Skip to main content

Millionaires Support Warren Buffett’s call for More Taxes on the Rich

Warren Buffett isn’t the only rich guy who wants to higher taxes on the rich, such as The Robin Hood tax which he has specifically endorsed. A survey from Spectrem Group found that 68% of millionaires (those with investments of $1 million or more) support raising taxes on those with $1 million or more in income.

Fully 61% of those worth of $5 million or more support the tax on million-plus earners.

Buffett, as you might recall, has proposed raising taxes on million-plus earners, saying the ultra-rich pay lower rates than everyday workers.

Rich people’s opinions of Buffett remain fairly positive in the wake of his tax-me-more crusade. More than a third of millionaires and ultra-high-net-worth’s said they have a more positive opinion of Buffett after his tax proposal.

The Robin Hood Tax on Wall Street can be a game changer start towards a fairer, more democratic, more humane, more balanced, and more moral American Tax System.

While the Nay Sayers are few, they have the Darth Vader brothers on their side.

Only 19% of millionaires and 22% of the $5 million -plus group said they had a more negative opinion of him after his tax increase proposal. For more details see:  

This tiny sales tax on Wall Street is:
.5% on stocks, just $.50 (50 cents) for each $100 of stock trades;
.1% on bonds, just $.10 (ten cents) for each $100 of bond trades;
.005% on derivative speculation in currencies, commodities, or other trades, just $.005 (half a penny) for each $100 of trades

The revenue generated is estimated by economists to be up to 350 billion each year!

The Robin Hood Tax can be a game changer for a fairer, more democratic, more humane, more balanced, and more moral American Tax System.

 photo endorser-pics-ver-2_zps637618d3.png

Please LIKE and SHARE this Diary.

To Endorse The Robin Hood Tax please go to our website at:

To Like and Share our main Facebook Page please go to:

To volunteer please go to:

To send us your campaign materials, posts, ideas, videos, pictures, please go to:

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Good to see this here (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bisbonian, Friar Tuck

    My union - California Nurses Association/National Nurses United - has been a major driver of this campaign, precisely because we see so many unmet human needs that an FTT could help to address.  It's an idea whose time has come,

    "Wouldn't you rather vote for what you want and not get it than vote for what you don't want - and get it?" Eugene Debs. "Le courage, c'est de chercher la verite et de la dire" Jean Jaures

    by Chico David RN on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 01:44:02 PM PDT

    •  There are many... (0+ / 0-)

      ...unmet needs. The best way to address them is to:

      1) Raise upper-bracket Income Taxes
      2) Raise Capital Gains Taxes.
      The transaction tax is bad because it is politically difficult to pass and is a big distraction from tried-and-true, effective means of reducing inequality.

      In fact, the Transaction Tax is such a horrible idea, that I sometimes think that the 1% are secretly behind it, using it to waste our time and political resources on something that will never happen.

  •  I so support the Robinhood tax (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bisbonian, Calamity Jean, Friar Tuck

    It is only fair and it might cool high speed trading.,

  •  Yet another hit-and-run spam... (0+ / 0-)

    ...Diary from the backers of the Transaction tax.

    I believe that most supporters of the Robin Hood tax have their hearts in the right place. They just haven't considered the downside of supporting such a tax.

    But what's really sad is the Diarist's use of dKos as a spam outlet for the Oxfam International campaign.

    The Diarist, in his series of Diaries should at least attempt to address some of the biggest flaws with the Oxafm International Transaction Tax.

    1) It will drive some trading overseas where the USA cannot regulate it.

    2) It will result in job losses and tax revenue losses in the US financial industry.

    3) It will decrease market liquidity and (therefore) increase volatility of stock prices.

    4) It won't raise anywhere near $350 billion.

    ...and most importantly,

    5) It is a distraction from simple, politically-attainable goals such as increasing the income tax and the capital gains tax.

    The transaction tax is a European idea that fits European goals. They already have high income taxes and they don't have a thriving Financial sector that generates billions in foreign exchange and taxes. The T-Tax is fantastic for the likes of France and Italy. They have nothing to lose!

    America is different. Our tax rates are unusually low and our national income from financial services is high. The T-tax would cause us much more harm than good.

    •  to answer your questions (0+ / 0-)

      1) no, 40 countries already have it
      2)no, this is a minor amount to a hugely profitable industry
      3)no proof at all of what you say, actually high speed trading cheats other traders
      4) yes, but wouldn't less revenues make someone like you happy? or no matter what are you unhappy?
      5) no proof that raising income taxes on all American's is more popular than raising taxes on the top 10% and Wall Street

      •  Point by point (0+ / 0-)

        Thank you for attempting to answer some of the concerns about the T-Tax.

        1) Yes, many countries have it. Have you looked at the weak financial sectors of nearly all of those countries? None of them, except maybe the UK (on a good day) do anywhere near the business we do in the US. Unlike the USA, those countries have nothing to lose.

