Oh YEA! ITS ON!

[JamesBW43]

You didn’t have to, you always running to his defense is pretty telling of whom you support.

I don't always defend the President. I do, however, defend him when I see a criticism that I think is unwarranted, ignorant, or stupid.

Maybe you should concentrate on improving your grammar before you try your hand at deductive reasoning.

[Roman529]

Like the one's he's currently using to only pay 15% in federal taxes? Or maybe you're referring to tax loopholes like a 75,000 tax break for owning a Dressage horse?

What you don't understand is A) Romney already paid taxes on INCOME he earned, he is paying 15% on his capital gains and dividends on investments, and this is the same amount everyone else pays on capital gains, and B) Romney doesn't make the tax laws... he isn't doing anything illegal.

[Ilovemyfins4eva]

I don't know how anyone could vote for Obama after witnessing the beat down Romney gave to him. It was like a seasoned Professor educating a freshman college student (Obama) on the basic fundamentals of business and economics. Without a teleprompter Obama is totally lost and clueless.

this is totally true, he maybe able to speak well with a teleprompter, but without it, he looks clueless, stuttering constantly

[Spesh]

What you don't understand is A) Romney already paid taxes on INCOME he earned, he is paying 15% on his capital gains and dividends on investments, and this is the same amount everyone else pays on capital gains, and B) Romney doesn't make the tax laws... he isn't doing anything illegal.

You realize nobody has accused Romney of doing anything illegal, right?

[rob19]

What you don't understand is A) Romney already paid taxes on INCOME he earned, he is paying 15% on his capital gains and dividends on investments, and this is the same amount everyone else pays on capital gains, and B) Romney doesn't make the tax laws... he isn't doing anything illegal.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Mitt Romney made $13.7 million last year and paid $1.94 million in federal income taxes, giving him an effective tax rate of 14.1%, his campaign said Friday.
His effective tax rate was up slightly from the 13.9% ratehe paid in
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.

The majority of the candidate's income came from his investments.
His 2011 income was considerably lower than the $21 million estimated by the campaign in February.

The majority of the candidate's income last year came from his investments: capital gains ($6.8 million), taxable interest ($3 million) and dividends ($3.7 million).
In addition, Romney reported $450,470 in business income.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


- I never said what he did was illegal, but if you guys are going to believe Mitt Romney is going to close the very same tax-holes he's currently using then good luck to you.

[CattailsrEdible]

Romney kicked osamas butt last nite!

Sent From My EVO 4G LTE!

[Dolphins9954]

Romney makes his money from investments. Which is why his tax rate is lower around 15%. Raise that rate to 30% or more like everyone else pays on income and what do you think will happen to investments in this country??? Not a fan of Romney at all but I do believe lower tax investment rates are good for the country.

[WVDolphan]

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Mitt Romney made $13.7 million last year and paid $1.94 million in federal income taxes, giving him an effective tax rate of 14.1%, his campaign said Friday.
His effective tax rate was up slightly from the 13.9% ratehe paid in
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.

The majority of the candidate's income came from his investments.
His 2011 income was considerably lower than the $21 million estimated by the campaign in February.

The majority of the candidate's income last year came from his investments: capital gains ($6.8 million), taxable interest ($3 million) and dividends ($3.7 million).
In addition, Romney reported $450,470 in business income.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


- I never said what he did was illegal, but if you guys are going to believe Mitt Romney is going to close the very same tax-holes he's currently using then good luck to you.

No one believes he is going to do anything to fix the loopholes. What do a lot of people not understand about the fact that most of us simply DO NOT CARE about making these ultra rich people pay every last penny they possibly can on taxes?

Facts are this......

Ultra rich wind up paying a **** ton of taxes as it is.

If we want to bring in more money through taxes, we need more people WORKING and therefore paying their share.

When people work and pay taxes, they are contributing to society in two ways(paying taxes and working a job that does something for people)

When people are working and paying taxes, they ARE NOT being dependants.

When people are dependants, they are taking tax money from the people who are working. Less workers and more people mooching puts a huge strain on us.

When business owners arent taxed to death, they can hire more workers.

When they hire more workers, more people work and pay taxes.

