The policy implications of Mitt Romney’s 13 percent

I will take Reid’s word for it using the karma rule.

• Link
• Report this comment

Romney acts as if he is seeking to be president of student government not president of the united states, who needs that kind of candidate around anyhow?

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay, apparently you either don’t know the difference between income or capital-gains tax, or you’re intentionally being dishonest to push a particular agenda. Color me shocked if its the latter.

• Link
• Report this comment

This was the fatal error in his campaign but to be fair our President does not have to prove anything to the American too.

• Link
• Report this comment

Mitt Romney will garner many, many votes and maintains a small chance of defeating President Obama in the November election despite his refusal to allow the public to view his tax returns.

His tax return for year 2011 has not been completed and is still has not been released.

What happens if he is elected President?; does he refuse to release his tax returns even though it is required?

• Link
• Report this comment

R. Lee — “Its hard to believe that the GOP powers would have pushed mittens to the front if they knew of something in his tax records…….but then again they put Palin up as VP so who knows?”

Palin wasn’t vetted properly. And I kind of doubt that Presidential candidates get vetted by their party at all.

• Link
• Report this comment

“apparently you either don’t know the difference between income or capital-gains tax,”

And this is what the cons can’t comprehend. The tax rate should be the same for both income and capital gains. Both taxes apply to money you have earned.

• Link
• Report this comment

Just like Obama’s Birth
records if there is nothing
to hide it is foolish to not
release the tax records and
continue the controversy.
However i think the law is
2 years and that is what
Mccain released.

• Link
• Report this comment

“However, on the matter of whether Romney paid taxes, and how much he paid, I’m willing to trust his word. For one thing, the backlash should it prove to have been a lie would devastate his campaign. (And yes, accepting Romney’s word means that Harry Reid has either been badly misled by his secret informer or that the Senate majority leader is himself lying.)”

Thanks for your reasonable concession, Jay. Trying to get some of the liberal posters on this forum to acknowledge as much is like pulling teeth.

“Even without that change, however, Romney’s effective tax rate of roughly 13 percent for at least two in the last 10 years suggests that the picture of an overtaxed upper class is simply wrong. Millions and millions of less-affluent Americans pay Uncle Sam a lot bigger share of their income than did Romney, and they have every reason to wonder why that might be.”

I guess the same can be said of Buffet (who I’ve read paid around an 11% effective tax rate in 2010), despite arguing that he should pay more taxes (although he could have voluntarily done so, which take the force out of his argument) on behalf of the Obama campaign. Ryan has said recently in a CBS interview that part of reforming taxes will be closing the loopholes for wealthy Americans. In my opinion, wealthy people who demonstrably invest in actually creating jobs should perhaps be given a tax break (to incentivize such behavior) while those who do not should pay more in taxes.

• Link
• Report this comment

booger,

He’s paying 13% on millions of dollars. Most Americans pay well over 20%. Why should a rich man pay less taxes than someone in the middle class struggling to survive?

• Link
• Report this comment

Even at 13% he paid more in real dollars than every poster here combined.

• Link
• Report this comment

“In my opinion, wealthy people who demonstrably invest in actually creating jobs should perhaps be given a tax break (to incentivize such behavior) while those who do not should pay more in taxes.”

And that is why the GOP is going to get destroyed. History proves otherwise. When taxes were higher, the wealthy had an incentive to reinvest in their companies to avoid taxes as opposed to hoarding their cash.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Even at 13% he paid more in real dollars than every poster here combined”

Like I said, “voters with common sense”.

• Link
• Report this comment

If true, this suggest the Obama campaign is worried:

http://washingtonexaminer.com/hillary-rejected-vp-slot-to-ready-her-own-2016-run/article/2505206#.UC55GlZOWSq

• Link
• Report this comment

Blah — “Even at 13% he paid more in real dollars than every poster here combined.”

So what?

• Link
• Report this comment

Robert

Jay, apparently you either don’t know the difference between income or capital-gains tax,”
”
Maybe this will help your answer? Last I looked at my tax return, capital gains income information was an attachment on my 1040 income tax return.

Then again, maybe it won’t help your answer…

Jay

FYI –

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/08/16/4184754/study-companies-paid-more-to-ceos.html#storylink=misearch

Twenty-six big U.S. companies paid their CEOs more last year than they paid the federal government in tax, according to a study released Thursday by a liberal-leaning think tank.

The study, by the Institute for Policy Studies, said the companies, including AT&T, Boeing and Citigroup, paid their CEOs an average of $20.4 million last year while paying little or no federal tax on ample profits, according to regulatory filings.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Do we have a revenue or spending problem in government?

• Link
• Report this comment

There is no other plausible explanation for why he has refused to follow the precedent set by every other major candidate in the modern era.
++++
This statement was ruled false by poltifact.com
http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2012/aug/14/debbie-wasserman-schultz/major-candidates-modern-times-have-release-12-year/

• Link
• Report this comment

“And that is why the GOP is going to get destroyed. History proves otherwise. When taxes were higher, the wealthy had an incentive to reinvest in their companies to avoid taxes as opposed to hoarding their cash.”

Would you mind elaborating upon and substantiating this point?

• Link
• Report this comment

The Democrats are whining like spoiled brats crying because they only get one scoop of ice cream instead of two. The voters are far more concerned with high unemployment, the weak economy, our growing deficit and deteriorating living standards along with other issues far more important than putting Romney’s tax returns under the microscope. Anyone with half a brain knows that the Obama campaign wants to avoid issues voters are most concerned with because team Obama hasn’t been doing a particularly good job. The Romney campaign knows that all the Democrats want is material they can nit pick to divert attention from having to defend this administrations failures.

• Link
• Report this comment

He should still release additional medical & school records as well as college transcripts, passports, harvard law papers & thesis, and it’s quite clear that there’s something in those records & transcripts that in Obama’s mind would not pass muster with the voters. There is no other plausible explanation for why he has refused to follow the precedent set by every other major candidate in the modern era.

Agree %100 !!!

• Link
• Report this comment

V. Kint — “Do we have a revenue or spending problem in government?”

Both. Anyone who tries to make just *one* side the problem is harboring an agenda.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Don’t recall if we’ve discussed it or not, but I’ve said almost precisely the same thing.”

Is that evidence that great minds really do think alike? Or that even a broken clock is right twice a day?

• Link
• Report this comment

G. Heathen — “Maybe it ain’t none of your bidness.”

It is if he wants to be President.

• Link
• Report this comment

rex,

Thanks for that mindless con knee jerk reaction but lets focus on the issue.

Thanks.

• Link
• Report this comment

So candidate Obama analyzed President Obama’s Vice President, made an excuse for his most recent outrageous “chains” comments and the incurious media said, “well, that settles that, I guess.”

I like this discussion about Mitt Romney’s taxes. I do. We need a new -er word to describe it–a word like “birther” or “truther”.

“Taxer” won’t work, but that certainly describes Obama. The taxer-in-chief would presumably allow taxes to rise in January were he elected–increases that everyone knows would harm the economic, ah, “recovery” we are experiencing now.

But Obama’s position is on record that taxes should go up despite the fact that reducing capital gains taxes has repeatedly resulted in increased revenue to the government, as well as higher significant reductions have helped grow the economy (the Reagan era), because of critical issue of “fairness,” the issue that Bookman all but plainly states in his column.

I wonder which the American people would appreciate more, having a growing economy, increased revenue to the government to support already high spending or the smug satisfaction of liberal columnists that a rich guy like Mitt Romney is paying a much larger share of his income in taxes?

That’s the choice Americans have this year.

It’s no wonder the incredulity we have that so many Obama supporters call themselves “progressives”.

• Link
• Report this comment

Or, stated another way, the assertion that Romney pays a lower effective tax rate than average Americans is a flat out lie.

• Link
• Report this comment

I saw an interview with Ann Romney last night on the news. She said her”s and Mitt’s financies and taxes had been handled in a blind trust for the missing ten years and they didn’t even know how much taxes they had paid.

That doesn’t square with Mitt’s story that he reviewed his tax returns.

If his wife is right, he couldn’t have. If she is wrong, that means he has been lying to her about what he has been doing.

Either way, looks bad. They should get their stories straight and give out the same answers.

Which story is right?

• Link
• Report this comment

A man who has reaped untold benefits from the tax policies of recent decades pursuing activities (Private Equity) that only became possible in the recent era under conditions of this new hyper-financialized capitalism who is the first candidate in modern times not to release more information on his income – and yet it’s unreasonable to look askance on that?

THAT is truly beyond the pale. And in no way whatsoever is it in the same league as Obama and the ridiculous birth certificate circus. Not that this stopped CNN’s Alex Castellanos from trying to demagogue the issue this week.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ben Shockley

“Facts are stubborn things.”

They are also without context. What’s your point? Do you agree with the spread? Think it in need of correction? Do you think the top 1% should pay 1%? Is that it?

• Link
• Report this comment

G. Heathen — “Why? I don’t see “release tax returns” in the qualifications section of the Constitution.”

I didn’t speak to qualifications, and I think you know it.

He’s going to have a hard time persuading people to trust him enough to make him President if he doesn’t trust the American people enough to show them what all the hubbub is about.

