The Republicans are the Problem

[Alceste]

Please feel free to say what you wish. Don't hold back ouit of politeness.

You will have to show me where the rich are required to pay less than any other group. In Romney's case the 15% he paid last year is on money that had already been taxed at a higher rate previously. It is more of a matter of having enough money to pay teams of people to find all loop holes possible. That is not a function of the tax rate rather a fault of the endless tax code we have. It is also justified to pay someone to try and shave of 1% of a billion dollars. It does not make sence to pay someone $1000 dollars to shave $300 dollars off a middle income. They are incidentals. I think all this comes from the rate on investment income and is simply extrapolated at will to every things else to justify class envy. It is not a stretch to say that emotional rhetoric and bitter sarcasm, with a missused fact here and there is not an evidenced based argument.

Please feel free to demonstrate that Romney's money was taxed twice.

 

[esmith]

Please feel free to demonstrate that Romney's money was taxed twice.

The money he made(income) was taxed at a higher rate than capital gains, dividends, and interest income. This is federal and state tax code. He then turned the money over to a blind trust which invested this money into stocks, bonds, and other securities. The money his blind trust makes from these investments are taxed at a lower rate. Therefor what I believe the poster was attempting to say is the earnings are taxed from already taxed income.

 

[Falvlun]

The money he made(income) was taxed at a higher rate than capital gains, dividends, and interest income. This is federal and state tax code. He then turned the money over to a blind trust which invested this money into stocks, bonds, and other securities. The money his blind trust makes from these investments are taxed at a lower rate.

That means everyone is taxed double, right? I mean, I was taxed on my income, and guess what? When I buy something with that income, I get hit with sales tax again. That's just called paying your taxes.

So, you're just saying that Mitt Romney has to pay his taxes. No news there.

 

[Alceste]

The money he made(income) was taxed at a higher rate than capital gains, dividends, and interest income. This is federal and state tax code. He then turned the money over to a blind trust which invested this money into stocks, bonds, and other securities. The money his blind trust makes from these investments are taxed at a lower rate. Therefor what I believe the poster was attempting to say is the earnings are taxed from already taxed income.

His ONLY released tax return (for the creation of which he instructed his accountants to make it look like he pays 15% by neglecting to deduct his tithing) INCLUDES his income from actual work and his reported capital gains. The 15% rate is for both.

And, the gains of his "blind trust" are not taxed at all. It's a legal way of hiding your income from the tax man and evading the estate tax.

So, no. :no:

 

[1robin]

Please feel free to demonstrate that Romney's money was taxed twice.

I knew you were going to ask that. I heard him and a reporter in an interview discuss that but I do not remember what the details were. Let me see what I can find out. Something I have never understood, many times when opponents respond it seems they look at the 3, 10, or 100 claims I or others make and select the one they think they can make an argument against. They simply dismiss everything else they couldn't counter and fixate on that one and ignore all the others. I never do that except in the interest of time or space and that is very rare, and I can't understand how anyone can feel they accomplish anything by doing so. Anyway I will check.

 

[1robin]

His ONLY released tax return (for the creation of which he instructed his accountants to make it look like he pays 15% by neglecting to deduct his tithing) INCLUDES his income from actual work and his reported capital gains. The 15% rate is for both.

And, the gains of his "blind trust" are not taxed at all. It's a legal way of hiding your income from the tax man and evading the estate tax.

So, no. :no:

If he is so money hungry and greedy why did he voluntarily give away more than Obama is worth? Compare that with Biden's couple of hundred in charity.

 

[esmith]

His ONLY released tax return (for the creation of which he instructed his accountants to make it look like he pays 15% by neglecting to deduct his tithing) INCLUDES his income from actual work and his reported capital gains. The 15% rate is for both.

And, the gains of his "blind trust" are not taxed at all. It's a legal way of hiding your income from the tax man and evading the estate tax.

