2012 Tuesday: The Romney tax return distraction
Mitt Romney’s tax returns are slowly leaking out, with full details to come later today. (UPDATE: The 2010 returns and 2011 estimates are available on Romney’s campaign website.) And as fully expected, progressives are in high sanctimony about his effective tax rate of 14 percent — as if they would have thought he’d fulfilled his patriotic duty by paying 25 percent, or 35 percent, or 50 percent, and still had well over $10 million they hadn’t gotten their claws on.
Lefties who always harken back to the Clinton-Gingrich-Lott years as a golden era of satisfactory, budget-balancing tax rates seem oblivious to the fact that the difference between what Romney paid under the current rates and what he would have paid under the rates that prevailed then is roughly $900,000. No, you’re not missing a decimal point: At a top income tax rate of 39.6 percent and a capital gains rate of 20 percent, Romney would have paid something like $900,000 more on his $21.7 million in 2010 income (capital gains of $20.8 million and other income of about $0.9 million).
If you actually believe an extra $900,000 in taxes paid would have spared Romney this political headache, I’m surprised you can actually read this blog post.
But that’s not all. Let’s say Romney’s capital gains not only had been taxed at the same top rate as regular income in 2010 (35 percent) but that he hadn’t been able to reduce his taxable income through charitable donations. In that case, Romney would have had something like $14.1 million left over after federal taxes (and a lot of charities would have failed to help a lot of people, but that’s another argument for another day). In reality, Romney donated $2.98 million to charity and paid $3 million in federal taxes, leaving him with $15.7 million.
Again, it’s foolish to believe the wealth-envy industry would have been satisfied with such a difference.
We could run any number of scenarios producing any number of hypothetical results (none of which would be truly accurate, because they all wrongly assume a differently structured tax code wouldn’t have affected Romney’s behavior). At the end of the day, it’s not really about that.
It’s not really about balancing the budget — not when the president and congressional Democrats make no secret of their desire to increase spending at least as fast as revenues might grow. Witness President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal, which assumed taxes would go up as he desired starting in 2013 — and yet, for the rest of his presidency, would not have cut the budget deficit even to 3 percent of gross domestic product. His budget deficits after raising taxes would have remained higher as a share of GDP than George W. Bush’s average budget deficit from the time he cut taxes until the housing bubble burst.
It is, however, about whose vision is best for the economy: Obama’s vision of a government that consumes a larger share of Americans’ production than this country has ever seen on a sustained basis, or the alternative of a government that returns to a rational size based on our historical experience and economic reality.
Because conservatives understand and acknowledge that tax rates affect individuals’ and businesses’ incentives and thus their behavior — the left understands this, but only acknowledges it when arguing for policies such as “green” taxes — we often get bogged down talking about the tax code. (Yes, my hand is raised here, too.)
But as Milton Friedman taught us, what really matters for the economy is the size of government spending. What the citizens don’t pay in taxes now, they pay in future taxes (debt) or price inflation. (Credit where credit’s due: Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate who consistently makes this case.)
The left is not making an issue of Mitt Romney’s tax rates out of an interest in closing the budget deficit. As Reagan learned to his chagrin, agreeing to raise taxes in exchange for promises of spending cuts only leads to higher taxes and higher spending. It would happen again if Obama-Pelosi-Reid got their way and took a larger chunk from “the rich,” as their unserious proposals for “cutting” spending demonstrate.
It is purely the politics of envy and redistribution: See those rich people like Mitt Romney? If you elect us, we’ll take more from him and give it to you.
That’s what the Romney tax returns story is really about. Shame on those Republicans who go along with it for their own temporary political gain, and woe to Romney if he can’t use this occasion to make the case for keeping money in the private sector rather than siphoning it off for ever-larger government.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
356 comments Add your comment
Jimmy62
January 24th, 2012
10:55 am
The only thing that will make them happy is if he changes his party to Democrat, or loses every penny he has.
JF McNamara
January 24th, 2012
11:11 am
Liberals and Progressives didn’t bring this up. Newt did. Even if Mitt paid my rate, he could still buy anything he wants and do anything he wants. Why is he special?
It’s more about fairness than anything else. I pay double the rate he pays, and given my wife’s new Lexus SUV, my kid has to go to *sigh* public school. I don’t mind paying taxes, and I don’t mind those less fortunate not paying taxes. I do, however, have a problem with someone who makes an order of magnitude than me paying a much, much lower rate.
It’s not fair now, and its never been fair no matter how you spin it.
Paul
January 24th, 2012
11:11 am
Under the Gingrich plan, with 0% capital gains tax, Romney would have paid ZERO. He paid what he was supposed to pay – a non-issue.
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
11:12 am
Jimmy62
January 24th, 2012
10:55 am
The only thing that will make them happy is if he changes his party to Democrat, or loses every penny he has.
——————————
Yep….What is the difference between John Kerry and Mitt Romney…!?!?
Kerry is a decorated Vietnam war veteran….Romney is a Mormon……
Kerry won his Senate race….Romney hasn’t worked in 6 years….
Romney started Romneycare….Kerry voted for Obamacare….
I guess that’s pretty much it……They probably pay the same in taxes….and they were both “for it before they were against it….”
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
11:20 am
BOTTOM LINE……Romney is not one of us….Gingrich is…..
Gary Johnson is one of us, too…..http://www.garyjohnson2012.com
jconservative
January 24th, 2012
11:22 am
I guess I have missed something, but so far the only people I have seen make a national issue of Romney and his money and his taxes is Gingrich and Perry.
If either are nominated they do not get my vote.
But that is not news. I do not vote for liberals for the White House and Gingrich is a liberal.
But so was George W, Clinton, George H W and Reagan. Maybe in 2016 we will have a conservative run for the Republican nomination.
And the best thing I can say about Perry is that he has weight and occupies space.
ByteMe
January 24th, 2012
11:32 am
BOTTOM LINE……Romney is not one of us….Gingrich is…..
From the looks of his waistline, Gingrich is several of us.
JF McNamara
January 24th, 2012
11:35 am
jcons,
You’ve been posting some grumpy comments lately. You must really hate all the Republican nominees.
Pizzaman
January 24th, 2012
11:35 am
Now I understand Kyle! Newt started this whole tax thing to draw attention FROM the President’s budget? I guess I really don’t understand.
getalife
January 24th, 2012
11:43 am
willard has a Swiss bank account and offshore fund to cheat on his taxes.
The newt is a lobbyist for freddie.
It is not distractions, it is the truth.
Own it Kyle.
Man up.
Edward
January 24th, 2012
11:44 am
How dare they tax the rich people at all. Tax those people making minimum wage more! They can skip a few meals each week to make up the difference. Do children really need school lunches? Forget road and infrastructure repairs, if you’re wealthy enough you can afford a nice car that just glides over those potholes.
Jon
January 24th, 2012
11:45 am
You make a big deal out of 900,000 not being a big deal, but that would be nearly a third more than he currently paid. If a whole lot of people paid a third more, then I’m pretty sure that would add up to quite a bit and we’d be a whole lot less in debt. Democrats might still not like Romney, but what does that have to do with anything. Even if you really don’t think Dems are interested in balancing the budget (which I think is a bit unfair), why wouldn’t you be? Cutting spending could be very healthy (although potentially problematic and complex too), but I’m convinced we can’t balance the budget without also getting real about taxes.
Junior Samples
January 24th, 2012
12:02 pm
Scavenger Hunt!
Did Kyle come up with a new catch phrase?
Obviously “wealth-envy industry” = main stream media.
10 imaginary points to whomever can find the original source.
Otherwise Kyle’s the winner!
Don't Tread
January 24th, 2012
12:10 pm
“it’s foolish to believe the wealth-envy industry would have been satisfied…”
Truth is, they won’t be satisfied until the government confiscates every penny you have and redistributes it as they see fit. (Of course, wealthy Democrats would be exempt from such a scheme.)
It’s all in “economic fairness”, you know.
Jefferson
January 24th, 2012
12:23 pm
You kids make it hard on yourself by worshipping money and power.
JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
12:24 pm
Conservatives – don’t be distracted by the Left who don’t understand that “percentage” is not a level playing field. A tax based on percentage is progressive just like their political idiology. They pay fifteen or twenty thousand in federal income tax, Romney pays millions, but he has not paid enough because they pay a higher percentage. Oh the horror. If they were making millions, they would want to keep more of it just like they want to keep more of the thousands they make now.
They, the Moonbats, scream if the rich were to pay more the deficit would go down. That could be true if the more paid was applied to the debt, but their champions will spend it, not apply it to the debt.
They, the Moonbats, don’t say a word about the 47% or better who pay zero federal income taxes (or in some cases actually get back more in a refund they they paid in all year). If those people paid, and their champions applied it to the debt, the deficit would go down also.
No Conservatives, don’t be led astray. The Left wants more of your money so they can spend it on growing government and giving more to those who have no drive to get ahead. Bless their little bleeding hearts.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
12:25 pm
“willard has a Swiss bank account and offshore fund to cheat on his taxes.”
If you had a brain, you’d know that there is nothing illegal about having offshore accounts. Your messiah Obama and Owl Gore both have them.
Do us all a favor and go back over to your daddys blog.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
12:27 pm
“If you actually believe an extra $900,000 in taxes paid would have spared Romney this political headache, I’m surprised you can actually read this blog post.”
Line of the day, Kyle!
Well done, sir.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
12:28 pm
“But so was George W, Clinton, George H W and Reagan.”
So in other words, you’ve never voted for anyone. Right.
JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
12:29 pm
BTW, re, my 12:24. Progressives don’t want a “level playing field.” No, they want Social Justice which is everyone “equal.” In other words, those that have worked and have more must give some of it to those who have not worked so all will be “equal.”
For the record, JohnnyReb could give two hoots in hell if everyone is equal. I don’t read it in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights. If you want more, work for it.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
12:29 pm
“and given my wife’s new Lexus SUV, my kid has to go to *sigh* public school.”
Nice to see that you and your wife have your priorities straight, JF McNamara.
Hint: Maybe YOU and your wife should do without the new Lexus SUV for the sake of your kid’s education. . . .
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
12:32 pm
From Jay Bookman
Buffett’s secretary at Obama’s State of the Union
12:16 pm January 24, 2012, by Jay
Based on this report from Politico, I think we have a pretty good idea where President Obama intends to go in his State of the Union speech this evening:
Billionaire Warren Buffett’s longtime secretary will be joining first lady Michelle Obama in her box at tonight’s State of the Union, White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer announced on Twitter. Debbie Bosanek, who has worked for Buffett for nearly two decades, has become a symbol in the White House’s fight over the tax code and economic fairness.
A nice touch, I think.
You also have to question the wisdom of the Romney campaign in deciding to release his tax returns today, setting the scene very nicely for what Obama apparently wants to talk about tonight.
Ok, Bookman is a MASSIVE hypocrite for writing that. He totally ignores the fact that Buffett is a billionaire but attacks Romney for being rich.
He also ignores the fact that Buffett was a big winner in the oil pipeline debacle.
You libs are a bunch of IDIOTS.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
12:33 pm
“For the record, JohnnyReb could give two hoots in hell if everyone is equal.”
No one is equal. There are ALWAYS people that are better than someone else. Libs/progressives are a bunch of little crybabies.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
12:34 pm
More lovely news from the land of Obozo.
Under Obama, Price of Gas Has Jumped 83 Percent, Ground Beef 24 Percent, Bacon 22
Percenthttp://cnsnews.com/news/article/under-obama-price-gas-has-jumped-83-percent-ground-beef-24-percent-bacon-22-percent
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
12:35 pm
“Romney hasn’t worked in 6 years….”
redneckbluedog, John Kerry hasn’t worked for almost 26 years.
He’s been a U.S. Senator. (and not a very good one at that)
Buckeyein Ga`
January 24th, 2012
12:35 pm
you’d know that there is nothing illegal about having offshore accounts.
yep it isn’t very illegal but it looks bad that he wants to lead the country but is stashing his money in another country.
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
12:36 pm
@Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
12:29 pm
Hint: Maybe YOU and your wife should do without the new Lexus SUV for the sake of your kid’s education. . . .
————————————–
Or you could just move to Massachussetts, Minnesota, or New Hampshire….BBBRRRRRR..!!!!
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
12:38 pm
@Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
12:35 pm
He’s been a U.S. Senator. (and not a very good one at that)
—————————————————————-
US Senator is a job……Paycheck, benefits, alarm clock, lunchbox…all that…..No comment, really, beyond that……I bet Kerry has a “Big Bang Theory” lunchbox…:-)…..or a “Star Trek” like Sheldon..:-)….
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
12:39 pm
“yep it isn’t very illegal but it looks bad that he wants to lead the country but is stashing his money in another country”
Clinton, Gore, Kerry……
JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
12:43 pm
Prediction – I am sincerely embarrassed that most of my adult life I was concentrated on work and personal matters that I paid very little attention to politics. I knew enough to vote Republican and that was about it.
Having retired from my first work life, settled down with the worlds greatest gal, and working for myself, I started paying more attention to politics. What I found was, our Country is in the toilet due to the Democrats/Progressives and “compromises” made by Republicans.
I don’t think I am unusaul. Instead, it appears millions like I have had the awaking due to Obama being elected, Fox News, and talk radio/TV like Rush, Glenn Beck, et al. The first evidence of the awaking was the outcome of the Nov 2010 mid-term elections.
My prediction is, the mid-term election trend will continue and Obama will go down in a landslide regardless of the Republican nominee.
My prediction will be ridiculed by Lefties supported by Legacy media in the tank for Obama because they too are Progressives. Don’t believe it.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
12:44 pm
redneckbluedog, you said Romney hadn’t worked in 6 years, not hadn’t had a job. Just because one has a “job” doesn’t mean one “works. Hence, my comment regarding Kerry.
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
12:46 pm
JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
12:43 pm
——————————
You need to get out more…..I got out over the weekend and ran across some “occupy” folks….Not on purpose…..They were young, angry, pierced, and tattooed……They’re mad because they’re parents had jobs when they were young and now they can’t find any……It was kind of scary….definitely moving…..
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
12:47 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
12:44 pm
———————————–
If you have somewhere to be on a regular basis, that interferes with your “R & R”…..that is a job…..If you can “work when you want to”…then that is not…..
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
12:48 pm
“They’re mad because they’re parents had jobs when they were young and now they can’t find any……It was kind of scary….definitely moving…..”
The one’s I met wanted people to give them money for free. Most of them have no idea who they’re mad at other than “the man.” If they had half a brain they’d know that Obama’s policies have scared businesses from hiring.
FACT: 28% of college grads have moved back in with their folks.
