So Mitt is in the same tax bracket as Buffet but Mitt is bad and Buffet is good

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Funny how things come full circle. They both pay the same rate basically but since Buffet cries about it he gets a pass? Have I got this right? Can I rob my neighbor as long as I condemn it while I do it?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

And don't give me that "he says they should be raised" bullshit. Anyone can use talking points. He he truly felt he was robbing the poor he could pay more. No one is forcing him to use loopholes and deductions. He could put his money where his mouth is but like EVERYONE else he enjoys his taxes being as low as possible.

 

[Care4all]

Funny how things come full circle. They both pay the same rate basically but since Buffet cries about it he gets a pass? Have I got this right? Can I rob my neighbor as long as I condemn it while I do it?

didn't buffet say he paid 20% in federal taxes, which was less than what his secretary had to pay in federal taxes as a percentage?

I thought Teresa Heinz Kerry got her federal taxes paid down to just 19% and I thought that was pretty damn low...

Now Mitt is saying his was only 15% in federal taxes....I for one, had no idea that those in the 36% tax bracket paid so little as a percentage in federal taxes....!!!

 

[Decepticon]

Funny how things come full circle. They both pay the same rate basically but since Buffet cries about it he gets a pass? Have I got this right? Can I rob my neighbor as long as I condemn it while I do it?

So you're argument is that since Mitt is apparently greedier than Buffet, and doesn't think he should pay more in taxes despite the evidence that tax cuts are what drove the deficits, that makes him morally superior somehow?

You conservatives shouldn't be so hard on Socialism. Hell you socialized the costs of 30 years your tax cuts for the rich, buy shoving the debt incurred as a result on the rest of us.

Seems to me, you conservatives like socialism just fine.

 

[bripat9643]

Funny how things come full circle. They both pay the same rate basically but since Buffet cries about it he gets a pass? Have I got this right? Can I rob my neighbor as long as I condemn it while I do it?

Buffet gets a pass because he wants to raise Romney's taxes. Romney doesn't get a pass because he doesn't want to raise anyone's taxes.

See how that works?

 

[bripat9643]

So you're argument is that since Mitt is apparently greedier than Buffet, and doesn't think he should pay more in taxes despite the evidence that tax cuts are what drove the deficits, that makes him morally superior somehow?

You conservatives shouldn't be so hard on Socialism. Hell you socialized the costs of 30 years your tax cuts for the rich, buy shoving the debt incurred as a result on the rest of us.

Seems to me, you conservatives like socialism just fine.

There is no "cost" to the taxpayer for tax cuts, dipshit. Only parasites look at tax cuts as a "cost."

 

[Decepticon]

Funny how things come full circle. They both pay the same rate basically but since Buffet cries about it he gets a pass? Have I got this right? Can I rob my neighbor as long as I condemn it while I do it?

Buffet gets a pass because he wants to raise Romney's taxes. Romney doesn't get a pass because he doesn't want to raise anyone's taxes.

See how that works?

Are you really that simple minded?

Your argument assumes that low tax rates on top earners is preferable? Why do you think that? The top tax rates under that pinko commie EISENHOWER were over 90%, yet during that time of HIGH TOP TAX RATES, the middle class PROSPERED and GREW. Income mobility was the highest EVER in this country.

Now over the last 30 years, all that has changed. Top tax rates are now 1/3rd of what they used to be. Yet, middle class income and mobility are both DOWN.

Now, while high tax rates may not be directly causal, they certainly do not PRECLUDE middle class growth, while it appears that LOW tax rates DO preclude middle class growth. So by saying that reducing Romney's taxes is the preferable option, you show that you are AGAINST MIDDLE CLASS AMERICANS.

Being WRONG about why you want to do something doesn't give you any MORAL superiority. It merely makes you appear ignorant.

 

[Care4all]

So you're argument is that since Mitt is apparently greedier than Buffet, and doesn't think he should pay more in taxes despite the evidence that tax cuts are what drove the deficits, that makes him morally superior somehow?

You conservatives shouldn't be so hard on Socialism. Hell you socialized the costs of 30 years your tax cuts for the rich, buy shoving the debt incurred as a result on the rest of us.

Seems to me, you conservatives like socialism just fine.

There is no "cost" to the taxpayer for tax cuts, dipshit. Only parasites look at tax cuts as a "cost."

WRONG bripat....there is most certainly "a cost" to tax cuts IF THE SPENDING IS NOT EQUALLY CUT......to go along with the tax cuts.....

cutting taxes in a deficit spending period, while not cutting the spending, but increasing the spending....HURTS US ALL, bigtime! Can't you see that?

 

[Jarhead]

Funny how things come full circle. They both pay the same rate basically but since Buffet cries about it he gets a pass? Have I got this right? Can I rob my neighbor as long as I condemn it while I do it?

didn't buffet say he paid 20% in federal taxes, which was less than what his secretary had to pay in federal taxes as a percentage?