So, no. :no:

Sorry you are wrong. FactCheck.org : Does Romney Pay a Lower Rate in Taxes Than You?

 

[Falvlun]

Sorry you are wrong. FactCheck.org : Does Romney Pay a Lower Rate in Taxes Than You?

Did you actually read that article? If so, what do you think that it proved?

 

[Alceste]

Sorry you are wrong. FactCheck.org : Does Romney Pay a Lower Rate in Taxes Than You?

Thanks for proving my point.

A new ad from the Obama campaign claims that Mitt Romney “paid only 14 percent in taxes—probably less than you.” ... if you include a combination of income taxes and payroll taxes — which make up the bulk of federal taxes for most taxpayers — the ad is accurate.

 

[esmith]

Did you actually read that article? If so, what do you think that it proved?

Well:

Originally Posted by Alceste
His ONLY released tax return (for the creation of which he instructed his accountants to make it look like he pays 15% by neglecting to deduct his tithing) INCLUDES his income from actual work and his reported capital gains. The 15% rate is for both.

And, the gains of his "blind trust" are not taxed at all. It's a legal way of hiding your income from the tax man and evading the estate tax.

So, no. :no:

That the comment from Alceste that his blind trust are not taxed is totally false. I would have to assume that Alceste doesn't know what a blind trust is and how it works.

 

[Falvlun]

Well:


That the comment from Alceste that his blind trust are not taxed is totally false. I would have to assume that Alceste doesn't know what a blind trust is and how it works.

I didn't see anything specifically about blind trust funds in there.

 

[esmith]

I didn't see anything specifically about blind trust funds in there.

Ok, here is data from the trustee of the Romney's money.
Note From Trustee Brad Malt

 

[no-body]

That's typical. If you can't keep them here so you can steal their money then tax them even more. Eliminate another freedom so you get more money to spend on whatever gets you elected. Not to mention they do not want to go overseas anyway. It's expensive and causes many problems. They are forced to because liberals tax them into insolvency, and the unions suck them dry.

So we go back to my original point. You want to cater to corporations so they can form oligarchies by having the same corrupt rules that the third world uses to steal our businesses. On top of that you want the "welfare class" to become the slave labor class.

Just because you have money does not make you superior nor does it necessarily mean you earned it fairly. There are many historical reasons why workers need unions, I would rather trust the government ran by the people than someone who is only out for themselves. Of course there will be problems and corruption no matter who is in charge so spare me your anecdotal welfare and union stories.

You libs have a very shallow understanding of things. The money he paid 14% on was previously taxed at a higher rate. He gave more to charity voluntarily than Obama is worth. Biden gave a few hundred dollars. Gates gave enough to immunize the entire world. You would instead take that money and spend it to bribe senators to pass a health care plan that we do not even have yet but has taken 750 billion that was stolen out of Medi-care. Not only that but then turn around and say Ryan is actually the one that is threatening Medicare by viciously saving it from the liberals. Some people just hate people with more than them and will make up anything to justify theft. There is no more generous a person with money than a liberal, as long as it is someone else’s money.

Gee and I wonder if most of the charity Romney gave to was to the Mormon church and if he received tax breaks for it.

Again we come to the fact that the rich can use loop holes and grey areas in the laws to unfairly favor themselves and "if you could do it you would to" is not an argument. If a corporation wants all the perks of being a person then they need to take the negatives too, it can't be one sided.

 

[Shermana]

to pass a health care plan that we do not even have yet but has taken 750 billion that was stolen out of Medi-care.

PolitiFact | Paul Ryan said President Obama

This 716 billion dollar myth needs to be laid to rest.

 

[1robin]

PolitiFact | Paul Ryan said President Obama

This 716 billion dollar myth needs to be laid to rest.

