Romney "Out of Touch"?

David E. Phillips: This is how Romney made his fortune at Bain. Taking distressed companies under the pretense of investing in their eventual success and if–more likely when– that success doesn’t materialize, chopping those businesses into pieces and selling them off at a massive profit.

Everyone knows that Romney doesn’t have the “common touch.” What many don’t know is how he grew his wealth. He did it on the backs of the common man, the mill worker, the plant employee, the workers of Armco and Ampad.

This is who Mitt Romney is. He builds nothing, destroys everything, has gotten filthy rich in the process, and his next project is our country.

****************

Romney is not going to release his tax returns. He doesn't want people to know just how rich he got off the backs American workers, who lost their jobs.

Meanwhile, Mitt has 5 huge houses which may or may not have elevators - for his cadillacs.

Those tax returns ain't coming.

He just needs to tell his accountant to release his old tax files, as you say DCIA.

All it takes is a phone call...

Let's tell em' girls! We want all of it scrutinized. Yesterday.

Perfect tune Feisty!

He need's more time to see how they can be" better presented" .To show only the bare essential's so he can say he released them .Another way to keep the people from seeing what he was up to !

Those tax returns ain't coming.

Pat,

Sadly, I think you are right - the MSM will give him a free pass because in their eyes they need this to be a horse-race!

Ratings... dontcha know?

Meanwhile, Mitt has 5 huge houses which may or may not have elevators - for his cadillacs.

Poor Anne, she does have her struggles being a stay at home Mom! lol

Perfect tune Feisty!

Let's Dance!

Oh, and, I will take a community organizer over a vulture capitalist anyday and twice on Sunday! ;o)

"Discrepancies".....with Mitt Romney's Taxes?

http://www.citizensforethics.org/legal-filings/entry/crew-calls-investigation-discrepancies-mitt-romneystax-return-disclosures

Somebody needs to "Fix"....his taxes.

FeistyLet's Dance!

Mind if i join in i do love a good party :D

Mind if i join in i do love a good party :D

Please do! The more the merrier! ;op

Feisty

Please do! The more the merrier!\

YIPPY

ill bring some entertainment in the form of Republican debate reruns

Michael Sherer: We can do the comparison for 2010, and it is not a favorable one for Romney. By my calculation, the Obamas paid 40% of their money in both federal taxes and charitable giving in 2010, while the Romneys paid a combined rate of 28%.

The Obama family money comes almost entirely from the sales of Obama’s books, which only took off after Obama was elected to the Senate in 2004. In recent years, however, Obama has made some strides to make up for lost time. In 2009, for instance, he donated his entire $1.4 million Nobel Prize check to charity, in addition to 6% of his annual income that year. That works out to about 25% of the Obamas’ net income in 2009 that went to charity, well more than the 14% that Romney gave to charity in 2010.

UPDATE: On Friday, the White House released the 2011 tax returns for the Obamas and Bidens. The Obamas made $789,674 in 2011, gave away 22% to charity and paid an effective federal income tax rate of 20.5%.

Romney has not released his 2011 return, but he has released an estimation of that return. It shows that the Romneys made $20,901,075 in 2011, gave 19% away to charity and paid 16% in federal taxes.

If those numbers stand, and not counting the Romney independent charitable foundation, the Obamas would therefore win the who-is-more-charitable contest for 2011 by a couple percentage points of total income. The Obamas also paid a higher percentage of their income in federal taxes, since less of the income came from investments, which are taxed at a lower rate.

*************

Romney "made" $20 million in 2011. He didn't work in 2011. He was busy running around the country running for the presidency. And for that, he "made" 20 mil.

Anyone who contributes their hard earned money to his campaign is a fool.

Mitt and Ann Romney give a shout out today at an NRA stump speech to aaaaaaall working dads and moms. The NRA.

Clueless.

Feisty, you and I have the community organizer's back. The community organizer could have made millions after college. He was a highly respected Harvard graduate.

He chose a different path. He is the perfect example of living a life of quality as opposed to a life of quanity, which the Romneys chose. Just think! A car elevator in every garage!!!!

Obama supporters posting here evidently have a huge disrepect for folks that have worked hard and have been successful...