• Link
• Report this comment

If I hid money off shore and paid no federal income taxes on that unknown quantity but paid federal income taxes on some portion that I decided to report, what would my federal income tax be as a fraction of my total income:

Fed Tax on total income (%) = (federal tax paid / (reported income + unreported income)) x 100

Given that the percentage of tax paid on reported earnings was claimed to be 13%, if unreported earning were equal to reported earnings, the percentage of tax paid would be 6.5%; if unreported earnings were double reported earnings, the percentage of tax paid would be 4.3%; if unreported earnings were four times reported earnings, the percentage of tax paid would be 2.6%…

What are you Romneys hiding in those off-shore accounts?
What income did you use each year to determine your tithe?
…

Why would anyone other than a true peer (i.e., another with equally suspicious background with regard to blood money financing, off-shore accounts, unusual tax deductions, non-transparency in disclosures, etc.) trust Mitt Romney in the role of leader of the United State? You’d have to be Republican tool to answer that. Speak up, Republican tools.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul, my point is that the assertion that Romney pays a lower effective tax rate than millions of average Americans is a flat out lie. And my assertion is irrrefutable.

• Link
• Report this comment

Just release ten years of taxes.

It is not going away.

• Link
• Report this comment

getalife, why don’t you point out ONE lie I’ve posted.

Good luck.

• Link
• Report this comment

He should still release additional tax returns, and it’s quite clear that there’s something in those returns that in Romney’s mind would not pass muster with the voters.
I don’t think it is clear at all. However, Romney has open himself up to speculation by not providing tax returns. Reid and Pelosi have not released their tax returns either in fact very people in congress have release their tax returns. Maybe it should be a legal requirement.

And yes, accepting Romney’s word means that Harry Reid has either been badly misled by his secret informer or that the Senate majority leader is himself lying.)
Reid was out of line especially since he had not release any of his tax returns even though I think Reid was out of line Romney allowed such speculation by not releasing tax returns.

On that point, Romney’s answer is much too coy.
I am not sure he is being coy. I think he is detached from reality.

Unfortunately, with the partisan divide both sides know they can head off any attack as partisan. He also knew he could use the ant-rich defense. Maybe he is being coy.

• Link
• Report this comment

For those who don’t understand the tax code…

http://www.smartmoney.com/personal-finance/taxes/whats-your-average-tax-rate-9548/

“So you’re annoyed that big bonus knocked you into the 33% tax bracket? Well, if it’s any consolation, you don’t have to pay the 33% tax rate on allyour income. That’s because you’re only taxed at the 33% rate on income beyond a certain threshold — $178,650 for a single filer in 2012. Those who are married, filing jointly don’t reach the 33% mark until $217,450. Income up to that point is taxed at the lower rates of 10%, 15%, 25% and 28%. So, your average tax rate is actually much lower than the highest rate you pay. Here’s how it works.

For example, say, you’re single and have taxable income of $185,000 in 2012. And let’s say your gross income was $210,000. Well, your income up to $8,700 is taxed at 10%. From $8,701 to $35,350 is taxed at 15%. From $35,351 up to $85,650, it’s taxed at 25%. From $85,651 to $178,650, the rate is 28%. And you’ll pay 33% on the remaining $6,350. (The top rate, 35%, kicks in at $379,150 for singles.) In this case, your average tax rate (the proportion of gross income you’ll pay in taxes) is “only” about 22%.

Plug your own numbers into our calculator to find your own average tax rate and see how it changes at different income levels.”

• Link
• Report this comment

ben,

All you cons do is lie.

No thanks, there are some here that will engage your lies but I gave up on having an intellectual honest debate with you cons years ago.

.

• Link
• Report this comment

Also, the higher your income, the more you get caught in the “alternative minimum tax” trap, i.e. you don’t get to claim all those deductions the libs whine about.

• Link
• Report this comment

The tax return topic is stale and boring on a nationwide basis. Only the desperate democrats keep it alive in hopes it will catch fire. It is a dud. Now you just have to love the irony in the following:

Bain Capital, the investment firm that Mitt Romney made famous, made a leveraged buyout that saved the site of Barack and Michelle Obamas’ first kiss.

Dunkin’ Brands is the parent company of Baskin-Robbins, at whose Hyde Park, Chicago location the president and his future wife Michelle went on their first date — and shared their first lip lock.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/16/romneys-bain-saved-site-of-obamas-first-kiss/#ixzz23pCZUpxB

• Link
• Report this comment

Ima Librul — “All this from a crowd that took three years to see a simple Birth Certificate……”

Wrong.

Obama’s BC was verified and validated by the State of Hawaii *before* the 2008 election. Republican Governor Linda Lingle said that there was nothing on his BC that would preclude Mr. Obama from becoming President, if he should be elected.

Please stop lying.

• Link
• Report this comment

Nobody gives a rats patootie about Romneys taxes. Let’s keep the focus on the economy where it belongs. Obama has done zilch to improve our economy or unemployment. His policies are a total failure and his administration is beyond criminal. Just Bookmans daily attempt to deflect our sad state of affairs off BHO where the blame solely lies.

• Link
• Report this comment

getalife

August 17th, 2012
1:20 pm

“ben,

All you cons do is lie.

No thanks, there are some here that will engage your lies but I gave up on having an intellectual honest debate with you cons years ago.”

TRANSLATION: “I can’t cite any lies, and I’m not bright enough to engage Ben in debate. Calling people names is pretty much the extent of my contributions to the blog.”

• Link
• Report this comment

By broadening the tax base, JHM, I meant by getting people jobs (and not the burger flipping kind either). Taxing the top 2% only does not solve the long term problem. Spending cuts have to be made but I haven’t heard anything from this administration that convinces me they are committed to doing it.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Jay did not say Romney paid at a lower effective rate than millions of //average// American. He said “Millions and millions of //less-affluent// Americans pay Uncle Sam a lot bigger share of their income than did Romney, ”

That’s a lie too, per the chart I posted a link to.

• Link
• Report this comment

mm, I interpret your post 2 1:24 to mean that you CAN refute my assertion?

We’re all anxiously waiting.

• Link
• Report this comment

ben,

Your initials are bs so…….

• Link
• Report this comment

FEDERAL INCOME TAXES ON MIDDLE-INCOME FAMILIES NEAR HISTORICAL LOWS

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3151

from the congressional budget office, by the way…

Federal taxes on middle-income Americans are near historic lows,[1] according to the latest available data. That’s true both for federal income taxes and total federal taxes.[2]

■Income taxes: A family of four in the exact middle of the income spectrum will pay only 5.6 percent of its 2011 income in federal income taxes, according to a new analysis by the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center. [3] Average income tax rates for these typical families have been lower during the Bush and Obama Administrations than at any time since the 1950s, as Figure 1 shows. (As discussed below, 2009 and 2010 were particularly low because of the temporary Making Work Pay Tax Credit.)
■Overall federal taxes: Overall federal taxes — which include income as well as payroll and excise taxes — on middle-income households are near their lowest levels in decades, according to the latest data from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

• Link
• Report this comment

getalife keeps calling names, keeps saying nothing of value.

some things never change…,.

• Link
• Report this comment

“It is not going away. Prove it.”

Grow up and get some thinking skills. How old are you, anyway? Even Jay acknowledges what most certainly must be the truth. You are making yourself look bad, my friend.

• Link
• Report this comment

Is this the same Mitt Romney that wants to be President of the U.S. that said “Let Detroit go bankrupt”? How can the U.S. sustain itself as “ONE” nation if it does not serve all communities?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1IhXZD4Txs

• Link
• Report this comment

Mick – why has unemployment been over 8% for over 40 months. Check out this graph:

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/080312jobschart1-600×306.jpg

• Link
• Report this comment

Oh no, right on cue, gomer the lesser has arrived worrying about what he thinks hillary might be thinking. Romney is toast already before his big tent revival even gets started…

• Link
• Report this comment

I don’t trust him.

Prove it .

• Link
• Report this comment

Like I said before. Romney is an investor. He got his funds from variety of source. Some of these sources might be of quetionable character. If Romney took their money and hid them offshore (in other word stole them) they will not be so kind to him. My guess that is what he is hidding and not 0% tax rate.

We all know many Corporations pay next to nothing in taxes and the masses never say a word. If Romney pays 0% tax I don’t care. Interprete any way you can you cons.

• Link
• Report this comment

Towncrier

August 17th, 2012
12:57 pm
“However, on the matter of whether Romney paid taxes, and how much he paid, I’m willing to trust his word.”

Didn’t Ronald Reagan say “….trust, but VERIFY!”?? Isn’t verification what the American public DESERVES???

• Link
• Report this comment

i wish the lib cryers would look to both sides of the coin and require less entitlements to go along with modified tax code. i will bet that if the libs get equal capital gains and income taxes equal, then they will need a new beef and it will be equal pay for unequal work/ability.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ben Shockley

//“Jay did not say Romney paid at a lower effective rate than millions of //average// American. He said “Millions and millions of //less-affluent// Americans pay Uncle Sam a lot bigger share of their income than did Romney, ”

That’s a lie too, per the chart I posted a link to.//

Ben, you’re coming across as being a bit too interested in a ‘gotcha’ rather than an examination of what is.