Hillbilly D
January 24th, 2012
1:05 pm
If all forms of income were taxed at the same rate, this would all go away.
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
1:08 pm
@Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
12:48 pm
———————————-
They were mad about all kinds of stuff…….Not being able to find a job…..Having to live at home….GMO’s (whatever that is)….BPA (DITTO)…..all those piercings and tattoos isn’t going to make it any easier for them to find jobs…..
JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
1:10 pm
redneckbluedog – roger on needing to get out more. I do have compassion for sincere folks who can’t find a job. But where did the “give me” attitude come from? Certainly some of it from liberal educators, but I can’t help but believe many parents are reaping what they sewed.
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
1:21 pm
@JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
1:10 pm
——————————-
YEP…..Don’t like the “give me” attitude….Also don’t care for the “make money by ripping people off” attitude, either…..I could single out some businesses, but not going there….
Somali Republican
January 24th, 2012
1:25 pm
So many bootlickrs in here
@@
January 24th, 2012
1:26 pm
What the citizens don’t pay in taxes now, they pay in future taxes (debt) or price inflation.
Don’t I KNOW IT!!??!! Inflation has already hit regardless of what we’re being told. Is Bernanke feelin’ my pain?
schnirt
Romney donated $2.98 million to charity and paid $3 million in federal taxes…
Whooaaa! Doing better than me on both counts.
I wonder what percentage of Romney’s entitlements $3 million went to pay for the dems’ “entitled”?
@@
January 24th, 2012
1:28 pm
Oops! Put than second $3 million in parenthesis.
UGA 1999
January 24th, 2012
1:31 pm
He is Rich – So what?
He paid all the taxes he was supposed to – So What?
He contributed to charities and donations – So What?
What is the big deal?
UGA 1999
January 24th, 2012
1:31 pm
@@…..pot meet kettle!
UGA 1999
January 24th, 2012
1:36 pm
kok….”The Great One”? Has Ronald Reagan come back? WOW great news!
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 24th, 2012
1:38 pm
Greedy, envious Obozo receptacles care about Romney’s tax returns. No one else. It’s like reading People magazine to these losers.
UGA 1999
January 24th, 2012
1:39 pm
Kok….are you Gm? Learn an language other than ebonics so that we can understand you! HA!
Sarah Coulter
January 24th, 2012
1:41 pm
“Instead, it appears millions like I have had the awaking due to Obama being elected…”
Ah yes, that speaks volumes, JohnnyReb.
Sarah Coulter
January 24th, 2012
1:45 pm
“More lovely news from the land of [word deleted due to lack of necessity and stupidity].
Under Obama, Price of Gas Has Jumped 83 Percent, Ground Beef 24 Percent, Bacon 22…”
So let me get this straight (or gay). If gay goes up, won’t food go up? Unless all grocery stores have a farm and slaughterhouse in their backyard.
Gas (a requirement) to transport food to the stores. Contards…
clyde
January 24th, 2012
1:46 pm
Let’s suppose that I had made the money Romney made and let’s suppose I paid the same tax.Does anyone out there really think I would still be working?????
I wouldn’t be stupid enough to be running for President either.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
1:49 pm
It’s not all about money with Mitt Romney. As pointed out by Boortz yesterday, the guy has a set of morals Americans should all be proud of. Read this:
http://www.boortz.com/weblogs/nealz-nuze/2012/jan/23/know-your-candidates/
Think Gingrich would do that in the same circumstance? I don’t.
Hillbilly D
January 24th, 2012
1:49 pm
Inflation has already hit regardless of what we’re being told.
I keep track of my mandatory expenses (discretionary spending isn’t included in the total) and it was up 7% for this last year and over 6% the year before that. Ben Bernacke, like most of the Fed people, doesn’t live in the real world.
@@
January 24th, 2012
1:51 pm
UGA:
@@…..pot meet kettle!
Thanks for the introduction, and you are….?
I may see Romney as lacking backbone, but I have no problem with the amount he pays in taxes. He’s contributing more than me in both charitable contributions and tax obligations.
In other words, I’m NOT complaining!!!!
You’re weird.
Matthias Klein
January 24th, 2012
1:52 pm
Who won the debate?
Who was pleasing the voters the most? OR Who was pleasing God the most.
Since the latter question is decisive for the future of a country I will will talk about it.
Nobody was focusing on God’s will. Nobody was giving Him honor for the good that happened and nobody was talking about the law of Christ, whom is given all authority.
So I cannot tell who was most pleasing to God.
Watch: German preacher’s thoughts on 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpLYq525SpM
UGA 1999
January 24th, 2012
1:55 pm
@@…..great we agree.
@@
January 24th, 2012
1:58 pm
Hillbilly:
The cost of groceries alone is a real showstopper. Not complaining, mind you…gives me a good reason not to cook. I’m pushing leftovers…something my husband has never been thrilled about. When I’m feelin’ generous, I transform them into something he doesn’t recognize.
(IW&SH)
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
1:59 pm
“So let me get this straight (or gay). If gay goes up, won’t food go up? Unless all grocery stores have a farm and slaughterhouse in their backyard.”
Not sure how “gay” goes up, loser.
@@
January 24th, 2012
1:59 pm
UGA:
You need to quit taking shots at anything that moves. You’re wasting ammunition.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
2:00 pm
“Kok….are you Gm? Learn an language other than ebonics so that we can understand you! HA!”
Most likely one of the Bookman trolls. I’m sure Kyle will take care of that trash real soon.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
2:01 pm
Sarah Coulter
Grow up.
UGA 1999
January 24th, 2012
2:01 pm
Somewhere…..lets all hope so.
You need to come back me up on the new Galloway thread.
ByteMe
January 24th, 2012
2:01 pm
New poll just came in:
52 percent of Americans say that capital gains and dividends should be taxed at the same rate as income earned from work because the current policy increases the federal deficit and is unfair to people who don’t have money to invest, according to the poll. Thirty-six percent approve of the current policy of taxing capital gains at a lower rate because it encourages investment and helps the economy.
…
While most Americans would seem to back the Buffett rule, the poll shows there are partisan differences on this question. Fifty-five percent of Republicans approve of the current policy, while 66 percent of Democrats say capital gains should be taxed at the same rate as employment income. Among independents, 54 percent say capital gains should be taxed at the same rate as work income.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
2:02 pm
“New poll just came in:”
Source?
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
2:02 pm
“You need to come back me up on the new Galloway thread.”
Who, what?
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
2:08 pm
Democrats. The poll-driven, lack of principles political party. The word “democrat” gets its origin in the term “One who panders to the masses”.
Which is why we do not have a true democracy.
And why polls don’t really matter when it comes to policy. Constitutional principles matter.
ByteMe
January 24th, 2012
2:11 pm
And why polls don’t really matter when it comes to policy. Constitutional principles matter.
Unless you’re talking to those people who want a “Christian nation” and then it’s all about how many Christians there are.
Hillbilly D
January 24th, 2012
2:13 pm
I’m pushing leftovers…
I was into leftovers before leftovers were cool, when I have any. Mama always made us eat everything on our plates and I’m still in that habit. I fix just exactly what I want to eat, right now, and not a bit more. That way no leftovers, to speak of. Of course if you do have leftovers, a hog is the best way to dispose of them. I’ve been thinking about getting me one. They’re pretty easy to raise and their lifespan is only about 6 months, if you plan it right.
@@
January 24th, 2012
2:16 pm
The “Buffett Rule” is just playing to the crowd. The dems controlled both houses during the first half of Obama’s rule. Nothing was done then.
He’s only pushing it now because he’s knows Republicans won’t go for it. It’s an election gimmick.
I’m with Hillbilly…flat tax is the only way to go.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
2:20 pm
“Unless you’re talking to those people who want a “Christian nation” and then it’s all about how many Christians there are.”
Or those who want an atheistic utopia, sharia law, etc… Or perhaps those who want to push gay marriage on others.
It goes both ways.
@@
January 24th, 2012
2:24 pm
ByteMe’s poll comes from CBS.
Hillbilly:
I’ve been thinking about getting me one. They’re pretty easy to raise and their lifespan is only about 6 months, if you plan it right.
You’re zoned for livestock? You’ve always left me with the impression that “humanstock” had taken over your neck of the woods.
I ain’t eatin’ anything ——I——- have to kill. I’ll leave that dirty work to others. Vegetables don’t have eyes, ‘cept taters, and they can’t see with ‘em.
(ISH)
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
2:26 pm
“ByteMe’s poll comes from CBS.’
May as well get a poll from Media Splatters.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
2:27 pm
This is exactly what the Obozo administration wants. Violence.
George Soros on the Coming U.S. Class War
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/01/22/george-soros-on-the-coming-u-s-class-war.print.html
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
2:32 pm
“Or perhaps those who want to push gay marriage on others.”
Uh, Somewhere? No one is suggesting pushing gay marriage “on others”. You need to worry more about your own personal life than the personal lives of others.
What part of “equality” do you NOT get?
Hillbilly D
January 24th, 2012
2:32 pm
@@
We don’t have zoning where I live (and even if we did, we’d all ignore it. What my neighbor does on his place is his business and none of mine). My closest neighbor is 300 yards away, which even though he is a perfect neighbor, is too damn close. It’s been invaded with people compared to how it used to be; a 1/2 mile away is plenty close enough for a neighbor. The population on this road is about 10-15 times what it was when I was a kid. Everything is relative.
Vegetables don’t have eyes, ‘cept taters, and they can’t see with ‘em.
And how do you know this? Are you fluent in the language of taters? (IW&SH)
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
2:34 pm
“Uh, Somewhere? No one is suggesting pushing gay marriage “on others”. You need to worry more about your own personal life than the personal lives of others.”
Uh….yeah they are.
“What part of “equality” do you NOT get?”
What part of STFU, do you not get?
@@
January 24th, 2012
2:40 pm
Hillbilly:
And how do you know this? Are you fluent in the language of taters?
Well…there are some AJC bloggers who’ve compared my intellect to that of a tater.
(IHugeSH)
Sarah Coulter
January 24th, 2012
2:42 pm
Somewhere over there:
You are a gem. And since you like to use the word “Obozo” (juvenile and infantile), I am going to reply to your “loser” with “I know you are but what am I?”
And you know that if gas goes up, so does the price of food. Unless the grocery stores have a farm and slaughterhouse in their backyards.
Hillbilly D
January 24th, 2012
2:47 pm
When the price of gas goes up, the price of everything goes up. I still believe that the price of gas in September/October may be the biggest factor in who wins the 2012 election. The other day I heard they are predicting $5 a gallon by the end of the year. I don’t know how accurate that is and hope it isn’t true but if it does go that high, you’re pretty much guaranteed a new occupant in the White House. I don’t think the President, whomever he is, has a lot to do with the price of gas but that don’t matter, that’s who the voters will take it out on. If the price of gas goes down between now and then, you may well see the opposite effect.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
2:49 pm
“You are a gem. And since you like to use the word “Obozo” (juvenile and infantile), I am going to reply to your “loser” with “I know you are but what am I?””
You must be under the false impression that I care what you think.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
2:51 pm
Kyle, What has gotten into you? Did you write that piece? It is fantastic, not just in substance, but in tone.
“…progressives…high sanctimony…lefties…oblivious…surprised you can actually read this blog post…wealth-envy industry…politics of envy & redistribution…”
The best part was “…the president & congressional Democrats make no secret of their desire to increase spending…”
Today marks 3 years that the Senate has not passed a budget. Obama’s budget failed in the Senate 0-97 last year. They ARE trying to keep secret their desire to increase spending, from their minions.
carlosgvv
January 24th, 2012
2:53 pm
Kyle, a good start to getting us not of your conservative persuasion to give you more credence would be to stop calling liberals “lefties”.
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
2:57 pm
Lot’s of anger in here directed at Democrats….when, in fact, it’s Georgia’s own, Newt Gingrich, that’s pointing out the tax disparity in America…!!!
clyde
January 24th, 2012
1:46 pm
Let’s suppose that I had made the money Romney made and let’s suppose I paid the same tax.Does anyone out there really think I would still be working?????
I wouldn’t be stupid enough to be running for President either.
————————————————————————————————-
To your point…There are rumors circulating, in far right-wing conservative circles….that perhaps Mr. Romney has a secret Mormon agenda…….Just sayin’….I saw it on the internets…!!!!
Intown
January 24th, 2012
2:57 pm
Romney’s tax returns probably are a distraction. Woe to Romney’s PR team who did not handle this story better.
Sarah Coulter
January 24th, 2012
3:00 pm
“You are a gem. And since you like to use the word “Obozo” (juvenile and infantile), I am going to reply to your “loser” with “I know you are but what am I?””
You must be under the false impression that I care what you think.”
Obviously you do since you responded.
waterstim
January 24th, 2012
3:01 pm
Here you go folks, straight from the community organizer: Under Obama, Price of Gas Has Jumped 83 Percent, Ground Beef 24 Percent, Bacon 22 Percent. GET HIM OUT OF HERE!
Hillbilly D
January 24th, 2012
3:04 pm
it’s Georgia’s own, Newt Gingrich,
Newt’s from Pennsylvania.
GT
January 24th, 2012
3:07 pm
This game is being played on your front yard, sport, there is not a Democrat in sight. So why do you try to blame us for a totally made in the Republican Party problem? Not only do you blame Obama for a Bush economy, go starts wars for the wrong and non existing reasons, now you guys are bringing us into your huddle and blaming us for your stupidity. This is rich, this is so Gingrich.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
3:08 pm
redneck@2:57, If you saw it on the “internets,” it must be true, especially since Al Gore “invented” it.
@@
January 24th, 2012
3:20 pm
Gallup: Gingrich leads Romney in national poll
Gingrich’s gains over the last week have come mostly among conservative Republicans, one of the groups that has been most “in play” throughout the Republican presidential nomination process.
Over the two-week period between Jan. 9-15 and Jan. 16-22, Gingrich’s support among conservative Republican registered voters increased from 16% to 28%. Romney’s support among conservatives fell between these two weeks, from 36% to 28%. By contrast, Romney’s support among moderate and liberal Republicans held constant across these two weeks, while Gingrich gained six points.
What the heck is a “liberal Republican”?
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
3:21 pm
@Hillbilly D
January 24th, 2012
3:04 pm
it’s Georgia’s own, Newt Gingrich,
Newt’s from Pennsylvania.
——————————————————
HA HA HA HA HA……I don’t blame you…..:-)…….God Bless Paul Coverdell….!!!!
