What is Warren Buffet afraid of?

[furface]

I keep getting amazed in this discussion of "millionaire" tax rates that virtually nobody is bringing up the obvious issue of wealth versus income. Someone who makes a million dollars in one year is not necessarily a millionaire, especially if you're taking away 30% of his income like Obama wants to do.

The comparison between people in lower tax brackets is legitimate. However, there's another more important comparison that I'm sure wealthy people like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, etc don't want anybody to talk about. If I'm a plumber who has a net worth of $200,000 equity in my house, and I sell my plumbing business for $1 million dollars in one year, does that make me rich? By today's standards I don't think so. Another example, if I make $5,000 per year for 20 years and one year make $1 million, am I rich? I don't think so.

A more just method of deciding who is subject to the income tax and at what rate would be to look at personal wealth. So even if Warren Buffet makes only $10,000 in one year, that has a high tax rate. If you have no assets and make $500,000 in one year, you shouldn't pay any income tax.

This is what wealthy people like Warren Buffet who advocate higher tax rates for higher incomes are afraid of in my view, that we will start looking at personal wealth, instead of yearly income, to decide who pays taxes or not.

The issue is very deep and goes to the heart of how elite financial & government interests control resources, capital, & people in our society. By letting individual wealth accumulate for less wealthy people without the burden of taxation, government & the super rich are giving up control. By unburdening the majority of people from the reporting requirements of the income tax, you're also giving up control. Governments and elite don't like that.

There's also a certain legitimacy to taxing wealth as opposed to income. Governments really protect wealth, i.e. capital surpluses, not "freedom" as State propagandists claim. I'm not saying that governments shouldn't protect wealth, only that it's legitimate to expect something in return for that protection. It's legitimate in a way that it's not legitimate for people who aren't independently wealthy. Poor sods toiling from day to day would not see their lives change much at all if a foreign entity were to invade or if there was a major disruption in the global economic network that US hegemony claims to protect. The Warren Buffets of the world would.

[furface]

BTW, sorry for the misspelling in the title. I can't seem to figure out how to edit titles or to even delete and repost properly.

[Pisces]

This is so true. I tell my mom this when she praises Buffett for saying that his taxes need to be raised. Also, the superwealthy are able to use their wealth to project their power through their tax-free foundations.

[furface]

Also, the superwealthy are able to use their wealth to project their power through their tax-free foundations.

That's an excellent point. Think about how different the world would be if you had lots of financially secure people giving to the causes they think are important instead of a few super rich people deciding what charity is, that along with a government bank robbing money from individuals and deciding what money and what morality is.