Romney's Taxes

[Thepaindispenser]

Only a true liberal sheep like Riot could spin someone giving $4 million to charity as something bad. Riot that is why you have no credibility as you instinctively go to your liberal websites so that you could cut and paste the spin from some liberal nutjob.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser

Only a true liberal sheep like Riot could spin someone giving $4 million to charity as something bad. .

I didn't say that, fool. I said the opposite. In fact, I used the word "generous" to describe their charitable deductions.

If you can't read, stop trying to comment.

The Romney's charitable deductions are not the issue here.

[rpncaine]

So what is Romney's net worth?

If I had his money I'm pretty sure i would donate that much too. What the hell else would I do with it...take it with me?

How rich is rich enough?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by rpncaine

So what is Romney's net worth?

If I had his money I'm pretty sure i would donate that much too. What the hell else would I do with it...take it with me?

How rich is rich enough?

i saw a figure yesterday of 250 million.

and he tinkered with his deductions so as to make sure he stayed at 13%, when in fact his percentage should have been lower. odd...he's right around the same total tax as someone making about 25k a year. amazing.

and yes, i know that investments are taxed at 15%, in order to 'encourage investment'. (which means he's part of the 47%, who get breaks from the fed )
but, i think they need to re-write the rates. give them 15% on money invested here, in things that help create jobs here. as soon as it goes to a foreign investment, the rate should be higher.

and i agree, donations are a good thing.

[Thepaindispenser]

Originally Posted by Riot

I didn't say that, fool. I said the opposite. In fact, I used the word "generous" to describe their charitable deductions.

If you can't read, stop trying to comment.

The Romney's charitable deductions are not the issue here.

I read it correctly, you repeated one of the Democrats spins that Romney purposely gave less to charity to keep his tax rate above 13%.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser

I read it correctly, you repeated one of the Democrats spins that Romney purposely gave less to charity to keep his tax rate above 13%.

Is that why the Clintons took used underwear (Willy's) as a deduction and the Gore's reason for donating less than 1% like Obama and Biden?

Support for America's waste! Fukk charity!

[Dahoss]

I'm hoping one of the smarter members here can explain something to me about Romney's taxes.

How is Romney going to respond when the democrats bring up the fact that Romney in fact paid a lower effective tax rate than Obama last year, despite earning so much more? Isn't that what Obama's point about taxes has been all along?

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I'm hoping one of the smarter members here can explain something to me about Romney's taxes.

How is Romney going to respond when the democrats bring up the fact that Romney in fact paid a lower effective tax rate than Obama last year, despite earning so much more? Isn't that what Obama's point about taxes has been all along?

How is he going to explain not turning over the returns but rather a carefully worded Auditors report citing averages. What is he hiding in the details?

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by jms62

How is he going to explain not turning over the returns but rather a carefully worded Auditors report citing averages. What is he hiding in the details?

I'm sure thepaindispenser will straighten it all out for us.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

I'm hoping one of the smarter members here can explain something to me about Romney's taxes.

How is Romney going to respond when the democrats bring up the fact that Romney in fact paid a lower effective tax rate than Obama last year, despite earning so much more? Isn't that what Obama's point about taxes has been all along?

i was talking to someone at the gym earlier, and mentioned that something was wrong in having romney have to leave off some of his deductions in order to pay around 13-14%, and ryan paid an effective rate of 20%. a guy walking by said 'yeah, but how much money did romney pay?' then he said there should be a flat tax. i asked how those two comments could be reconciled with each other, as the man is obviously at odds with himself. if he thinks there should be a set percentage for everyone, how can he than defend a lower rate for a richer man? yeah...he couldn't.
there is NO earthly reason why romney should be paying that effective rate. it's absolutely ridiculous, indefensible, obscene and unconscionable that a man worth a quarter of a billion dollars should be paying a lower effective rate than most of us do.
as i said before, i get that we want to get people to invest...but in this case (and probably in many others), it seems romney in fact is part of the 47% that is taking the govt for a ride.

many have said for years the tax code needs reworking-but knowing who pulls the strings, what are the odds of that happening?

[Danzig]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate..._returns_.html


note where it talks about what tax rate he'd have paid had he taken the full deduction on charitable donations, rather than what he claimed in order to remain around 13%.....and where it would put him in relation to the 47% that it won't be 'his job to worry about'.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser

I read it correctly, you repeated one of the Democrats spins that Romney purposely gave less to charity to keep his tax rate above 13%.

No,you didn't read it correctly. And that is not "Democratic" spin, the bolded part is a direct quote from Price-Waterhouse, Romney's accountant , in the tax release document.

Please - get a clue.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser

Only a true liberal sheep like Riot could spin someone giving $4 million to charity as something bad. Riot that is why you have no credibility as you instinctively go to your liberal websites so that you could cut and paste the spin from some liberal nutjob.

She and the President believe government can do a far better job than charity except planned parenthood, which should no longer be needed once Obamacare kicks in and everyone is insured. Another savings from Obamacare. As well as all the community/county hospitals and free clinics that will no longer be needed.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

She and the President believe government can do a far better job than charity except planned parenthood, which should no longer be needed once Obamacare kicks in and everyone is insured. .

Planned Parenthood takes people with insurance. Why would a health care provider - one of the top health care providers for women's health in the country - close because more people have insurance and are insured? That's looney.

And why do you repeatedly attack Planned Parenthood? That's like attacking the Mayo Clinic.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

She and the President believe government can do a far better job than charity except planned parenthood,

No. I don't. Neither did I complain about Romney's charitable deductions. That's false. In fact, I praised them.

Black. White. Superficial. Shallow. Opinion unsullied by fact or reality. That's clearly the extent of some folks understanding of the world and politics. Very sad.