MarkV
January 24th, 2012
3:25 pm
Kyle,
What you have written is insulting; no wonder you get accolades from some on this blog. “wealth-envy industry,,” “politics of envy & redistribution” Is it so much beyond you power of understanding that people who want fairness in taxes do not have to be led by envy? Do you have any evidence for your insulting words?
Perhaps the most ridiculous part of your article is when you make the following argument:
“Lefties who always harken back to the Clinton-Gingrich-Lott years as a golden era of satisfactory, budget-balancing tax rates seem oblivious to the fact that the difference between what Romney paid under the current rates and what he would have paid under the rates that prevailed then is roughly $900,000. No, you’re not missing a decimal point …”
I wish you were a politician and had to go and tell that to voters, for whom that negligible (to you) amount may represent a 20 year family income.
GT
January 24th, 2012
3:26 pm
A “liberal Republican” is the only hope you have, or as some of us call you’re trying to say,” a normal moderate” that is not a fruitcake.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
3:27 pm
“Obviously you do since you responded.”
HAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
3:28 pm
“What the heck is a “liberal Republican”?”
Someone who claims to be a Repub but only votes Democrat.
@@
January 24th, 2012
3:30 pm
“a normal moderate” that is not a fruitcake.
Homophobe, GT?
Jes kid’n.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
3:31 pm
Occupy Wall Street = Obama’s Willing Servants.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
3:35 pm
A liberal Republican is a RINO, a Republican in name only. They are to the Republican party what Blue Dog Democrats are to the Democratic party: a pain in the neck.
GT
January 24th, 2012
3:35 pm
Envy? Wanting the upper 1% to get involved in this country is now called envy. Maybe if they got more involved, like in paying for things they might get off their high horses and run a qualified candidate. As it is they obviously do not care, and why should they. And why should we the left who are being handed an election by default. There is just something about a one party system that should worry all of us, but all we can do is handle our side of the street. I fully expect Gingrich to challenge Mitt to a Hamilton dual in one of his feverish illusions and pull a gun out on his coat. If he has shot Romney on stage in SC he might have gotten 99% of the vote instead of 41.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
3:38 pm
” Wanting the upper 1% to get involved in this country is now called envy”
It’s not the rich folks fault that your poor. Maybe you should quit crying, change your diaper and save your money.
Kyle Wingfield
January 24th, 2012
3:39 pm
GT: Other Republicans made an issue of Romney’s releasing his returns, but the White House press secretary — among others — has already jumped on this issue. So, while it might be shameful for Gingrich and Santorum to raise the issue and watch Democrats do their dirty work (as I said in the OP), it’s not the case that “there is not a Democrat in sight.”
Sport.
Kyle Wingfield
January 24th, 2012
3:42 pm
MarkV: Where did I say $900,000 was negligible? If I thought it was negligible, why would I object to its being taken in taxes?
What I said, quite plainly, is that it’s not enough to satisfy the wealth-envious. To hear them tell it, Romney is stiffing the country by a lot more than $900,000 — and they sure as heck want a lot more than an additional $900,000 out of the likes of him.
As for the motivation: When someone can define “fair share,” I’ll start taking seriously the notion that this conversation is driven by more than envy and pandering.
Kyle Wingfield
January 24th, 2012
3:45 pm
GT: “Get involved in this country”? The man paid more money in federal taxes in 2010 alone than I will probably pay in my lifetime! But I, and people at or below my income level, are “involved,” and Romney and people at his income level are not?
Hillbilly D
January 24th, 2012
3:59 pm
The man paid more money in federal taxes in 2010 alone than I will probably pay in my lifetime!
But is your tax burden at 15%?
GT
January 24th, 2012
4:00 pm
Kyle “watch my hands they will never leave my fingers”. Your party has become the party of the slight of hand. You have a monkey on your back in Gingrich. The man is not just happy winning debates he has to nuke the room and his whole party doing it. It doesn’t matter what the White House calls attention to, it fall on deaf ears and hard heads. Your boys are so worked up Newt could come on the stage naked and one million men would walk the street the next morning naked in his support. SC proved one thing to me. They finally woke up over there and realized a black man is living in the White House, news moves a little slow down here. I found it no small wonder that this red meat pep rally they held was within a few miles of Fort Sumter. I am surprised they didn’t have it right on the ruins fireworks and all.
MarkV
January 24th, 2012
4:02 pm
Kyle Wingfield @3:42 pm
You implied that it was a paltry sum by your comment “No, you’re not missing a decimal point.”
As for you comment about motivation, your lack of logic is apparent. Defining “fair share” and having as a motive envy and pandering are different concepts. What you are saying is that if someone does not consider the taxes fair, even if he/she cannot exactly define what fair would be, his/her only motive can be envy or pandering. That is both illogical and insulting.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
4:03 pm
Tonight in Obama’s State of Union Address (political speech), you will hear him say, “…pay their fair share” twenty-eleven times.
The fed. marginal income tax rates are already progressive AND fair. They are: 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% & 35% for married filing jointly. The 35% bracket is for those making over $379,150.
The only capital gains rate of 15% is for long-term capital gains. The other 5 capital gains tax rates range from 25% to 35%.
Wage earners pay taxes on their income. If they invest their disposable income, they pay taxes AGAIN.
Romney probably paid 35% when he was employed & ANOTHER 15% since he became an investor.
The fed. govt. has proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is a poor steward of taxpayer dollars & the Dems. have proved that they have no intention of reducing spending NOR reducing the natl. debt. They are the ones who have been UNFAIR to the American people in their words & deeds (lies & deceptions).
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:03 pm
GT
Why are you here?
Kyle Wingfield
January 24th, 2012
4:09 pm
No, MarkV, that comment was all about comparison to the rhetoric of the “fair share,” which would have you believe Romney alone should be paying millions more every year.
GT
January 24th, 2012
4:10 pm
Kyle my point exactly. I want a debate of ideas, doesn’t bother me to lose a few, because I am not really losing if I am a real American and the winner has a better idea. There are more good Republicans not running in Atlanta, Georgia than are running in the whole country. Most of those good American are right up there in the 1% the rest of us can’t afford the time off and like in my case don’t have the imagination that a self made billionaire may have. Gingrich sounds like a drunk at the bar talking about politics, surely there is something better out there calling himself a Republican.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:12 pm
“Most of those good American are right up there in the 1%”
If you love communism so much, move to NK.
JDW
January 24th, 2012
4:14 pm
@Linda…”Wage earners pay taxes on their income. If they invest their disposable income, they pay taxes AGAIN. Romney probably paid 35% when he was employed & ANOTHER 15% since he became an investor.”
I know you struggle with complicated concepts , but you only pay taxes on the PROFITS from investments not the ORIGINAL CAPITAL that was already taxed as income.
Sarah Coulter
January 24th, 2012
4:15 pm
” Wanting the upper 1% to get involved in this country is now called envy”
It’s not the rich folks fault that your poor. Maybe you should quit crying, change your diaper and save your money.”
Wouldn’t it be cheaper to just rinse the diaper out? But it is the rich folks fault that you don’t know the difference between “your” and “you’re”.
JDW
January 24th, 2012
4:16 pm
BTW this just in…$12.9 million of Romney’s income came from carried interest taxed as capitial gains…now we know why he likes that particular loophole.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:18 pm
“Wouldn’t it be cheaper to just rinse the diaper out? But it is the rich folks fault that you don’t know the difference between “your” and “you’re”.”
Awe, the little baby wants some more attention. Sarah, I’ve noticed you haven’t added one single opinion to the topic. Instead, you throw out mindless insults.
Keep trying, little one.
Bless yer heart.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:19 pm
” But it is the rich folks fault that you don’t know the difference between “your” and “you’re”.”
Awe, Sarah found a typo. Good fer you, little one. And no, it wasn’t any rich persons fault that I made a typo. It’s called being human, sport.
Have a nice day.
JDW
January 24th, 2012
4:21 pm
@Kyle…”The man paid more money in federal taxes in 2010 alone than I will probably pay in my lifetime!”
Point is that he profited from the system to a much larger extent as well…it’s a simple concept…those that benefit from the system to the greatest extent should pay the lion’s share of the maintenance costs. After all, even you can’t think Romney could have made that level of income without the imputed aid of the rest of us. You know the people that work in the companies, buy the products, fight the wars, provide the services, and otherwise give ole’ Mittens the free time to reap the benefits.
JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
4:22 pm
Is there anyone from the Left that can explain “fair share” in terms other than the rich should pay more? What is fair?
Can the Left explain how they justify the current Progressive tax structure as being fair?
Is it fair that 47% pay no federal income tax? If they paid something, even if small, would it not be more fair than them paying nothing while others pay progressively more?
Let the bleeding hearts begin.
Rafe Hollister
January 24th, 2012
4:23 pm
I’m willing to bet the $3M Romney gave to charity did more good for mankind than the $3M he paid in to the federal treasury.
We probably used the $3M in federal income to finance the study on why pigs stink, funded some green energy boondoggle, or handed it out to some Katrina victim, who actually lived in Nebraska and has never visited the Gulf coast.
Doesn’t it scare even you libs/progressives to think of living in a country where Barry Oblamer was the sole judge of “fairness” and did they “pay their fair share”. Seems the only people who have benefitted during this Obama depression have been friends of Oblamer, like the Solyndra guys, Brazil’s potentates and Warren Buffet.
Have all you libs seen the charts showing all the thousands of pipelines crossing the Ogalla acquifer in Nebraska. I thought, listening to Obama, this area was virginal. Looking at the charts makes one wonder, what is wrong with #1001 pipeline?
Not sure if you guys who depend of the MSM will ever see the charts showing all the pipelines, but you should do some research.
Election year politics obviously trumps jobs and energy prices.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:23 pm
“those that benefit from the system to the greatest extent should pay the lion’s share of the maintenance costs.”
So you’re a communist.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
4:23 pm
“I know you struggle with complicated concepts , but you only pay taxes on the PROFITS from investments not the ORIGINAL CAPITAL that was already taxed as income.”
Either way, that profit wouldn’t have been realized if the capital hadn’t been risked, thus the reward should not be taxed at all.
GT
January 24th, 2012
4:24 pm
Whose crying? We are winning this thing, they have already ordered the champagne in the White House. You’re right about one thing it is you’re not your, I took my lessons in an Atlanta Public School house, it is a wonder I can speak at all.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:24 pm
“Is there anyone from the Left that can explain “fair share” in terms other than the rich should pay more? What is fair?’
The left ONLY cries about how the right should pay more in taxes. You’ll never hear any of them say that Obama, a millionaire, or Clinton, a millionaire, should pay more in taxes.
Again, left wingers don’t get the concept of capitalism.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:25 pm
JDW
Let’s talk about how Clinton made 76 million in speaking fees.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
4:26 pm
“those that benefit from the system to the greatest extent should pay the lion’s share of the maintenance costs. ”
They actually do already.
But let’s take that a step further, shall we? Shouldn’t those who benefit the most from social programs pay at least SOME of the maintenance costs under your theory?
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:26 pm
“We are winning this thing, they have already ordered the champagne in the White House. ”
Good, it’ll be fun watching them get drunk as they get booted out.
Kyle Wingfield
January 24th, 2012
4:28 pm
JDW @ 4:21: But he and other high earners ARE paying the lion’s share of the maintenance costs. As every analysis of the tax structure of this country, the most progressive one in the industrialized world, demonstrates.
Like you said: simple concept.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:29 pm
“You know the people that work in the companies, buy the products, fight the wars, provide the services, and otherwise give ole’ Mittens the free time to reap the benefits.”
Ok, so you hate rich people. Got it.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:30 pm
JDW
What kind of trailer park do you live in since you are obviously poor.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
4:31 pm
JDW@4:14, You really get off trying to insult those with which you disagree. What’s your problem? You seem to be a fairly intelligent person. Can’t you see that it’s impossible to have an intellectual discussion with someone when you lead off with a putdown? You reveal your own inadequacies in trying to underestimate the intelligence or knowledge of others.
The fact that I am a fiscally conservative when the natl. debt is over $15 T means that I have more sense than all the Democrats in the beltway combined.
Georgia, The "New Mississippi"
January 24th, 2012
4:32 pm
We can win this thing as long as us 1% continue to stick together. Mr. Romney does not need the “small change” the Presidency pays. He is a”real American” that loves his country and that is why he is seeking the Republican nomination to turn this country around.. He along with Rush Limbaugh are the only ones that know what they are doing because they have the most money…..etc,etc,etc …
Bob
January 24th, 2012
4:34 pm
Read Thomas Sowell’s column today…Romney=McCain=Thomas Dewy. All are candidates that don’t offend anyone, but don’t stand for anything either. They are acceptable to the Republican establishement, but not the voters. Which QB would you rather have in the Super Bowl, one less likely to throw and interception, or one most likely to throw a touchdown pass?
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
4:34 pm
@Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate!
January 24th, 2012
4:26 pm
But let’s take that a step further, shall we? Shouldn’t those who benefit the most from social programs pay at least SOME of the maintenance costs under your theory?
——————————————————-
Love this idea…But it’s a heavy lift to implement…without creating another program…
Kyle Wingfield
January 24th, 2012
4:35 pm
As for this: “the people that work in the companies, buy the products, fight the wars, provide the services.”
I’ll leave out the “fight the wars” part. The people who work in the companies do so willingly, as do the ones who buy the products and provide the services. If they feel they are underpaid and/or overworked, they can try to find work elsewhere; if they feel they aren’t getting their money’s worth for what they buy, they can take their business elsewhere. Pretty much everyone thinks they ought to be paid more and get more for their money. But there’s nowhere else on Earth where they have as much freedom to seek out the alternatives as they do in this country.
Bob
January 24th, 2012
4:35 pm
And, good article Kyle…you learned well in Dalton.
JDW
January 24th, 2012
4:35 pm
@Kyle…”When someone can define “fair share,” I’ll start taking seriously the notion that this conversation is driven by more than envy and pandering.”
I know I have defined this for you before, but “fair share” is approximately the amount he would have paid under Clinton plus a closed loophole for carried interest…in this case Romney’s “fair share” would have been your $900K plus 39% of the $12.9 million earned as carried interest or another $3.1 million on those earnings.
Additionally I think the threshold for long-term capital gains should be 5 years which could have added another as much as $2 million more…
Romney’s “fair share” should have been between $7 million and $9 million depending on the holding period of his other investments.
Kathy
January 24th, 2012
4:36 pm
I wouldn’t care one witt about how much Mitt paid in taxes, if he would employ some people with all his millions. But for all his money, I don’t see him investing in a few good American workers.
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
4:38 pm
Rafe Hollister
January 24th, 2012
4:23 pm
I’m willing to bet the $3M Romney gave to charity did more good for mankind than the $3M he paid in to the federal treasury.
