The 10 Year Tax Lie

[Murf76]

I said Romney is a plutocrat, you made the inference I suggested all Republicans are Plutocrats and no Democrats are Plutocrats. I don't feel any need to defend a position I did not assert and do not hold.

That said, plutocracy is what we have become, the rich make the laws, Congress is filled with wealthy men and women - both D's and R's. The Supreme Court drove the final nail into the coffin of democracy with their ruling in CU v. FEC and now the super rich are able to buy the rich men and women who make the laws which the hoi polloi must obey.

The irony of this is people like you aspire to be rich but are nothing like them. The type of government you hope for - I assume by your words - is one where R's are the majority in the House, in the Senate and hold the White House. Me, I prefer the mixed bag, the type of government where the R's and D's put the country first, and the country is the people - rich and poor, sick and healthy, gay and straight, black, white and every shade in between, catholic and Jew, Muslim and Jane, Hindi and Buddhist.

I see no value in D's after this administration. My eyes have been opened on that score. The "progressive" (read socialist) wing of the party has overtaken it and the Blue Dogs are all but destroyed by it. But yeah, I would agree that legislation was not meant to be easy. It was meant to be measured, debated, and difficult.. as every new law limits liberty and comes inherently with unintended consequences.

That said, you have ZERO credible reasons for referring to Mitt Romney as a "plutocrat". There's literally nothing in his resume to support your assertion.

Since Gov. Romney is quite reticent on the source of his compensation, how do you know he is not a plutocrat? How do we know anything about his politics? Look to his time as Governor of MA? He's disavowed much of what he did. However, if you listen carefully to the Gov. and his wife, their comments are telling.

Your use of the term "socialist" is also telling, it tells me you have no understanding of Socialism and are only parroting the propaganda of right wing media.

When did you stop beating your wife?

And... Socialists exist. They steal your socks. But only the left ones.. What's up with that?

 

[Wry Catcher]

It's a sad state when you have to defend and protect American citizens from the thievery of the American government.

It's an even sadder state when some of the wealthiest Americans have conned millions of average Americans into voting against their own rational self interest.

My rational self-interest is not in keeping or getting handouts from government, but in keeping government from becoming so monsterous and abusive, I no longer have any freedom.

Which freedoms have you lost?

If the government, through the advocacy of its acolytes like you, succeed in making class warfare a useful weapon, and can use it against the most powerful people in this country, the ordinary, middle class, citizen does not stand a chance.

Class Warfare? This is another of the clichés used by the purveyors of propaganda. A progressive income tax has been in effect for a century - it is not class warfare. Only propagandists and parrots use that term today.

Our self interest lays in keeping government caged and severely restricted in power.

Yet some hope to have the government control a women's body, and others find no problem in restricting the rights of citizens to vote on the off chance - not supported by evidence - that fraud may occur.

Fear mongers who cannot cut apron strings and live on their own two feet like adult men and women do not interest Me in the slightest.

Ah, so you also object to the Romney's and Koch's of the world, those persons whose wealth was not earned but inherited.

 

[Murf76]

It's an even sadder state when some of the wealthiest Americans have conned millions of average Americans into voting against their own rational self interest.

My rational self-interest is not in keeping or getting handouts from government, but in keeping government from becoming so monsterous and abusive, I no longer have any freedom.

Which freedoms have you lost?

If the government, through the advocacy of its acolytes like you, succeed in making class warfare a useful weapon, and can use it against the most powerful people in this country, the ordinary, middle class, citizen does not stand a chance.

Class Warfare? This is another of the clichés used by the purveyors of propaganda. A progressive income tax has been in effect for a century - it is not class warfare. Only propagandists and parrots use that term today.

Our self interest lays in keeping government caged and severely restricted in power.

Yet some hope to have the government control a women's body, and others find no problem in restricting the rights of citizens to vote on the off chance - not supported by evidence - that fraud may occur.

Fear mongers who cannot cut apron strings and live on their own two feet like adult men and women do not interest Me in the slightest.

Ah, so you also object to the Romney's and Koch's of the world, those persons whose wealth was not earned but inherited.