I thought Teresa Heinz Kerry got her federal taxes paid down to just 19% and I thought that was pretty damn low...

Now Mitt is saying his was only 15% in federal taxes....I for one, had no idea that those in the 36% tax bracket paid so little as a percentage in federal taxes....!!!

They do ONLY when it is cap gains income.

Buffet assumed the people were naive when he said he pays less taxes than his secretary. He only does becuase he doesnt take money out of the company...He likely takes a minimal salary........likely 52K......and lets his distributions stay within the company...and then pays 15% on any cap gains he experiences.

This strategy is nothing more than tax deferring....but again, Buffet assumed the people were too naive to realize that....and apparently he was correct.

 

[Jarhead]

So you're argument is that since Mitt is apparently greedier than Buffet, and doesn't think he should pay more in taxes despite the evidence that tax cuts are what drove the deficits, that makes him morally superior somehow?

You conservatives shouldn't be so hard on Socialism. Hell you socialized the costs of 30 years your tax cuts for the rich, buy shoving the debt incurred as a result on the rest of us.

Seems to me, you conservatives like socialism just fine.

There is no "cost" to the taxpayer for tax cuts, dipshit. Only parasites look at tax cuts as a "cost."

tax cuts are offset by federal borrowing...assuming spending does not decrease.

Sooner or later, that money needs to be paid back....and interest adds to it.

So it IS a cost to the taxpayer.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Funny how things come full circle. They both pay the same rate basically but since Buffet cries about it he gets a pass? Have I got this right? Can I rob my neighbor as long as I condemn it while I do it?

So you're argument is that since Mitt is apparently greedier than Buffet, and doesn't think he should pay more in taxes despite the evidence that tax cuts are what drove the deficits, that makes him morally superior somehow?

You conservatives shouldn't be so hard on Socialism. Hell you socialized the costs of 30 years your tax cuts for the rich, buy shoving the debt incurred as a result on the rest of us.

Seems to me, you conservatives like socialism just fine.

WTF is the problem with people on here? I didn't say any of that shit. Maybe you should try reading the lines rather than in between them.

 

[Jarhead]

Funny how things come full circle. They both pay the same rate basically but since Buffet cries about it he gets a pass? Have I got this right? Can I rob my neighbor as long as I condemn it while I do it?

So you're argument is that since Mitt is apparently greedier than Buffet, and doesn't think he should pay more in taxes despite the evidence that tax cuts are what drove the deficits, that makes him morally superior somehow?

You conservatives shouldn't be so hard on Socialism. Hell you socialized the costs of 30 years your tax cuts for the rich, buy shoving the debt incurred as a result on the rest of us.

Seems to me, you conservatives like socialism just fine.

WTF is the problem with people on here? I didn't say any of that shit. Maybe you should try reading the lines rather than in between them.

I noticed Decpticon quotes posts but doesnt really respond to what is in the quote...instead he goes off on some diatribe (is that the right word) about his sentiments....I dont even pay attention to his posts anymore.

 

[AquaAthena]

Funny how things come full circle. They both pay the same rate basically but since Buffet cries about it he gets a pass? Have I got this right? Can I rob my neighbor as long as I condemn it while I do it?

We will hear more on this in the next debate, tomorrow night, ( Thursday ) and hosted by CNN. I am sure Mitt will be the main target again.

 

[Decepticon]

Funny how things come full circle. They both pay the same rate basically but since Buffet cries about it he gets a pass? Have I got this right? Can I rob my neighbor as long as I condemn it while I do it?

So you're argument is that since Mitt is apparently greedier than Buffet, and doesn't think he should pay more in taxes despite the evidence that tax cuts are what drove the deficits, that makes him morally superior somehow?

You conservatives shouldn't be so hard on Socialism. Hell you socialized the costs of 30 years your tax cuts for the rich, buy shoving the debt incurred as a result on the rest of us.

Seems to me, you conservatives like socialism just fine.

WTF is the problem with people on here? I didn't say any of that shit. Maybe you should try reading the lines rather than in between them.

Since when is it "robbing your neighbor" to having them pay their fair share?

The rich paid over 90% top tax rate under that pinko commie Eisenhower, but now that the rich have seen their tax rate DROP by 2/3rds, suddenly asking that much of them is THEFT?

When you don't tax the rich and cut spending to match it, it drives up our NATIONAL DEBT, which is owed by ALL of us. THAT'S SOCIALIZING the COSTS of your tax cuts for the rich on the backs of EVERYONE ELSE. Don't deny the IRREFUTABLE consequences of your positions, just because you don't LIKE them. We've had enough of that already.

 

[g5000]

Now Mitt is saying his was only 15% in federal taxes....I for one, had no idea that those in the 36% tax bracket paid so little as a percentage in federal taxes....!!!

Mitt pays 15 percent on his capital gains. He pays 36 percent on money from his book sales. But he gave away all his book sale money, so his effective tax rate is close to 15 percent.