———————————————————-
$1.5M of that went to the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS….They primarily help fellow Mormons….
And yes….the federal government wastes WAY more than $1.5M a year….
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:38 pm
“I wouldn’t care one witt about how much Mitt paid in taxes, if he would employ some people with all his millions.”
Since when is it mandatory for a millionaire to employ people.
“But for all his money, I don’t see him investing in a few good American workers.”
Not sure if you know this or not, but Mitt doesn’t own a company. Shhh, don’t tell anyone else.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:39 pm
“I know I have defined this for you before, but “fair share”
I think you should have to pay an AJC toll just for wasting so much comment space with your wealth envy nonsense.
JDW
January 24th, 2012
4:39 pm
@Kyle…”If they feel they are underpaid and/or overworked, they can try to find work elsewhere”
In the best of times that’s pompous…right now it smacks of “let them eat cake”. You do remember how that story ended don’t you?
You, I and select others have those options to a degree. Average Joe…not so much.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:39 pm
” You do remember how that story ended don’t you?”
France.
Kyle Wingfield
January 24th, 2012
4:40 pm
JDW @ 4:35: Ira Stoll deals with this argument quite well here. See “Myth No. 4.”
JDW
January 24th, 2012
4:41 pm
@Kyle…”But he and other high earners ARE paying the lion’s share of the maintenance costs”
NO …they are paying the lion’s share of the taxes at this time. The maintenance costs are considerably higher, therefore the deficit exits.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:46 pm
JDW
Why do you hate people who make money?
JDW
January 24th, 2012
4:47 pm
@Kyle…”Ira Stoll deals with this argument quite well here. See “Myth No. 4.””
Ira glosses over the fact that neither the hedge fund manager nor Romney has an actual investment at play. They are simply taking a commission just like every salesperson in the world and paying capital gains taxes instead of income taxes.
JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
4:47 pm
The idea that Romney’s millions does not employ peope is ridiculous. He may not directly employ people, but the money is not laying in a safe deposit box somewhere. It is invested. That means other companies have borrowed its use and they in turn employ people. Without the Mitt investment, it is safe to state there would be less employed.
JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
4:50 pm
Addendum to my 4:47 – A concept the Left in all their intellectual superiority cannot seem to grasp.
JDW
January 24th, 2012
4:50 pm
@Linda…”What’s your problem?”
My problem is that any moron should know that this is a disingenuous statement….
“If they invest their disposable income, they pay taxes AGAIN.”
They do not pay taxes AGAIN. They pay taxes on the profits which have never before been taxed.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
4:51 pm
Kathy@4:36, Did you hear about the new home for Tom Brady & his wife? They are officially the top earning couple in the world. It set them back about $20 M, taking about 20 mts. to construct. Think of the carpenters, floor guys, installers, framers, concrete finishers, landscapers, pool men, painters, wallpaper hangers, etc. Think of the people who work for the companies that manufacture appliances, windows, lumber, tools, bricks, carpet, furniture, accessories, etc.
The Bradies were instrumental in the employment of many blue collar workers, jobs created without the fed. govt. That’s trickle down economics.
Kyle Wingfield
January 24th, 2012
4:51 pm
JDW @ 4:39: Then let me ask this: If someone can’t find better work for the same pay or the same work for more pay, then by what objective measure is he underpaid/overworked?
Are options always more limited for the less skilled or otherwise less in demand (due to overcrowding in the field)? Of course. Are they even more restricted during economic downturns? Obviously. But government has never proved capable of “fixing” this situation in a way that doesn’t have unintended consequences at least as bad as the underlying problems. The notion of letting a handful of smart folks try to outwit the collective decisions of 310 million people (6.8 billion people, really, since the only closed market is the world market) is pure folly.
We provide a safety net for people thrown for a loop by circumstances they couldn’t have foreseen or controlled. We have all manner of educational programs to help them reinvent themselves. Beyond that, there’s not much government can competently do.
JDW
January 24th, 2012
4:52 pm
“Let’s talk about how Clinton made 76 million in speaking fees.”
And paid income tax rates not capital gains rates..what’s your point?
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
4:52 pm
“My problem is that any moron should know that this is a disingenuous statement….”
So you’re a moron. Got it.
Kyle Wingfield
January 24th, 2012
4:52 pm
JDW @ 4:47: And if the investments don’t gain, they don’t get any commission…
Rafe Hollister
January 24th, 2012
4:55 pm
NO …they are paying the lion’s share of the taxes at this time. The maintenance costs are considerably higher, therefore the deficit exits.
_______________
No, the deficit exists because the Dems want the government to be all things to all people and refuse to even entertain rolling back the cost of government. They just prefer to raise Mitt’s taxes and keep SPENDING.
Bob
January 24th, 2012
4:58 pm
JDW…did slick Willie earn those speaking fees, or were they political payback?
Rafe Hollister
January 24th, 2012
4:58 pm
RNBD
$1.5M of that went to the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS….They primarily help fellow Mormons….
Mormons have to eat as well. Last I checked they were US citizens, tax payers, and some of the most loyal patriotic people in this country. What is your point?
MarkV
January 24th, 2012
4:59 pm
JDW and Kyle,
In my opinion to define fair share by citing some numbers is completely unproductive. JDW, why would you think those numbers you cite mean that those taxes would be fair? Why would “fair share” be “approximately the amount he would have paid under Clinton plus a closed loophole for carried interest…?” That is no better than saying “The fed. marginal income tax rates are already progressive AND fair.” The validity of “fair” is left to be in the eyes of the beholder.
The way I define fair is a tax structure, which makes the after-tax income to change by about the same percentage for different income groups over a reasonable historical period, say a decade. This is what has been out of whack in the recent history.
JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
5:00 pm
Double Taxation – the wife and I own an S-Corp. It in turn owns a retail shop. If the retail shop makes $50K profit, we pay taxes on $50K because it all rolls to our personal return. If we take $25K of that and reinvest it into the retail shop in inventory, we get to pay property taxes on any of that inventory remaining as of the first day of the new year. In fact, all inventory regardless of how long it has been in inventory is subject to property taxes each year. That means an item paid for with after tax dollars that stays in inventory over a period of years is taxed over and over. Some system. And, the Left thinks that’s fair because those chillin must have a government school paid for with the property tax dollars. Thanks, I feel so much better (no I don’t).
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:00 pm
“The maintenance costs are considerably higher, therefore the deficit exits.”
Um no, the deficit exists because of spending, sport.
Keep trying. Maybe something you cry about will stick.
JDW
January 24th, 2012
5:00 pm
@Kyle…”then by what objective measure is he underpaid/overworked?”
I did not say they were underpaid nor overworked, merely that without their work product Romney nor anyone else could have profited.
“But government has never proved capable of “fixing” this situation in a way that doesn’t have unintended consequences at least as bad as the underlying problems.”
I never said government should fix that particular problem…as I posted the other day….
““The legitimate object of government, is to do for the people whatever they need to have done, but which they can not do, at all, or can not do, so well, for themselves – in their separate and individual capacities …. ”
That includes things like regulation, education systems, defense, healthcare, etc…all the things that make up the infrastructure to support the society that Romney and others have profited from. Therefore when the bill comes due they should pay it…not defray thier expenses by running a deficit.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:01 pm
“did slick Willie earn those speaking fees, or were they political payback?”
Not sure, but one thing I do know is that the left is completely silent about it.
gm
January 24th, 2012
5:02 pm
I wonder how much money the people he layed off made? Romney is a example why this country collaps, but the idiots on the right think its a badge of honor to collect 200 million at the expense of the middle class worker.
Darwin
January 24th, 2012
5:02 pm
Mitts is only part of the problem. When 47% of income earners pay no tax, then payment of government services falls on those who do pay. And the 47% are not free loaders. They are playing the system designed to give breaks for large families, mortgage debt, and other special interests. Corporations who pay no tax are included in this bunch. No, the whole tax system is a disgrace. Mitts only helps to showcase what’s wrong with our current tax code. Eliminate the special interests (including Wall Street vulture capitalists) and create a level field. Only then can we begin to look at cutting services if we are serious about balancing the budget.
JDW
January 24th, 2012
5:03 pm
@MarkV…”why would you think those numbers you cite mean that those taxes would be fair? ”
I use those numbers as a baseline for fair because when taxes were at those levels we did not run a deficit. I have not put a pencil to it but I expect those numbers would have come close to your definition as well.
1961_Xer
January 24th, 2012
5:04 pm
All the Romney tax return points out is that the tax code needs a major overhaul. I earn a modest paycheck and pay a higher percentage than someone who rakes in $20million a year in capgains/div/etc. Romney doesn’t pay SS or Medicare on that $20million, either. While it is perfectly legal for Romney to do so, it says a pantload (bad) about the problems with our taxcode.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:04 pm
“I wonder how much money the people he layed off made? Romney is a example why this country collaps, but the idiots on the right think its a badge of honor to collect 200 million at the expense of the middle class worker.”
Well, here’s another shining example of liberal ignorance in all it’s pathetic glory.
JDW
January 24th, 2012
5:04 pm
@Kyle…”And if the investments don’t gain, they don’t get any commission…”
Nor pay any taxes….
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:04 pm
” I earn a modest paycheck and pay a higher percentage than someone who rakes in $20million a year in capgains/div/etc. ”
Stop lying.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
5:05 pm
JDW@4:50, If you think I’m a moron, why would you want to waste your time engaging me?
one + one = two
once + once = twice
Investors can’t invest money they do not have. Most investors invest money they have earned & paid taxes on. Investors pay taxes twice, once when they earn money/wages & again on the capital gains, IF they make a gain.
JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
5:05 pm
gm – you should take a different viewpoint. Sure several of the companies Bain invested in were downsized or went out of business. But, many were successful and stayed in business with the Bain infusion. It is similar to Obama claiming to have created X number of jobs. You don’t really know how many, you just know it helped.
Bob
January 24th, 2012
5:06 pm
Don’t you really think that the major obstacles/challenges/problems are lack of term limits, so called “think tanks”, and electing lawyers to represent our interests? Maybe our founding fathers were correct when they decreed serving the public rather than life-time job.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:08 pm
Linda
JDW is probably unemployed and living in his parents basement. Take his rants with a grain of salt.
JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
5:09 pm
I have seen a T-Shirt with the Paul Revere like rider proclaiming – “the lawyers are coming, the lawyers are coming!”
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:11 pm
“I have seen a T-Shirt with the Paul Revere like rider proclaiming – “the lawyers are coming, the lawyers are coming!””
Well, he did live in the New England area famous for lawyers.
JohnnyReb
January 24th, 2012
5:15 pm
Well, another grand day at the debate thread! The Left puts up no sustainable point to justify their position and can only parrot the Obama talking points. The loyal right wipes them out with only occassional backup from the moderator who slays them with logic and history.
Be reminded of Reagan who stated the problem with the Left is, they know so much that is not true.
Good evening and best wishes.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
5:16 pm
Humanitarian initiatives of the Mormon church include:
Emergency Response
Wheelchair Distribution
Clean Water Service
Neonatal Resuscitation program
Vision Treatment Training
The LDS church also has over 300 job development & placement centers around the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LDS_Humanitarian_Services
Bob
January 24th, 2012
5:17 pm
Good one JohnnyReb (and thanks for serving). How many of ya’ll would turn over your 401Ks, retirement accounts, and/or investments to your attorney to manage? Isn’t that what you’re doing when you elect one? And, how many think we have enough laws…maybe we need to enforce the ones on the books now. Just asking.
redneckbluedog
January 24th, 2012
5:20 pm
@Rafe Hollister
January 24th, 2012
4:58 pm
———————————-
My point is that they creep me out and I don’t want one running my country…!!!!!
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:25 pm
“How many of ya’ll would turn over your 401Ks, retirement accounts, and/or investments to your attorney to manage?”
None of them.
MarkV
January 24th, 2012
5:31 pm
JDW @5:03 pm
I am glad that some numbers are already available that could be the starting point, because using my definition obviously would require adjustments to be made depending on the results. My main problem with your reasoning, rather than your numbers, is that deficit and fairness are completely independent concepts.
Sarah Coulter
January 24th, 2012
5:31 pm
I love watching the 99%ers gag, and defend the 1% as if they give a hoot about what you say.
Here is a question for the contards that adamantly defend the millionaire and billionaires: do you think that if the millionaires and billionaires were really paying so much that they wouldn’t have figured out a way to rig the system to their benefit or that they would be complaining about how much money the government takes from them?
I never see any of the billionaires or millionaires complaining about how much they pay. It always the non-millionaires and non-billionaires that are doing the “Leave Britney alone” or in this case “leave the rich alone”.
Bob
January 24th, 2012
5:32 pm
And one last point before I hit the bar, maybe we shouldn’t put much stock into “how much money he/she made”, “what tax rate paid”, “how many wives”, or “how smooth he/she talks”, maybe we should vote for the person most qualified to be the general manager of this country and be a good steward of the financial resources. Just my opinion…peace.
Staff Media Urologist
January 24th, 2012
5:33 pm
The tax code is whacked. The poor pay less taxes because they CAN’T PAY MORE, the rich pay less taxes because they LEVERAGE THEIR MONEY TO PLAY THE SYSTEM, and the middle class bears an incommensurate load for working their fool butts off every day with HR Block as their tax advisor. This isn’t about class envy. It’s about a system that fails us and fails the capitalist model that we pride ourselves on.
I’m all for the flat tax. Until the politicians eff that up too.
Kathy
January 24th, 2012
5:38 pm
I am well aware that Mitt doesn’t own a company and I never said employing people was mandatory. If private industry and those with a substantial amount of money would hire a few people, then it would definitely help the unemployment rate. Why can’t Mitt create a company and put people to work?
Somewhere Over There – Thanks for making my point. Additional tax cuts will not result in higher employment levels. Those that are able to hire don’t hire anyway.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:42 pm
“Here is a question for the contards that adamantly defend the millionaire and billionaires: do you think that if the millionaires and billionaires were really paying so much that they wouldn’t have figured out a way to rig the system to their benefit or that they would be complaining about how much money the government takes from them?”
What was that you were saying earlier about being “mature?” Geez, you are a walking contradiction, little girl.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:44 pm
“Why can’t Mitt create a company and put people to work?”
Ok, you’re not a smart person. Got it.
“Those that are able to hire don’t hire anyway.”
I’m gonna go out on a limb and take a wild guess that you have never owned a business.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:45 pm
“I love watching the 99%ers gag, and defend the 1% as if they give a hoot about what you say.”
I love watching you implode all over Kyle’s blog.