You are so intelligent that I can not believe you are challenging this one claim out of the many I posted. Why do people get one hundred points find the one or two they think they might have a chance to counter, dismiss the rest without a fight and claim something was accomplished. Yes the great numbers wizard (Obama) seems to claim that $716 billion will be saved and that is what is being used on Obama care. That is only as good as his word and his ability as the liberal messiah to prophecy what will happen in the future. Given his numerical gymnastics in other areas I have about 0% faith in what he says. What we do know is that $716 billion must be pulled out of something to pay for the plan that was supposed to save us money. Considering he said it would save money, yet he is collecting taxes for years before it begins and is stealing money from other areas to bribe senators and pay for it all the while med school numbers have declined and every doctor I have heard hates it and said they advised their kids to pick another career. Seems that every month brings a higher cost estimate from the CBO, and that money whether or not the savings fantasy produces a dime is still coming out of medicare anyway. Yet it is Ryan who has never taken a dime out of medicare that the talking heads blame for it. Appalling. If you have faith in a mans ability to predict the future that said if we did not let him spend a trillion dollars unemployment would rise to 8% and we did and unemployment went above 8% anyway, and who said he would cut the deficit in half while actually increasing it tremendously then you are welcome to. I prefer reality.

 

[tytlyf]

If you have faith in a mans ability to predict the future that said if we did not let him spend a trillion dollars unemployment would rise to 8% and we did and unemployment went above 8% anyway, and who said he would cut the deficit in half while actually increasing it tremendously then you are welcome to. I prefer reality.

Do you think Obama would have spent what he did on the stimulus if it weren't for the Bushy recession? The stimulus was needed to stimulate the economy and keep the Great Recession from dipping into a depression.
There's a lot of panic mongering in your posts.

 

[esmith]

Just because you have money does not make you superior nor does it necessarily mean you earned it fairly. There are many historical reasons why workers need unions, I would rather trust the government ran by the people than someone who is only out for themselves. Of course there will be problems and corruption no matter who is in charge so spare me your anecdotal welfare and union stories.

I agree that if you made money it does not mean you are superior, or that you earned it fairly or not. However, it does say that if you made money you had the intelligence to make that money on your on with possible help with other intelligent people. Of course I am talking about making money within the laws of the United States. I really don't understand your comment "government ran by the people than someone who is only out for themselves". You do realize that the voters elect the government they want to represent them, don't you? I submit that the great majority of politicians of all flavors want to be re-elected. All of them are basically looking out for number one, and if you can't see that I pity you. On your statement about unions. Yes many years ago there was a great need for unions. Do we need them today? I'm not to sure. There is a tendency of some unions to put the union above the needs of the people. Right now, one of the biggest time bombs ticking away is the underfunded public union retirement funds. Ask yourself why charter schools do considerably better than a lot of public schools. Is it that the unions think they come before the student?

Gee and I wonder if most of the charity Romney gave to was to the Mormon church and if he received tax breaks for it.

To answer your question. First, I realize there is no such thing as a stupid question. if you do not know the answer to that, you really need to read up on the tax code on charitable deductions. Let me ask you a couple of question, if you itemize your deductions, can you claim charitable donations to charities, to any church? I'll, give you a hint; yes you can. What makes you think that the Mormon Church is any different from any other church in the United States. By asking this question, it leads me to believe that you really don't know the basic itemized deductions rules of the Federal Income Tax or you think that the Mormon Church is not a Church. Which is it?

Again we come to the fact that the rich can use loop holes and grey areas in the laws to unfairly favor themselves and "if you could do it you would to" is not an argument. If a corporation wants all the perks of being a person then they need to take the negatives too, it can't be one sided.

I agree that the US Tax Code needs to be overhauled, most tax accounts can't figure it out and the IRS really doesn't have a handle on it. I have only heard one person indicate that they want to change the tax code. Now, I admit they haven't given specifics; but wouldn't it be a better idea to get both sides of Congress together and work on this idiotic tax code together instead of putting forth specific points that then would immediately polarize both parties? Think I saw this in the health care debate.

