Romney's Bain Lie

[Ravi]

Why?

Why do you think the firm would have folded for certain? Bain is much bigger now than it was. His leaving wound up making his partners richer than they almost certainly would have been.

I was laughing at your contention.

Because I don't believe that anyone with a lick of sense wouldn't care what was being done by a company that he totally owned.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Again, the issue is their effective federal rate. When they shift jobs to low wage, third world shitholes, their profit increases. They are taxed, at the federal level, on profit. Hence, their effective tax rate should increase by screwing America. Yet it doesn't. Why is that?

Perhaps it's because countries like Vietnam and China don't have all of those tax credits that we do, but companies are willing to move operations there because they provide a cheap, near slave wage market, so it doesn't matter that they pay a bit more in tax to those countries, while they write those same taxes off here?

Nope. It's a bullshit argument that American corporate tax, effective rates are high. The reality is the corporations like paying peanuts for wages, and could give a rat's ass about America.

When companies shift production abroad, their tax rate falls. The math is simple. If a company earns $200 in the US, it will pay $70 in taxes. If it shifts half of it's production to a tax free jurisdiction, all else being equal, it will then pay $35 in taxes, cutting it's effective tax rate from 35% to 17.5%. Lowering the corporate tax rate reduces the incentive to shift production abroad. All else being equal, if the US corporate tax rate in the example was 17.5%, there would be no incentive to shift production offshore.

The data shows their effective "Federal" rate. You're excuse doesn't make any sense. The fact that many of them move operations to cheap labor third world shitholes increases their profits, while their effective Corporate Tax rates continue to decrease.

One of the reasons why corporations pay a lower effective tax rate is because they shift economic activity to lower tax jurisdictions.

We should lower corporate taxes while eliminating loopholes for companies.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Again, the issue is their effective federal rate. When they shift jobs to low wage, third world shitholes, their profit increases. They are taxed, at the federal level, on profit. Hence, their effective tax rate should increase by screwing America. Yet it doesn't. Why is that?

Perhaps it's because countries like Vietnam and China don't have all of those tax credits that we do, but companies are willing to move operations there because they provide a cheap, near slave wage market, so it doesn't matter that they pay a bit more in tax to those countries, while they write those same taxes off here?

Nope. It's a bullshit argument that American corporate tax, effective rates are high. The reality is the corporations like paying peanuts for wages, and could give a rat's ass about America.

When companies shift production abroad, their tax rate falls. The math is simple. If a company earns $200 in the US, it will pay $70 in taxes. If it shifts half of it's production to a tax free jurisdiction, all else being equal, it will then pay $35 in taxes, cutting it's effective tax rate from 35% to 17.5%. Lowering the corporate tax rate reduces the incentive to shift production abroad. All else being equal, if the US corporate tax rate in the example was 17.5%, there would be no incentive to shift production offshore.

The data shows their effective "Federal" rate. You're excuse doesn't make any sense. The fact that many of them move operations to cheap labor third world shitholes increases their profits, while their effective Corporate Tax rates continue to decrease.

You are using FAR too much logic and reasoning with him. But you're still winning, so I encourage you to continue. It's really fun watching Progressives nail Conservatives on economic issues.

 

[Toro]

First, nobody said he didn't care.

Second, you have to understand the nature of a general partnership. Most of Romney's earned wealth wouldn't be within the GP. The GP entity owns little. Funds are shifted out of the GP and invested in limited partner interests alongside other investors. The GP is a conduit to flow profits through then out of the entities. Its not like GE were there are plants and equipment. If Romney wanted to stop actively investing, the whole thing could collapse and it wouldn't matter much to him. And it's common practice amongst GPs that when they leave the business to transition ownership interests away to those who are active, usually at some multiple of book value or cash flow, or even just given away. Often, once these guys hut a certain number, they start doing other things because they have more money than they will ever need, and they're going to give most of it away anyways. I've seen it many times.

Why?

I was laughing at your contention.

Because I don't believe that anyone with a lick of sense wouldn't care what was being done by a company that he totally owned.

 

[Ravi]

First, he effectively said he didn't care when he claimed he had nothing to do with Bain while he "wasn't there." I say bullshit, he owned the company 100%.

Second, how could it be a GP if Mitten was the sole stock holder?

 

[Toro]

You aren't following. I'm not saying the effective tax rate is high. I am saying that because the statutory rate is high, there is incentive to move production offshore. If we lower statutory corporate taxes, we reduce the incentive for companies to lower their effective tax rates by shifting production. Of course, taxes aren't the only cost, but they are one we can influence. So lower the corporate tax rate to 15% and eliminate the loopholes. Obama has proposed lowering corporate taxes for this very reason, though to something like 27%.

Again, the issue is their effective federal rate. When they shift jobs to low wage, third world shitholes, their profit increases. They are taxed, at the federal level, on profit. Hence, their effective tax rate should increase by screwing America. Yet it doesn't. Why is that?