The topic’s effective rates, not marginal income rates. What we’re getting at is the perception that Mitt and others at his range have it better in tax treatment than what the average person pulling the lever does. Jay’s final two paragraphs transitioned to include the accepted Republican wisdom that the top, top, tier are grossly overtaxed, that Republican proposals would get their rate to near zero and that millions of other Americans pay a bigger //share of their income//.

Or, as the NY Times put it, “a typical household making $100,000 a year would pay closer to a 10 percent average federal income tax rate than a 15 percent rate, Congressional Budget office data suggest.

For many middle-class households, however, other taxes — like payroll taxes and state and local taxes — typically cause their total annual tax rate to rise to 20 percent of their income and higher. For Mr. Romney, these other taxes most likely had only a small effect on his total tax rate, because much of his income came from investments, which is generally taxed at a lower rate than wage income.

In 2011, Mr. Obama and his wife reported an effective federal income tax rate of 20.5 percent. In 2010, their rate was just over 26 percent.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/17/us/politics/romney-says-he-paid-at-least-13-percent-in-income-taxes.html

• Link
• Report this comment

Romney and Obama made X millions last year. I made X thousand.

Romney and Obama made X millions this year. I hope to make X thousand.

I do not care what they make. That has no affect on me. Stop the stupid class warefare! Incase anyone has not noticed we have 8% plus unemployment!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

verbal

Where were you in sept 08 and the following months? Man, you dense repubs just want to believe unemployment rates over 8% began in january 09, ridiculous combined with pre-alzhiemers…

• Link
• Report this comment

Why should we trust Romney’s word on his taxes? He has lied about his taxes before using the exact same phrase he’s using now- “You’re just going to have to trust me on this.” No, that’s not the way it works. And his dishonesty in the past about claiming his primary residence as Massachusetts on his tax forms when in fact he’d paid in Utah casts a shadow over any claims he makes now en lieu of sufficient evidence. He needs to release 5-10 years of taxes, just like all other presidential candidates have done, including his father, and only then will he put the matter to rest. And he makes it sound like he did a great thing by paying 13%, which is about half of what middle class families pay. So it’s now admirable that a multimillionaire pays less than half of what the guy driving the bulldozer pays? Really?

• Link
• Report this comment

Just looked at my paystub from this week. I make about $125,000 anually, which puts me in the top 10% I believe. Not sure though. Anyway, on $86,650 earned so far this year, I’ve paid $10,665 in federal income taxes, or 12.3%.

So I’m in the top 10% and I pay a lower effective rate than Romney’s 13%.

So Jay’s assertion that millions pay less than Romeny = bald faced lie.

• Link
• Report this comment

“The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity”

- Benjamin Franklin‏

• Link
• Report this comment

Show me the tax forms.

Now.

Prove it.

• Link
• Report this comment

G. Heathen — “By hubbub you mean all that BS that the Dems are “speculating” about to deflect attention away from Obama’s economy?”

No, I mean the tax issue that Romney and his wife keep trying and failing to dismiss on national TV.

I’ve got no problem whatsoever talking about the economy under President Obama, and I welcome a factual comparison of his plans and Romney’s plans.

• Link
• Report this comment

Lets talk about how great Obama is doing. After all he looks like me. So he is doing a great job. 15% unemployment? What do you mean? More of us on food stamps than ever before? More of us not owning homes? Lowest in 30 years? What could you possibly mean? The national debt is going through the roof? I don’t care. Just give me my check.

• Link
• Report this comment

“As we know, the Republican position has long been that taxes on the wealthy and on corporations are punitively high, and that reducing them would help create jobs and new investment. President Bush, for example, used that argument in successfully pushing major tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, yet finished his eight-year presidency with fewer private non-farm payroll jobs than when he began.”

The latter does not disprove the former, as there are many factors that feed into job growth, such as the availability of capital during a financial crash or a global recession.

“Despite that history, both Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, continue to push the story line that America’s wealthy are being used and abused by the ungrateful masses, and continue to present tax plans that would further favor wealthier Americans. ”

The first sentence is silly. They have in no way accused anyone of being ungrateful, let alone the masses. Nothing they have said indicates they feel that way at all. If what they were saying was truly radical, Bookman would not need to manufacture this dreck.

Many folks, including many economists, share the view that reducing tax rates for everyone (even those mean old rich people) does result in increased economic investment and growth. There is a reason why Obama renewed the Bush tax cuts, and that is because he knew that it would have a negative economic effect during a fragile recovery. The fact is many folks believe that these tax cuts will benefit everyone, including those mean old rich people. Are we not supposed to pursue an economic policy if it benefits rich people too? Is this some new criteria by which a particular class of American citizen is not to benefit from any policy decisions along with the rest of the populace? Sounds like a nutso way to make policy decision and has more to do with creating a wedge issue than it does with solving any problems.

• Link
• Report this comment

Edit – inauguration 2009

• Link
• Report this comment

And, as to the entire Republican platform that low taxes lead to lower unemployment and a better economy via trickled down economics, that’s entirely false. Since 1948 there has been a statistically significant negative correlation between tax rates and unemployment rates, meaning that when taxes are low unemployment tends to be high, and when taxes are high unemployment tends to be low. There is no quantitative evidence for the conservatives’ beliefs on the issue, and the evidence actually suggests just the opposite.

• Link
• Report this comment

It’s verification you want so when is Obama going to verify his birth certificate? Not gonna’ do it is he. I still say giving to charity is better than throwing it down the Fed gub’ment toilet and it is still legal to give to charity. If Romney did anything wrong with his taxes then the IRS would be all over him. He has shown ALL of his tax records to the IRS and has been charged with ZERO violations. He has a due right to privacy just like every other citizen of this country. Obama is just trying to divert us from what this election is about – the federal debt, the economy and unemployment. Obama has mismanaged the government and our tax dollars. He is naive and inept. Time for a change.

• Link
• Report this comment

V. Kint — “JHM – Why did Obama ignore the Simpson Bowles commission recs?”

Probably because a number of the commission members publicly criticized the recommendations as being too heavily tilted toward entitlement reductions and tax cuts. That’s my recollection of the main criticism against the commission, anyway.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Crier, that’s like demanding evidence that Venus isn’t made of green cheese. Go ahead, prove it!”

I see. First, I am very surprised to discover that you think that a politician’s public pronouncements are always truthful (rather than strategic or calculating or some other such thing). Secondly, the main reason I linked the article (go back to my post) was to say that if, in fact, the Obama campaign had recently made an overture to Hillary (via Jarrett) that this suggest it is worried. We are miscommunicating , it seems. Can you refute Klein’s report of a recent meeting in which the VP position was discussed? THAT is what I was asking from you.

• Link
• Report this comment

There is no trust for politicians.

ryan’s do nothing corrupt house is polling at an all time low.

Lets get real and prove your bs.

Show us ten years of taxes like or President or bow out. Period.

• Link
• Report this comment

Damn Bush’s fault. I thought I was the only one posting dumb stuff. Bro, I think you got me beat…LOL

• Link
• Report this comment

has anyone ever thought of eliminating deductions, that one fix may make the tax code “fair.” whatever that means….seriously, eliminate all deductions except for a personal deduction and leave the rates as they are. Just a thought…..

• Link
• Report this comment

In 2002, when Mitt Romney was running for Massachusetts governor, he would not release his tax returns. All of the candidates running on the Democratic side, Robert Reich, Tom Birmingham, Shannon O’Brien, who became the ultimate Democratic nominee, they all released multiple years of tax returns. But Mitt Romney on the Republican side, would not release his.

So, when it came time for the general election, you got a Democrat, Shannon O’Brien, who has released her tax returns, and you’ve got the Republican, Mitt Romney, who has not released his tax returns. From that position, as the guy who hasn’t released his returns, Mitt Romney attacks Shannon O’Brien for her husband not releasing his tax returns.

What we have here for the first time is the republicans are supporting a King and Queen. They don’t have to respond to the common people. Ann would be a nasty queen at that, boy what an attitude!

• Link
• Report this comment

My take on the “release them/don’t release them” kurfluffle is:

1. If he releases them and there is nothing there (no illegal activity, no “amnesty” benefit), it will not change the mind of anyone that has already decided NOT to vote for him. I seriously doubt anyone in that group, after seeing the returns, will suddenly say “Well, I was going to vote for Obama, but since the returns are clean, I’m on the Romney train”. Those people want to see them, hoping there is something in them so they can say “See!!!! I told you Romney is a ____________”.

2. If he releases them and they are on the up and up, the focus will then turn to HOW rich he is and what LEGAL deductions he took. Look how much mililage the “ZOMG HE TOOK A $77,000 DEDUCTION FOR A HOBBIE HORZE UUUURRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHRRRRRHHH!!!!!!”, without digging much further than that to see the Romney’s only realized a $49 savings from the horse.

3. Honestly, how many voters are savy enough to understand the complex paperwork associated with filing tax returns for a multimillionare? There are people that struggle with the 1040EZ form. That leads to people being TOLD what the different items in the returns mean from sources with an agenda. That is how you get the above mentioned poutrage (ZOMG HE TOOK A $77,000 DEDUCTION FOR A HOBBIE HORZE UUUURRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHRRRRRHHH!!!).

4. I actually think there is something in his returns dealing with the 2009 amnesty and that would be “all she wrote”, but I could be wrong.

