Warren Buffett has some tax advice for us:

Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent. …

I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation. …

I know well many of the mega-rich and, by and large, they are very decent people. They love America and appreciate the opportunity this country has given them. Many have joined the Giving Pledge, promising to give most of their wealth to philanthropy. Most wouldn’t mind being told to pay more in taxes as well, particularly when so many of their fellow citizens are truly suffering. …

I would leave rates for 99.7 percent of taxpayers unchanged and continue the current 2-percentage-point reduction in the employee contribution to the payroll tax. This cut helps the poor and the middle class, who need every break they can get.

But for those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate.

My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.

To that, Pat Buchanan (of whom I’m not usually a fan) has a suggestion: “Why doesn’t he set an example and send a check for $5 billion to the federal government? He’s got about $40 billion. … You know, you had a plan up there … where the superrich could contribute an extra amount, and it was something like one-tenth of 1 percent did it. You get all this noise from these big rich folks; let them send checks and set an example instead of writing op-eds.”

For that matter, nothing is stopping Buffett from telling his tax professionals to stop finding ways for him to (legally) avoid taxes. Clearly, Buffett’s not doing that, either, which makes him, regardless of his fortune, another tax hypocrite. (You don’t suppose that Buffett favors estate taxes because he owns six life insurance companies and 10 percent of life insurance company revenue comes from those avoiding estate taxes, do you?)

Perhaps Buffett isn’t writing that $5 billion check because of the real reason to oppose Buffett’s tax proposal: Because government at every level wastes our tax money, every day. Buffett cannot possibly be naïve enough to believe that more tax dollars won’t get sucked into some patronage-fueled hole in Washington. (Remember the word “earmark”?)

Buffett also has a selective memory about tax legislation, as does Bloomberg BusinessWeek:

In 1982, amid a punishing 16-month recession, Reagan approved the largest peacetime tax increase in U.S. history. A booming economy followed in 1983 and 1984, enabling him to sail to re-election.

In 1993, President Bill Clinton forced a tax increase through Congress that Representative Dick Armey, then chairman of the House Republican Conference, condemned as a “job killer” that would push the economy into recession. That increase was succeeded by the creation of 23 million new jobs, and the Clinton Administration left a budget surplus of about $236 billion. By contrast, President George W. Bush pushed through two rounds of tax cuts and created just 3 million jobs. He also turned the surplus he inherited into a $1.2 trillion deficit.

Obviously, today’s economic crisis is vastly more severe than anything Reagan or Clinton faced, thus the timing and scope of tax increases must be carefully calibrated.

What neither Buffett nor Bloomberg told you is that one year before the 1982 tax increase (or, as Reagan called it, “revenue enhancement”), Congress passed a substantial tax cut.  Congress also passed tax reform with substantially lower rates in 1986. Congress also passed tax reform in 1997. And a business magazine editorial writer should be smart enough to know that no president and no politician creates jobs; businesses create jobs, and every dollar a business spends on taxes is $1 less to spend on anything else.