Buffett's op-ed piece

This is the first piece I'm writing and I wanted to give a little bit of background information.  I am a trader and I have worked on Wall Street for some time now.  I have a lot to say on a variety of topics but this blog will mainly focus on Wall Street and its extracurricular activities.  I welcome any and all feedback and while I am opinionated, I also hope that I will be open-minded to hearing other thoughtful opinions. 

About two weeks ago, Warren Buffet wrote an op-ed piece in the New York Times voicing his opinion on the debt and his tax-the-ultra-wealthy strategy on helping reduce the debt.  He claims that while he paid roughly seventeen percent on his income taxes, his employees (who generally make far less than he does) paid between thirty-three and forty-one percent. He didn't offer any details, however, he wants to raise the rate of those making more than $1 million and raise the rate further on those making in excess of $10 million. 

Now Warren has been a proponent of higher taxes on the wealthy for some time.  This isn't anything new.  What is new is that there has been a recent investigation of Berkshire Hathaway and one of its employees, David Sokol, regarding potential insider trading activity ahead of a Berkshire Hathaway takeover of Lubrizol, a chemical manufacturer.

To be clear, I see nothing wrong with what Mr. Sokol did.  He believed Lubrizol was a good investment and he was willing to put his money where his mouth was.  He brought the deal to Mr. Buffett and he too thought the stock was a good investment and decided to buy the comany.  Now I'm not sure if Sokol disclosed his position to Buffett at the time but to me it doesn't matter.  If he didn't buy Lubrizol, someone else would have.  If Sokol knew about the takeover and then transacted he may have a problem on his hands.  But he didn't.  

The real reason Warren Buffett wrote that piece was to stave off the government's investigation into whether he knew of any wrongdoing related to the Lubrizol transaction.  Whether or not he is successful is yet to be seen.  If history proves correct, he most likely will be.