WTF - raiding corporations and firing people is your idea of successful?

Good luck with THAT! lol

By all means, continue to swill the GNOP Hate-Or-Aide...

Willard, earned his money the old fashioned white way - he inherited it!

I've never worked for a poor person

Neither have I, however being an accountant, I have worked for plenty of right wing TAX CHEATS!

And in order to keep my JOB, have had to compromise MY integrity!

Get back to us when you sober up... honey...

Feisty, you and I have the community organizer's back.

You know it Pat - my running shoes are ready to hit the pavement! There is far too much at stake!

juanita, quality v. quanity - Mitt concentrated on getting rich. Period. Yet he can't answer the simpliest of questions and refuses to face the media except FOX.

Jealousy of Romney's money is ridiculous. He has no core values/principles to run on. That's the problem we have.

Perhaps you don't care how he got rich. Many people who lost their jobs because of his practices do.

Let me guess he can't produce his tax return because he did them on his Etch O Sketch.

I think Mitt is short for unmitigated liar, nobody trusts or believes this guy not even many of the people who will vote for him in spite of knowing that he constantly changes his story.

Mittens: The funniest thing happened to me on the way down to show you all my returns. I left them on the roof of my car and seamus ate them!

That's so phony Rob nobody has a problem with people being rich, it is the offshore accounts, and the skirting of paying their fair share of taxes that people are fed up with. It's their claiming what great Americans they are but all the while cheating on America. It's them getting a better deal than any other Americans only for the fact that they are wealthy, Americans are supposed to be treated in an equal fashion, tell me a good reason why my income should be taxed at well over 30% and his income taxed (the part he does not hide offshore) be taxed at 15%. Do you earn an income Rob? You blog an awful lot, are you on welfare? Maybe your a multi-millionaire that never has anything better to do. If that's the case that would explain your defending a tax rate that is less than half of what I pay. I'm not a bit jealous, but I don't like being screwed and having people tell me it's good for me. You eat that crap up if you like it, I'm not into it, I know better.

If Romney is such a colosial businessman and would be such a fantastic steward of the economy, how come he can't even get his own taxes done on time. What a load of crap this Romney is.

Stop being such whiny envious jealous losers. Grow up already!

Rob - You sound like the whiny little loser. Probably not half as whiny as you will be in November when Mittens goes home the "Loser". LOL

The capital gains rate is at 15% for a reason.

Yup, the wealthy elites spent a lot of money buying legislators to give them an even bigger payoff in the form of lower taxes.

Meanwhile, I suppose it doesn't really matter if Mittens releases his taxes later, when more people will be paying attention and notice his ridiculously low tax rate. That'll fix everyone's impression of him as an out of touch rich man trying to buy the presidency.

Or maybe he'll come up with some other reason why he can't release them, making him look even more as if he's hiding something.

Willard's going to need a lot more feet...he's already shot himself in both of the ones with which he was born.

It's phony Rob I got over a million invested in the stock market it's all at risk and they won't be taxing me at 15% when I cash out. It's phony Rob we had higher rates for years, many years and much higher rates, and we had a stronger economy and always had investors. Smoke and mirrors Rob no basis in historical fact whatsoever, we became an economic powerhouse and we have always been the center of investment with the higher rates. Do you really believe people will stop making money just because they have to pay their fair share of taxes, they have before and they never will, your buying a pig in a poke. BTW I have my own business, I risked plenty of my own personal capital on patents and trademarks I never got a special tax rate because it was extremely risky. Wall street did not risk much they were made whole again on their losses with taxpayers money, please don't try to justify to me why we should be chumps for these guys, I don't buy it, it is not fair, and there is no basis in fact that they will not invest if they don't get a better deal than the rest of America. It's a good story to make some people feel better about getting screwed, and that is all that it is, a storyline. I'm not into story-time Rob, I'm not into getting played for a chump, and I don't expect to get a better deal than anybody else just because of the way I make some of my money.

John, tell me if Romney taking advantage of the tax codes, like everyone else, was due to anything he did? He had nothing to do with any of the tax loopholes currently being used by many tax payers. Why don't you join with me and others and yell at you members of congress and the President to revise the current tax codes by closing loop holes and subsidies and deductions and other nonsense currently in the code. Somewhere I read that the current tax code is about 40,000 pages.

