You would think an individual of Mr. Buffett’s stature would support someone more like Ron Paul, who stands for limited government, sound fiscal policy, and a solid currency. (Congrats to Jim Cramer by the way for his AWESOME 12/14/07 interview with Ron Paul on Mad Money!) – BUT WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD BUFFETT SUPPORT HILLARY CLINTON??!!
Music: “KYA” by Paulus
In a recent interview, Mr. Buffet and Ms. Hillary said they believe that people who are successful and have and make lots of money need to give more money to the government (as if we’re not already giving enough)! Not only is this a ludicrous proposal, but it would hurt the economy tremendously. Just look at how many jobs Mr. Buffett himself has created over the years with the terrific businesses he’s built. Can he really believe – can anyone anywhere truly believe – that the government could spend the money better – and generate more new jobs – than those who earned it in the first place?
Which brings us to the estate / death tax, another area where Mr. Buffet should mind his own business. If he’s so keen on giving more to the government, then why did he defer most of his assets to the Gates Foundation? And taking this a step further, if Mr. Buffet doesn’t believe in “dynastic” wealth, why is he still passing along a cool BILLION dollars to his childrens’ charitable foundations? With access to that kind of money, his kids won’t exactly be roughing it.
As such, his position on dynastic wealth applies to very few, so perhaps he should clarify what it means to be dynastic these days? Having $10 MILLION, $100 MILLION, $1 BILLION? In 2011, the death tax will be back to 55% for anything over $1 MILLION – barely enough to buy a nice Manhattan 1-bedroom apartment these days. Who’s right is it anyway to decide whether any inheritance is good or bad for someone’s own children. Isn’t that a decision that parents — not the government — should have the freedom and responsibility to make?
But supporting Hillary? Here’s an interesting thought, Mr. Buffett. Would you trust her to manage and run your company and all you’ve built? I don’t think so. And if not, then would you really trust her to manage and run the whole country?
[note] Maybe she’ll pay for some of it by putting an end to the Iraq War. Is she for or against it this week?!
Tags: 6 million dollar man, berkshire hathaway, bill gates, charitable foundations, death taxes, democrat, estate taxes, federal reserve, gates foundation, hillary clinton, inflation, jim cramer, libertarian, mad money, melinda gates, nyse:brk.a, nyse:brk.b, republican, ron paul, six million dollar man, warren buffett
1 Comment »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
XphatmageXX (23 hours ago)
woot nice
ClubBurgis (23 hours ago)
why copy xxphatmagexx u nerd.
trooperblooper (22 hours ago)
say what?
klard (23 hours ago)
Warren Buffet does not care about the rest of us. Under Hillary he believes he will accumulate power and wealth.
liz1060 (23 hours ago)
As the 3rd richest person in the world, he already has power and wealth. I suspect some misguided altruism — like electing the first woman president. Not that Hilary wouldn’t give him a tidy package, as well, but Buffet considers himself a man of the people and is well known for philanthropy, having given away many millions of dollars to a variety of charitable funds.
klard (22 hours ago)
liz1060: Just like the Rockefellers use their foundations and charities to extend their power by influencing and controlling those who receive their funding.
illhonky (23 hours ago)
You kept this one short and to the point, good job. 5 stars.
brianconcannon (23 hours ago)
is Mr Buffet just a generous zionist
if he had any compassion he would be endorsing Ron Paul.
zionists love war and so does Hillary
filstr2 (22 hours ago)
Yes I agree this was one of your better moments
oceanbound222 (22 hours ago)
Zionist support only those who will continue to wage war in the Middle East. Keep the Arab countries destabalized and this keeps Izrael strong.
Cx31199 (21 hours ago)
if hillary is elected president america will become a shared society.
SeizureChords (21 hours ago)
I used to have to take the bartender & Her Bo out twice to take just Her out once I worked up to taking MuffMuff & Her dude out once to take Her out twice.How many more Vids ’til Hi-temp Honeypie? Who can think bout $ at a time like this?
trooperblooper (20 hours ago)
say what?
Texasred63 (21 hours ago)
So i take it your a republician? Hilary all the way in 2008!! WB knows exactly what he is doing!!
vlogolution (20 hours ago)
Political parties don’t mean much to me – it’s what the candidates truly stand for that counts. I’m for whoever I believe wants what’s best for all Americans. I just hope other Americans care enough to research and understand what I’m talking about.
vlogolution (20 hours ago)
Hillary is both for and against just about every issue depending on the day and who she’s trying to impress. She’d show up dressed as a black person talking about retribution for slavery if she thought it could help her get more votes. Oh wait, didn’t she do something sort of like that once too?!
theloathlydaddy (21 hours ago)
Genius, love ya dude! LOL Seriously, this may be your finest moment, congratulations!