5. He’s not going to win, he knows it, so why release them.

just my .03 (it was .02 but I got a raise, daymn Obama economy)

• Link
• Report this comment

Gale, get past a paycheck and let your money earn you money and you to can join him. Thousands of Libs do the same thing. He’s only doing what Dem Charlie Rangel and his crackpot tax committee have allowed as laws him to do. Nothing more, nothing less.

• Link
• Report this comment

Eliminate the home interest deduction and you can watch the housing industry really tank. On the other hand, remove a housing interest deduction for all except the first primary residence, and I would sign on to that.

• Link
• Report this comment

Yea Jay! And many Democrats pay nothing!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

I thought with W we had hit bottom and run out of material . But these guys are hilarious…..

• Link
• Report this comment

“The top 1% pay an effective federal tax rate rate of 19%, vs 14.4% for those in the top quintile, 6.2% for those in the second quintile, 3.3% for those in the middle quintile, and zero (or less) for those in the bottom two quintiles.”

From Ben’s data:

Change in effective tax rates for all quintiles 1979-2007 = -1.8%
Change in effective tax rate for the top 1% 1979-2007 = -7.5%

Only God knows where it’s gone in the last five years.

We’re bleeding these poor billionaires to death. No wonder they can’t hire any more pool boys and stable muckers.

Also answers part of the “do we have a revenue problem” question.

• Link
• Report this comment

Rob -Me has never had to explain anything and it shows….

• Link
• Report this comment

When defense lawyers don’t have a strong case they revert to an insanity defense. Likewise, when you Democrats don’t have a strong defense case for electing your candidate for president, you revert to accusations of Romney’s tax avoidance. Nice try.

Don’t want to talk about the miserable economy, the crippling debt, and 8.3 unemployment that is on your watch? Your distractions are as dumb as Harry Reid’s ridiculous accusations or the steel worker’s murdered wife or the dog on the roof or proposed felony charge against Mitt or rolling granny off a cliff or Ryan’s blowing up Medicare plan.

What can we say. You looters are the most pathetic bunch of low life characters trying to reelect a failure for 4 more years. Speaks volumes for your judge of character.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Besides which, I find it interesting that you apparently believe that a president should have such great power over the direction of the economy, that in fact you apparently believe that a president is the single most important factor in such things.”

A president that leads can have a very pronounced effect on the economy, whether good or bad.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’ll be glad to release my tax returns to Obama, and show him how my income has decreased every year he’s been president. I’d love to be paying more taxes, for what that implies.

Let’s all of us send 3 years worth of our tax returns to Obama. Here’s what you built.

• Link
• Report this comment

Gale, though it’s my position that I feel a federal gov’ts place is NOT to prop up a segment of the economy, I might find that compromise reasonable. See the issue isn’t the tax rates, it’s the deductions and other tax regulations. Some folks can greatly hide assets legally through our tax code(which btw has been written by wealthy Republicans and wealthy Democrats). I say eliminate all loopholes and all deductions and voila, there is not argument. Cause then, not only are the rich paying more (which they do amount wise) they end up paying more percentage wise.

• Link
• Report this comment

Yea Jay! And many Democrats pay nothing!!!

Care to explain this nugget of wisdom, seabeau?

• Link
• Report this comment

Pelosi Threatens Media: ‘Maybe The People Writing These Stories’ Should Release Their Tax Returns

Also google any time Cox sisters and tax issues

I curse God for not allowing a baseabll 98 mph or write worthless blogs for a living

• Link
• Report this comment

The policy implications of Comrade Obama’s lack of experience and communist/anti-colonial Philosophy….

• Link
• Report this comment

“Do you think the top 1% should pay 1%? Is that it?”

And those in the bottom 99% should pay 99%?

• Link
• Report this comment

What the Cons dont realize is it really is all bushs fault that there vision for this country has been destroyed.

• Link
• Report this comment

“The rules are skewed to let the rich get richer. Simple fact.”

You may be right. It is astonishing how many elected officials on the “hill” are wealthy. And look at people like Gore. I think liberals are right to decry greed as a problem for our nation, but it is not just CEOs and their ilk that are greedy. Humans are greedy.

• Link
• Report this comment

liberal hack

August 17th, 2012
1:44 pm
-_______

I agree with you about deductions. Eliminate all deductions including mortgage interest.
A business has to deduct expenses from revenues to arrive at profits to pay taxes on. The question of what is a business deduction is where most of the problems are. Most of the loopholes are for businss eductions.

• Link
• Report this comment

THANKS DUBYA!

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul, my point is that the assertion that Romney pays a lower effective tax rate than millions of average Americans is a flat out lie. And my assertion is irrrefutable.

The average federal income tax rate as a percentage of reported AGI for the 3.2 million people with reported incomes in 2009 between $200k and $500k was 19.5% per the IRS data.

• Link
• Report this comment

Honestly, the debate about disclosing past records is getting silly. Obama released his birth certificate – long form – and years of tax records. Has Romney released his long form birth certificate? We know he’s hiding something in his taxes, since he won’t release those. However why should Obama have to release college transcripts,theses, passports, etc. for Romney to only release his tax records??? Seems to me that Obama has disclosed more already.

• Link
• Report this comment

Does Obama not releasing his college records bother you at all Jay? Such a hypocrite…

• Link
• Report this comment

“The average federal income tax rate as a percentage of reported AGI for the 3.2 million people with reported incomes in 2009 between $200k and $500k was 19.5% per the IRS data.”

That was households, not individuals, but as always, thanks for playing.

• Link
• Report this comment

Why are people saying that folks are overtaxed?

• Link
• Report this comment

Donovan – “What can we say. You looters are the most pathetic bunch of low life characters trying to reelect a failure for 4 more years. Speaks volumes for your judge of character.”

I love Donovan! He does the best imitation of a Republican asshat that I have ever seen. Seriously, The accuracy of his satire is oscar worthy! Keep it up!

• Link
• Report this comment

Wrong, Mr. Shockley. High earners will pay a 3.8% medicare tax on investment earnings. And on profits from the sale of vacation homes.

• Link
• Report this comment

Here are the effective tax rates with payroll taxes according to Poltifact:

Bottom fifth of earners: 1 percent
Second-to-bottom fifth: 7.8 percent
Middle fifth: 15.5 percent
Second-highest fifth: 18.7 percent
Highest fifth: 24.3 percent

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/09/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-most-americans-pay-higher-tax-ra/

• Link
• Report this comment

Tax Man- I guess it’s because they don’t realize that federal income taxes are the lowest they’ve been in 80 years (with the exception of around 1988-1991 when they were between 28-31% and we had another recession).

• Link
• Report this comment

Romney reminds of a manager I had a few years ago. Sounded confused when he talked and didn’t stand up for his employees, but he was a nice guy.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ben Shockley

That was households, not individuals, but as always, thanks for playing.

No, Ben, that was for Individual income tax returns per. Thanks for playing though.

• Link
• Report this comment

Oops, per IRS data.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Does Obama not releasing his college records bother you at all Jay?”
–
Maybe they can make a deal. Romney releases his tax returns and President Obama will release his grades.

• Link
• Report this comment

thanks Oscar. I think eliminate all deductions ends this silly debate on who pays more. but I have a feeling that would never change because one party in particular loves to use that card to stir up people and distract them from real issues. the business deductions kinda make sense but hadn’t quite figured out a solution, possibly it could be to make all small business owners get a tax id and only allow those business deductions to be applied to said tax id, and make the business owner pay himself a salary or whatever and that is his income. besides I believe we all know that what a business grosses in revenue isn’t what a business owner takes home to support his family…

• Link
• Report this comment

Repost (since you came at me so strongly, Jay):

“Crier, that’s like demanding evidence that Venus isn’t made of green cheese. Go ahead, prove it!”

I see. First, I am very surprised to discover that you think that a politician’s public pronouncements are always truthful (rather than strategic or calculating or some other such thing). Secondly, the main reason I linked the article (go back to my post) was to say that if, in fact, the Obama campaign had recently made an overture to Hillary (via Jarrett) that this suggests it is worried. We are miscommunicating , it seems. Can you refute Klein’s report of a recent meeting in which the VP position was discussed? THAT is what I was asking from you.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay @ 2:11- I’ll say it again, there’s a negative correlation between the top marginal tax rates and the unemployment rate from 1948-2011, r(64) = -.31, p = .013. When tax rates are high, unemployment has been low. When tax rates are low (as they are now) unemployment has been high (as it is now). There is no debating those numbers. They are facts.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay would fix this problem by instituting a 100% tax rate.

• Link
• Report this comment

welcome to the occupation, don’t you have to earn income from working first before you put it at risk on the market? I think that’s why that rate is lower than the income rate….

btw, I get that some folks inherit money and invest it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, that’s it!

There is no way I can vote for Romney now!

I mean, what the heck?! He didn’t pay more than he was legally obligated to pay???

I’m sure Obama donated an extra 10% or so to the IRS beyond what he was obligated to pay.

That’s what good democrats do.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hey Guys, Democrats also pay what they are supposed to, just like Republicans.

Don’t Democrats know how incredibly stupid they look on this issue?

• Link
• Report this comment

it’s quite clear that there’s something in those returns that in Romney’s mind would not pass muster with the voters

should read:
quite clear that there’s something in those returns that in Romney’s mind would not pass muster with the voters left…

• Link
• Report this comment

“It didn’t matter when George W. Bush didn’t do it.”

