In a 2011 interview, billionaire investor Warren Buffett decried tax loopholes that allow him, because of his investment income, to pay a lower effective tax rate than his secretary, and he advocated changes to tax policy that would require the super-rich (or, the 1%, as they would come to be known by the Occupy Wall Street movement [2011]) to pay more of their income in taxes. In late 2011, the White House proposed the “Buffett Rule,” which would require a minimum tax rate of 30% for people earning $1 million a year. As part of its unveiling, the White House released the video included here, in which Brian Deese, the Deputy Director of the National Economic Council, presents a simplified explanation of exactly what the Buffett Rule proposes.
Question
11.9
B6x37/Fadeov8X2bp0wKbV+1RXHlBVNaPijZZ7jaxtGX+z5pIBAZ3inQRrQWngbE0T2C2tjMh7yeZ967lgCWaDHuObS/TkLbn4UqNq2FC+/eUfjVd7Obn6Za3eDXxppjYsS/H3xvAJSvnEYZjmU+kyIOXXuzqLl2UF+0mvvNsYXOmI1ODtr8UPpOTog8ucOzmgmJQviIi4/Cx9zIzF/4Qo5oEHGaxSEO0tW8Qw7CDUfBJYn2lZn9GfbPX/B6rr9bPN5G/vIVfnSQXmzAC1ZVdgyTZc0=
Possible Answer: Some of the modes that Deese uses to explain the Buffett Rule include definition, comparison-and-contrast, and cause-and-effect. Deese defines the Buffett Rule. He uses a chart to compare the incomes and taxes of a single executive assistant who makes $49,480 and pays 16% in taxes; a couple (a teacher and a police officer) who earn a combined $105,000 salary and pay 19%; a doctor who makes $175,900 and pays 23%; and a super-rich family earning $110,000,000 and paying 18%. Deese also uses cause-and-effect to explain what would happen if the Buffett Rule passed: There would be no change to the amount of taxes most citizens would have to pay, but the super-rich would have to pay at least 30% of their income in taxes.