DStyle86 (19 hours ago)
Great one! 5stars especially for mentioning Ron Paul
vlogolution (19 hours ago)
Just got in a Dec 16th donation before midnight. Looks like Ron Paul may just have broken John Kerry’s 2004 one-day fund-raising record of $5.7M today, with more pouring in every minute! He’s currently at $18.04M just for the 4th quarter! – geez!
balgill1000 (19 hours ago)
Well when Bill Clinton ran the country he left a balanced budget, so why wouldn’t Hillary? And I don’t know why people attack universal healthcare with the argument “how are we going to pay for it?” What about the Iraq war? It has cost half a trillion dollars, way more than healthcare will cost.
b101aa2 (19 hours ago)
Lookup Baby Boomer Trust fund and Bill Clinton. 1 trillion cash no longer exists. That’s how you balance a budget and increase spending a few hundred billion. It’s also why social security is broke.
vlogolution (19 hours ago)
the clinton facts:
prorev. com/legacy.htm
hillaryproject. com
againsthillary. com
balgill1000 (19 hours ago)
Well at least he never took us to an illegal war that has killed over 3800 american, 80000 iraqis and again cost half a trillion dollars…score 1 for clinton…I did look up the “baby boomer trust fund” thing on google and found nothing
vlogolution (17 hours ago)
nah, clinton just gave the chinese access to technology to improve the accuracy of their long range missiles in return for campaign contributions
billyX84 (16 hours ago)
Well that was really stupid. We’re giving china way too much power, that will haunt us in the future. But that is continuing under the Bush admin (giving china more power). Again no one is perfect, we just need to choose the lesser if the many many evils. That is why if Hillary were nominated, I would choose her over all the republicans (I don’t ron paul will be nominated, if he is, then I would take a closer look at him).
b101aa2 (16 hours ago)
The trust fund was setup in the 80′s with the understanding that around now SSI was going to get hit hard. Bill took about a trillion of it out to to give the appearance of a balanced budget and to fund new programs. In reality, without the theft of the money, the deficit would have doubled in the late 90′s. But now, it’s broke anyways, so we’re all screwed pretty bad.
balgill1000 (15 hours ago)
I searched the internet but didn’t find anything about that. Do you have any links to support your claim? I know social security is good till 2017, after that its broke. But that’s a problem for everyone that hasn’t been solved by the repubs or dems.
b101aa2 (15 hours ago)
Easiest way to find it is from 60 Minutes from some years ago (maybe yr 2000). That is the only time it became public. Not once since then has a single journalist covered the topic, because it scares the hell out of Washinhton. The fact is simple, within the next 5 years or so, SSI output will double. We don’t have that even now. 2041? No, try 2010. The rest is borrowed cash.
b101aa2 (15 hours ago)
Ah, here is one entry. Google: (bill clinton took from social security trust fund) Second entry for prnewswire And yes, Bush is guilty as sin in it too. Clinton though worked it for about 1 trillion.
balgill1000 (14 hours ago)
I found the article, it says that Reagan starting stealing from it, Senior Bush continued it, as did Clinton, then it says that Bush “escalated it” which means he stole MORE from it than anyone else. What’s unconscionable here is that Bush stole it to PAY for the TAX CUTS he gave to the WEALTHY!!! My God impeach his dumb ass!
b101aa2 (14 hours ago)
It was setup in the 80′s, last year of reagan term they started stealing, bush sr. continued, clinton did it too, and bush is as well. be factual and name names. clinton though hit it for 1 trillion. bush jr. has now surpassed that 1 trillion mark. Woohoo for national bankruptcy
because that is what’s keeping us afloat currently. And note: Use of social security revenue for non security use is a federal crime. When they created it, they created that law.
balgill1000 (14 hours ago)
If its a crime then how come nothing is happening about it (or happened as of it)? Also read my comment about your “1 trillion” figure being incorrect since the total stolen, according to the article, was 1.5 trillion.
balgill1000 (14 hours ago)
Also since Bush stole more than Clinton, and the total taken was 1.5 trillion, then your “1 trillion” dollar is wrong. You say it “scares” Washington, but I think if Clinton did steal 1 trillion (which I have shown he hasn’t, and that Bush had stolen more) the repubs would’ve been all over it, but they’re not, b/c they’re doing it to but more so.
balgill1000 (18 hours ago)
1st website: shows more convictions for reagans admin than clintons (138 for Reagan)…I’m not saying that Clinton is “perfect” but she is better than all of the republicans by far (other than ron paul, but he didn’t vote for schip, so he loses my vote)…Her positions don’t change like u said..her positions are very similar to edwards and obama (almost identical), and I would vote for ANY democratic nominee, whoever it is
b101aa2 (16 hours ago)
as far as convictions, she has none. She was here in Iowa a few months ago giving a speech to women about how she wants to help middle class america and limit imports from china. Then, 3 days later giving a speech to execs in silicon valley telling them how she wants to maintain and expand free trade. Kind of a contradiction there. And no, i did not hear that on Lou Dobbs. I just pay attention a bit more.
balgill1000 (15 hours ago)
I don’t think its a contradiction at all. There is a difference between saying limiting imports and expanding free trade. By limiting imports from China, that’s a good thing for obvious reasons. By expanding free trade, its a symbiotic relationship between countries, so our goods don’t have to face any tariffs, and so won’t theirs. I think you need to pay a little bit more attention.