It was done for him (through the media), as it was for Gore and Kerry. And that information undeniably became part of the campaign dialect.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay, what do you think of my idea of eliminating all deductions except for the personal deduction for everyone….won’t that solve most of what bothers some about the tax code?

• Link
• Report this comment

Welcome to the Occupation
August 17th, 2012
2:14 pm

Moderate lin: “Using Romney has an example is misleading because most of his income is derived from capital gains”

Now step back for just a second and think about that statement.

Most of his income is derived from capital gains.

Let’s take that apart, because that “most” is one helluva understatement.

Romney made what, 42 million dollars last year, and of that I think he said he made $375 k from “speaking fees”. So that means 375,000 / 42,000,000 = .0089 of his income was actually “earned”.

Meaning that he made well over 99 % of his income for doing, what exactly?

Nothing. That’s what.

Why do people on here want to go to bat for people who want to go EVEN FURTHER in shifting the tax burden onto people who WORK to the benefit of the speculators?
++++
Furthermore, I believe taxes should be raised because I do not believe we will every balance the budget by cutting spending. My post was only to show that Romney is not a good example of the typical tax payer in the upper income.

• Link
• Report this comment

Its funny to see the 0% crowd whining about 13% as if 0% is “fair”, but 13% isn’t.

• Link
• Report this comment

hack,

The solution is to vote out the gop.

There ya go.

• Link
• Report this comment

Lots of dancing around, I still haven’t heard one poster who takes issue with Jay’s lead state if they think Romney and others in his strata pay too much or not enough.

Isn’t that supposed to be one of the issues separating the candidates? So c’mon, Romney supporters – would you greatly cut his taxes to near zero percent, as Ryan suggested, would you leave them alone our would you increase them?

• Link
• Report this comment

“Its funny to see the 0% crowd whining about 13% as if 0% is “fair”, but 13% isn’t.”

The lower ranking enlisted men and women working around the world this very minute to insure your freedoms, salute your dumb ass.

They are part of that 0% crown you demean as if you are somebody special in this world

You are nothing

• Link
• Report this comment

W. Mike — “Hey Democrats, how about making it a law to give absolutely zero incentives to do business and to people who want to invest their money.”

If you want to do business, then do it. If you want to invest, then invest. But why should you receive incentives for doing it?

In my opinion, if you’re not actively and DIRECTLY creating jobs for Americans right now — whether you’re an individual or a corporate entity starting or expanding an existing business — then you don’t deserve any tax break of any sort.

If you’re not DIRECTLY contributing to the recovery of the economy by creating or sustaining some American jobs, then I don’t believe you deserve any incentives delivered via the tax code.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Lots of dancing around, I still haven’t heard one poster who takes issue with Jay’s lead state if they think Romney and others in his strata pay too much or not enough.”

I offered an opinion that relates to this question. But I don’t dance with the stars.

• Link
• Report this comment

“I am not a crook” willie robme.

• Link
• Report this comment

“In my opinion, if you’re not actively and DIRECTLY creating jobs for Americans right now — whether you’re an individual or a corporate entity starting or expanding an existing business — then you don’t deserve any tax break of any sort.

If you’re not DIRECTLY contributing to the recovery of the economy by creating or sustaining some American jobs, then I don’t believe you deserve any incentives delivered via the tax code.”

JHM and I are (mostly) agreed on this matter (there may be some tax breaks that should remain, such as for home ownership).

• Link
• Report this comment

It certainly looks like he’s hiding something by refusing to release them and it doesn’t sound right that he doesn’t see why anyone is interested in the taxes of a presidential candidate. Didn’t he think about this years ago when he first decided to run for president?

• Link
• Report this comment

Towncrier

True, that.

Sinkwich

“The prime goal of conservative policy is robust economic growth.”

Okay, fine.

Now what steps do Republicans propose to achieve the goal of economic growth?

Besides tax cuts. Or tax cuts. Or tax cuts. Or eliminating regulations. Or tax cuts Or tax cuts. Or repealing Obamacare. Or tax cuts. Or tax cuts.

• Link
• Report this comment

It was a rhetorical question Jay…we all knew it wouldn’t bother you at all. Because you are biased and hypocritical.

By the by…GM is well on their way…time for another $25 Billion dollar bailout.

• Link
• Report this comment

doggone, how can you not say that wouldn’t be a solution. if a millionaire earned a million in income, he’s practically taxed at 35% minus the personal deduction….someone making 30,000 is taxed at 15% minus the personal deduction…..

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay, what do you think of my idea of eliminating all deductions except for the personal deduction for everyone….won’t that solve most of what bothers some about the tax code?

not that you asked me, but–

In principle, getting rid of deductions and having just a set batch of tax rates is fine with me.

However, there is no way to accomplish this, practically speaking. You can’t go it in one fell swoop without having devastating effects on the economy–so you’d have to phase it in over more than just a few years.

and in that time, short of some Constitutional amendment, any tax code legislation would be subject to the usual manipulations, year in and year out.

Simplifying the tax code sounds great. In practice, it’s almost impossible. I’m more than willing to accept that loopholes and deductions will always be with us, and fight to make them humane and beneficial to as many Americans as possible.

• Link
• Report this comment

I like rich people (liberal and conservative) who take full advantage of the law (as passed by Congress) and avoid (vs. evade) paying federal taxes and are therefore able to buy more yachts, private jets, mink coats, Cadillacs or whatever. Because buying those things gives people jobs !

P.S.

“Conservatism/Capitalism seeks to give everyone equal opportunity and to bring people up to the best level of prosperity obtainable. No system in the history of the world has done better.

Liberalism/Socialism seeks to force equal outcomes and to bring people down to the level of shared misery. The history of the world is full of failed, despotic systems that have done just that.”

• Link
• Report this comment

Erwin’s cat

All that’s fine and well, but it still doesn’t get to the question those on this blog opposed to Obama seem averse to answering: Why should people who make money by owning resources be taxed less than people who make money by working?

• Link
• Report this comment

Moderate Lin: “My post was only to show that Romney is not a good example of the typical tax payer in the upper income.”

Well, glad that you’re not opposed to tax increases in principle.

As for Romney being typical top earner, guess it depends on whether we’re talking about top 1% earner or top .01% earners. While I don’t think he’s necessarily typical for all the former group, I do think he’s fairly typical of the latter.

• Link
• Report this comment

I like the Buffet plan on the deficit.

If it is over 3 % of our gdp, congress is dissolved.

• Link
• Report this comment

Conservatives think the failing, over-regulated economy is the primary problem facing America. Leftists think it is Romney’s tax forms. Tells us a lot about each.

• Link
• Report this comment

“There is no other plausible explanation for why he has refused to follow the precedent set by every other major candidate in the modern era”

Are you sure about that? Candidates released taxes 10 years *previous to election*? I only see Obama doing that. Who else did that? Mind you looking back, you will see tax returns going beyond being elected, but that should not be confused with *before first being elected*. Obama is the only one, and that is a far cry from “eveyr modern candidate”.

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul,
We can argue tax code all day long..it has nothing to do with Mitt’s (or any other rich mofo) morality
I BTW look at actual dollars and not percent. It’s laughable that an individual who paid $6M in taxes is demonized as not paying enough by those that pay a few thousand

• Link
• Report this comment

That’s cool, getalife.

Keep on howlin’

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdnwLX5m3G8

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, I might pay a lousy waiter 13%—if it was a set-down place, not Ryans or Golden Corral, and the guy spilled my food and drink all over me and said my wife was fat and I was ugly to boot. I don’t know. Seems to me it takes guts to spit tobacco juice in the guvmint’s eye and say it never deserved even that. Me, I would blush and maybe turn red all over if I made that much money and paid a lower tax rate than the garbage workers. I hope at least Romney hired somebody else to turn the tax return over to the IRS and never tried to do it hisself.

But that’s just me.

• Link
• Report this comment

Rags

What it tells us is that your usual generalities show despite the fact you write well, you can’t think past Meth Head Rand fantasies

Exhale. You got “leftist” out today.

Smile and pat yourself on the back a few times

• Link
• Report this comment

at least getalife sees
Birthers = Taxers

• Link
• Report this comment

I BTW look at actual dollars and not percent.

why? That just seems bizarre, as if the concept of proportionality didn’t matter in these discussions.

• Link
• Report this comment

Why should people who make money by owning resources be taxed less than people who make money by working?

Paul- simple math. Capital gains are 50% of ordinary income tax rates because corporations can only take losses to the extent of capital gains and individuals are limited to $3k a year.

Easy fix is to make capital gains = ordinary and fully allow capital losses.

Currently heads the gov’t wins tails the risk investor losses

• Link
• Report this comment

This case is not
He who casts the first stone must be without sin,
it is
Anyone who wants to see Romney’s 10-year tax returns must be showing his 20-year tax returns first.

• Link
• Report this comment

I know. Everyone should just pay a flat dollar amount in taxes. How about $5. Make it $10.

• Link
• Report this comment

Towncrier

Looks like you can put Klein’s writings right up there next to your Dr Seuss collection……………

• Link
• Report this comment

Birthers=Deniers

• Link
• Report this comment

Thomas – define what you are calling capital gains please

• Link
• Report this comment

Scout: Conservatism/Capitalism seeks to give everyone equal opportunity and to bring people up to the best level of prosperity obtainable.