I can not blame anyone for taking advantage of the tax codes, I have and so has everyone else to files taxes.

BTW, most people really don't care about his tax returns, since most won't understand them anyway. I looked at Obama's and his federal and state are 48 pages of schedules, statement and forms. I would venture to say Romney's will be much more, so why just accept his estimated tax which has been published and put more effort into reforming the tax codes.

Ah, but you see Romney is taking advantage of the current tax code while working to make the code even more unfairly beneficial to the wealthy elites; http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/obama-romney-tax-plans-for-ultra-rich-offer-window-on-disparate-economic-views/2012/04/13/gIQAf8BFFT_story.html

That's REAL class warfare, and Rob is right in that the American people are getting pretty sick of it. That's why 60% of Americans favor the Buffett Rule. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-gallup-poll-buffett-rule-20120413,0,7741415.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fnews%2Fpolitics+%28L.A.+Times+-+Politics%29

When I take that money out of my retirement portfolio it will be considered personal income not a capital gain, and I will pay the current tax rate at that time and my tax accountant tells me it won't be 15%, furthermore if I took that money right now I would pay a 10% penalty on top of the taxes, and yet my money is invested in companies right, capitalizing them, creating jobs, you enlighten me pal, what the hell is the difference between me and Romney except I don't have access to the tax breaks. You enlighten me Rob was is the difference between a guy earning a paycheck and a "capital gain" you tell me why people who save all their lives to have a retirement income have that treated as income and not a capital gain. You know if you make money, however you make it, it is a capital gain, or maybe I am just too simple minded to understand how some people work and invest and it is a capital gain, but when other people work and invest it is personal income and how this is fair. Income is income and should be taxed as income, it's phony Rob.

Great comment, Forrest. Heck, no less a Conservative than Ronald Reagan believed it was wrong to tax capital gains differently than regular income.

Forrest--- Rob is one of two things. Either he is a complete fool and he buys into all the justifications the billionaires use to get his vote or he's rich and he wants to protect his bottom line. I vote for the former.

By the way, I ponder the idea of someone, who no doubt ,must of been a huge Bush supporter having a scintilla of credibility on any subject.

Yes, debates about fundamental fairness in America are always "silly."

If you have no leg to stand on just belittle someone else's argument...it's what Conservatives do.

Oh I'm for real Rob, and fairness and equitable economic treatment of all US citizens is not class warfare, it is simply fairness and equity in a society where there is not supposed to be special treatment for anybody.

Rob---You see a bowl of fruit and think to yourself " I want it all."

I did not miss it, I answered it because it is my retirement portfolio and it does not qualify under the rules of capital gains, that what my tax accountant tells me, maybe you can explain why it does fall under the special consideration of capital gains.

Expecting fairness is not envy NJ, and if Romney's taxes are too complicated for him to complete on time, I'll be damn if he can run the country. You don't make the guy who can complete his homework assignments on time the head of the class. Maybe he should go to HR Block, or get a copy of Turbo Tax, his US taxes are not the problem are now they.

Besides my patents, trademarks, and consulting business I have been actively involved in unions all my working life. My union is the only reason I had the income and security to develop the other businesses, and the retirement portfolio. I don't see myself as waging a class war, just a guy that works with and for people that work damn hard to make sure their company and boss makes a good profit, and believe they should have a fair slice of the profit their labor makes possible. I will always stand up for myself, my union brothers and sisters and others in that regard. I'll be damned if you think I will agree that our government should continue to codify special treatment of some peoples income on the basis of the way they generate that income.

I'm with you Forrest! ; )

Expecting fairness is not envy

That's a powerful statement, Forrest, and testimony to the elitist self-absorbtion of the Right that Conservatives can't tell the difference.