Everybody wins. Especially the working class. The ones Obama pretends to care about. Obama cares about the ****ing poors. He gives them free everything. They have no desire to work, because what they hell, they can sit on their sorry ass and make about 60% of what working people make.

The people who dont want these tax breaks for small business owners and middle class people are the sorry ****ing bums who dont want to go to work. Im tired of floating the bill for these dependants.

[Dolphins9954]

Romney kicked osamas butt last nite!

Sent From My EVO 4G LTE!

The only reason why I didn't give you a negative is because you have Lauren doggie style as your sig. On man I would dig some tunnels with her.

[rob19]

The people who dont want these tax breaks for small business owners and middle class people are the sorry ****ing bums who dont want to go to work. Im tired of floating the bill for these dependants.

Ain't no tax-break for the middle class coming for you.

I don't know where some of you guys get the notion that Mitt Romney's gonna "crack down on taxing rich people", when he plans on giving people with an income above 250,000 dollars a tax-break, and to do that he has to increase taxes on everyone below that. He's said he won't have to raise taxes on people below 250,000, but the numbers show that isn't mathematically feasible.

On “60 Minutes” last night, Mitt Romney said it again. “I want to keep the current progressivity in the code. There should be no tax reduction for high income people.”

You’ve heard Romney say this — or some variant of it –dozens of times before. What’s changed since then is that Romney has admitted that his tax cuts, if they’re not going to add to the deficit, will have to increase taxes on people he defines as middle income and cut them on people he defines as high income.

Before we get to that admission, a quick refresher. Romney’s tax plan proposes to cut tax rates by 20 percent. That would cost trillions of dollars, and mean a particularly big tax cut for the rich.

But Romney promises his tax cut won’t cost anything, won’t raise taxes on the middle class, won’t cut taxes on the rich, and won’t end the tax breaks for savings and investment.

The Tax Policy Center, the gold standard in nonpartisan tax wonkery, looked at the tax cut and these promises and declared the proposal “not mathematically possible.” Since Romney doesn’t want to touch tax breaks for savings and investment like the capital gains cut — a position he reiterated last night on “60 Minutes” — there just isn’t enough money in the remaining tax breaks for people making over $250,000 to pay for their tax cuts.

For awhile, the Romney campaign had no answer to this. They just said they didn’t believe the Tax Policy Center — called it biased, even though it’s run by one of George W. Bush’s top economists.

Then, slowly, right-leaning economists and outlets began releasing their own studies showing that, if you made some really, really questionable assumptions, you could kinda sorta make Romney’s math look like it might add up. And so you might have heard Romney say this to David Gregory on “Meet the Press”:

The good news is that five different economic studies, including one at Harvard and Princeton and AEI and a couple at The Wall Street Journal all show that if we bring down our top rates and actually go across the board, bring down rates for everyone in America, but also limit deductions and exemptions for people at the high end, while you can keep the progressivity in the code, you could remain revenue neutral and you create an enormous incentive for growth in the economy.

The Harvard study was done by economist Martin Feldstein, and he makes a very important decision in his paper. He writes, “I think it is very reasonable to say that people in that high-income group” — by which means people making over $100,000 — “are not the ‘middle class.’”

And so, under really, really unrealistic assumptions, he shows that the math can kind of work, but that Romney’s policies would mean a really big tax increase for people making between $100,000 and $250,000 in order to pay for a big tax cut on people making more than $250,000. But that’s okay, because people making over $100,000 are not in the middle class.

And Romney has been all over the place trumpeting this study, saying this study shows his math works out. But then ABC’s George Stephanopoulos caught him out:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.

For the record, I’m actually with Feldstein on this one: I think it’s reasonable to say households making more than $100,000 are not middle income. But Romney disagrees with me, and with Feldstein.

So the study Romney is promoting — the one he says is the study you should be looking at — actually shows even under the most favorable assumptions possible, he’s going to have to raise taxes on the people he defines as the middle class. In saying that that study is credible, he has admitted he can’t make his tax promises add up. And yet he constantly, repeatedly says the opposite.

Romney has clearly calculated that there aren’t many people who read these analyses. If he just keeps saying his tax plan can cut taxes on the rich while cutting taxes on the middle class while not cutting taxes on the rich while not costing a dime, eventually, his version of this will come to be seen as the truth. And perhaps he’s right. But the numbers show what they show.