Bullshit. The crux of the election cycle is preventing the Republican Party from EVER AGAIN putting a candidate in the WH.
And all election cycles in the future, until the Republican Party is just as deeply in the dustbin of history as are the Whigs. Only when this goal has been achieved will it again be safe for us to place the focus on the performance of the incumbent.
Please note that I’m not any happier about this fact than you are.
Again with the unsubstantiated allegations…it’s kind of like saying, “You DO realize that it’s possible Obama is a secret Muslim, right???”
If you believe that’s a good rate, you should urge your representatives to champion it.
Magellan, it so happens that it looks worse if Romney DIDN’T do anything illegal. He’s trying to implement policy, the premise of which is: Give the wealthy more and cut back on the safety net.
We’ve had it drummed into our heads for years that _% of the wealthy pay _% of the taxes…that their innovation is hampered by such a HUGE burden and they can’t create jobs with such a heavy tax burden.
Now here comes along a typical successful business man…pillar of the community…running for the presidency. He only paid 13%. AND he might have paid less in other years.
We don’t get to see the actual percentage of tax that these zillionaires pay. EVER. It’s kept totally
mum. But the one time we do, the one time a zillionaire is FORCED to publicly show his returns…he pays only 13% and won’t let us see the rest knowing full well he probably paid even less.
The WHOLE PREMISE of the republicans is now is question. The wealthy pay LESS in taxes than the average Joe. They’ve been scamming us all along.
Perhaps you meant to say the wealthy pay a lower effective tax rate (percentage) than the avergage Joe?
Example: Mr Moneybags pays 15% on his income of $10,000,000. His secretary pays an effective tax rate of 18% on her $50,000 income.
Though the secretary pays 18%, that tax bill of $9000 is much lower than the $1,500,000 paid by Mr Moneybags.
Or that “the wealthy” are such a small percentage of the population that the income taxes they pay are a lower percentage of the overall taxes paid than thos paid by the average Joe?
Example: If we define “the wealthy” as the top 1% income earners and they pay 38% of all the federal income taxes then it is true that the weathy, as a group, pay less than the 99%.
She won’t even pay a lower effective rate. A person making $50,000 won’t have $9000 in tax liability, even if she’s single and rents. She’ll pay less than 10% in that case. if she has kids or owns a home, she may have no income tax liability at all.
You’re correct. The wealthy pay less in taxes for each dollar earned.
Mr Moneybags took home 8,500,000. His secretary took home 41,000.
Mr Moneybags wants to pass new tax codes so he can take home more and he want’s his secretary to
shoulder more of the tax burden and take home less. He also wants her health care cut, wants her to work longer hours for less, and wants to eliminate her social security…all so he can take more home.
His tax liability started WAY higher. Then the deductions happen. If you’re rich you can minimize your taxes considerably. Let’s say he made $10 million (and let’s ignore the standard automatic deduction for now and say he owes takes on $10,000,000). And let’s say the rate is 40% on everything. So, he owes $4,000,000. But lets say he gives $5,000,000 to charities, now he owes taxes on the remaining $5 million: 2,000,000, and his overall tax rate is 20%. Did he do anything bad? Immoral? UnAmerican? Embarrassing?
Let’s start with that.
Ok, let’s. Romney gave half of his income to charities and didn’t use any loopholes, shelters, or questionable deductions to lower his tax burden to 13%. What’s he so ashamed of then?
So, anyone on the Dope asking for a cite is a troll now, eh? How many times does a cite not say what the citer say it says - reason enough to refuse to cite.
And, are you calling a liar? Just to make sure I am right about this.
No, it’s not the same thing at all, and I think if you think “It’s possible Mitt Romney was one of the many millionaires who illegally kept money outside the country then took advantage of the IRS’ amnesty program to return that money to the USA, he should release his tax returns to prove that he didn’t because someone who broke the law like that is not fit to govern” and “OBAMA IS A SECRET MUSLIM!!!” (which wouldn’t matter at all even IF true), then I don’t really have anything further to say to you.
No let’s not, because that is crap and you know it. The basis of his low rate is very clear - almost all his income gets taxed at the capital gain rate. That was on the return he released.
If his old returns just showed the same rate, why not release them? If he gave to charity (and to paraphrase Mr. Dooley the average rich person is as quiet about charity as a waiter with a load of dishes falling down the stairs) he’d be sending them out so fast our heads would spin.
[quote=“magellan01, post:189, topic:630085”]
Reid has “evidence” that a citizen didn’t pay taxes for ten years. And a rich citizen at that! That’s unAmerican, especially since the government could really use that money. so the question is, why is Obama, Holder, and the head of the IRS not doing their job and launching an investigation into Romney’s ten year period of paying no taxes? Not doing so is dereliction of duty. It also send the message that none of us really have to pay our taxes. What the hell is wrong with Obama and his head of the IRS? Why don’t they do their jobs?!!![/QUOTE
I have already covered this, when I said that it is too bad that Nixon isn’t president.
First, hearsay is hardly a reason to begin a politically sensitive in public. And we don’t know that someone in the IRS isn’t looking already, but Romney’s returns are hardly something you skim over in a day.
Just because Republicans use government for blatantly political purpose (remember DoJ in Bush time?) doesn’t mean Dems will.
As for me, I’m betting they are legal but embarrassing.
Just something he does when anyone gets a rhetorical advantage on him, is all. If everyone **Shodan **deemed a troll were banned, this would be the world’s smallest website, and I’m playing the world’s smallest violin for him right now.
You’re right. And Obama should’ve released his birth certificated a lot sooner than he did. Also those college grades and records - still waiting on those. Because if we accuse someone of a crime without any evidence, we should TOTALLY make them prove their innocence.
This is the same Warren Buffett you’re speaking of?
“Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Owes Taxes Going Back To 2002”
What crime?
What crime is Romney being accused of without evidence? Barely paying any taxes doesn’t have to be a crime. WE GET THAT. But if one of his remedies for fixing the economy is to lower the tax rate for the over burdened wealthy, and he, a typical wealthy investment capitalist, won’t show his returns knowing full well he pays a lower rate than people earning much less, makes him a hypocrite.
Was Obama running on “Ill be a great leader because I made such great grades…but you can’t see my transcripts”?
It was, what, a week between the allegations coming out and him releasing his birth certificate? How much sooner did you want? And all that to rebut an allegation that was patently absurd on its face. Now, we have an allegation that seems quite likely: That Romney paid a very low amount of taxes. And for that allegation, you’re willing to just wait and see indefinitely?
Romney is clearly damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t.
If Reid’s claim is false, Romney can prove him wrong and embarrass him all to crap.
If Reid’s right, voters are going to wonder why such a rich man can get away with paying so little, while they pay a larger percentage. This will hurt the Republicans, and even the dullest Fauxistas will pull away from Romney, and maybe not vote at all.
Romney probably did nothing illegal, but the sheer audacity of making so much and paying so little brings a lot of things into the open that the uber wealthy would prefer to keep quiet.