Perhaps it's because countries like Vietnam and China don't have all of those tax credits that we do, but companies are willing to move operations there because they provide a cheap, near slave wage market, so it doesn't matter that they pay a bit more in tax to those countries, while they write those same taxes off here?

Nope. It's a bullshit argument that American corporate tax, effective rates are high. The reality is the corporations like paying peanuts for wages, and could give a rat's ass about America.

When companies shift production abroad, their tax rate falls. The math is simple. If a company earns $200 in the US, it will pay $70 in taxes. If it shifts half of it's production to a tax free jurisdiction, all else being equal, it will then pay $35 in taxes, cutting it's effective tax rate from 35% to 17.5%. Lowering the corporate tax rate reduces the incentive to shift production abroad. All else being equal, if the US corporate tax rate in the example was 17.5%, there would be no incentive to shift production offshore.

The data shows their effective "Federal" rate. You're excuse doesn't make any sense. The fact that many of them move operations to cheap labor third world shitholes increases their profits, while their effective Corporate Tax rates continue to decrease.

 

[Valerie]

I guess when you can't run on the merits of your own Leadership, all you have to do is merely insinuate how your opponent is a liar and a felon then, facts be damned, just hope that perception sticks in the minds of the voters... Damn, why on earth wouldn't Mitt want to turn over more private facts which are not required by his candidacy? Must be because he is hiding something, of course.



Partisan politics at its most pathetic!

Articles: What Is Obama Hiding?

Apparently Mitt can't run on his own leadership. He's distanced himself from Bain and won't discuss his abysmal term as governor.

And have you seen his attack ads?

He is not required to "discuss" on Dembot demand...


There is no doubt that during this campaign Mitt Romney plans on engaging the American public directly and will "discuss" his very successful and consistent track-record of Executive leadership...



That Mitt, in a political realm, verbally drew a factual distinction of the time period in which his Executive leadership at Bain ended, does not mean that he needs to distance himself from Bain, or that SEC filings prove him a liar and a felon, or anything of the sort...

 

[Ravi]

I guess when you can't run on the merits of your own Leadership, all you have to do is merely insinuate how your opponent is a liar and a felon then, facts be damned, just hope that perception sticks in the minds of the voters... Damn, why on earth wouldn't Mitt want to turn over more private facts which are not required by his candidacy? Must be because he is hiding something, of course.



Partisan politics at its most pathetic!

Articles: What Is Obama Hiding?

Apparently Mitt can't run on his own leadership. He's distanced himself from Bain and won't discuss his abysmal term as governor.

And have you seen his attack ads?

He is not required to "discuss" on Dembot demand...


There is no doubt that during this campaign Mitt Romney plans on engaging the American public directly and will "discuss" his very successful and consistent track-record of Executive leadership...



That Mitt, in a political realm, verbally drew a factual distinction of the time period in which his Executive leadership at Bain ended, does not mean that he needs to distance himself from Bain, or that SEC filings prove him a liar and a felon, or anything of the sort...

What executive leadership do you mean? Bain? Governor of MA?

 

[Valerie]

Apparently Mitt can't run on his own leadership. He's distanced himself from Bain and won't discuss his abysmal term as governor.

And have you seen his attack ads?

He is not required to "discuss" on Dembot demand...


There is no doubt that during this campaign Mitt Romney plans on engaging the American public directly and will "discuss" his very successful and consistent track-record of Executive leadership...



That Mitt, in a political realm, verbally drew a factual distinction of the time period in which his Executive leadership at Bain ended, does not mean that he needs to distance himself from Bain, or that SEC filings prove him a liar and a felon, or anything of the sort...

What executive leadership do you mean? Bain? Governor of MA?

Both. Why so hysterical???

 

[Valerie]

I guess when you can't run on the merits of your own Leadership, all you have to do is merely insinuate how your opponent is a liar and a felon then, facts be damned, just hope that perception sticks in the minds of the voters... Damn, why on earth wouldn't Mitt want to turn over more private facts which are not required by his candidacy? Must be because he is hiding something, of course.



Partisan politics at its most pathetic!

Articles: What Is Obama Hiding?

Politics, same as it ever was.

Mitt can't win just because he's "Not Obama." Somebody with a LOT less baggage would need to have been nominated.

Oh "baggage" like he won't show any extra tax returns which are not required by his candidacy...? "Baggage" like the fact that Dems have no qualms about making things up in order to foster classwarfare type resentment among the electorate...?

Gee, how come the "baggage" of Obama's past was so meaningless???






Aww poor poor pathetic President has had the terrible burden of Leadership in such a difficult time in our history... all we hear is wa wa wa for 3 plus years now...


But hey, No worries, America! Mitt got rich and it is all his fault that you are not rich, so vote for me! vee vill protect you from the eevil rich people!

