there is waste and abuse in the welfare ranks that is of real concern, but a good portion of the 47 percent nonpayers are the aged. Many more are the poor whose tax burden evens out to zero after claiming deductions. They are not deadbeats; they contribute through their work and their payroll taxes.</p> <p>  </p> <p> <img alt="" src="/sites/default/files/mediumobamacampaigntrail%20%28StefRich%29_0.jpg" style="width: 600px; height: 400px; " /></p> <p>  </p> <p> It is the freeloaders at the top end of the economy who may be a larger drag. According to the Cato Institute, the libertarian think tank, close to $100 billion goes towards corporate welfare in terms of business subsidies. While Democrats and Republicans are both responsible for this affront to free enterprise, when coupled with the free-for-all deregulation championed by Republicans, it often helps line the pockets of the top brass of the companies. The street credo that Republicans are chums with such robber-barons of industry is not off the mark.</p> <p>  </p> <p> In reality, the more sinister income-redistribution may be the money taken from the middle-class for the “welfare” of executives drawing multimillion dollar salaries—even as the companies they lead file for bankruptcy. This not only siphons away millions of dollars from circulation, but also hurts the buying power of the thousands who get laid off—a double whammy on the economy.</p> <p>  </p> <p> Many Indian-Americans came to this country with the proverbial $20 in their pockets, and went on to carve successful careers and lives. In a disproportionately high percentage, many of us rose to dizzying heights in industry, enterprise, academy, arts, and innovation. This, to me, is not a profile of a community that would fall for myths manufactured by propaganda. This, I suspect, more than anything, is responsible for our overwhelming tilt towards the Democratic Party.</p> <p>  </p> <p> Indian-Americans vested with the Republican Party invariably cite issues such as outsourcing as a reason to align with the right. Sure, India is perhaps the largest beneficiary of outsourcing. Indian-Americans, however, need to ask themselves: is electing an American president about being pro-India? This matters only if all other things are equal. Only if the Republicans and Democrats were virtually the same, and one were pro-India, then it makes all the difference. As to outsourcing, a country is well within its rights and responsibilities to promote business and job growth on its soil instead of proactively pushing it to foreign countries.</p> <p>  </p> <p> <img alt="" src="/sites/default/files/mediumromneycampaigntrail%20%28rogerBaroneTRNS%29_0.jpg" style="width: 574px; height: 600px; " /></p> <p>  </p> <p> <strong>Romney: a fiscal extremist</strong></p> <p>  </p> <p> Romney made it through the wrangling Republican primaries because he seemed the most moderate in a party that has hunkered down in its hardcore shell—and not on classic conservative values of individual liberty, fiscal responsibility, and free enterprise—but on religious and social fundamentalism.</p> <p>  </p> <p> That assessment of Romney as a moderate was befitting a few years back. Today, as candidate Romney, he has morphed into a peon for the far right. More importantly, on the issue that is center stage for this election—the economy—Romney is far from moderate. During the run-up to the primary elections, none other than Newt Gingrich pointed out that Romney is the kingpin amongst all the GOP contenders of the kind of fiscal policies that brought America to its knees at the end of George W. Bush’s presidency.</p> <p>  </p> <p> The criticism of Romney’s lack of ideas, solutions, and vision is mounting, and it is not just from liberals. In an article titled, “So, Mitt, what do you really believe?” The Economist, the reputable champion of free enterprise, writes about him, “A businessman without a credible plan to fix a problem stops being a credible businessman. So does a businessman who tells you one thing at breakfast and the opposite at supper. Indeed, all this underlies the main doubt: nobody knows who this strange man really is.”</p> <p>  </p> <p> <strong>Obama’s fault: That he is no god</strong></p> <p>  </p> <p> What is the overarching and relentlessly repeated criticism of Obama? It boils down to this: that he failed to restore our country to good times like those seen in the Clinton years from the wreckage caused by the Bush years.</p> <p>  </p> <p> This would be perfectly legitimate criticism if Obama had been a passive president. Quite, the contrary, he acted extensively and boldly—like no other president in recent history. Are we there yet? Of course not. I empathize with the worry and fear for our future that persists. But laying the blame on Obama for failing to be God and miraculously turning around, in less than four years, a historic mess unseen in 70 years would be a mistake.</p> <p>  </p> <p> Even as the myth machinery of the extreme right tries to portray Obama as a socialist czar bent on unraveling America, some of those who value true conservatism are fleeing the party. A grassroots organization called “Republicans for Obama” says, “Our current Republican leadership is unable to stand up to the most extreme elements in our party, no matter the circumstance. Meanwhile, President Obama has challenged his own party on numerous issues, including taxes, healthcare, and foreign policy.”</p> <p>  </p> <p> There are no shortcuts to weight loss. And reviving a broken economy of unprecedented proportions is far more improbable by someone who has little more than “tax cuts” in his arsenal.</p> <p>  </p> <p> <a href="http://newamericamedia.org/2012/10/part-2-seeing-through-the-myths.php">New America Media</a></p> <p>  </p> <p> <em><strong>Photos: New America Media; Roger Barone, TRNS (Creative Commons); Stef Rich (Flickr, Creative Commons).</strong></em></p> </div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-tags field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Tags:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/obama" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Obama</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/president-obama" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">President Obama</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/mitt-romney" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Mitt Romney</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/wealthiest-americans" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">wealthiest americans</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/indian-americans" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Indian Americans</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/jewish-americans" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">jewish americans</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/warren-buffet" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">warren buffet</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/bill-gates" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">bill gates</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/elections" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">elections</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/presidential-elections" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">presidential elections</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/taxes" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">taxes</a></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/economy" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">economy</a></div><div class="field-item even" rel="dc:subject"><a href="/bill-clinton" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Bill Clinton</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Parthiv N. Parekh</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-pop field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Popular:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">not popular</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-photographer field-type-text field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Photographer:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">New America Media</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-bot field-type-list-boolean field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Bottom Slider:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Out Slider</div></div></div> Sun, 21 Oct 2012 17:29:56 +0000 tara 1762 at https://www.highbrowmagazine.com https://www.highbrowmagazine.com/1703-why-wealthiest-demographic-groups-us-should-vote-obama#comments