That also applies to Romney’s employees at Bain Capital.
I have a stupid question: When people talk about “tax rate” like this, are they taking into account all deductions? Or just some generalized bracket?
>meek<
A tax rate is the entire amount of tax paid divided by the entire income. So, if you paid 10 dollars total in tax and your income total was 100, you’d have a 10% tax rate.
Brackets show what the rate would be for specific levels of the income. The first X dollars at 10 percent, X +1 through Y at 15, etc.
I am pretty sure that he had opportunities in life that he would not have had if he hadn’t been so good at picking his parents. With that said, there are plenty of guys born with just as much if not more advantage in life that don’t make it nearly as far as he has. But if he is claiming that he has not had some serious advantages in life by virtue of having powerful and wealthy parents then he is full of shit.
Yeah but the Democrat superpacs might not be as reluctant.
And there’s that.
I think you’re missing a significant part of my point, that only a small part of our electorate is really at play in any case. How many people who are part of, or identify with, or even agree with, the OWS movement Republicans? How many of them have ever voted Republican for President? I imagine the number is very, very small.
I’d be interested to find out how many of them don’t vote at all, since they are predominantly in an age bracket that doesn’t vote very much, I imagine at least a large portion of OWS people themselves won’t even vote in November.
I agree with the rest of your analysis of Romney, he isn’t a great candidate. But no one on the slate was this year. FWIW I’ve already said on multiple occasions I suspect Obama will be reelected (cite, cite,cite), I think we’re in an election cycle similar to 2004. The incumbent isn’t especially popular, and in many ways you might expect a change, but then the actual candidates have to be looked at and that is when you see what’s going to happen. It’s just very unlikely any of the GOP crop could beat Obama head to head. In 2004 George W. Bush wasn’t unbeatable, he was just unbeatable by John Kerry (he was also unbeatable by the guys who John Kerry beat in the primary.) If you look at the Democratic primaries in 2004 it really is the bottom of the barrel of Democratic politicians. You have a tepid John Kerry, a totally inexperienced sleaze in John Edwards, a New England radical with virtually no national electability in Howard Dean, and a guy like Wesley Clark who had been touted as a potential Presidential candidate for years but who ended up being an empty suit with no real personality or political acumen.
I think a lot of more savvy politicians don’t want to go up against an incumbent unless they look like they’re on their last legs, and despite all the exaggeration neither Bush in 2004 or Obama in 2012 was/is similar to Jimmy Carter in 1980.
I don’t actually disagree with any of this, but all of this was just as true before he released his effective tax rate. Will the Dems use his tax rate against him (if he even wins the nomination, let’s not put the cart before the horse)? Absolutely. The effective tax rate thing is “part” of that, but it’s not really the stick of dynamite I think people are making it out to be. John Kerry was successfully portrayed as aloof and out of touch, but that’s just a general thing about a candidate. I don’t think Romney is going to be portrayed as an out of touch elite millionaire because of his tax returns, I think that’s going to be part of the story but the fact that he really is an elite out of touch multimillionaire is probably a lot bigger than anything that comes out in his returns.
No, I’ve explained quite clearly that you guys are confusing the general issue with a specific piece of data. The specific piece of data, unless truly outstanding (like having a running mate that spent time under psychiatric care) are rarely very important at all. I’ve never said taxes on the wealthy aren’t going to be important in this election cycle. I think they’ll be important come November, and that they would have been whether Mitt Romney paid 30% in taxes or 15%, and even if Gingrich or Santorum won the nomination.
It’s like when John Kerry ordered a philly cheesesteak the wrong way. No one really cared about that, but the fact that it even was being talked about on the news for a few days shows how throughout an election cycle lots of little things get focused on that really aren’t important at all.
It was important that John Kerry had an out of touch personality, it hurt his appeal to “common man swing voters” who probably are why he lost in Ohio and thus the Presidency. But the fact that he didn’t know how to order some shit sandwich in a shit hole like Philadelphia was truly irrelevant. I hate to break it to people from Philly, but in the rest of the country fucking minimum wage ass clowns that make sandwiches are expected to make it exactly how we tell them to and not to have an attitude about it, they are doing a low-wage job because they are too stupid and unskilled to have a good job and normal consumers won’t put up with BS from people like that. Because of the monumentally backwards attitudes in the entire city of Philadelphia, people for some reason find rude service staff to be endearing.