Odis
January 24th, 2012
5:45 pm
How does someone who makes 21 million dollars a year without having a job, relate to middle-class Americans? Mittens is just out of touch with 99% of Americans.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
5:47 pm
gm@5:02, Obama closed 1454 GM dealerships, resulting in the loss of 72,620 jobs in the short-term AND 789 Chrysler dealerships, resulting in the loss of 43,081 jobs in the short-term, & according to the TARP Inspector General, he based the closings on race, gender & location.
http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/2010/07/23/tarp-inspector-general-obama-administration-closed-down-auto-dealerships-due-to-race-gender-and-location/
Romney had to close a few failing businesses but was instrumental in saving about 75%. How many net jobs did Romney save or create?
Bob
January 24th, 2012
5:48 pm
@Somewhere…excellent point my friend. Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi, et al have made it expensive to hire folks. Much cheaper to outsource. And what do all three have in common? Lawyers!
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:48 pm
“How does someone who makes 21 million dollars a year without having a job, relate to middle-class Americans?”
Same way Clinton, who made 76 million dollars last year did. Same way Obama, who made over 1 million dollars last year did.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:49 pm
“Mittens is just out of touch with 99% of Americans.”
No, he’s just out of touch with the loser Democrat retards who call themselves the 99%/
BTW, where are all the whiney little babies now who called themselves the 99%?
Kathy
January 24th, 2012
5:50 pm
Somewhere over there -You don’t even know me and yet you have the gall to insult me. This is exactly the problem with the extreme right. YOU are destroying the country. Not interested in serious discussion, just insults.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:50 pm
Bob
These so-called “intellectuals” don’t even know how to balance their own checkbooks. They also don’t even realize that their cult leader Obama is a millionaire.
Somewhere over there
January 24th, 2012
5:51 pm
“You don’t even know me and yet you have the gall to insult me.”
No, I had the gall to correct your lies.
“This is exactly the problem with the extreme right. YOU are destroying the country. Not interested in serious discussion, just insults.”
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!
Linda
January 24th, 2012
6:05 pm
Sarah@5:31, Taxes are not levied on wealth. They are levied on income.
It appears that you have “fallen” for the liberal rhetoric. Obama & the Democrats harp about the “millionaires & billionaires” in a dishonest way. Their intent is to raise taxes beginning with singles making $200,000 & couples making about $250,000. Those are “thousandaires.”
My question to you is this: regardless of income or tax bracket, what do you think is the maximum number of months that any human being should work for the govt., that is, the fed. govt. + his or her state govt., that is, paying taxes, before he or she gets to keep one dime so that they can pay for stuff such as food, clothing & shelter?
Hint: a combined federal marginal tax rate of 40% plus a state tax rate of 10% means that that tax payer works for the government half of the year.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
January 24th, 2012
6:08 pm
Most dummycrats can’t count that high so they just blubber along with their media pimps.
It’s all a big foggy, whiny world out there.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
6:13 pm
Kathy@5:38, Your idea is so great that Mitt wants to take you up on it, but rather than a company, he wants to run the whole country AND he wants to runs the whole country exactly like he ran his company. The problem with politicians is that they are politicians. They think they need to spend all the revenues we send to Washington PLUS another $1.6 T per year. It’s never enough.
Romney is not a career politician. He was a governor. He is used to profits, not deficits & debt. He will be a better manager.
Michael H. Smith
January 24th, 2012
6:14 pm
Alms!
Alms for the State!
Pay thy fair share and comrade dear supreme re-distributor obumessiah shalt bless thee.
Get ready conservative compeers, tonight obumessiah the anointed one shall eulogize that old evil greedy capitalism in the name of “Class Warfare” and the demagoguery of “Equal Fairness”. Let’s see how closely the magnificent one can come to reciting the mantra of Karl Marx without actually using his words, “From each according to their ability, to each according to their need.”
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
January 24th, 2012
6:21 pm
Here’s our annual 2012 State of the Union pool, name, in order, the following things iman obozo is most likely to do tonight-
1) Lie like a rug.
2) Whine about the rich.
3) Blame Bushie.
4) Call you and your family energy hogs.
5) Gush over the murderous Chinese communist hellhole.
6) Pick out some defenseless, decent and moral person from the audience, who is unable to respond, and run his mealy little at them like the two bit goon that he is.
7) Blabber about lowering taxes, shrinking government and cutting regulations that, if Republicans are still awake at this point, should induce uproarious howls of laughter from them.
I got 1-2-3-4-5-6-7, beat that, punks.
Somebody else is going to have to keep score cause I ain’t watchin this klownshow.
Michael H. Smith
January 24th, 2012
6:23 pm
Linda@6:13 pm If memory serves me correctly Mitt wants to cut the size of government, not just slow down the rate of growth in government, but really cut its’ actual size by 10%.
Bring on the ax. Oh, and if you by accident slip and cut off another 30% I’ll smile and say oopsy for you, Mitt.
Karl Marx
January 24th, 2012
6:27 pm
Americans are spoiled. You could never live like the Russian’s did under communism. Chicken scraps and potatos and be happy you got that. And the living conditions? They would make section 8 look like Romney’s neighborhood. But that is what the libs want. Everyone brought down to the lowest common denominator.
Eric
January 24th, 2012
6:29 pm
I’d feel better about this article and Mr. Romney if I thought corporate America had our citizens’ interests at heart. But they don’t (i.e., shareholder wealth), so it’s hard to trust the message here anymore, given our lack of jobs and job security. And we’re being told we have to be “more” competitive. Wow, that’s some fine outlook for American citizens!
littlebiggygirl
January 24th, 2012
6:33 pm
tyranny does not rely on your opinion to continue – it only requires your money.
though tax systems are designed to extract money from the apathetic they can be reconstructed into an instrument of liberation for all of us. http://www.taxkilla.com
Linda
January 24th, 2012
6:34 pm
Michael@6:23, We are borrowing 40% of every dollar we are spending. That means we need to cut 40% of the fed. govt.
We have a $15 T natl. debt. To ever begin to pay that down, we need to cut another 10% of the fed. govt.
That means we need to cut the fed. govt. in half–a full 50%!
I would pull out a copy of the Constitution. If a dept. or agency is not listed in it, that dept. or agency would be outta here.
This is a time for out-sourcing. I would send the entire EPA overseas. Maybe Iran or N. Korea could use their expertise.
MarkV
January 24th, 2012
6:44 pm
Karl Marx @6:27 pm
I suspect and your ilk you will try to distort my post to a “defense of communism,” which will be preposterous, but exaggerations like yours only make your side look ridiculous. If you think that Russians in general in the Soviet Union lived on chicken scraps and potatoes, it only shows your ignorance. Same with living conditions.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
7:01 pm
Eric@6:29, in 7/09, Bob Chanin, Gen. Council for the NEA said, “…Despite what some among us would like to believe, it is not because of our creative ideas, it is not because of the merit of our positions, it is not because we care about children & it not because we have a vision of a great public school for every child. NEA & its affiliates are effective advocates because we have power & we have power because there are more than 3.2 million people who are willing to pay us hundreds of millions of money in dues each year because they believe that we are the unions that can most effectively represent them, the unions that can protect their rights & advance their interests as education employees…”
The quote begins at minute 21:21 on the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqn1rvv7Fis
If you can understand that teachers’ unions are not effective because they care about our children nor their schools, perhaps you can understand that corporations are in the business to make profits for their shareholders. That is the definition of business.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 24th, 2012
7:10 pm
Romney didn’t pass or sign any of the tax laws his returns are responsive to. Obozo could have set the rates wherever he liked, and promised to end the Bush tax cuts even before they could sunset.
And it’s Romney you libtards are mad at?
JDW
January 24th, 2012
7:14 pm
MarkV, taxes IMO are fair when government does the proper amount of spending to achieve the agreed goal and the is enough tax revenue to pay 100% of the cost. Inside that equation there should be a distribution as you describe.
@@
January 24th, 2012
7:17 pm
Given all the flak Romney took for his $10,000.00 bet with Perry…did he think it wise to put up a $1.6 million dollar reward for anyone who brings forth additional documentation on Newt’s freddie/fannie affair?
Slo-o-o-o-o-o-w
wallbanger
January 24th, 2012
7:24 pm
Americans have wealth envy. Most Americans appear to be greedy. Most Americans, not just the rich. How does one reasonably indict someone who pays the legal amount of taxes? Buffet complained that his were a smaller percentage than his secretary’s, but did he ante up more dough? Heck no. I would love some of these loud mouthed and rich liberals putting their money where their mouths are. How about it Nancy??
Karl Marx
January 24th, 2012
7:59 pm
Woo Hoo! It’s almost time for Oblamer to make vaque promises, propose to increase spending and divide the nation more.
Rafe Hollister
January 24th, 2012
8:05 pm
I guess Dems think that if they can confiscate enough from the wealthy in taxes, then they have no moral obligation to give to charity. This would explain the Drudge Report reporting Romney gave 15% to charity, while Oblamer gave 1% and Biden gave $368. Seems to be a pattern with Dems as Kerry and Clinton were also charity avoiders.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 24th, 2012
8:43 pm
Rafe, Obozo has proposed eliminating the deduction on charitable giving. Not as part of an overall tax reform, mind you, but to weaken private charity and shift more power to government.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
8:49 pm
Two progressives are communicating with each other above. One said, “…The validity of ‘fair’ is left to be in the eyes of the beholder” & his partner-in-crime answered by saying, “…taxes are fair when govt. does the proper amt. of spending to achieve the agreed goal & enough tax revenue to pay 100% of the cost. Inside that equation there should be a distribution as you describe.”
Is anyone else paying attention?
Who is this “beholder?” Is it His Majesty or His Highness?
What’s the govt.’s “proper” amt. of spending? What goal is it trying to achieve?
Where in the Constitution is the word “distribution” used?
Does anyone doubt the agenda of the progressives, which has absolutely nothing with progressing this country toward fiscal responsibility?
@@
January 24th, 2012
9:23 pm
I can report on the State of the Union. There can be no union with all the class warfare being waged by Obama.
Romney Camp Wavers on Tax Break
Campaign Backtracks After an Aide Hints Candidate Might Alter Policy Benefitting Private Equity.
Now I’ve heard some say Gingrich is shameless. Works to his advantage when going up against the Democratic party. Their entire platform is built on shaming people into giving.
Looks like Romney can be easily shamed. It’s not that I dislike Romney, but criminey…what’s wrong with him? He’s plumb squishy!
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 24th, 2012
10:09 pm
Romney donated 15% to charity.
Obozo? A princely 1%. What a guy.
Linda
January 24th, 2012
10:25 pm
@@ @ 9:23, Can’t click on your site. Please re-do. Would like to view it.
Sarah Coulter
January 24th, 2012
10:27 pm
But Linda @ 6:05, you didn’t answer my question but reverted to the same tired Republican talking points about paying the state. Where are the millionaires and billionaires complaining about how much they have to pay in taxes? And don’t you think that if they were paying an insane amount that they wouldn’t have the clout and the best accountants money can buy to change the system to favor them? Why is it people like you that are speaking for them?
Let’s speak in hypothetical terms. If I earned 21 million dollars between June 2010 and June 2011, don’t you think that I would find the best accountant that money can buy to make sure that I get money back and not have to pay anything? And don’t start with the Republican talking points about paying the state blah, blah, blah.
Sarah Coulter
January 24th, 2012
10:29 pm
Lil’ Dinglebarry Bailout, get ye back to thy corner and put back on that dunce cap!
Sarah Coulter
January 24th, 2012
10:30 pm
And just to irritate Somewhere, the only imploding I am doing is from laughing at your redonkulous statements.
Fast and Furious Spending
January 24th, 2012
10:31 pm
@@,
Herman Cain summed up Romney best I’ve ever heard when asked on the Today Show about him. Cain replied, “great hair.”
I don’t like to kick Romney when he’s down, so I won’t; but Lord knows the media and everyone else (including Romney) kicked the others previously.
Fast and Furious Spending
January 24th, 2012
10:38 pm
Two ridiculous things I heard at the Obama show tonight that were so absurd I wonder if there are adults anywhere in the White House going over the president’s speeches: (I’m using quotes but, if quote is not completely accurate, please accept my apologies)
1. “We need to take the half a trillion savings from the Iraq war and use it for two things: let’s pay down the deficit and start putting people back to work.” Sure. Let’s borrow more money from the red Chinese so that we can pay them back for money we borrowed last year!
2. “Let’s start a veterans civilian work corps, so that we can get our veterans employed as policemen and firefighters.” The idea isn’t absurd in the abstract, but what the President said was entirely nutty. If he thinks veterans need a federal program worth billions to get jobs as firefighters and cops, then he really is crazy, and he obviously thinks the rest of us are stupid.
jm
January 24th, 2012
10:45 pm
Obama lied when he said government invented fracking
Obama probably thinks Al Gore invented the internet too
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-03/shale-gas-reserves-have-potential-to-reignite-u-s-economy.html
Michael H. Smith
January 24th, 2012
10:49 pm
Yeah Newt, you got some ‘Splaining to do
Gingrich said he never lobbied for Freddie Mac, and he never registered as a lobbyist.
But in his consulting role, he became a public cheerleader for Freddie Mac and government-sponsored mortgage enterprises, which he said at the time were worthwhile. In a 2007 interview posted on Freddie Mac’s website — which has since been removed — Gingrich said, “The housing GSEs have made an important contribution to homeownership and the housing finance system.” He added that the space program and health care could be ripe for a government-sponsored enterprise.
Gingrich now says he was advising Freddie Mac not to buy risky mortgage-backed securities. When the housing market collapsed, those investments went bad, and Freddie — along with fellow government-sponsored enterprise Fannie Mae — received a federal bailout.
“I think he’s got a lot of explaining to do,” Mack said. “And what I would say is the people in the state of Florida who have had their homes devalued or lost their homes, they want to know what the relationship was, and I think they deserve that answer.”
http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/gingrich-draws-biggest-crowd-1315519.html
@@
January 24th, 2012
10:50 pm
Linda:
Sorry for the delay. Got lost in paperwork.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203806504577180811581675618.html
Michael H. Smith
January 24th, 2012
10:53 pm
Hope everyone got to listen in on Gov. Mitch Daniels response to the mis-State of the Union.
I still wish he would of ran for President. hmm… think he’d go for a VP offer?
Linda
January 24th, 2012
11:01 pm
Sarah@10:27, Until you acknowledge that taxes are not paid on wealth, but rather income, & answer my question to you @6:05, I cannot communicate with you.
