Fun Warren Buffett quote

When you get rid of the estate tax, you’re basically handing over command of the country’s resources to people who didn’t earn it. It’s like choosing the 2020 Olympic team by picking the children of all the winners at the 2000 Games.

The thing is, given genetics, the Olympic method would probably work quite well.

Money making not quite so much of course.

28 comments on “Fun Warren Buffett quote

  1. Another vastly rich left-leaning turd Buffet certainly needs to have all his cash confiscated .

    What his statement translates to is “I’ve got mine so lets make sure that the little people will never prosper”.

    What his cockrot means in practice is middle-class people will be estate-raped while the very rich duck the scam and talk about how they don’t pay enough tax.

  2. Why is there a difference? If the ability to run fast is to some degree genetically transmitted to children of champions, why should the skills (and intelligence) that allow good decision making processes not also be transmitted to the offspring of a successful business owner?

  3. Why does it matter if the rich hand their money on? It is their money. Is it better that they spend it? Think what the rich might do with their money if they could not give it to their children. Buy them friends and cushy jobs presumably. See Chelsea Clinton.

    What is more, the descendents of the super rich are a great benefit to the nation. Old money provides taste. New money is crass.

    However money does not make people frugal. Nor does it make them smart. Old money invariably misses out on the new economy. Being rich did not make the Rockefellers invest in Apple. The new super rich are new money indeed. Where is the Ford family these days? The old oil families?

  4. What his cockrot means in practice is middle-class people will be estate-raped while the very rich duck the scam and talk about how they don’t pay enough tax.

    Worth repeating.

  5. All you need to know is that when Buffet decided to give away tens of billions of dollars he gave it to the private Gates Foundation and not to the government.

  6. I’m basically pro-inheritance tax on the basis of: if you must tax me, do it when I’m dead.. but I do buy the idea that putting wealth in the hands of disappointing offspring means a lot of it will be pissed around the economy in a sufficiently random fashion to do at least as much good as any targeted government spending would.

  7. The same Warren Buffet who make $$$$ from selling ‘life’ insurance policies to very high net worth 70-80 year olds.

    Policies which strangely enough cost > 95% of the geriatric individuals net worth, and pay out ‘tax free’ to the ‘beneficiaries’, inheritance tax free because it’s ‘life insurance’.

    Not bad for 12.5% commission

  8. Maybe there’s a liquidity issue with inheritances? Disappointing offspring can spunk cash around, but not a 4,000 acre ranch? So tax liquid assets lightly, and illiquid ones harshly? Maybe test for a yield (on the asset)?

  9. As I recall he has, like many modern wealthy people, made provision for his family and made arrangements for a large chunk to not go to the government but used for other things.
    Bill & Belinda Gates Foundation being a relatively new method of dealing with wealth.

  10. If at the age of 25 I had been a billionaire, I probably would have married the prettiest woman I knew or a super model.
    Therefore I am not 100% sure that genetics would mean our children would have brilliant at business – there would have been only a 50% chance of that happening.

  11. ‘you’re basically handing over command of the country’s resources to people who didn’t earn it.’

    So hand it over to government, which didn’t earn it, either. He is over using the word “earn.”

    Let the person who earned it decide where it goes.

    Command of the country’s resources to government is a very, very bad idea. Far better to go ‘to people who didn’t earn it.’ And what does “earning” it have to do with anything? Leftist claptrap.

    Let’s not give Christmas presents because the kids didn’t earn it.

  12. “Why is there a difference? If the ability to run fast is to some degree genetically transmitted to children of champions, why should the skills (and intelligence) that allow good decision making processes not also be transmitted to the offspring of a successful business owner?”
    Would have though the answer was obvious. Because it’s possible to wax fat in the Guild of Shyster Accountants, Economic Ignoramuses & General Shitstirrers without the slightest intelligence or skills whatsoever

  13. If the inheritance tax is paid, it gets to be spent by others who didn’t earn it either.

    Would prefer to leave it in the hands of the disappointing offspring and let mother nature take care of it.

  14. Who owns the country’s resources at the moment? After generations of death duties and CTT and IHT, can we say who owns the UK’s resources? I suppose the trivially true answer is that the Monarch owns them. But for practical purposes? The land holdings of the nobility have largely eroded over time because of taxes and the costs of maintaining stately homes. The really major landowners own mostly agricultural or unproductive land – there are exceptions such as Westminster and charitable institutions such as the Oxbridge colleges, National Trust etc. There holdings have been virtually unaffected by estate taxes. Who owns the mineral resources? The coal owners such as the Marquis of Bute and the Fitzwilliams are not getting much return these days. The banking and broking families, eg Rothschild’s, Barings either went bust or got taken over – and it should be noted that later generations were more interested in collecting pottery or studying zoology than in banking. The brewing families have sold out to multinational conglomerates. So if you abolished IHT, it would have zero effect on resource ownership. In other words, not for the first time, Buffet is talking out of his big fat arse, at least as far as the UK is concerned. Even in the US, how many Gettys, Rockefellers, Vanderbilts, Morgans, Fords are still involved in business?

  15. If at the age of 25 I had been a billionaire, I probably would have married the prettiest woman I knew or a super model.

    Like Zuckerberg did?

  16. Peter Schiff has a podcast up saying Buffett has benefited from ‘distressed’ sales of businesses. In other words he’s bought businesses at lower prices than they would have been because the children who were selling had an inheritance tax bill to pay.

  17. “Would have though the answer was obvious. Because it’s possible to wax fat in the Guild of Shyster Accountants, Economic Ignoramuses & General Shitstirrers without the slightest intelligence or skills whatsoever”

    Wax fat on nice salaries and pensions, yes. Accumulate stupendous amounts of capital, no. Its quite possible for a twat like RM to acquire an income of approaching 6 figures, and maybe rack up a property or two over his lifetime from his membership of the GoSAEUGS, but create a business from nothing and drive it forward to create a global business in the manner of a Bill Gates, or Amancio Ortega, not in a million years. That takes some serious drive and ability, which I’d say was genetically based.

  18. “Peter Schiff has a podcast up saying Buffett has benefited from ‘distressed’ sales of businesses. In other words he’s bought businesses at lower prices than they would have been because the children who were selling had an inheritance tax bill to pay.”

    Oh yes, forgot that one. Didn’t Buffet buy Dairy Queen for a snap cos the children had to sell it post haste to pay estate tax on it?

    So…. Man who has benefited enormously from others having to pay IHT is in favour of IHT. Funny that…

  19. When the poor inherit the earth, it’ll take the rich one week to get it back again. Money is like rescue animals. It prefers a good home where it will be loved and well looked-after.

  20. Where is the Ford family these days?

    Talking about new money vs old

    Tesla now has a higher market cap than Ford…

  21. A creative economy works out ways to get the money off the kids, then spends it on things creative people in the private sector like. A statist economy takes the money under threat of imprisonment and spends it on things that petty bureaucrats like (usually more bureaucrats….and prisons).

  22. Ducky,

    So tax liquid assets lightly, and illiquid ones harshly?

    That is basically saying don’t try to start a successful business. It’s pretty easy to come up with the tax money if the inheritance is cash. Not so much if that million quid is a custom widget maker.

  23. “So…. Man who has benefited enormously from others having to pay IHT is in favour of IHT. Funny that…”

    He’s the same man fighting the Keystone Pipeline. Because his trains carry the oil today.

  24. I did the analysis when Piketty came out. The. 1% in 1900 was not the same as the. 1% in 2000. The people involved are different

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.