Moody's and Buffett and Hillary’s Tax Plan

Economists from Moody’s Analytics write articles saying that Hillary’s economic policies are better for the economy than Trump’s policies. These articles come can come from Mark Zandi, Don White or in this case, Jeff Benjamin. Whenever any article comes from Moody's analytics a footnote should show that a major shareholder of Moody's is Warren Buffett who campaigns for Hillary. The image they project is that Moody's is an objective, independent source. Zandi is always trotted out as the independent economist whenever Obama or Hillary need an economist to support their policies.

Here is an article showing Buffett’s ownership.  In 2010, Buffett and Zandi testified before Congress that they didn't spot the bubble. They either lied or are stupid. Either way, why would anyone trust their analysis of how economic policies would affect our $17 Trillion economy when they had no idea that housing prices would collapse if people couldn’t afford them?

Isn't it amazing that S & P was sued by the Justice Department for $5 Billion for their high ratings on junk mortgages, but Moody's wasn’t? It sure helps to be a friend and supporter of Obama doesn't it? All you have to do is support his policies and you won't be punished whether your name is Buffett or Hillary.

Warren Buffett’s company Berkshire Hathaway has accumulated $75 Billion in cash. Buffett always says that the rich should pay more, so why won’t he pay a dividend out of Berkshire Hathaway so he and all other owners of the stock would pay a tax? It appears that Buffett doesn’t want to be double taxed. All the company stocks that he owns within Berkshire do whatever they can to reduce their corporate tax also.

There is a section of the tax code that says companies should pay an accumulated earnings tax if they don’t need the cash for anything, so why isn’t Berkshire hit with the 15% tax?  Or why doesn’t he voluntarily pay it since he says he is undertaxed? Buffett essentially is not complying with the law by not paying this tax while Trump appears to be following the law.

Buffett said the other day that he has never used the deduction that Trump has used. That is misleading at best. Trump’s income or losses from his corporations flows through his personal return because of the way the corporations are structured. Buffett’s income flows through a C Corporation. My guess is many of the companies that Buffett has owned over the years have used net operating loss carry forwards. I know he had an interest in U.S Air that continually lost money.

Buffett doesn’t pay dividends from his corporations so that he isn’t double taxed; the corporations he and his company owns are structured to pay as little tax as possible, he pays himself a very low salary so he doesn’t get hit with ordinary income tax and the 2.9% Medicare tax on all salaried income, he deducts his gifts to charity at market value instead of his low cost and he structures everything he does to avoid the onerous estate taxes. Then he goes out and lectures others to pay more tax. What a hypocrite.

The economists that support Hillary's proposed policies say they are more fiscally sound and honest. There is nothing sound about the greedy government confiscating more money and power for itself when the same policies the last eight years have yielded the slowest recovery in around 80 years. Hillary wants to not only continue those policies but to compound them. She wants to take the massively complicated tax code and make it more complicated. Her proposals essentially assume that taking more money away from the private sector won’t slow down the economy. Does that seem logical?

Recently 300 economists signed a letter saying Hillary's policies bad for America. Why do you think that this is not reported by major newspapers or major networks?  Obviously because most are in the tank for Hillary and bad stuff for her is glossed over. The media's job is to coordinate with the Clinton campaign and trash Trump.

It will be a disaster for our economy, and especially for the poor and middle class, if Obama Care continues, if the government continues to increase regulations and the cost to hire people and continues to seek to destroy the coal industry and fossil fuel industry. There is nothing progressive about making more people dependent on government.

If you experience technical problems, please write to