Romney made his own money. He gave his inheritance to charity. And your "progressive" tax scale has 48% of Americans with no skin in the game on federal income taxes. Weirdly though, you folks are all concerned that some voters might be influenced by Citizens United.

 

[zonly1]

Mitt Romneys election platform:

I only pay a 5% tax rate.......and if you elect me, I will make sure it stays that way

what did jeffery emelt and GE pay in taxes producing in china........nothing/zero/nada....so shut the hell up moron.

 

[8537]

It's a sad state when you have to defend and protect American citizens from the thievery of the American government.

It's an even sadder state when some of the wealthiest Americans have conned millions of average Americans into voting against their own rational self interest.

What the hell would a socialist know about self-interest??? The self-interest of freedom-loving individuals is best served by not having a jackboot on one's throat. That way, the opportunity that is our birthright is preserved.

A jackboot on one's throat? A top marginal rate of 39.6% is a "jackboot on one's throat? For Fuck's sake, that would make General Eisenhower a triple-duper Jackboot thug of extraordinary power.

Seriously, how is an increase of 4.6 points in the top marginal rate for labor income a sign that someone has had a jackboot placed on their throat?

 

[8537]

It's a sad state when you have to defend and protect American citizens from the thievery of the American government.

It's an even sadder state when some of the wealthiest Americans have conned millions of average Americans into voting against their own rational self interest.

My rational self-interest is not in keeping or getting handouts from government, but in keeping government from becoming so monsterous and abusive, I no longer have any freedom.

If the government, through the advocacy of its acolytes like you, succeed in making class warfare a useful weapon, and can use it against the most powerful people in this country, the ordinary, middle class, citizen does not stand a chance.

I'm pretty sure the middle class will continue to "stand a chance" if the top marginal rate increases by 4.6% and the few freeloaders who don't have health insurance but access the system are required to pay for it.

 

[8537]

My rational self-interest is not in keeping or getting handouts from government, but in keeping government from becoming so monsterous and abusive, I no longer have any freedom.

Which freedoms have you lost?

If the government, through the advocacy of its acolytes like you, succeed in making class warfare a useful weapon, and can use it against the most powerful people in this country, the ordinary, middle class, citizen does not stand a chance.

Class Warfare? This is another of the clichés used by the purveyors of propaganda. A progressive income tax has been in effect for a century - it is not class warfare. Only propagandists and parrots use that term today.

Our self interest lays in keeping government caged and severely restricted in power.

Yet some hope to have the government control a women's body, and others find no problem in restricting the rights of citizens to vote on the off chance - not supported by evidence - that fraud may occur.

Fear mongers who cannot cut apron strings and live on their own two feet like adult men and women do not interest Me in the slightest.

Ah, so you also object to the Romney's and Koch's of the world, those persons whose wealth was not earned but inherited.

Romney made his own money. He gave his inheritance to charity.

Lol.

 

[rightwinger]

Mitt Romneys election platform:

I only pay a 5% tax rate.......and if you elect me, I will make sure it stays that way

what did jeffery emelt and GE pay in taxes producing in china........nothing/zero/nada....so shut the hell up moron.

You somehow think I don't want to go after corporate taxes also?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Why would you care how much money the guy has made or where he owns property or has bank accounts? What does that have to do with the job he's running for? Certainly, he's not in it for the money. The job only pays $400k per year. To a guy like him, that's chump change. By your stated opinion, his speeches aren't worth paying for... so what do you think is his motivation for seeking office? Certainly he's got plenty of cash, and if he was the nefarious cat y'all make him out to be, it follows he'd likely not want a whole lot of public scrutiny. So just what is it that you think he's plotting???

In a word, Ambition. That's what drives him.

I don't believe he has an agenda and I don't believe he is nefarious; I do believe he is a Plutocrat and believes in his heart and soul that when the rich do well it will trickle down to the rest. I know in my heart, my soul and my frontal lobe Voodoo Economics is a bullshit theory advanced to benefit the rich.

What you ignorantly call voodoo economics is actually nothing more than common sense. If you want an enterprise to grow, you have to put capital into that business. The more capital available to invest, the more that one can grow the enterprise. That applies to a lemonade stand, and it applies to the national economy.