MarkV
January 24th, 2012
11:07 pm
JDW @7:14 pm
JDW, I think we are now quibbling only about the choice of words. The way I would put it is that the distribution of taxes if what is or is not “fair,” while the total amount provided by that distribution should be appropriate, i.e, to provide enough tax revenue to pay 100% of the cost.
MarkV
January 24th, 2012
11:15 pm
It is sad when somebody is unable to understand a simple argument. When a person argues that a particular, existing distribution of taxes is fair, without offering any proof or evidence of that fairness other than that person’s opinion, then the validity of the fairness of that distribution is only in the eyes of the beholder, i.e., of the person who has made that assertion.
Michael H. Smith
January 24th, 2012
11:15 pm
Linda, I hope you are as fed-up with this tax demagoguery as I am. Steve Forbes idea of a flat income tax sounds great to me one rate would probably be best but I’d go for two and eliminate all subsidies, loopholes, crave outs, shelters etc.
A two tier capital gains tax might be worth considering where a much lower tax rate would apply to the small investors, the Romneys’ could stand to take a bigger hit.
Oh did you get Gov. Daniels comments on means testing the Safety Net benefits? It could be seen as bit socialist I suppose as it would be redistribution of wealth. Not really sure I’m big on that idea but if the rich of this country are willing to go that way I’d concede. Truth is most of them probably would.
Fast and Furious Spending
January 24th, 2012
11:24 pm
Michael,
If some social programs like social security or medicaid aren’t means tested we, as a nation, are going to go broke paying for our grandparents’ medical bills and retirement motor homes. I see no solution other than to insist on some serious and deliberate reform that will be politically painful to make happen. Otherwise, business as usual with Obama promising more good things from ever more spending…and then subsequently delivering crap.
@@
January 24th, 2012
11:34 pm
Michael:
That 2007 interview is old news. It can be viewed in its’ entirety. He’s already acknowledged that he promoted homeownership as something that should be embraced by conservatives and that GSE like Fannie & Freddie could aid in that goal.
Anyhoo…to sum it up in Newt’s own words:
“And making homeownership more accessible and affordable is a policy goal I believe conservatives should embrace”
“So while we need to improve the regulation of the GSEs, I would be very cautious about fundamentally changing their role or the model itself.”
Did you read the part about needing to improve regulations?
Nothing new, Michael….it’s pretty much what he’s been saying all along.
Fast and Furious Spending
January 24th, 2012
11:35 pm
More incredulity within the speech.
1. Obama said no more bailouts.
2. He bragged of the auto bailouts.
Obama DOES indeed think we’re all stupid.
SBinF
January 24th, 2012
11:55 pm
Apparently, $900,000 isn’t much money to Kyle. What a charmed life you must lead.
Linda
January 25th, 2012
12:03 am
Michael@11:15, Just heard Daniels’ comments. With DVR, cooking & pausing to eliminate commercials, makes life opposite of “in the fast lane.” Daniels’ comments were AWESOME. Obama’s speech was a rerun many times over.
Good night, everyone!
Michael H. Smith
January 25th, 2012
12:04 am
@@
Like you told me @@, that’s what you NEED to think.
It might be old but it ain’t good and your guy Newt ain’t clean. Your claim about Newt not establishment… not insider… HUH? Nah, Newt can call what he did not lobbying all he wants to, it doesn’t ring true.
And open your eyes to all that was said:
But in his consulting role, he became a public cheerleader for Freddie Mac and government-sponsored mortgage enterprises, which he said at the time were worthwhile. In a 2007 interview posted on Freddie Mac’s website — which has since been removed — Gingrich said, “The housing GSEs have made an important contribution to homeownership and the housing finance system.” He added that the space program and health care could be ripe for a government-sponsored enterprise.
Solid conservative, HOOEY! Sanctimonious baloney alright. Not another word from you Newt on others about their “health care”…. Ripe for a government-sponsored enterprise?
That’s ain’t all that’s RIPE Newt!
Pleasant evening @@ and a good night.
PS. Tell Newt if he is the GOP nominee he best not tip his hand anymore on what drives his debate skills, the obumer people are very quick studies(in fact they may have staged it). If I’m onto what happened in first Florida debate you can bet fluffy boy and axlefraud are as well.
ld
January 25th, 2012
12:16 am
Churchgoers usually consider their “first tenth” tithes to their church as charity when, in reality, it is just club dues.
Charity, per the bible, is what you give to the poor and
The bible is clear–charity is something done annonomously–as in for no benefit or recognition, and a tax break is certainly recognition and benefit.
ld
January 25th, 2012
12:20 am
Obama’s speech was boring–political, feel-good posturing. It reflected his lack of leadership capability.
That said, the GOP candidates w/leadership capability want to lead us further down the road to ruin.
Bad and/or worse.
We REALLY need a third–VIABLE–option.
Acer706
January 25th, 2012
12:35 am
Michael,
He is a politican. Duh.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 25th, 2012
5:57 am
SBinF: Apparently, $900,000 isn’t much money to Kyle.
———
And it isn’t your money to decide what to do with, you greedy, envious parasite.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 25th, 2012
6:08 am
Mitch Daniels: Out here in Indiana, when a businessperson asks me what he can do for our state, I say ‘First, make money. Be successful. If you make a profit, you’ll have something left to hire someone else, and some to donate to the good causes we love.’
———–
Democrats were screaming “Criminal! You’re encouraging the 1% to overcharge the public!”
Why do Democrats fear free market capitalism? Other than because they know they can’t cut it?
DeborahinAthens
January 25th, 2012
6:20 am
A lot of rhetoric, but bottom line, Dubya the Dumb was told his tax rates would cause a huge deficit–this was before the two unfunded wars, Medicare Part D. The people that say restoring the tax rates won’t do much to fix the deficit are missing the point. We need to do a lot of things to fix the deficit. If we just undid everything Dubya the Dumb did, we would wipe out a good bit . Get rid of Medicare Part D, end BOTH wars,, stop giving massive amounts of support to countries in the Middle East let the tax rates revert back to where they were when Bush took office. Remember, Bush and the Repugs were in total control for TWO stock market crashes and TWO recessions–one of which rivaled the Depression. Republican economic policy does not work!!! Keep electing the idiots.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 25th, 2012
6:56 am
[Our President Bush] was told his tax rates would cause a huge deficit
——–
Bottom line, revenues went up after He cut tax rates.
Obozo promised to repeal those tax rates before they could sunset, and had a filibuster proof congress to do it. Why didn’t he?
Because he didn’t have the balls.
Obozo: Coward. Liar.
JDW
January 25th, 2012
7:07 am
@LBB…”Bottom line, revenues went up after He cut tax rates”
Tax Receipts by year in constant 2005 dollars
2001 2,215.3
2002 2,028.6
2003 1,901.1
2004 1,949.5
2005 2,153.6
2006 2,324.1
2007 2,414.0
2008 2,286.8
2009 1,898.3
2010 1,919.0
Please don’t allow the truth to stop another Republican fantasy…
Mad Max
January 25th, 2012
7:17 am
Deborah – Apart from your biased tirade against Bush, did you suggest that all the Bush tax cuts expire – If so, I’ll agree with you on that one. If it’s just the upper level, then you are not serious. 2/3’s of the “lost revenue” went to middle and lower income taxpayers. So if the president is not in favor of class warfare and really wants to increase revenue, he needs to let all of them expire, not just against those he percieves to be making too much.
DeborahinAthens
January 25th, 2012
7:53 am
Yes, all of the tax cuts should expire. Then get rid of the loopholes. Get rid of the earned income tax credit ( a program established by the Republicans during Reagan’s administration) .
HDB
January 25th, 2012
8:12 am
Mitch Daniels….the architect of the Bush tax cuts…..and look what happened to the financial system and employment…….
With losing over 700K jobs monthly and trillion-dollar deficits for as long as we can see them…….
“You’re doing a good job, Brownie.”
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 25th, 2012
8:16 am
Thanks for making my case–tax rates were cut in 2003 and revenue went up (until Democrats stopped paying their mortgages and tanked the economy.)
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 25th, 2012
8:18 am
There are fewer people employed today than when Obozo took office.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 25th, 2012
8:20 am
Why didn’t Obozo raise tax rates like he promised while he had that filibuster proof congress?
Don't Tread
January 25th, 2012
8:48 am
I suppose “shared responsibility” is the latest euphemism for wealth redistribution. Nice attempt at a guilt trip too…but it won’t work, Comrade Obama.
the edge
January 25th, 2012
9:32 am
Dems sure love their tax raises. And their redistribution of other people’s money too.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
9:42 am
Can anyone tell me what “fair share” equates to?
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
9:47 am
“Can anyone tell me what “fair share” equates to?”
It means only Republicans who are rich should pay higher taxes.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
9:48 am
“Yes, all of the tax cuts should expire.”
You should talk to your cult leader because he extended them.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
9:49 am
“Republican economic policy does not work!!!”
Unemployment under Bush = 4.6%
Unemployment under Obozo = 9%
Yep, keep electing idiots like Obozo.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
10:12 am
I wish Obama had been under oath last night. Atleast then we could impeach him for his lies!
Ernest T. Bass
January 25th, 2012
10:17 am
“Can anyone tell me what “fair share” equates to?”
It means that rich people should pay at the same rate as the poor.
Not half that rate.
The Lesson of the widow’s mite is presented in the Synoptic Gospels (Mark 12:41-44, Luke 21:1-4), in which Jesus is teaching at the Temple in Jerusalem. The Gospel of Mark specifies that two mites (Greek lepta) are together worth a quadrans, the smallest Roman coin. A lepton was the smallest and least valuable coin in circulation in Palestine, worth about six minutes of an average daily wage.[1]
In the story, a widow donates two small coins, while wealthy people donate much more.[2] Jesus explains to his disciples that the small sacrifices of the poor mean more to God than the extravagant donations of the rich.[2]
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
10:19 am
“It means that rich people should pay at the same rate as the poor.”
That makes absolutely no sense. Poor people don’t pay a lot in taxes. Geez, you left wingers are MORONS.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
10:19 am
“I wish Obama had been under oath last night.”
He never would have taken the stage.
Ernest T. Bass
January 25th, 2012
10:21 am
Unemployment under Bush = 4.6%
The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate rose from 4.3% in January 2001, peaking at 6.3% in June 2003 and reaching a trough of 4.4% in March 2007. After an economic slowdown, the rate rose again to 6.1% in August 2008 and up to 7.2% in December 2008.[55] From December 2007 when the recession started to December 2008, an additional 3.6 million people became unemployed.[56] And, as of January 1, 2009, his last month in office, the nation lost 655,000 jobs, raising the unemployment rate to 7.8%, the highest level in more than 15 years.[57]
The economy was in free fall when Obama took over from the idiot. It takes more than a couple of months to fix that kind of damage.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
10:22 am
Ernest T. bASS — They do pay the same rates….they pay more. They say Romney paid over $6million in taxes in two years. He also gave away another $6million. I would be willing to bet you will not earn $6million in your lifetime. How much is enough? When the lower half pays ZERO in federal income tax.
Also most of the wealthy in this country are the job creators or “C” level executives for major companies. So you guys want to raise their tax rates eliminate subsidies…..and you think the price of consumable goods will not change? You think that will cause them to start creating jobs? NOPE!
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
10:24 am
How can anyone have listened to that terrible speech last night and not realize that he is the most socialist president in history????
Ernest T. Bass
January 25th, 2012
10:25 am
That makes absolutely no sense. Poor people don’t pay a lot in taxes. Geez, you left wingers are MORONS.
They pay more of what little money they do have.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
10:28 am
Ernest T. Bass…..They pay ZERO!!!!
Ernest T. Bass
January 25th, 2012
10:28 am
You think that will cause them to start creating jobs? NOPE!
Their taxes are low now. Where are all the jobs they are creating ?
The rich don’t create jobs when you give them more money.
They just but another fur coat or yacht.
Witnessing the donations made by the rich men, Jesus highlights how a poor widow donates only two mites, the least valuable coins available at the time. But, Jesus observes, this sum was everything she had to her name, while the other people give only a small portion of their own wealth.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
10:28 am
Ernest T. Bass…..They also receive the most benefits!
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
10:30 am
“They pay more of what little money they do have.”
How do you know that?
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
10:32 am
“Where are all the jobs they are creating ?”
Ask you cult leader Obama that question.
“The rich don’t create jobs when you give them more money.”
You really don’t understand economics do you?
“They just but another fur coat or yacht.”
Ok, you’ve lost any and all credibility with that idiotic comment.
“But, Jesus observes, this sum was everything she had to her name, while the other people give only a small portion of their own wealth.”
She wasn’t giving her money to the government.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
10:34 am
Ernest…..right now the tax rate has nothing to do with job creation. It is the instability in the market that OBAMA has caused! Until that goes away the jobs will not return. In fact, Obama’s administration lies about the unemployment numbers. If they would calculate the number of Americans that have given up looking for work the unemployment number would be around 10%!
The rich DO create jobs. I have never seen a homeless man that owns a business. Keep trying.
“The just but (buy) another fur coat or yacht”…..Envy Envy Envy.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
10:34 am
41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.
43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.”
Again, she wasn’t giving her money to the Democrat Party.
Ernest T. Bass
January 25th, 2012
10:34 am
Ernest T. Bass…..They pay ZERO!!!!
Umm no they don’t. Poor people pay taxes everywhere they turn.
Investor and multi-billionaire Warren Buffett has criticized the U.S. tax code as highly regressive, citing himself as anecdotal evidence: Buffett stated that with an income of over $46 million, he pays a tax rate of 17.7 percent, whereas his receptionist pays a tax rate of 30 percent
Mark 12:38-44
In His teaching He was saying: “Beware of the scribes who like to walk around in long robes, and like respectful greetings in the market places, and chief seats in the synagogues and places of honor at banquets, who devour widows’ houses, and for appearance’s sake offer long prayers; these will receive greater condemnation.”
And He sat down opposite the treasury, and began observing how the people were putting money into the treasury; and many rich people were putting in large sums. A poor widow came and put in two small copper coins, which amount to a cent. Calling His disciples to Him, He said to them, “Truly I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all the contributors to the treasury; for they all put in out of their surplus, but she, out of her poverty, put in all she owned, all she had to live on.”
Mark 13:1-2
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
10:35 am
Ernest T. Bass
If it weren’t for rich people, you would not have a computer to type on.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
10:37 am
Ernest T…..YES THE DO!
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
10:37 am
“Poor people pay taxes everywhere they turn.”
EVERYONE pays taxes, bozo!!!!!
“Investor and multi-billionaire Warren Buffett”
Buffett just made millions off of Obama’s pipeline shutdown.