Capitalism does no such thing. Capitalism tells the masses to view the abstract freedom, or “political” freedom offered in liberal democracy, as equivalent to freedom in the economic marketplace, which of course it’s anything but.

Conservativism has not always been in league with capitalism, by the way.

No system in the history of the world has done better.

Better at what exactly? Providing mass prosperity.

That’s misleading too. If we look at the world today, with its vast megalopolises that are largely gigantic slums, humongous zones of desperation, war, and poverty, I think we can quickly disprove the idea that capitalism automatically brings widespread prosperity to the peoples of the globe, despite the fact that it clearly has lifted the general level of well being in important ways.

• Link
• Report this comment

Why should Gov. Romney release more tax returns? What purpose does it serve other than to prove that he is wealthy? Near as I can tell, he EARNED his money the old fashioned way, by working . Talking about Romney’s tax returns is more important if you happen to have the record of governing this country so ineffectively as Obama does. Were I in his position, I wouldn’t want to talk about my own job performance either!

• Link
• Report this comment

I am sick of all this talk about Romney’s taxes. How about all the lies that Obama andhis henchmen have laid on us for the last 3+years. Why don’t jay and is clones ask him about those, ie healthcare, etc. Why don’t you get on every lame excuse Obozo makes? When is anything his fault? I’m more interested in unemployment medicare reform, changes that are needed in ealing with the illegal alien issue (note that I didn’t cll them undocuented workers.) These are issues Odumbo can’t or won’t discuss because he’s done nothing except dodge these issues like he did in Conress when he voted Present. What a liar, charlatan and socialist scum he is!

• Link
• Report this comment

mike,

It is about willie robme’s taxes .

Focus con.

• Link
• Report this comment

Step 6: Wake up.

Step 7: Suffer through hangover.

• Link
• Report this comment

Note: My prescription for economic growth may not be shared by all in the republican party, but it should be.

• Link
• Report this comment

Don Abernethy

“Who would you want personally to handle your finances Romney or Obama? If your answer is Obama you are dumber than dumb.”

Ummmm… really?

Romney doesn’t handle his own finances. He pays lots of other people to handle his finances……

• Link
• Report this comment

Yeah filky,

The gop listens to you.

Fat out hilarious.

• Link
• Report this comment

Flat.

Opps.

• Link
• Report this comment

Step 8: Check with this Frank Sinkus’s gas station attendant to see which stocks are hot and then retire rich in a few months.

• Link
• Report this comment

Getalife is right about election reform. Obama should give back the money raised from Mack Wilbourn’s fund raisers here in Atlanta since the FBI just proved that he won airport concession contracts under false pretenses. He won under the disadvantaged minority business program. Even though he didn’t qualify, regulators looked the other way. Just like Jon Corzine, I guess if you are stroking checks to the big O, then the rules of “fairness” are more fair for you than the rest of America.

• Link
• Report this comment

What would a flat tax need to be to cover the basics?

Let’s see, I think we had about 140 million returns filed so we need to divide up the cost of running our government equally amongst them. Starting with the 2010 DoD outlay of 705 billion, that works out to about $5k per person. Now, what to do about those 11 million that earned less than $5k that year. How about pauper’s prison and let them sit there until they can pay to get out. Now what do we do with the rest of that budget. I think those with an ability to continue to contribute will drop off rather dramatically with each line item and who will be left to pay–the wealthiest. That sounds too progressive.

• Link
• Report this comment

odrama,

No, he is playing the game.

Don’t like it?

Change the game.

• Link
• Report this comment

apparently not when viewing the lower 45%…where’s your concept of proportionality then?

I’ve advocated (as has Jay) returning to the Clinton era tax rates, which would have a lot of those folks paying higher taxes.

• Link
• Report this comment

” when Reagan did release his ‘79 tax release, it showed that he paid $230,886 in taxes on an income of $515,878.”

I don’t think we’re going to hear that from Hannity or any speakers at the Republican Convention about how they want to return to Reagan -

• Link
• Report this comment

Paul & Stands for dB
well then, if we want to look at percentages, lets look at which group pays the highest percent of the total tax bill… since we are talking about the concept of proportionality

• Link
• Report this comment

“Looks like you can put Klein’s writings right up there next to your Dr Seuss collection…”

I have neither, but wish I still had the latter.

• Link
• Report this comment

Erwin’s cat

Sure. Except it’s not a single-factor analysis. The system is a progressive tax system, remember?

So the top brackets should, in fact, have a much, much, much higher percentage than the mid and lower.

Else it would be regressive – having a greater negative impact on the lower tier than the upper tier.

• Link
• Report this comment

7 pages of 0% whining about 13%.

Let’s go to 5% and 18%. Anybody on board?

• Link
• Report this comment

oops! “wealth” not wealthy

• Link
• Report this comment

when Reagan did release his ‘79 tax release, it showed that he paid $230,886 in taxes on an income of $515,878.

Let’s see now . . . 515 into 231 . . . carry the naught—Holy Cr@p! That’s close to 50%!

On second thought, let’s not bring up Reagan. No use in giving people the wrong idea.

• Link
• Report this comment

“I think Bama self reporting cheating is like robme self reporting offshore tax cheating amnesty.”

You sound like Charlie Brown’s teacher to me now.

• Link
• Report this comment

I have neither, but wish I still had the latter.

Nice lol. :thumb:

• Link
• Report this comment

wish I still had the latter.

I could probably sell you a few.

• Link
• Report this comment

doomy,

The local news showed him meeting the fans and he looked high.

I don’t think he is comfortable in the spotlight and could not deal with the pressure.

• Link
• Report this comment

crier,

You might want to google the IRS’s offshore tax amnesty and Bama’s recent violations to get informed.

• Link
• Report this comment

doomy,

How many did LSU report?

• Link
• Report this comment

Sorry, but can’t wait for the official signal.

It’s Friday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54XRNQ2C2×0&feature=related

• Link
• Report this comment

If Obama had kept his tax returns secret before the 2008 election, the tea party, talk radio,Fox news and the rest would have been screeching to high heaven. So don’t give me this bs about Mitt having more pressing issues to talk about instead of taxes. The longer he refuses to release his returns, the more suspicious people will become. I guess there really is something in those returns that would sink his campaign.

• Link
• Report this comment

College records, when did that enter a list of things we need, to know what a president, especially one in office and a known commodity, can or cannot do? When I see these desperate stabs at got ya by the right I really am beginning to believe O is going to win this thing bigger that I first thought.

Taxes gives you a very good present day look at what you are. If we don’t need any of this disclosure lets take it off the books, but I don’t think that is how we elect a president. Romney wants very hard to be elected with us knowing absolutely as little about him as possible. It has been a theme ever since he was in the primaries. Getting in office and finding out these things that always come up is a little late.

• Link
• Report this comment

crier,

fox is the gop’s campaign headquarters where talking points are born.

Hope that helps.

• Link
• Report this comment

“The longer he refuses to release his returns, the more suspicious people will become. I guess there really is something in those returns that would sink his campaign.”

queue the howlers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdnwLX5m3G8

Punked.

• Link
• Report this comment

I wouldn’t doubt he made more charitable contributions than every poster here combined as well.

He’s required to as a member of the LDS. I’m not saying that’s good, bad or indifferent; it simply is what it is.

• Link
• Report this comment

hid.

• Link
• Report this comment

crier,

Nah, I will mindlessly deflect blame and attack the gop.

The karma rule.

• Link
• Report this comment

The Republican position has long been that taxes on the wealthy and on corporations are punitively high.

• Link
• Report this comment

For more than a decade Emory University intentionally misreported data about its students to groups that rank colleges, President Jim Wagner said Friday

As bad as the City of Atlanta School System

• Link
• Report this comment

Yes, good one, Fred.

• Link
• Report this comment

“College records, when did that enter a list of things we need, to know what a president, especially one in office and a known commodity, can or cannot do?”

I guess you have forgotten that (thanks to the media) we were privy to the college records of Bush, Gore and Kerry and that those records became part of the dialogue in the races? Many liberals were saying that Bush was “stupid” because he was a “C” student, not realizing that Gore and Kerry were also “C” students. Academic records are an indication of intelligence, a quality that bears on holding any position. They are now, in my opinion, fair game since they were in earlier elections.

• Link
• Report this comment

can anyone cite something as outlandish being said by a Fox New analyst than what MSNBC’s Touré said about Romney engaging in the ‘n****rization’ of Obama?

JMHO, but I think the “terrorist fist jab” business was in a similar position on the Stoopit Scale.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/09/fox-anchor-calls-obama-fi_n_106027.html

• Link
• Report this comment

getalife,

Most schools don’t publicly report them because they are of such minor insiginificance if they are secondary in nature.Nobody really cares if they are minor, accidental violations. Alabama’s were reported because someone wanted to know and filed a freedom of info request.

In the case of LSU though they reported some major violations in the last 2 years which are of much greater significance. LSU had to forfeit 2 scholarships due to the more serious nature of these violations.
http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/9739/lsu-self-reports-ncaa-violations

• Link
• Report this comment

woo hoo! Heathen SHEETZ.