Left wingers often cite the great economy that Clinton built with his 1993 tax hikes, but you ignore that when Bill Clinton left office, the economy was already moving into a recession. Yes, the dot com bust had a hand in that, but the economy had already flattened out before that happened. Those tax hikes slowly strangled small businesses by taking the capital they needed to expand. Consequently, they quit expanding, and the economy suffered. We need a steadily expanding economy just to provide work for the young people entering the work force.

Yada Yada yada...check your 'facts'. Since you won't, why not explain why the Bush Tax Cuts of 2001 and 2003 did not lead to the great expansion? Why has the increase in revenue held by some maga businesses not lead to reducing unemployment?

And most importantly, explain why the wealth in our nation is so disparate?

 

[rightwinger]

How many of you honesty could go to your neighbors and suggest the richest family in the neighborhood should pay everyone's electric bills? Even if you could, how many neighbors do you think would agree? What are the chances the richest neighbor won't just move away, if confronted by a bunch of neighbers with a petition?

We already do that through real estate taxes. Those with massive estates pay more in local taxes.

 

[Vel]

How many of you honesty could go to your neighbors and suggest the richest family in the neighborhood should pay everyone's electric bills? Even if you could, how many neighbors do you think would agree? What are the chances the richest neighbor won't just move away, if confronted by a bunch of neighbers with a petition?

I find it interesting that you have those with such altruistic ideals about fairness as long as it's someone else they think needs to contribute more. If they were the ones being asked for the larger portion, their altruism would quickly disappear.

Gee, you must be omniscient. You know that to be true - I'm impressed.

No special powers necessary. I had only to look at Obama's tax return numbers. Obama is out daily saying that guys like him need to pay a little more, guys like him WANT to give back to those responsible for their success and yet on his own tax return, writes off donations to his kids in order to shelter his money and pay fewer taxes. What does that say about Obama's high minded ideals?

 

[Vel]

It's an even sadder state when some of the wealthiest Americans have conned millions of average Americans into voting against their own rational self interest.

I find it worse that you expect people to vote for their own self interest by expecting someone else to carry their share of the load.

Who said anything about expecting others to carry the load?

When did self- centeredness become a virtue?

hmm... Adam Smith? Ayn Rand?

If 50% of people are not paying taxes , then the other 50% is carrying their load.

 

[8537]

I find it worse that you expect people to vote for their own self interest by expecting someone else to carry their share of the load.

Who said anything about expecting others to carry the load?

When did self- centeredness become a virtue?

hmm... Adam Smith? Ayn Rand?

If 50% of people are not paying taxes , then the other 50% is carrying their load.

Everyone who works - and almost everyone who lives - in this country pays taxes.

Everyone with a job pays a combined higher rate than Mitt Romney in federal payroll taxes alone - 15.3%.

Why doesn't Mitt carry his own load?

 

[Wry Catcher]

I find it worse that you expect people to vote for their own self interest by expecting someone else to carry their share of the load.

Who said anything about expecting others to carry the load?

When did self- centeredness become a virtue?

hmm... Adam Smith? Ayn Rand?

If 50% of people are not paying taxes , then the other 50% is carrying their load.

As brillian as you are I'm sure you know that Ayn Rand accepted her social security checks.

 

[Vel]

Who said anything about expecting others to carry the load?



hmm... Adam Smith? Ayn Rand?

If 50% of people are not paying taxes , then the other 50% is carrying their load.

As brillian as you are I'm sure you know that Ayn Rand accepted her social security checks.

I'm as sure that she paid into the Social Security Insurance program. It's not welfare to get YOUR money back. It's welfare when you take what was someone elses.

 

[DiamondDave]

Who said anything about expecting others to carry the load?



hmm... Adam Smith? Ayn Rand?

If 50% of people are not paying taxes , then the other 50% is carrying their load.

Everyone who works - and almost everyone who lives - in this country pays taxes.

Everyone with a job pays a combined higher rate than Mitt Romney in federal payroll taxes alone - 15.3%.

Why doesn't Mitt carry his own load?