b101aa2 (15 hours ago)
There’s nothing wrong with free trade when it is on a level playing field, but that’s not what she is advocating. In the public realm yes, but in the real world and whom is paying her bills, no. To them she discusses the status quo that has been destroying our country and expanding upon that by making it even easier. Only reason that speech made it public (barely) is because someone recorded it on a cell camera. It was a private money raising event for the filthy rich.
balgill1000 (14 hours ago)
Sorry, I don’t understand. I don’t get what you’re trying to say here. What is she advocating? If its to execs in the silicon valley, and she saying something that will help there companies do better in trade isn’t that a good thing? Because that would mean American goods are sold more. Unless you are saying something different?
b101aa2 (19 hours ago)
This is funny and very accurate. Only difference between both parties is just a name. Same People who own Bush’s punk *ss also own Hillary, guliani, etc etc. Think teh only two who aren’t owned is Ron Paul and Obama. As for Buffet, Dee Dee Dee
InTheSticks1881 (19 hours ago)
The super wealthy can be out of touch with how the real world operates. On a good note, Jim Rogers another successful investor supports Ron Paul.
hilaryluv (19 hours ago)
What?!
sheiki22 (19 hours ago)
Register and vote in the primaries next year, give Ron Paul a chance!!
Alexander you are so cute!!
vlogolution (17 hours ago)
aw thanks sheiki you’re making me blush!!
miltownkid (19 hours ago)
Warren Buffet as strange as it sounds perhaps doesn’t have a strong grasp on basic economics and such. His investing skills are obviously ace, but that doesn’t make one an excellent economist.
blempo (18 hours ago)
If Buffet really believes that government should confiscate peoples’ hard earned money, he ought to move to Europe where there is a higher degree of government confiscation. But he will be a hypocrite and continue living in the good old US, you can count on that!
ReliableInsider (18 hours ago)
Hillary is *THE* most fiscally responsible candidate who has entered the race so far.
The GOP hasn’t been fiscally responsible in the White House since Ulysses S. Grant.
ReliableInsider (18 hours ago)
WHO endorsed Hillary?
Warren BUFFETT!
Wake up!
ReliableInsider (17 hours ago)
Clinton was the first President since Lyndon Baines Johnson to submit A BALANCED BUDGET to Congress.
And he submitted TWO of them!
Balanced budgets. The very definition of fiscal responsibility.
Since then, Congress has been spending like a drunken sailor.
vlogolution (17 hours ago)
Remember people, the issues here are not democrat or republican, bush or no bush. it’s about who’s best for all of us and why. Less government intervention, sound monetary policy, and incentives to invest capital and build more wealth = more jobs, more happy people, and greater prosperity and opportunity for all. There’s no greater example and proof of that model than Hong Kong’s amazing growth in the past 30 years.
billyX84 (15 hours ago)
There is a BIG difference between Hong Kong and the US.
ReliableInsider (17 hours ago)
Hong Kong hasn’t spent two trillion invading Iraq.
If we want to be able to distinguish between promised kept and promises broken (“Read my lips,” etc.) . . .
we have to look at history.
ReliableInsider (17 hours ago)
(What is the $2,000,000,000,000.00 figure?
That’s the money we will spend for the war including medical expenses for injured veterans.)
leepakim (17 hours ago)
i also liked the interview Cramer did…
sirbadman (16 hours ago)
Good points, great vid.
annarboriter (14 hours ago)
When somebody can show me how we as a nation are paying to much in taxes while the debt increases, I will start to listen to the complaints of the wealthy.
Dynastic wealth often is never taxed before it is transfered from one generation to the next especially if it is in the form of appreciated assets.
Normally the financial analyses here are spot but this post was full of cliches and talkingpoints.
jokester1111 (11 hours ago)
Hilary Clinton for prez!
rippsterman (9 hours ago)
Money talks
iyacker (8 hours ago)
LOL!
DistillersRock (8 hours ago)
he he he this is funny
zer0cool81 (8 hours ago)
Dude! Where are the candles in the candle holders behind you?
ArtisanofNito (4 hours ago)
Here is how the US could make more money….WOULD EVERYONE JUST STOP FOCUSING ON CELEB SLUTS AND FOCUS ON SCHOOL?!?!?! Think about it….more people in college=more educated=smarter people=people helping themselves and managing money wisely=a better economy!!!
cityview1989 (4 hours ago)
I cant believe the main stream media isnt reporting on his record breaking fund-raising.
I really really dont like main stream media.
Thanks for the internet, huh.
cityview1989 (4 hours ago)
Warren Buffet is a member of the “Council of 300″….GOOGLE IT
vlogolution (3 hours ago)
yea that’s right – ron paul broke kerry’s 2004 one-day fund-raising record with over $6 MILLION in one day on 12/16/07 – way to go!
Sasukegirl911 (3 hours ago)
This is hilarious XP
joekidd33 (1 hour ago)
rich people are the BIGGEST socialists out there because they want to maintain their dominant position. they don’t like competition. one of hte biggest mistkes liberals make is assume that businessmen are for free markets. They aren’t. They abhor competition and do everything they can to preevent it.
angryoldfatman (32 minutes ago)
Cleon Skousen, “The Naked Capitalist”.
Hmmm… naaaaaked.