As for your pick and choose Bible verse, you seem to have it confused. The woman was NOT giving her money to the government.
Geez dude, you are a confused person.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
10:37 am
Ernest T….Dont manipulate the conversation. I said Federal Income Tax!!!! Manipulation is the same as lying. Yep keep quoting the bible!
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
10:38 am
“whereas his receptionist pays a tax rate of 30 percent”
His receptionist makes $60,000 a year and also has stock options and massive bonuses at the end of the year.
Try again.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
10:38 am
UGA 1999
He thinks the widow was giving her money to the government.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
10:38 am
Ernest T…..How are we ever going to be “energy independent” when Obama keeps striking down the oil pipeline. OH THAT IS RIGHT, THEY HAVE PROVEN THAT WARREN BUFFETT WOULD LOSE MONEY ON THAT DEAL!!!!! THUGS!
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
10:43 am
How about the line Obama used regarding illegal immigration and education. He was more or less telling Mexicans to come here illegally! Isn’t that the same as telling someone to break the law!?!?!?!!?
curious
January 25th, 2012
10:44 am
Where’s Boortz and the Fair Tax when we need him? Even if “poor” people pay the flat rate, the “prebate” will probably give it all back. Imagine the size of the agency that’s going to administer the fair tax program.
Anybody that doesn’t believe Newt’s contract with Freddie Mac wasn’t for “lobbying” is on the same level as the “separate but equal” crowd.
Newt’s obession with Mitt’s tax return tells me Newt has a case of wealth-envy.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
10:48 am
curious….good job diverting the conversation away from the Liar Obama.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
11:02 am
Wow did everyone leave? Nice!
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
11:03 am
“Wow did everyone leave?”
No, I’m still around. I guess Ernest had a cop car to crap on.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
11:05 am
Somewhere…..Ha, nice. I don’t understand how we can lay out simple truths to those on the left and they refuse to see it. It amazes me.
getalife
January 25th, 2012
11:19 am
Seal Team Six does it again and rescues hostages last night.
Our President told Panetta great job last night and that was what he was talking about.
Our President is on a roll and can’t be stopped.
He is one of the best ever and you cons know it.
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
11:22 am
Getalife…..yep, great job Seal Team 6, amazing work!
Our president is on a roll and can’t be stopped! hahahah now THAT is funny! You are right he is on a roll….right into a ditch!
Linda
January 25th, 2012
11:27 am
Mr. Bass, The fed. marginal income tax rates are progressive & range from 10% to 35%. Marrieds filing jointly pay 35% for income over $379,150.
Do you understand the difference between marginal tax rates & capital gains taxes?
You said, “It takes more than a couple of months to fix that kind of damage.” Sir, it’s been THREE YEARS! Obama said that if he couldn’t fix it, he would be a one-term president. Can you tell me ONE MONTH that the unemployment rate has been lower during THREE YEARS of the Obama Adm. than it was during EIGHT YEARS of the Bush Adm.?
You said taxes are low now. How high should they be & on what income brackets?
If small businesses don’t use money to create jobs, what do they use?
UGA 1999
January 25th, 2012
11:39 am
Linda….nice post.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
11:43 am
“Our President is on a roll and can’t be stopped.”
Right, and LSU won the national title.
Linda
January 25th, 2012
11:59 am
Obama is totally dishonest comparing Buffet’s capital gains earnings to Buffet’s secretary’s job earnings. Does he really believe that people don’t know the difference between capital gains taxes & marginal tax rates?
Liberals believe that a 30% tax is twice as much as a 15% tax. It isn’t & Obama knows it. During a presidential debate on the topic of the capital gains tax rate, Charlie Gibson said to Obama, “And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased, the govt. took in MORE money…when the tax increased, the revenues went DOWN. So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people…own stock & would be affected?”
Obama answered, “…for the purposes of FAIRNESS…”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__L5DOxghD4
Raising the capital gains tax would DROP tax revenues & hurt the economy & 100 million people, but it’s FAIRNESS.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 25th, 2012
12:10 pm
Why didn’t Obozo raise tax rates?
The receptacles can’t answer.
Ernest T. Bass
January 25th, 2012
12:37 pm
You said taxes are low now. How high should they be & on what income brackets?
They should be more than 14 percent for multi millionaires like Romney who gets most of his income from capital gains.
Why should I pay double the rate he does?
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney and his wife, Ann, paid $3 million in federal taxes in 2010 on nearly $21.7 million of income derived from a vast array of investments, amounting to an effective tax rate of 13.9 percent, according returns released by his campaign Tuesday.
In addition, the Romneys expect to pay $3.2 million on $20.9 million of income for the 2011 tax year, for an effective rate of 15.4 percent.
That’s substantially lower than the top 35 percent marginal tax rate on wages and salaries – and much lower than the rate than his political rivals. President Barack Obama paid an effective tax rate of 26 percent in 2010, while former House Speaker Newt Gingrich paid a rate of 31.6 percent. Experts say Romney benefits from a tax code that allows investors to keep more of their income than wage earners, particularly investors in the rarefied world of private equity.
Even among his wealthy peers – a cohort that particularly benefits from the lower capital gains rate – Romney’s rate is below the average 18.5 percent effective tax rate paid by the richest 1 percent, according to the Tax Policy Center.
Even a dummy knows if you have 10 units of something and pay only 1.5 of those units in taxes you are paying less than someone who has 5 units of something and pays 3.5 of those back.
You guys can keep believing in “trickle down” economics but it doesn’t work.
Maybe we should just cut rich peoples taxes to 0% and give them all our money.
Think of all the jobs then !!!!!
Ernest T. Bass
January 25th, 2012
12:39 pm
We should start a Paypal account and have everyone send all income to Romney.
Think of the jobs he will create !!!!
Think of all that money trickling down to us !!!
Regular people cannot be trusted with money. It should all go to the rich !!!!!
Then they can decide how much to trickle our way.
If we’ve been good maybe they will let us have a little more !!!
Ernest T. Bass
January 25th, 2012
12:45 pm
One other thing.
Obama will win again.
And there is nothing you can do about it.
Gingrich cant win a general election and Gordon Gekko (Romney) has far too many problems.
Obama wins in a landslide.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
12:46 pm
“Think of all the jobs then !!!!!”
Where are all the jobs Obama the 1% president promised back in 08?
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
12:47 pm
“Obama will win again.”
You shouldn’t bet your double wide trailer on that lame prediction.
“Obama wins in a landslide.”
HAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
12:48 pm
“Gingrich cant win a general election and Gordon Gekko (Romney) has far too many problems.”
Unemployment is 8.6%, Obama’s approval ratings are in the low 40s, he’s lost independents etc. His record as president is horrible.
Obama has waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more problems than Newt and Mitt combined.
See ya in November, racist.
Ernest T. Bass
January 25th, 2012
1:00 pm
See ya in November, racist.
See ya there !!!
Obama hasn’t been the best but when people look at the alternatives trust me Obama is going to look a whole lot better.
Ernest T. Bass
January 25th, 2012
1:01 pm
You shouldn’t bet your double wide trailer on that lame prediction.
You shouldn’t bet yours on Obama losing.
See I can call names and make up stuff too.
jms
January 25th, 2012
1:04 pm
“Can anyone tell me what “fair share” equates to?”
For some it means progressive tax rates. For others it means even more steeply progressive tax rates.
Ernest T. Bass
January 25th, 2012
1:07 pm
http://www.nmvoices.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/job-growth-chart.jpg
Thank god for the Obama recovery huh.
Just imagine if we had stayed on that same path we were on.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
1:54 pm
“Obama hasn’t been the best but when people look at the alternatives trust me Obama is going to look a whole lot better.”
HAHAHA!!!!!!!!!
“See I can call names and make up stuff too.”
But you didn’t call me a name, goober.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
1:54 pm
“Just imagine if we had stayed on that same path we were on.”
Yeah, unemployment might be 9%. Imagine that!
Linda
January 25th, 2012
2:00 pm
Mr. Bass, You said you paid double the tax rate as Romney. If you paid 30% on your income & had disposable income to invest, do you think you should pay 30% twice?
Where did Romney get his money to invest? He received it in wages when he was employed & probably paid the highest marginal tax rate of 35%. When he invests his disposable income, should be pay another 30 or 35% on the gain again?
There is absolutely nothing “rarefied” about investing. The capital gains tax code applies to any investment, whether it is stocks, bonds, options, dividends, real estate, arts, rugs, antiques, jewelry, precious metals, wine, stamps, coins, etc. You would be subject to same tax code if you sold an old pie safe at a yard sale. Teachers, ministers, day care providers, etc. are typical investors. Anyone who is self-employed has to plan for they own retirement. Governments invest pensions.
If “trickle down” economics does not work, maybe you could give some insight into how Keynesian economics has worked for us for the last 4 years.
Regular people CAN be trusted with money. Money nor the lack of it does not make people irregular. It’s the fed. govt. that can’t be trusted with taxpayers’ money. Not only do we have a $15 T natl. debt, but the idiots in Washington spent every dime in both the Social Security & Medicare “Trust” Funds to the tune of $97 T. Both are full of chits, that is, little pieces of paper that say IOU.
What is it you like about Obama’s policies? Since you quote the Bible, are you not horrified that Obama wants to take billions of dollars away from charities?
My upbringing & my faith has led me to respect everyone who is respectful. I hold no grudges against the rich. I’m not jealous or envious. I appreciate their donations to charities & for additions & entire buildings at our hospitals, colleges, universities, museums, etc. If a rich person buys a yacht, a lot of blue collar workers appreciate the jobs it takes to build it.
Linda
January 25th, 2012
2:08 pm
Mr. Bass@1:07, Your site is incorrect. It does not even correspond to the unemployment rates you quoted earlier. The unemployment rate is arrived at by subtracting jobs lost from jobs created.
I’ll answer the question I asked you earlier. There has not been ONE single, solitary month that the unemployment rate has been lower during THREE YEARS of the Obama adm. than it was during EIGHT YEARS of the Bush adm. The economic stimulus of almost $1 T was a complete waste.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
2:09 pm
Ernest T. Bass
Your little chart comes from the office of the Democratic Leader. You may want to try to find something a little less biased and truthful.
If the economy is good, why is unemployment 8.6%?
Why aren’t you crying about Obama, a millionaire, paying more in taxes?
Come on little fella, you can do better than that.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
2:09 pm
” Your site is incorrect.”
Linda, that “site” is Democrat garbage. If you look to the bottom left, you’ll notice something interesting.
JF McNamara
January 25th, 2012
2:19 pm
Linda,
If I make $1300 working, I pay $300 in taxes leaving me with $1000. I now take that $1000 and invest it. At the end of one year, I have a total of $1200 from my investment. I will only pay on the gain, meaning I only pay taxes on $200 ($1200 – $1000) profit.
Yes, he should pay taxes on the $200. That’s income. Its not paying 30% twice. Its paying 30% on two different income streams.
The wealthy make most of their money from investments where others work for it. They live off of their investment income like you live off the income from your business or job. That being the case, they should pay the same rate. Why should there be favoritism based on how you acquire your income?
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
2:21 pm
“The wealthy make most of their money from investments where others work for it.”
Simple solution: Invest money and make money. Geez, is that too hard for you to comprehend?
“Why should there be favoritism based on how you acquire your income?”
Why should you get to decide how much hard working people have to pay? If people like you weren’t so lazy, you’d have more money.
Pretty simple, cupcake.
Linda
January 25th, 2012
2:28 pm
Somewhere, for about 2 1/2 years, month after month after month, the Democrats have been giving Obama credit for the jobs created & blaming Bush for the jobs lost. Obama owns half of the economy & Bush is still responsible for the other half. Obama owns the plus side of the math & Bush owns the minus side. Obama says it math, but is seems fuzzy to me.
The last time a Democrat posted this same chart, it specifically stated that it was from Nancy Pelosi’s office.
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2010-02-05/wall_street/30088805_1
JF McNamara
January 25th, 2012
2:32 pm
Somewhere over there,
I do invest my money and make money. I just don’t have $200M to invest so I have a job too.
I’m lazy? Yeah, working 60 hours a week is lazy. If only I worked harder, I would have a jillion dollars and manna would fall from the heavens. That’s the stupidest **** I’ve ever heard.
Why should you get to decide how much hard working people have to pay?
Why should you? We have to pay taxes to run the government, provide defense, and get other value added services. My vote counts just as much as yours. You aren’t special.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 25th, 2012
2:42 pm
Why should I pay double the rate he does?
——–
You don’t. Your capital gains rate is the same as Romney’s.
Duh.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
2:55 pm
” I just don’t have $200M to invest so I have a job too.”
So quit complaining.
“I’m lazy? Yeah, working 60 hours a week is lazy. If only I worked harder, I would have a jillion dollars and manna would fall from the heavens. That’s the stupidest **** I’ve ever heard.”
So stop complaining.
“Why should you get to decide how much hard working people have to pay?”
Huh?
“My vote counts just as much as yours.”
Doubt it.
Linda
January 25th, 2012
2:55 pm
Mr. McNamara@2:19, My point was that the money an investor invests does not come out of thin air. It’s usually obtained from income from a job after fed. & state taxes are paid, for decades. When the investor sells his investment, he pays taxes AGAIN.
The wealthy work or worked for their money just like everyone else. My father never walked a step in his life & could not afford a wheelchair until he was 40. He died wealthy & I can assure you that no one worked any harder than he did, having to crawl or be toted. Most people don’t begin cashing in their investments until they retire.
There are many reasons why congress set one of the capital gains rates at 15%. One is that the fed. revenues decrease when the rate increases. Another is to encourage investments in the economy.
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
2:56 pm
Linda
SPOT ON!!!!
Hillbilly D
January 25th, 2012
3:04 pm
When an investor sells something at a profit, they pay tax on the gain, not the entire amount.
Linda
January 25th, 2012
3:23 pm
Mr. McNamar@2:19, If, as you said, the wealthy made most of their money from investments, where others work for it, we would not have had a pro-football season & be looking forward to the Super Bowl, we would not have pro-basketball, we would not have pro-golf, we would not have Ali, we would have no movies, we would have only C-Span to watch in the evenings, we would have no Apples, we would have no computer programs & we would be living in tents with nothing to eat & nothing to drive. If CEOs quit when they became wealthy, we would have unsuccessful corporations. Without corporations, we would not have the components to build our homes, the appliances & accessories to equip them, the food we eat or the vehicles we drive.
Most wealthy people became wealthy because they worked. Wealthy people LOVE to work. They work with more passion than most of us.
Dusty
January 25th, 2012
4:06 pm
Where is Kyle?
Some good comments here on investments but let’s move on.
