His daddy was wealthy. He inherited some dough.
On his own he earned a lot of dough.
He has invested quite a lot of his wealth.
Is he (a) supposed to know exactly what each investment firm does with each insignificant or each significant portion of his investments? or (b) supposed to care all that much if some of his money gets invested in a place like the Cayman Islands?
How and why should that be an "oh nozies" moment?
I am not a Mitt fan, but I see lots of good reasons to limit the criticism to the politics the guy has, and not waste a freakin' second on this kind of tripe.
The fact that he inherited a lot of money and made a lot of money is immaterial. The fact that he pays a lower percentage in taxes than most Americans just means he takes advantage of tax loopholes that allow him to pay less taxes. This is an indictment of our tax system, not Romney.
What disturbs me is a presidential hopeful choosing to use offshore accounts. Romney says he pays the taxes just as if the funds where in the US. However Cayman banking regulations put a veil of secrecy over accounts such that the IRS or anyone would have a hard time proving otherwise. Cayman accounts are fine if you need the secrecy, but a presidential candidate should not have that need.
There is some merit in that post you just offered.
Of course, it's still not clear that Mitt is placing his money in the Caymans. some of the investment companies where he has invested some of his wealth may have.
If they are doing so to avoid taxation, then it might be somewhat problematical.
Also, up to a certain point, I think Presidential candidates SHOULD have less claim to secrecy in their finances. But even so, I really understand why many public officials are opposed to any requirement that they must completely forgo the right to privacy in their personal affairs, just to hold public office.