• Link
• Report this comment

Flip has punked himself. And as jonix observed about Fish Sandwich last night, he stinks on ice.

IF Flip grew some balls and IF did what every other candidate has ever done, and what the American people expect him to do, he loses! Because OBVIOUSLY there will be some something in those returns very damning to the oligarch candidate. Something along the lines of in the past 12 years he paid either nothing at all or some absurdly small amount in one or more of those years.

And if the spineless one doesn’t release them, he plays into the nationwide perception that he is hiding from the American people.

Either way, the same conclusion has to be drawn.

Unfit to lead.

• Link
• Report this comment

“He’s required to as a member of the LDS. I’m not saying that’s good, bad or indifferent; it simply is what it is.”

Except he chooses to be a member of the LDS. It is not a requirement.

He still doesn’t get my vote but I thank him for his large tax payments. He put a hell of a lot more into the tax bucket then I did.

I can’t get to worked up by either side. When Obama wins Romney will still be rich. If by some miracle Romney wins Obama will score about a $15 million dollar book deal and he gets even richer. Either way they still have way more coin than me. Good for them.

• Link
• Report this comment

GT
August 17th, 2012
3:29 pm

College records, when did that enter a list of things we need, to know what a president, especially one in office and a known commodity, can or cannot do? When I see these desperate stabs at got ya by the right I really am beginning to believe O is going to win this thing bigger that I first thought.

Taxes gives you a very good present day look at what you are. If we don’t need any of this disclosure lets take it off the books, but I don’t think that is how we elect a president. Romney wants very hard to be elected with us knowing absolutely as little about him as possible. It has been a theme ever since he was in the primaries. Getting in office and finding out these things that always come up is a little late.
+++++
That must be why Harry Reid and Pelosi have not released any tax records and only 17 members of congress have.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/nancy_pelosi_downplays_tax_return_demand-216283-1.html

• Link
• Report this comment

Steve-USA “None of the Above”
August 17th, 2012
3:43 pm

“He’s required to as a member of the LDS. I’m not saying that’s good, bad or indifferent; it simply is what it is.”

Except he chooses to be a member of the LDS. It is not a requirement.

He still doesn’t get my vote but I thank him for his large tax payments. He put a hell of a lot more into the tax bucket then I did.

I can’t get to worked up by either side. When Obama wins Romney will still be rich. If by some miracle Romney wins Obama will score about a $15 million dollar book deal and he gets even richer. Either way they still have way more coin than me. Good for them.
+++
I agree completely.

• Link
• Report this comment

“JMHO, but I think the “terrorist fist jab” business was in a similar position on the Stoopit Scale.”

Thanks, sfb. I think it as nearly as bad as well.

• Link
• Report this comment

Erwin’s cat

August 17th, 2012
3:34 pm
First I say…he paid a lot of money…and I get
the concept of proportionality…so I apply that to the total tax bill…and I get
well you just can’t look at those percentages you need to consider other variables…so is this

a straw man
a rabbit hole …or
a goal posts move

Erwin’s cat,

Seems like you forgot to include a 4th option for all of the above.

• Link
• Report this comment

Birthers=Deniers.

• Link
• Report this comment

Warmers = Penguin Sciencers

• Link
• Report this comment

“The whole picture – the rich pay more in taxes than the middle class and the poor.”

And control a bigger slice of the wealth pie. Sorry, but looking at one little slice of the whole picture doesn’t cut it. The way *I* see it, it should be a strict percentage basis. The top 2% of taxpayers should pay 98% of the total of taxes paid in, and the bottom 98% should pay 2% of the total of taxes paid in.

• Link
• Report this comment

JamVet,

Talk about having scotums and spines…

Obama sure has lots of that after making all those outlandish promises to win an election and then not backing them up.

Have fun voting for Obama.

At least you don’t have to vote for Cynthia McKinney this time. (j/k)

• Link
• Report this comment

Crier: “Obama’s baby mama”…

• Link
• Report this comment

that’s why getting rid of them should be the thing to do.

I used to feel that was a noble goal. I don’t any more. I figure deductions/loopholes are a humane way to get people to do things they ought to do (at their best), and I also figure that we-the-people are within our rights to try to steer things to outcomes we want, so…

we’ll have to disagree on this. But I do get why people find the idea of eliminating loopholes/deductions appealing–it does seem rather elegant, I guess.

/drive-by

• Link
• Report this comment

I want to see Tim Geithner’s tax returns…you know….the Tax Czar.

Not that would be interesting.

• Link
• Report this comment

You can bet your last dollar the IRS, at the direction of this administration, has gone over his taxes with a fine toothed comb to ensure his taxes are in order. You can also double down that Mitt’s tax accountant has done the same. If something was wrong, he would have been audited already. I for one believe he has paid his taxes, and given much more to various charities, that exceeds the percentage or amount any liberal has, or ever, will pay. This election needs to focus on the issues of the economy, jobs, medicare and what it means to be a proud American. Four areas Obama can’t discuss because he does not care about any one of them. I’ll take ideas over ideology for my next President.

• Link
• Report this comment

Towncrier — “I don’t believe Mormons are “required” to tithe 10% – just encouraged to do so. Otherwise, how do you explain Reid’s paltry charitable contributions (isn’t he also a Mormon)?”

They are required to do so in order to remain in good standing with the church. Also, the church can and will perform audits, though this usually only happens to wealthier Mormons or if the church believes that you’re holding out on them.

Noncompliance can be penalized in a number of ways, from loss of one’s Temple Recommend (essentially being banished from services and anything taking place inside the church) to outright excommunication.

My wife’s family are ex-Mormons, and the threat of an audit was a significant factor in their decision to leave the church.

• Link
• Report this comment

Pat,

Now, if Romney would only come up with some ideas. Currently, he’s criticizing the President for cutting government spending!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Yes, it is warmer. Not that a denier would acknowledge the obvious.”

Depends on what you use as a starting point for your data set. You can pick a year or set of years anywhere you want where the weather was hotter for several years and say that we are now in a cooling trend. So statistically its a silly and rather ridiculous argument seeing as how anyone can use a different data set to prove the earth is warming or cooling. I woulda figured that since you write so much on this that you would have figured this obvious flaw in your argument out by now.

• Link
• Report this comment

“They are required to do so in order to remain in good standing with the church. Also, the church can and will perform audits, though this usually only happens to wealthier Mormons or if the church believes that you’re holding out on them.”

I have not heard that. One of my best friends is a Mormon, but he hasn’t discussed this matter much with me. Tithing is an Old Testament command that, if still applicable, so must be all of the other codes. It is not a bad guideline but should not be binding upon anyone today who professes to be a Christian.

• Link
• Report this comment

Towncrier — “I have not heard that. One of my best friends is a Mormon, but he hasn’t discussed this matter much with me.”

They’re not really *supposed* to talk about such things with outsiders. If you bring it up, he may or may not talk about it, but you would probably make him uncomfortable by doing that. I understand that the LDS church didn’t do a lot of public complaining about the “Big Love” series on HBO for exactly that reason; they didn’t want to spark public discussion of their precepts and practices. A couple of times during that show’s run (we watched most of the episodes), my wife went “holy sh1t” because she couldn’t believe how *closely* the show matched up with actual Mormon practice.

“Tithing is an Old Testament command that, if still applicable, so must be all of the other codes. It is not a bad guideline but should not be binding upon anyone today who professes to be a Christian.”

I *think* that promising to abide by the tithing requirements is part of the process for getting a Temple Recommend (which my wife refers to a a “Holy Hall Pass”).

• Link
• Report this comment

Have fun voting for Obama.

You too, betty???

Oh my, this is disappointing…

• Link
• Report this comment

“The top 2% of taxpayers should pay 98% of the total of taxes paid in, and the bottom 98% should pay 2% of the total of taxes paid in.”

Well its a little refreshing to see from at least one lib that they just plain want to soak the top 2% while the other 98% pay little to nothing. Disturbing that people think that way. But refreshing to see one of em own up to it. I think I’ll have to adjust my expectations and hope to make it into the top 3% of earners as opposed to the top 2%. That way I’ll just squeeze under that arbitrary figure and avoid it. Cause at that 2% and above is where apparently libs think they have a right to screw people.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Well its a little refreshing to see from at least one lib that they just plain want to soak the top 2% while the other 98% pay little to nothing”

I see that your “irony meter” isn’t as good as you claim it to be.

• Link
• Report this comment

oops! 2% not @% !!

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone: I understand that, but I’m saying that focusing on the size of the “pie” is wrong. Are we not in agreement here?

I do disagree with you about a straight percentage. I think multiple variables have to be considered – one of them being avoiding excessive accumulation of wealth.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone: Curl away!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Doggone: Curl away!”

Ok, you asked for it! Starting from the fact that ALL taxes are ultimately paid by the retail buyer…I think we should do away with ALL income based taxes. Corporate and personaly. Then we should have a progressive sales tax. In spending bands, the higher the amount on your ticket at the time of the sale, the higher your tax rate.

