Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Paul Jacob :: Townhall.com Columnist
Tax the rich, hide the swindle
by Paul Jacob
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will Congress pass Obamacare by the end of the year?

Is it possible that I’m smarter than Warren Buffett?

Well, not likely. There’s so much evidence to the contrary, at least of the "if you’re so smart, why aren’t you rich?" kind.

But, on my side, I didn’t let myself be interviewed by Tom Brokaw and say that I should be taxed at a higher rate. Buffett compared the federal taxes he pays to the taxes his office workers pay. Relating these tax amounts to the respective incomes, he then figured rates:

Mine came to — 17.7 percent. The average for the office was 32.9 percent. There wasn’t anybody in the office, from the receptionist on, that paid as low a tax rate. And I have no tax planning, I don’t have an accountant, I don’t have tax shelters. I just follow what the U.S. Congress tells me to do.

Brokaw immediately eggs Buffett on, asking about why there’s no outrage about this. Buffett is philosophic:

. . . I think what people don’t realize is that almost one third of the entire budget comes from payroll taxes. And payroll taxes on income, just like income taxes are taxes on income.

What Warren Buffett has done, of course, is lump Social Security contributions (payroll taxes) with the federal income tax. Then, he complains (so to speak) that his Social Security taxes aren’t high enough. His claim makes no sense if Social Security taxes are excluded. Considering the basic federal income tax only, he pays at a higher rate than his assistants. Far more.

But he lumps the two together for a specific set of purposes. And we can expect to hear a lot more of this kind of talk as the days of Social Security insolvency come nearer. What is not being made clear by Mr. Buffett, nor the myriad other Democrats who make this pitch, is what a revolution they are proposing in the very concept of Social Security. And what they are sweeping under the rug.

You see, Social Security is indeed a tax — it is a forced expropriation of wealth from individuals to government. But it is a tax designed to support a safety net pension program. It was not designed to fund highways or rockets or indoor rain forests.

Further, from the very beginning, Social Security mimicked in a few crucial ways private pension accounts. The more you contributed, the more you got out of it. Even as the first few recipients of its largesse gained thousands and thousands off of meager contributions, that feature was well-ensconced into the fabric of the system.

So, a professional restaurateur making a hundred thou per year would have higher contributions to the system than a minimum wage fry cook; at retirement, that fry cook would take much less home than the richer restaurateur.

Is this unfair? Well, Karl Marx might say yes, but it’s just life. The more you have, the more you can save. The more you’ve saved and invested, the more you can reclaim later in life, at retirement. Social Security did not set out to equalize incomes in America, just narrow them at retirement, providing a floor of poverty below which it would be hard to sink.

The trouble, of course, is that the system was not run like a modified tontine, with invested funds then shared by the narrowed ranks of the longest lived. It has been a pay in, pay out system, without investment. Well, other than the “investments” made by giving the surplus funds to Congress to spend. (The money thus turned into IOUs, which only meant that future taxpayers would have to pay future Social Security retirees by increased federal taxes.)

What most of us non-rich folk may forget (as Warren rightly remarks) is that, after $102,000 of income, the government stops taking out FICA withholding, which is the lion’s share of the payroll tax. That’s because, as the government rightly figures, after one has paid for one’s contributions to a pension system, one reserves one’s income for other things.

Mr. Buffet’s incredulity notwithstanding, it should not be shocking to discover that the richer person spends a lower percentage of his or her income on necessities like food, transportation, health insurance — and retirement — than does the poorer person. That’s yet another reason why we’d all prefer to be rich. Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Paul Jacob is President of Citizens in Charge. His daily Common Sense commentary appears on the Web, via e-mail, and on radio stations across America.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Tell you what
Since you rich people have such a horror of Socialism, why don't you stop applying for Social Security when you retire and only people on the poverty level can get it. Or at least only receive so much on a sliding scale? Or is what you are really suggesting that we become as callous and as corrupt as the drug cartels and their politicians in mexico who scr*w their people over everyday? No pain no gain, ain't that what you monetary vampires say? You don't need it as you said. No pay no receive. It can BE DONE! Don't make me riot for it....

If Buffet wants to pay more...
he can write a check to the government for any amount he likes. The government is always happy to accept more than you owe.

But he will never do that.

What people like him always mean when they say their taxes are to low is YOUR taxes are too low. And they will be willing to pay more if you are forced to pay more.

Go ahead, Warren, write a check for the additional amount you think you should pay and mail it in!
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.