        2) Actually it is pretty huge. $350 billion (where, oh where, does that crazy number come from?) is about fifteen times more than total Wall Street profits in 2012. Do you think that the threat of losing all their profits is not enough to make many banks relocate overseas? Really?

        3) If you want to look at markets with high transaction costs, check out:
          - The real estate market
          - The used car market
          - The art and collectibles market
          - The precious metals market
          - The (pre-crash) CDO market

        When you raise the cost of transactions, you get fewer transactions. If there are fewer transactions, the market price cannot move smoothly to react to events. It moves in sharp, sudden jerks. All of the above markets are characterized by high transaction costs, high middleman profits, high volatility, and little price transparency. Why do you want to inflict the same ills on the stock market?

        4) Less revenues are bad. The Oxfam Plan will waste our political capital on something that even if implemented won't bring in enough money. If I'm gonna knock on doors (or post spam to political sites) I want it to be for something that will actually help the people.

        5) I don't want to raise taxes on all Americans. Just the top brackets. The capital gains tax mostly affects the top brackets also. There are many polls showing that AMERICANS (not Oxafam Europeans) support more progressive taxes.

        Americans have a tried-and-tested formula for prosperity. It worked in the 1950s and it will work again. There is broad popular support for it. It relies on existing taxes and frameworks and doesn't sell out our domestic Financial Industry. It's simple: Raise income and capital gains taxes.

        •  really (0+ / 0-)

          1) i guess France and Germany are weak states - you can't pick your facts, so silly
          2) the tax is on trades - not profits
          3) change the subject - but yes most Americans pay Sales tax on the items you list at 5 to 8% - the rich pay ZERO in sales tax on the stocks they buy
          4) you confuse me
          5) this tax almost exclusively hit the top 90%

          Robin Hood Tax not a regressive tax, not even close to regressive, since the top 10% of Americans already own 94% of ALL stocks and bonds. The Robin Hood Tax will nearly exclusively affect them (as it should).

          Unless you are in the top 10% of Americans by wealth it does not affect you very much. The top ten percent of American Households have 81% to 94% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and almost 80% of non-home real estate.

          Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America.

          •  Clarifications. (0+ / 0-)

            1) France and Germany have small financial sectors compared to the USA. You can look at this chart to see. The USA trades about 136% of our GDP. France is only 43% and Germany is 85%.

            Not to mention that the USA has a bigger GDP, so the total dollars lost by wrecking our financial sector are much greater.

            Besides, the Europeans can't raise their top-bracket income taxes because they are already high. We have a lot of room to raise ours.

            2) Yes, and who will pay it? If the banks pay it, then it will reduce their profits to zero. ($350 bill > $28 bill). If the banks aren't paying it then it must be getting passed on to consumers....

            ....which brings up the next point. Poor people don't buy stocks and bonds, but poor people sell bonds all the time. When you take out a mortgage or borrow on a credit card, you are creating a bond that some Rich Person will buy. The crazy Transaction Tax taxes both ends of the trade so that the poor and middle class must now pay.

            (That's why taxing trading profits and capital gains is smarter. Only the rich get gains from loans, so only they should pay).

            3) When you increase transaction costs on a market you increase volatility. This is a well-researched fact.  Your Transaction Tax is another transaction cost -- that will make stock booms and crashes more likely. Not less.

            4) Sorry if I was confusing. Basically all these guys pushing the transaction tax (which will never happen and would suck if it did happen) should get behind the standard Progressive/Liberal platform of raising top-bracket taxes. That way we can win.

            5) This is the silliest one of the T-Tax arguments. Basically, you are saying: "We need to tax rich people, so lets tax something most rich people do".  Wrong. We need to tax rich people by simply taxing rich people. Raise the income at Capital gains taxes. Raise the inheritance tax.

            Progressives are on a roll. We are winning elections and people are waking up to the fact that Conservative Economics is a failure. Let's not waste this moment on these Robin Hood pipe dreams.  

  •   I would favor a flat 1% tax (0+ / 0-)

    split between the buyer and seller, on stocks bonds and derivatives.  its flat, that is it stays the same , percentage-wise, whether the value of the  stock is $1 or $1000000, but how much the tax brings in goes up as the value does. if the stock  is 1 dollar, the tax is a penny, if its 1 million, its 10000 dollars. while some may go overseas, good businesspeople will take the tax into account and adjust their stock plan accordingly. We had a transaction tax in this country from 1913-64, and it varied from time to time, but by the end it was .11 on stock and .05 on bonds. Currently the only tax at all is the section 31 fee which is a tax of .0034 but raises billions every year to fund the SEC.  adding 1% tax to stocks and bonds would give the feds a cut in the profits, much like how everyone antes up in a card game before the cards are dealt, the fed doesn't care if trades are  even as long as it gets its share.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site