Just as examples:
Sales receipt = $.01 to $10,000 – tax rate on the purchase is 5%
Sales receipt = $11,000 to $20,000 – tax rate on the purchase is 8%
Sales receipt = $20,000+ to $100,000 – tax rate on the purchase is 10%
Sales receipt = $100,000+ to $500,000 – tax rate on the purchase is 15%
Sales receipt = $500,000+ to $1,000,000 – tax rate on the purchase is 20%
Sales receipt = $1,000,000+ to $5,000,000 – tax rate on the purchase is 25%
Sales receipt = $5,000,000+ to infinity – tax rate on the purchase is 30%

This just a rough idea. Things like food (for example) could still be excluded to keep from adversely impacting those lowest on the economic scale.

I come at this as much as, or more, from a philosophic point of view. But the practical aspects would be higher amounts in everyone’s paycheck, lower costs for businesses – because they would not have to pay taxes at the wholesale level and more money to be spent, which would help the economy.

• Link
• Report this comment

Sorry! Tried to do that in too much of a hurry! This: ” think we should do away with ALL income based taxes” should be “all taxes” not just income based taxes

• Link
• Report this comment

“The “trickle down your back” crowd”

What they don’t want to look at is this: After taxes, for EACH DOLLAR – your person A has 84 cents to spend, and your person be has 78 cents to spend.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone

Person A is the one with the most to spend. B has a higher burden.

That’s why the “trickle” crowd likes to accentuate the 91% of the total paid in. You can see them get angry on this blog when the individual rates are brought up.

The irony, they say they are for the individual and it is the left who likes to group people.

They can’t group those numbers and sell that percentage fast enough

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone: should be “all taxes” not just income based taxes

Seems to me that there would be enormous problems of practicality in any such purchase-based scheme. And if you don’t have a system that goes ahead and bases itself on income from the outset then how will adjustments later be made without throwing the whole thing out of kilter? Either income has to be central to the taxation system, in which case you simply tax on that basis, or not, in which case we throw the whole thing out and go with flat taxes. But if we go with the latter, then you sever any tie between wealth and social responsibility – or you sever what remains of one as this link has been under relentless assault for decades and is already greatly weakened, hence the calls for such flat tax schemes as what you suggest.

• Link
• Report this comment

DLink

August 17th, 2012
5:05 pm
I try to imagine him pulling off the road to help a stranded motorist. Try imagining that. I can imagine Obama sending someone from his detail off after noticing a motorist in obvious distress. I can’t imagine Romney noticing a person in a broke down Pinto on the side of the road, much less doing anything about it.
______________________________________________________________________
Nah, Romney helps NO ONE.

”
Somebody (a Republican) did end up giving Henrietta Hughes a place to live, but the most recent story I can find on her is from Apr. ’09, and she was still struggling and was in danger of losing that home. Not sure whatever happened to her. The point is that she asked Obama for help, and he made her one of his many, many promises. In the Era of Obama, his promises are considered accomplishments in and of themselves, so he was hailed for his compassion. It was a heartwarming story, we were told, and anybody who had anything critical to say about it was a horrible person and of course a racist.

Fast-forward almost three years. Fox News:

As a candidate who has raised tens of millions of dollars during his presidential campaign, Mitt Romney did something unusual Saturday while shaking hands after an event in Sumter, South Carolina. He opened his wallet and handed unemployed Ruth Williams some cash. Williams would not say how much money Romney gave her but campaign aides say it was between $50 – 60″ (cue the “he’s a millionare and that’s ALL he gave her? (while the ignore that Obama gave her $0 and he’s a millionare as well))

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/16/romney-condemned-for-helping-the-poor/#ixzz23qN01hua

• Link
• Report this comment

Whether what Romney has done with his taxes is legal is not the problem. The problem is, is he paying his fair share compared to the rest of American’s? By hiding his wealth offshore and not being able to see his taxes returns we don’t know if he and many others are paying their fair share of Taxes. Just because those in our government passed policy’s favoring themselves and the rich, doesn’t make it right!

• Link
• Report this comment

DLink, how about someone who sells their house to a couple that could not qualify for a conventional mortgage. And at a loss to the seller. Would you want someone like THAT in the Whitehouse?

“The renters were offered the first chance to buy, but the Stampses could not qualify for a mortgage, recalled Mr. Stamps, who at the time had recently lost his job at an oil company.

“Then I got this phone call, personally, from Mr. Romney, asking if we really wanted to buy the house,” Mr. Stamps, 63, said in an interview the other day at the barbershop he now runs. “I said, yes we did. And he said he would loan us the money. He really helped us when we needed it.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/10/us/politics/in-real-estate-deal-romney-made-his-loss-a-couples-gain.html?pagewanted=all

• Link
• Report this comment

If I don’t hear it from Rush, Hannity, Beck or FNC, then it didn’t happen. Everyone else is out to get republicans! It’s an all out war on republicans!!

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone, I really like your tax idea.

• Link
• Report this comment

I can’t stand people trying to shove things down my throat. Enough about Mitt’s taxes already.

Shoving down your throat? The guy is running for president and has now added as his VP pick the person with some of the most extreme budget plans ever seen in Washington, plans that if they ever passed would likely result in the most dramatic redistribution of wealth upwards to the very wealthiest people we’ve ever seen in this country.

I think THAT is what is getting “shoved down” our throats.

• Link
• Report this comment

Eva

And you were made to read this article and the comment section?

You must be pretty weak minded that you would be so upset yet read it all anyway.

Call the police immediately if you are under duress.

• Link
• Report this comment

Sorry, JHM, that’s ‘wife’ not ‘life’ -

• Link
• Report this comment

Sinkwich: ““Washington — Unemployment rates rose in 44 U.S. states in July, the most states to show a monthly increase in more than three years and a reflection of weak hiring nationwide.”

Last vapors of the stimulus burning out.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Millions and millions of less-affluent Americans pay Uncle Sam a lot bigger share of their income than did Romney, and they have every reason to wonder why that might be.”
No really, Jay. Because that’s the way the tax code is set up. Thirteen percent sounds like capital gains tax. If you envy others or are trying to score some political gotcha points, then I can understand your concern.

• Link
• Report this comment

Bobby Goren
August 18th, 2012
9:30 am

Let’s take Mitt at face value – which I think people would be chumps to do because there are too many ways for the 13% to be true in a narrow, “meaning of is” sense but not what any reasonable person would consider accurate. Still, let’s ass-u-me it’s 13%.

According to the IRS, the effective tax rate for the middle quintile (40-60th percentile) was 14.3% in 2007.

+++++
Poltifact has said this is a half-true. Taxes withiout payroll taxes:
Bottom fifth of earners: -12.3 percent
Second-to-bottom fifth: -4.2 percent
Middle fifth: 4.1 percent
Second-highest fifth: 8.2 percent
Highest fifth: 17.3 percent
Taxes with Payroll taxes:
Bottom fifth of earners: 1 percent
Second-to-bottom fifth: 7.8 percent
Middle fifth: 15.5 percent
Second-highest fifth: 18.7 percent
Highest fifth: 24.3 percent

• Link
• Report this comment

Moderate Lin
August 18th, 2012
9:47 am

Moderate Lin
August 18th, 2012
9:42 am.
+++++
Correction they include both employer and employee contribution to payroll taxes/

• Link
• Report this comment

DNC stuck on stupid:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/08/14/DNC-Chair-Wasserman-Schultz-Demolished-by-CNN-s-Wolf-Blitzer

• Link
• Report this comment

Let’s just take the social engineering out of the tax code. I’m no economist but I would bet that a progressive income tax with no deductions starting at .5% and topping out at 10% would fill the coffers to the brim. Everyone that earns an income would pay something. No one would get a refund. It will never fly because our corrupt elected officials would lose a substantial amount of income from lobbyists, but if we are serious about tax reform, let’s consider it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Could you imagine if Obama had of told the America people just take my word for it, sum bags like Hannity, Rush will have been running around the clock negative spew against him, but its ok for Mitt to stand up in front of poor whites, middle class people and tell them you have more concerns.

This tycoon will not relase his taxes because it shows all the money he has made at the expense of middle class America, and points out the out source of jobs, how can you stand in front of poor, middle class whites with a straight face and tell them you are going to fight for them when you have billions, this generation of rep have to be far the the dumbest ever”””’

• Link
• Report this comment

gm- This tycoon will not relase his taxes

too easy: http://www.mittromney.com/learn/mitt/tax-return/main

When is Mr Transparency going to release his college transcripts? What does he have to hide?

Loved Michelle’s essay on how women and minorities aren’t able to debate on a level playing field because they don’t have the mental capacity. Very inspiring for the welfare class.

• Link
• Report this comment

H! iI am a left wing idiot, I am between the age of 40-55 and have paid thousands of dollars into medicaid, I am going to vote for the clueless rich black guy who is bankrupting our country. Since they shifted $741 BIILLION from medicare into obamacare, the whole medicare system is going to collapse. I won’t see a dime of my investment. It could be restructured to last, but I am totally against that because a white Republican suggested it.

Even though I have paid thousands into the system, I rather vote for the rich black guy who stands in front of me and says he wants to creat jobs but is too busy golfing and campaigning to actually do anything. His only p[lan is not to come up with a plan, because then everyone so could what a crappy leader he actually is. It could happen, but not during an election year.

I vote against my interest every time because I’ve been taught the government knows what’s best for me. I know it’s true because someone called Harry Reid and told him it was.

Vote obama: You were dumb enough to fall for it last time!

• Link
• Report this comment