The only reason this has become an issue in the past few days is because the White Obama thinks pointing this out will help him win in deeply red South Carolina. It is all very strange. Newt's been attacking venture capitalism and the low capital gains tax rate.

How the hell is he running as a Republican and not being run out of town on a rail?

 

[Zander]

Protestations of being liberal exempt you from the crime of being a 1 Percenter.

Such is the audacity of progressive cognitive dissonance.....

 

[Jarhead]

So you're argument is that since Mitt is apparently greedier than Buffet, and doesn't think he should pay more in taxes despite the evidence that tax cuts are what drove the deficits, that makes him morally superior somehow?

You conservatives shouldn't be so hard on Socialism. Hell you socialized the costs of 30 years your tax cuts for the rich, buy shoving the debt incurred as a result on the rest of us.

Seems to me, you conservatives like socialism just fine.

WTF is the problem with people on here? I didn't say any of that shit. Maybe you should try reading the lines rather than in between them.

Since when is it "robbing your neighbor" to having them pay their fair share?

The rich paid over 90% top tax rate under that pinko commie Eisenhower, but now that the rich have seen their tax rate DROP by 2/3rds, suddenly asking that much of them is THEFT?

When you don't tax the rich and cut spending to match it, it drives up our NATIONAL DEBT, which is owed by ALL of us. THAT'S SOCIALIZING the COSTS of your tax cuts for the rich on the backs of EVERYONE ELSE. Don't deny the IRREFUTABLE consequences of your positions, just because you don't LIKE them. We've had enough of that already.

There is that fair share thingy again.
Say it properly...dont regurgitate what the president says.

It should be said this way...

Yes, the wealthiest Americans pay the bulk of the revenue coming into the federal government. They most certainly pay more than the lions share....more than their fair share. But we certainly cant turn to the poor to help with the deficit...and to turn to middle class Americans during eceonomic times like these will most certainly put many households underwater....So I am asking the wealthiest Americans to understand the dilemma we are in and recognize that we have no other place to turn than to them...and ask that they temporarily pay more as we find other solutions to minimize our spending...

His problem was that he said that those that have actual dollars going into the federal government are not paying their fair share while IMPLYING that those that dont have actual dollars going into the federal government ARE paying their fair share.

It was a childish approach and resulted in a debate that is a waste of time.

 

[Care4all]

Funny how things come full circle. They both pay the same rate basically but since Buffet cries about it he gets a pass? Have I got this right? Can I rob my neighbor as long as I condemn it while I do it?

ummmmm yea....that is why buffet gets a pass....because he is willing to raise the taxes on his own bracket....for the sake of the country....at least that is how it is being played....

And truthfully, those with the kind of money as buffet, probably won't miss a lick of it and probably don't care about a few percentage points in extra taxes....

the problem imo is that those clearing 250k are in the same tax bracket as someone like buffet or Heinz Kerry, or Koch brothers, or Hilton or Gates, and they would be hit with the same tax hike as the billionaires if taxes were raised on that group.....

 

[Jarhead]

Funny how things come full circle. They both pay the same rate basically but since Buffet cries about it he gets a pass? Have I got this right? Can I rob my neighbor as long as I condemn it while I do it?

ummmmm yea....that is why buffet gets a pass....because he is willing to raise the taxes on his own bracket....for the sake of the country....at least that is how it is being played....

And truthfully, those with the kind of money as buffet, probably won't miss a lick of it and probably don't care about a few percentage points in extra taxes....

the problem imo is that those clearing 250k are in the same tax bracket as someone like buffet or Heinz Kerry, or Koch brothers, or Hilton or Gates, and they would be hit with the same tax hike as the billionaires if taxes were raised on that group.....

As I said earlier....

If he had said...

Yes, the wealthiest Americans pay the bulk of the revenue coming into the federal government. They most certainly pay more than the lions share....more than their fair share. But we certainly cant turn to the poor to help with the deficit...and to turn to middle class Americans during eceonomic times like these will most certainly put many households underwater....So I am asking the wealthiest Americans to understand the dilemma we are in and recognize that we have no other place to turn than to them...and ask that they temporarily pay more as we find other solutions to minimize our spending...

He may have had a better response by the wealthier Americans.

Instead he claimed they werent paying their fair share...and that tunred the debate into one about the poor and what they pay..

But that should never have been the debate.

Logic is logic...if you are in debt and you need money....go to has the most of it.....but hell...dont call them cheap right before you ask them for it.

 

[g5000]

Here's an idea. Let's raise taxes and cut spending.

We can start by cutting the massively bureacratic new Cabinet-level department created by Bush. The Department of Homeland Security. Eliminate it.

Huge savings right there.

Then, Warren Buffet can raise his own taxes. He can donate all of his money to the IRS.

That will keep the government going for another ten minutes.

After that, we can eliminate the Medicare Part D created by the GOP. That thing is bleeding us dry.

Then we can eliminate ObamaCare. That thing is going to bleed the states dry.

What else?