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you think Obama would have spent what he did on the stimulus if it weren't for the Bushy recession? The stimulus was needed to stimulate the economy and keep the Great Recession from dipping into a depression.

They always say this, but they don't have any evidence that the benefits of stimulus exceed the costs (debt, inflation, waste, opportunity cost).
Moreover, any actual gains would be reduced for many years by paying back the debt. If it fails, what do they say? We just didn't spend enuf.
No analysis I've seen ever includes costs. it's simply faith-based economics which justifies ever greater spending.

 

[1robin]

Do you think Obama would have spent what he did on the stimulus if it weren't for the Bushy recession? The stimulus was needed to stimulate the economy and keep the Great Recession from dipping into a depression.
There's a lot of panic mongering in your posts.

How is speaking about events three years ago panic mongering? If I yelled the Japs are bombing battleship row in Pearl Harbor would you panic? Even if I was attempting to panic anyone concerning Obama there are few more worth while efforts in politics. I have heard dozens of respected economic scholars that have universally concluded that even if Obama is out in a month we still might have gone too far to ever come back. We are literally spending our grand children into oblivion as hard as we can go on the heels of socialist Europe.

To your questions:
The economic troubles were primarily not Bushe's fault. Carter created a program to give people who could not afford the houses they wanted a loan anyway. This he backed up with our money if it defaulted. Clinton actually doubled down on that mess and pushed banks to given even less justifiable loans. I live in an area that this was rampent in. Instead of getting a poor couple a small house it was used to get a $60,000 dollar a year engineer a 3/4 of a million dollar mansion he could not afford. This created a bubble that grew and grew. In I think 2002 a congressional hearing led by Mccain and the republicans who foolishly suggested that we should only spend somewhere around what we actually have and specifically said Fanny May and Freddy Mac were about to explode. The wonderful liberals shouted them down, and as they are doing now accused the republicans of trying to scare everyone, and appealed to sympathy and victim hood and acted like they were being picked on. Nothing was done. A small dip in the market after 911 caused the bubble to burst wide open in 07 and the economy went in to free fall. Naturally the people who tried to stop this from happening were accused by the ones who actually did do it of causing it and apparently you are one of them. So much for Bush's recession. Now what should have been done about it. I am no economist but I might have just let whatever was broken fail and go away. Tough love, but the politicians including Bush decided that we must save these broken systems and feed the problem. I disagree with Bush but after 7 boom years Bush had one or maybe 2 years of decline that he had nothing to do with. To give credit or blame where it is due, I will admit that while Bush never signed any bail out, however but Obama did twice, that first trillion was on Bush. However this is where bad went to diabolical. Obama has bailed out anything or anybody he decided to and deny anyone else for the same reasons. In the middle of this economic bloodletting he introduces the most expensive piece of legislation in American history by threat and bribing who ever was required, even though over 60% of the country does not want it. He lied and rammed through something that can easily break this country, has already began ruining the greatest health care system in human history, not to mention propping up Fanny Mae and Freddie Mack again and they are currently doing the same thing that Carter and Clinton forced them to that broke us to start off with. Plus in this recession he has grown government by over 20%, appointed more radical Tzars than Russia had in it's entire history, subverted the constitution, spent more money than any other president in history (please do not post that one study that suggests otherwise, it has been thoroughly debunked) punished our job creators, presided over the highest rate of government dependance (approx 45%) in our entire history, destroyed our oil and coal industry, and rejected the great Canadian oil pipe line as well as refused permission to tap our (the greatest on the Earth) own oil reserves, plus funded and enabled Islam terrorist organizations to overthrown many middle eastern governments, and all in the middle of a recession his party caused and blamed on Bush.

 

[esmith]

PolitiFact | Paul Ryan said President Obama

This 716 billion dollar myth needs to be laid to rest.

I commented on this issue here: Post #23
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/north-american-politics/139976-medicare-discussion-3.html