 

[Pho_King]

Why isn't this shitmark of a thread in the conspiracy forum?

I am fairly new here so could you help me out? I am thinking this is the kiddie pool of the discussion board. Could you direct me to the adult swim area? Thanks.

Welcome to the Moronathon..... Sadly, this is the adult area.

 

[BDBoop]

He is not required to "discuss" on Dembot demand...


There is no doubt that during this campaign Mitt Romney plans on engaging the American public directly and will "discuss" his very successful and consistent track-record of Executive leadership...



That Mitt, in a political realm, verbally drew a factual distinction of the time period in which his Executive leadership at Bain ended, does not mean that he needs to distance himself from Bain, or that SEC filings prove him a liar and a felon, or anything of the sort...

What executive leadership do you mean? Bain? Governor of MA?

Both. Why so hysterical???

Where is this 'hysteria' you speak of.

 

[BDBoop]

I guess when you can't run on the merits of your own Leadership, all you have to do is merely insinuate how your opponent is a liar and a felon then, facts be damned, just hope that perception sticks in the minds of the voters... Damn, why on earth wouldn't Mitt want to turn over more private facts which are not required by his candidacy? Must be because he is hiding something, of course.



Partisan politics at its most pathetic!

Articles: What Is Obama Hiding?

Politics, same as it ever was.

Mitt can't win just because he's "Not Obama." Somebody with a LOT less baggage would need to have been nominated.

Oh "baggage" like he won't show any extra tax returns which are not required by his candidacy...? "Baggage" like the fact that Dems have no qualms about making things up in order to foster classwarfare type resentment among the electorate...?

Gee, how come the "baggage" of Obama's past was so meaningless???






Aww poor poor pathetic President has had the terrible burden of Leadership in such a difficult time in our history... all we hear is wa wa wa for 3 plus years now...


But hey, No worries, America! Mitt got rich and it is all his fault that you are not rich, so vote for me! vee vill protect you from the eevil rich people!

You know, for almost a year you were sane, and normal.

Tell Valerie I miss her.

 

[Valerie]

Politics, same as it ever was.

Mitt can't win just because he's "Not Obama." Somebody with a LOT less baggage would need to have been nominated.

Oh "baggage" like he won't show any extra tax returns which are not required by his candidacy...? "Baggage" like the fact that Dems have no qualms about making things up in order to foster classwarfare type resentment among the electorate...?

Gee, how come the "baggage" of Obama's past was so meaningless???






Aww poor poor pathetic President has had the terrible burden of Leadership in such a difficult time in our history... all we hear is wa wa wa for 3 plus years now...


But hey, No worries, America! Mitt got rich and it is all his fault that you are not rich, so vote for me! vee vill protect you from the eevil rich people!

You know, for almost a year you were sane, and normal.

Tell Valerie I miss her.

**** you very much!

 

[Zxereus]

Obama needs to take control of his people, and he should fire the spokesperson who suggested Romney is a felon.

 

[Lakhota]

Major Romney Donor Being Investigated For Suspicious Activities

 

[BDBoop]

Oh "baggage" like he won't show any extra tax returns which are not required by his candidacy...? "Baggage" like the fact that Dems have no qualms about making things up in order to foster classwarfare type resentment among the electorate...?

Gee, how come the "baggage" of Obama's past was so meaningless???






Aww poor poor pathetic President has had the terrible burden of Leadership in such a difficult time in our history... all we hear is wa wa wa for 3 plus years now...


But hey, No worries, America! Mitt got rich and it is all his fault that you are not rich, so vote for me! vee vill protect you from the eevil rich people!

You know, for almost a year you were sane, and normal.

Tell Valerie I miss her.

**** you very much!

And you think Ravi's hysterical?

 

[Toro]

First, he effectively said he didn't care when he claimed he had nothing to do with Bain while he "wasn't there." I say bullshit, he owned the company 100%.

Second, how could it be a GP if Mitten was the sole stock holder?

I can't comment on what he said or it's context but a GP is a legal entity. It doesn't imply broad ownership. This structure is common amongst private equity firms, hedge funds and law firms. It's not uncommon for there to be a sole owner. In my experience, that's probably the case a significant amount of time. Most of the time, there will only be one, two or three owners.

 

[BDBoop]

Major Romney Donor Being Investigated For Suspicious Activities

Rut-roh!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If Romney didn't lie, then why did Bain continue to pay him until 2002?

Face it...............you hate it when you're shown to be wrong.

And like I said, your link isn't for shit.

Because he was on a leave of absence, just like he said. Some people, mostly union worker types, get paid on leaves of absence. On top of that, he was the owner, and owners either get paid directly or by taking a share of the profit. He chose to pay himself a salary. Anyone who runs a business will tell you that is the simpler of the tow methods for accounting purposes.