Historically tithing has meant different things at different times in the Catholic Church. Up until the French Revolution the Catholic Church had rights to collect a share of the produce from many plots of land. They would refer to the portion of a farmer’s crop they took as the “tithe” but in practice it actually often amounted to 14-18% of the farmer’s production. It was actually typically worse for you to farm on land where you owe a share of your produce to the church, because church owned land tended to have higher “taxes/tithes” attached to it than land just owned by ordinary nobles or land owners.
How exactly…?
I looked that up because I was confused myself. Apparently he asked for it with Swiss cheese.
Everyone knows that a Philly cheesesteak sandwiches are made with Philly cheese. I’ve never eaten steak with cream cheese myself, but there ya go.
First, its the independents you are going for. Not the loyal GOP base. The best you hope for from the other party’s base is that they get so fed up or disappointed that they just stay home. Secondly, you don’t need to be part of the OWS movement to be exposed to it, any more than you have to be a Tea Partier to be exposed to their ideas on smaller government. You just need to not cherry pick your news.
I’ve voted Republican for President, am an independent (fiscally conservative, socially liberal, big business ‘friendly’ compared to most liberals), and while I think much of the OWS movement is naive and simpleminded, I think the wealthy paying 15% is shameful while we hold our economy hostage and we don’t learn anything from Europe burning. For me, it IS the decisive issue this election.
Philadelphia Cream Cheese is a brand name. I’ve never had (or heard of) a Philly cheesesteak with cream cheese on it. Cheesesteaks, depending on where you go, could have Cheez Whiz, Velveeta, or provolone. If I was in a place that offered either of the former two, I too would ask for swiss.
And jalapenos. 
My understanding from various cultural references and Food Network shows is in Philly most people say you have to order it with Cheez Whiz, which is basically a brand of processed cheese food in liquid form that comes out of a squirt bottle.
However the “real purists” in Philly will point out that Cheez Whiz was just an adaptation to selling the sandwiches out of carts on the street because it was fast and easy. The “original” cheese from the 1920s or whenever it started was provolone, and among purists it is still the preferred cheese.
I’m almost positive I learned that on the History channel, because aside from seeing documentaries about Nazis who were involved in the Occult the best thing on there is history of food documentaries :D.
Also, it’s always been a tradition that politicians get a cheesesteak in Philadelphia. Both Obama and Hillary passed up on it, though. Obama apparently sampled some $100/pound specialty ham.
I actually have far more respect for that. I’m assuming that Obama, having earned over $1m/year for awhile now from book sales and such probably had a decently refined palate in 2008. Anyone with a decently refined palette is probably just being patronizing when they go order some sandwich on nasty bread with nasty cheese made with crappy cuts of beef that is heavily diced and all thrown together.
An ordinary schmo who didn’t know how to order a cheesesteak, I’d think nothing of it. But the whole reason politicians do things like order cheesesteaks is to show how in tune they are with the local customs. Politicians have people in their campaign whose job it is to tell them how to order a proper cheesesteak and the like. Kerry ordering one with Swiss might not have been a big deal in itself, but it shows tremendous political ineptitude.
And for the record, I’ve never seen nor heard of a cheesesteak made with Velveeta, and I doubt most steak joints would even have it in the kitchen. American and Velveeta are not synonymous.
You left out “overcooked”.
Where did you get that particular piece of information from?
The most famous cheesesteaksare made with Cheez Whiz, which is just a spreadable form of Velveeta. Both are made by Kraft.
Velveeta and Whiz are both highly-processed Kraft products, but that’s about as far as the similarity goes. And besides, Frank, who brought it up, listed Whiz, Velveeta, and Provolone as the options. I’m not trying to be elitist here, incidentally: Whiz is certainly a standard choice for a steak, and it’s just as “common” or whatever as Velveeta.
Mods, please move thread to Cafe Society.