Which seems silly, because it wouldn’t be about Romney personally, it would just happen to be the method by which some people learn about the unfairness of existing tax laws.
It’s like shooting the messenger, really.
(I’m an Obama supporter, BTW.)
Not silly at all. You know how we talk all the time about poor people voting against their own best interests? Well, this will put a face on that abstract concept. “You want THIS fabulously wealthy guy to pay no taxes while you have to cut corners? Really? Or would you rather vote for someone who wants to lower yours and raise his?”
It’s not shooting the messenger as much as it’s exposing the message as bullshit. The GOP’s tax policy (and, coincidentally, Romney’s current stance) is all about how onerous taxes are, especially on the rich who create jobs. If it turns out that Romney’s taxes are less onerous than the average voter’s (percentage-wise, of course), that message is going to be a tough sell.
Many Romney supporters believe taxes are evil and it is pro-American to evade them. As a Job Creator, the more money he can acquire by cheating, the more Jobs he can create. What’s not to like?
In Thailand, obvious criminals get good political support. I’ve had middle-class Thais patiently explain to me that they want smart leaders … and who’s smarter than a wealthy criminal? U.S. is slow to learn, but may be catching on to what Thailand has known for some time.
Is this true? When I fill out Form 1040, I follow the instructions and list, on Schedule D, every stock I sold that year. I’m not saying you’re wrong – I’ve long been aware that U.S. income-tax rules for those who follow the instructions are quite different from the rules for those with expensive accountants and lawyers.
If he releases anything, I doubt it will include that level of detail even if it’s available.
In all honesty, I wouldn’t be surprised if Romney was quite literally unable to provide a complete break down of what stocks he bought when, how much he paid and when he sold them. (I’m just a poor plebeian - would such a break down be provided by a brokerage house?) That must be thousands of trades in a year for someone of his wealth - would it really be expected that he detail each and every one?
If he [or his business manager] doesn’t actually KNOW what he has purchased or sold, they are fucking morons. If you don’t know what your assets are, you can get ripped off without realizing it. There will be records at least in the brokerage houses of his purchases and sales.
Think of it as handing your ATM card off to someone. Would you or would you not at least require that they give you all the receipts from purchases and withdrawals/deposits? Or would you figure that they won’t cheat you?
I hear you, and I totally would -
BUT if you asked me to compile all of my credit card, ATM and Debit Card transactions for a year, it would be a mammoth task (and my bank does aggregate some ATM transactions) - and while it is technically feasible to do so, it wouldn’t be something I’d care to try.
I’m just thinking that with somebody of that wealth, I’d kinda expect that there must be quite literally thousands of transactions that need to be compiled and listed. I’ll admit upfront I don’t know what sorts of reports his broker is providing, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if some level of detail were lost due to the volume, and there was some aggregrating going on.
All of his sales or trades have to be reported. Brokerage houses provide a 1099-B at the end of the year and then his accountant has to provide the details of the rest of his transactions that weren’t covered in the 1099-B.
Since the invention of computers, this sort of reporting is really quite easy, even if the transactions number into the thousands.
The other aspect is that Romney hasn’t released his 2010 Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts attachment (oops, he must’ve forgot)… that would list more than has already been disclosed through the part of the 2010 tax return that he did release. ( description here: http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=148849,00.html )
I still wonder if the main issue might be how little of his money he’s actually tithed to the LDS church over the years.
I’d imagine Romney is held in extremely high regard in the LDS church. Also, if it turns out that he’s tithing far less than 10 percent, that could send the message to the average person who really struggles with that tithe, that if the billionaire doesn’t find it necessary to make the tithe, why on earth should the guy making $30,000
The incredible naivete of this post represents Romney’s only chance of somehow getting through the PR disaster of his unreleased tax returns.
It’s absurd, almost literally unthinkable, that Romney doesn’t know and can’t easily provide an accounting of his every penny in bank accounts, the stock market, and elsewhere on a daily if not hourly basis.
But if there are enough impossibly naive voters like Bengangmo reasoning, “Well, if I can’t list my holdings, then how can Romney, commanding a financial empire, do it?”, then maybe he’ll get away with this shit.
Never underestimate the stupidity of the American public…
I’m not so sure how to take this post.
But do take note, that were I American, Romney would not have my vote. He would have lost it long long long ago. I think his taxes stink, but he hasn’t done anything illegal.
My ferverent hope is that, one way or another multiple years of his returns are released that damage him enough to lose embarassingly.
I would love to see the political theatre that would attach to him failing to secure the nomination, but I wonder if that is going a little too far.
There are about 30% of voters who would vote for Mitt even if they came home to find him having sex with their dog in the middle of the living room. I’m not sure if it is stupidity or just a rigid ideology that Obama just does not fit into. To me, bigotry would be a more accurate term.
Not on the roof of their car?
But Republican voters don’t respond to that.
If it turns out Romney paid a ludicrously low amount of tax, half the USA will say “Good for him” or “Well, the rules are the rules, and he followed them” or whatever.
Frankly, the whole thing is a ridiculous sideshow.
Republican voters might not respond to it, but some “low-information” voters might. Let people see “trickle-down economics” for the bullshit it is.
Yes, Republican voters are going to vote for Romney no matter what. (Well, those who aren’t too hateful towards Mormons or former Massachusetts liberals as a group will, anyway.) But perhaps some independents will be disgusted by his epitomizing the 1% and proposing their future tax relief. It’s a wedge, though admittedly of a select few, those middle-class independents actually willing to think about their own interests.
Let’s test this.
I’m not disagreeing with this - but there is an equal percentage of voters who would still support Obama, even if it turned out he was a Kenyan-born goat felcher.
The topic of this thread is “What would the reports have to contain to disqualify Romney?” So, I’m not sure how your comment applies 