Obama has made another “I’m so great” speech and Democrats are heating up the airways.
Even Pelosi has added a wooden nickel to the race with her suggestions that “she knows SOMETHING” about Gingrich. Whoopee! What will it be this time? That Gingrich is really Jack the Ripper and he pays no income tax??
Let us Republicans show more “vigor” in our work. We need to get going if we plan to rid ourselves of a president failing at his job. That is, of course, Obama the three year wonder of failing achievements. (You have to mention his name because many libs seem to think that Bush is still president.)
Somewhere over there
January 25th, 2012
4:08 pm
“Even Pelosi has added a wooden nickel to the race with her suggestions that “she knows SOMETHING” about Gingrich. ”
Now she’s backtracking.
JF McNamara
January 25th, 2012
4:40 pm
Linda,
Good for your Dad, but you know the difference between when he was around and now? Rich people paid more taxes and it allowed the middle class to advance. Now that your family is at(near) the top, you seek to change the system he used to advance, and are fighting feverishly against going back to it.
If the concentration of wealth was increasing like it was in your father’s time, its likely he would have turned out middle class too. Start a business today with people having less disposable income like they have today, and see how that effects the outcome. I’ll show him a due measure of respect, because it takes some greatness to become rich. You need a system to help that happen as well though. The meritocracy your father came up in has turned more aristocratic.
As for your other comment, I don’t get what you mean. The wealthy football owners, movie studio owners, and technology company owners are investors. Does Blank work for the Falcons? Do the major shareholders at Lion’s Gate direct movies? Bill Gates does not work at Microsoft and Steve Job’s family does not work at Apple. Venture Capital firms own most tech firms. Are they working at that company?
A CEO, in most cases, is an employee of the real owners. The Shareholders. The owners (shareholders) don’t actually do work except in special cases like Steve Jobs.
MarkV
January 25th, 2012
4:49 pm
Dusty @4:06 pm
Dusty,
Since you have allowed me to ask you questions, I am taking advantage of that. You have written about “a president failing at his job, “ meaning, naturally, Obama. My question to you is the following: Do you submit that “failing at his job” comment as your opinion, or as a statement of fact?
Michael H. Smith
January 25th, 2012
5:50 pm
I just had ta do it Mitt, cause its’ just not fair.
From Nealz Newz
Raise the capital gains taxes “for the purpose of fairness”
That was Barack Obama during the campaign in 2008: “Well Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.”
….If you are a regular listener to the show, or reader of Nealz Nuze, you know that history shows that raising the capital gains rate actually lowers government revenues, while decreasing the capital gains rate increases government revenues. Here are just a few examples …
Between 1968 and 1972 rates increased by 10 percentage points and revenues fell 21%.
In 1978 the rate fell by 15 points from 35% to 20% and revenues increased by 46%.
In 1986 the rate was raised by 8 points to 28% and by 1991 15% less revenue was being raised.
In 1996 the rate was reduced by 8 points to 20% again and by 2000 revenues had grown by some 50%
In 2003 the rate was cut to 15% and revenues grew by 45% over the following three years.
When presented with the specific example from the Clinton administration, Barack Obama replied with the quote from above. That’s the kind of baseless wealth envy we are dealing with, folks.
This is a time when we need to be encouraging investments. Start up small businesses are responsible for most new jobs in America, at least they were for a long stretch of our history. US experts agree that increasing capital gains taxes ‘significantly damages the economy.”
But don’t bother these Democrats with the facts. Those just get in the way of their reelection campaigns based on wealth envy.
http://www.boortz.com/weblogs/nealz-nuze/2012/jan/25/raise-capital-gains-taxes-purpose-fairness/
Dusty
January 25th, 2012
5:56 pm
MarkV
Well, I usually try to be truthful. So that is my opinion that it is a fact that President Obama is failing at the job.
Why?
Because he seems unable to do anything about debt reduction, unemployment reduction, price of gas & grocery reduction, and reduction of friction with Congress. He is good at making plans that do not seem to ever meet the need or even happen.
He is now going to reduce the military, the one group that has performed well during his three years.
I will bet you one heated bird bath that you don’t agree with me. Lay your cards on the table!!!
Linda
January 25th, 2012
6:15 pm
Mr. McNamara@4:40, You are wrong on all your assumptions. The taxes paid by the rich or anyone else for that matter did not affect my father. He didn’t “start” a business. He was merely trying to survive. There was NO “disposable” income. There was NO income. There was NO money. There was NO system. There was NO meritocracy. My father was unable to finish elementary school.
There are NO classes. You either HAVE class or you don’t. My father had the same class his entire life. He was born poor & died wealthy, but he never changed. No one knew he had become wealthy, not even me. He never met anyone who was less deserving than he was, one of the most giving persons one could ever meet. He inspired everyone who knew him. His town honored him in life & death.
My father succeeded without a dime from the fed. govt. He helped more people than the fed. govt. could ever dream of, in ways that actually made a difference in their lives. He would be appalled at the fed. govt. today, especially at the massive debt. He never paid a cent of interest during his entire life. The fed. govt. is hurting more of us than it is helping. We are failing as a country.
You said, “The wealthy make most of their money from investments where others work for it.” What an insulting statement. Wealthy athletes play sports with passion. Wealthy actors & actresses love their work. It was death, not wealth, that stopped Steve Jobs from working. Wealthy Bill Gates is still a mover & shaker. Wealthy CEOs work in high gear. The point is that without wealthy people actually working & performing their work with a passion, we would be in the Dark Ages.
Linda
January 25th, 2012
6:20 pm
Michael@5:50, See my comment @11:59 AM. You are 6 hours too late. I thunk it first. Copycat!
MarkV
January 25th, 2012
6:26 pm
Dusty @5:56 pm
Dusty,
You are right in one respect, which is that I do not agree with you. (No heated birdbath for that.) But you have avoided a straight answer. There are facts, and there are opinions. You cannot have an opinion that something is or is not a fact. At most, you can believe it.
To put it differently, if it is your opinion that the President is failing, I cannot and will not dispute that. I will just say that my opinion is different, that he is not failing, and that will be it. But I will argue that the facts do not support your opinion.
@@
January 25th, 2012
7:11 pm
“Slate’s” John Dickerson described Obama’s SoTU as “constipated”.
In the end, it was a constipated version of his speech in Osawatomie, Kan. in December.
Why didn’t he just say “full of crap”?
schnirt
Linda
January 25th, 2012
7:13 pm
The zillions of economic indicators prove that the president’s policies have failed, up one side & down the other. Who can argue with even half of those?
Linda
January 25th, 2012
7:15 pm
@@, What is schnirt?
@@
January 25th, 2012
7:22 pm
What is schnirt?
A refined “schnort”. It’s more feminine.
(ISH) Insert Smile Here.
I don’t do emoticons…despise the things.
GodHatesTrash, Superstar
January 25th, 2012
7:40 pm
Schnirt is what most of Kyle’s Kavalcade of Konservative Kooks and KKKrazies have for brains.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 25th, 2012
7:46 pm
Maggots are what Obozo has for supporters.
GodHatesTrash, Superstar
January 25th, 2012
7:49 pm
Ahhh, L’il Barry with his santorum breath speaks!
Creep.
@@
January 25th, 2012
7:49 pm
GHT:
‘k.
@@
January 25th, 2012
8:00 pm
“For those in middle income, anyone earning under $200,000 a year, I would propose paying no taxes whatsoever on their savings. I think the people who’ve been hurt most in the Obama economy should be able to save money tax free,” Romney says.
If it’s in my savings account, I’ve already paid taxes on it. If it’s in an IRA or 401K, it’s already tax exempt. No mention of taxes upon withdrawal.
Nitpickin’? Maybe…but the guy has a communication problem.
Linda
January 25th, 2012
8:19 pm
Mr. Trash@7:40, It’s 2012. Why are you still defending Obama’s policies? How do you think any of them have worked for the economy or the American people? Why are you against conservatives? All we are trying to do is preventing any more debt & trying to keep our country from tanking.
Dusty
January 25th, 2012
8:35 pm
Ah MarkV
As Sargent Friday said, “Just the facts, mam.” or sir, in your case.
You want my opinion to be filled with facts, but you offered none in your disagreement.. I have told you my reasons. Now it is your turn. No charts please. No poll nunmbers. (Do you work for the IRS?) Just checking!! Don’t want to get on their bad side.
You owe me a birdbath.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
January 25th, 2012
8:40 pm
The trashman polluteth.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
January 25th, 2012
8:56 pm
Just think America, in 9 months we will be rid of obozo and the dummycrat party.
Doesn’t the very thought send chills up your spine?
My goodness, we will no longer be an Arab dictatorship, an economic hellhole or the most ignorant laughingstock on the entire Planet Earth.
Fasten your seatbelts, fellow countryman, because we’re gonna come roarin back.
GodHatesTrash, Superstar
January 25th, 2012
8:57 pm
I am not pro-Obama, I am anti-stupid – that’s why you find me so intimidating.
GodHatesTrash, Superstar
January 25th, 2012
9:04 pm
Reality check, kkkons – no matter who wins on November 6, 2012; on Wednesday November 7, 2012 you’ll still be a bitter angry LOSER idiot.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 25th, 2012
9:10 pm
If Obozo wins, all Americans are losers.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
January 25th, 2012
9:10 pm
Most narcissists do consider themselves smarter than others with out ever explaining why.
Just sayin…
Linda
January 25th, 2012
9:19 pm
Mr. Trash@8:57 & 9:04, Why will you not answer my question?
Dusty
January 25th, 2012
9:36 pm
Well, that Newt is something!! I see where he has told Floridians that he would plan a colony on the moon. Yes, sir, the moon!!
He did not say so but I bet he would give the honor of “first moon colonists” to a contingent of Democrats. I bet he even has a list. Yes, indeed, and let them stay permanently.
Just a matter of sharing the glory, of course.
MarkV
January 25th, 2012
9:51 pm
Dusty @8:35 pm
Sorry, Dusty, no birdbath for you, because I did not accept your wager.
“You want my opinion to be filled with facts, but you offered none in your disagreement.”
Why should I offer any facts? I did not write that facts supported my disagreement. I merely wrote that I disagreed with your opinion, and I argued that facts did not support your opinion. See the difference?
GodHatesTrash, Superstar
January 25th, 2012
9:55 pm
Curly, pretty funny coming from you.
Actually, very funny – don’t worry – I’m laughing at you, not with you, little buddy.
Fast and Furious Spending
January 25th, 2012
9:58 pm
I am anti-stupid – that’s why you find me so intimidating.
GodHatesTrash, Superstar
January 25th, 2012
9:04 pm
Reality check, kkkons
The above taken verbatim–the klan is everywhere. Wow, why don’t you get Jay Bookman to leave his little dead-horse powow tomorrow about birthers and cover this resurgence of “racism” –in 2012? Maybe you could get Cynthia to take her old job back of sneering at white conservatives.
We don’t find you intimidating. We find you unappealing, absurd, petulant, childish, whining, disgusting, obsessed with your own anatomy, adolescent, obnoxious and puerile. One argues with the intimidating; with the delusional, we do not.
Oh, and don’t let us lead you out of your liberal fantasy.
GodHatesTrash, Superstar
January 25th, 2012
10:07 pm
Little lady, we all know you aren’t the sharpest knife in the drawer, even the other Klowns in Kyle’s Kavalcade of Konservative Kooks and KKKrazies cringe when reading your empty, vacuous, monotonous posts.
Regardless, I responded to your drivel at 8:19 pm by letting you know that I am not pro-Obama so much as I am anti-stupid, so naturally someone like you would see me as an enemy. I have a great deal of disdain for the tea-t-ards and their simple hate-and-fear filled little minds, Obama has nothing to do with that.
Face it – tea partiers are knuckle-dragging cave-people, who want to drag the whole world down into the mud with them.
Linda
January 25th, 2012
10:16 pm
Mr. Trash, I tried to engage you @ 8:57 & 9:04, Evidently, you can’t answer basic questions & engage in an intellectual debate with me. What are you afraid of? Is it that you can’t defend Obama? I can see that. Bless your heart. It must be overly disappointing for you to believe in his hopey changie thingie & learn that all he turned out to be was a community organizer spouting Saul Alinsky. Poor thing. I will pray for you tonight.
GodHatesTrash, Superstar
January 25th, 2012
10:29 pm
Little lady, I ask Gawd every day to cure the ignorant and the mentally ill, so I pray for you, too. Twice!
Linda
January 25th, 2012
10:44 pm
Mr. Trash@10:07, I just read your comment. Thank you for calling me a lady. I do deserve that. Do you know the difference between a lady & a woman? Do you know the difference between a man & a gentleman?
I may be little in statute but less than little in communication skills. Do you know what those are?
I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I don’t keep my knives in a drawer.
I’m glad you read through my “empty, vacuous, monotonous posts.” That gives me hope.
I’m also glad that you read my drivel.
I’m very disappointed that you are not in favor of the Tea Party, which is a grassroots movement, begun in ‘09, right after the passage of the economic stimulus bill. The Tea Party was insightful, knowing that it would be a total waste of taxpayer money, as has been all the other spending bills, bailouts, etc. that the Democrats passed. This is YOUR party: anti-stupid.
The platform of the Tea Party is fiscal responsibility. That’s it. If you are against fiscal responsibility, you are anti-American.
Wish you were a patriot.
GodHatesTrash, Superstar
January 25th, 2012
10:46 pm
Fast, why so pouty tonight? Feeling like a loser again, I bet. Given who you are, that’s a logical way to feel.
Stagger over to the mirror. Take a good look. There’s where your problem is – not me or my “liberal fantasy” on the internet, not Obama in the White House, not his long form birth certificate, or the fact that he once lived in a Muslim country. No, no, no little buddy, you know what your problem is…
He’s looking back at you.
(Yes, it’s a big, fat, ugly problem, but it’s you.)
So the choice is yours. Pour out the beer, take your meds, go to bed. And wake up tomorrow with your usual lies in your head and fear and hate in your heart – or try a new way of looking at things.
Linda
January 25th, 2012
10:57 pm
Mr. Trash@10:29, Again, thank you again for calling me a lady & shame on you for calling me little. If you are asking Gawd for stuff, maybe your prayers aren’t being answered because you have the wrong name. He’s God. Okay? You are welcome. Praise the Lord!
If you are praying every day for God to cure the ignorant & mentally ill, those folks who still support Obama after 3 long years of hole-digging, I’m praying along side you.
Thank you for praying for me, too. I’m also praying for you!
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 26th, 2012
9:13 am
Why didn’t Obozo and the filibuster-proof Democrat congress raise the tax rates?