SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : NOTES
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: David Lawrence who wrote (2436)5/22/2003 5:06:09 PM
From: mph  Read Replies (1) of 2505
 
good points, David.
I thought ridiculous Buffett's statement that his receptionist would still be paying 30% when his tax
rate was effectively reduced to 3% under his dividend
analogy.

Presumably any money he put in to Berkshire was
previously earned and therefore previously taxed.
That money was then invested for a return.

If his secretary had bought stocks paying
dividends and derived a significant portion
of her income from that type of investment,
she too would have a lower effective rate under
Buffett's analogy.

However, he is evidently comparing her income from employment to his from investment.

These are two different things.

JMO
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News