pay for in the bill, which is to do the warren buffett rule, not allowing someone in his category of income to pay a lesser tax rate than his administrative assistant. that gave us to pay for. that is again to have something to cover the debt they have run up. so their argument really is weak, if it exists at all. they just don t want to have a success for this president. they don t want to have an issue that deals with the middle class. and they re quite content to have wealthy people to well at the expense of middle class and families out there struggling. dr. dyson, this is, by the way, for their constituents and our constituents. it seems like all of us, like the president said seemed like all of us would be into this. it just makes sense. of course. let me ask you a question. john boehner is always talking about securing an economic future for his grandkids. my grandkids are watching now. mosey, max, layla, hope you kids are obeying your grandmother. i ll be home soon. why i
guest: absolutely and the president of the united states the other day changing the biographies on the president but for gerald ford and putting in to my father s biography that ronald reagan would have supported his warren buffett rule. i tweet add challenge to the president of the united states, saying, i will debate the president of the united states any place, any where he wants to, one-on-one, on ronald reagan supporting or not supporting the buffett rule. i am still waiting. i will not use a tell prompter. neil: celebrating a sell off today on one side of the market.
the buffett rule? luke, the president, again, has made it really clear that we need to have a broad conversation about reforming the tax codes and the buffett rule is just one measure in that kfgs, and the kind of deep dive we have to do on that front. but it is an intrinsically important one, and it points out the disparities that we have in our society right now. and when you consider that over the course of the last few decades, as billionaires have taken advantage of our code, have hired accountants and lawyers to kind of game the system to their advantage, while the incomes of average of americans have gone down and their tax rates have gone up, i think that most of your viewers would agree that this is an important conversation to be having right now. yesterday an adviser to the dnc, hillary rosen said that mitt romney and ann romney s wife never necessarily had a real job. that caused a very massive
of river research and joins me now. how are you doing, sir? hi, luke. you made an argument in your piece i found fascinating. you say the buffett rule is already in place, to a degree. can you explain that? yeah, and, again, this observation does not come from, you know, my great creativity. it comes from the nonpartisan center for tax policy, the new york times reported about this. so if the buffett rule means a 30% tax rate for people who earn over $1 million, that s kind of the general outlines, if you look at irs reports of how americans pay taxes, most people on the upper income levels pay about 28% in federal taxes. about 85% of the vast middle pay 12 to 14%. and the lower, lower quartile pay less than 1%. what is not part of that is if you have investment income, capital gains, or private equity gains, which is exactly the kind of income that warren buffett and, of course, mitt romney
senate? no. my take on this, this is good politics and pretty anemic or insignificant economics. even if this did pass, whether the figure is $50 billion over ten years or as ezra klein pointed out in the washington post 100, a pittance in the face of what the federal government will spend over this time. but as an electoral marker, particularly now that it s clear that mitt romney is going to be the republican presumptive nominee, given that this is an individual who is one of the, you know, thousands, and we re talking about a very small handful of people who have all of their income from capital gains and private equity, mitt romney fits that bill. so in a weird way, you could call this not the reagan rule, not the warren buffett rule, you could call this the gauntlet thrown in the face of mitt romney rule. and it s all about optics, optics, optics. look, just a final word here. the fairness thing, i think, is an important one. but it s not an economic panacea. thank you s