Uhhh.. nope.. NOT EVERYONE WITH A JOB pays a higher rate than Romney.. many 'working poor' get more back in 'refunds', credits, freebies, and entitlements than they put in

But hey, it is you guys who want nothing to do with a flat tax with no ceiling, floor, loopholes, or exceptions and treating all income equally... I wonder why that is??!!??

 

[Wry Catcher]

If 50% of people are not paying taxes , then the other 50% is carrying their load.

As brillian as you are I'm sure you know that Ayn Rand accepted her social security checks.

I'm as sure that she paid into the Social Security Insurance program. It's not welfare to get YOUR money back. It's welfare when you take what was someone elses.

lol

Do your homework.

 

[8537]

If 50% of people are not paying taxes , then the other 50% is carrying their load.

Everyone who works - and almost everyone who lives - in this country pays taxes.

Everyone with a job pays a combined higher rate than Mitt Romney in federal payroll taxes alone - 15.3%.

Why doesn't Mitt carry his own load?

Uhhh.. nope.. NOT EVERYONE WITH A JOB pays a higher rate than Romney.. many 'working poor' get more back in 'refunds', credits, freebies, and entitlements than they put in

"many" get more back in the EITC and other credits than the 15.3% they pay in?

I'd like to see "many' defined and that claim substantiated. But let me rephrase my original statement to be more accurate:

Most people with a job pay a combined higher rate than Mitt Romney. I'm sure the public will feel better knowing that Mitt pays a higher rate than someone who qualifies for the EITC.

But hey, it is you guys who want nothing to do with a flat tax with no ceiling, floor, loopholes, or exceptions and treating all income equally... I wonder why that is??!!??

who are "you guys"?

I presume your flat tax wet dream would apply to all sources of income - labor, investment, corporate etc....

 

[Wry Catcher]

If 50% of people are not paying taxes , then the other 50% is carrying their load.

Everyone who works - and almost everyone who lives - in this country pays taxes.

Everyone with a job pays a combined higher rate than Mitt Romney in federal payroll taxes alone - 15.3%.

Why doesn't Mitt carry his own load?

Uhhh.. nope.. NOT EVERYONE WITH A JOB pays a higher rate than Romney.. many 'working poor' get more back in 'refunds', credits, freebies, and entitlements than they put in

But hey, it is you guys who want nothing to do with a flat tax with no ceiling, floor, loopholes, or exceptions and treating all income equally... I wonder why that is??!!??

The government maybe subsidizing the employer of the working poor, has that idea ever crossed you mind? Some businesses, I'm sure this will surprise you, actually limit the hours of employees so that the business does not need to pay benefits.

The working poor are working, something conservatives would seem to applaud, but the 'conservatives' on this message board consider the working poor contemptible. The Callous conservative wraps themselves in the American Flag, prays to Jesus and ignores the values of both.

 

[DiamondDave]

Everyone who works - and almost everyone who lives - in this country pays taxes.

Everyone with a job pays a combined higher rate than Mitt Romney in federal payroll taxes alone - 15.3%.

Why doesn't Mitt carry his own load?

Uhhh.. nope.. NOT EVERYONE WITH A JOB pays a higher rate than Romney.. many 'working poor' get more back in 'refunds', credits, freebies, and entitlements than they put in

"many" get more back in the EITC and other credits than the 15.3% they pay in?

I'd like to see "many' defined and that claim substantiated. But let me rephrase my original statement to be more accurate:

Most people with a job pay a combined higher rate than Mitt Romney. I'm sure the public will feel better knowing that Mitt pays a higher rate than someone who qualifies for the EITC.

But hey, it is you guys who want nothing to do with a flat tax with no ceiling, floor, loopholes, or exceptions and treating all income equally... I wonder why that is??!!??

who are "you guys"?

I presume your flat tax wet dream would apply to all sources of income - labor, investment, corporate etc....

All sources of income... correct.. capital gains, interest, wages, etc... all the same...

Now as for business or corporate, they should have a flat rate too... whether that would be he same as income tax, would be a discussion to have

As for 'you guys'... it means the leftists... who continually champion taxing the 'rich' more, for obvious reasons