The BIGGER problem is ALL these "so-called Tax Reform" people who have signed the "Norquist Pledge"?? There are 41 Senators & 238 Congressmen; (Plus Mitt & Newt) who are holding this Country hostage Gridlock 'til they get what THEY want?? For "TRUE TAX REFORM" just "AX THE TAX CODE"?? With the Codes' $1.1TRILLION in "breaks", AND allowing 45% to pay NOTHING; there is your "DEFICIT"?? "Tea Party People" follow your "namesakes"; grab your "axes" & "AX THE TAX CODE". Remove all the "Caps" & "Cuts". We need more Revenue coming in??

forrest,

Your plain spoken eloquence in all your posts shines compared to all the voodoo, trickle down garbage the public has been fed for years.

Keep on posting! You are my hero. Say hello to Mrs Grump for me.

Have a nice weekend,

K

Forrest, if you ever have a networth of 250 million i'm sure taxes zre a little more difficult than turbo tax can handle.

Pat Boston, look at Obama's previous years of income. There was no where near this years levels of donations. Also, no president would keep the cash from a nobel prize that would be political suicide.

The buffet rule is nothing more than a distraction tactic being used by the democratic party. If oh so many people that are millionaires are in favor of such a high tax rate and think they have too much money... they can give it to charity or donate it to the US government. Instead, most, with notable exceptions like Gates and Buffet, just want to make the government take the money from everyone in their "bracket".

I am POSITIVE that Mr. Romney is wealthy enough to have his taxes done on time. I means he is Harvard educated and KNOWN for a year that this was coming. Wait?! What!?

Hmmm Hm. I must retract and change my position on my previous statement. ; ]

Cheers

Watch Mittster blame it on Ann his finance advisor! I would like him to tell us the question he asked her for finance advice he all of a sudden needed to have to show he talks with women. Give us an example how ANN WILL LEAD THE COUNTRY if he is elected. How dare you wonder if his stay at home wife works! Do you know how hard it is to choose which color cadillac to drive to the salon? Do you know how hard it is to decide which home to stay in this week? Some mom mentions she feeds her kids macaroni because it is cheap. Romney SAYS OH YEAH i KNOW, i BOUGHT 5 OF THOSE mACARONI GRILL RESTAURANTS REAL CHEAP, THEN SOLD OFF EVERYTHING AND CLOSED THEM DOWN. MADE A BUNDLE!

Tiberius-you're right on. This Buffet Rule is just a political tactic by President Obama to distract from the serious issues like unemployment. There's no way Congress is going to pass such a law because they are obviously all in the 1%. If President Obama really wanted to push the envelope he could start by proposing a reduction in salary and entitlements for Congress. Since they are all elected, I would like to see their tax returns made public. I'm sure we'd all faint if we really knew what they're earning.

Forrest:

That's so phony Rob nobody has a problem with people being rich, ....

Yea .... and thieves and robbers don't have a problem with people being rich ..... the problem occurs when the rich don't want to give it all up.

it is the offshore accounts, and the skirting of paying their fair share of taxes that people are fed up with.

If Romney wanted to hide money in offshore accounts to avoid paying taxes ... why would he put the accounts on his tax returns, why would he announce it?

You don't find it odd that there are no cries from Obama for Romney to pay taxes on the declared offshore amounts?

You don't think that may be because Romney paid taxes on that money?

Most people use safe deposit boxes, or diversify, or any other number of things to protect their earned wealth. Offshore accounts serve the purpose too. Some idiot(s) can take Romney to court in hopes of hitting the lottery. If they win, they can attach or get US bank accounts, homes with elevators in the garage, whatever .... they can't get the offshore stuff ... that simple.

Nothing criminal or nefarious, just prudent ... deal with it.

I did not miss it, I answered it because it is my retirement portfolio and it does not qualify under the rules of capital gains, that what my tax accountant tells me, maybe you can explain why it does fall under the special consideration of capital gains.

Your accountant can't explain that to you?

Sheesh, who is your accountant .... Feisty?

I'm no accountant, but do you think it just may having something to do with the fact that the money put in your retirement portfolio is tax deferred?

You realize that means you have paid no taxes on the money that is creating your wealth.

You want the capital gains rate?

Don't put your money into a retirement account - pay the taxes on it - then buy something and if you don't lose your money on it when you sell it ... if you make a hundred bucks on your $500,000 dollar investment - write a check to the IRS for $15.

Would you invest $500,000 of your labor, what 5 or 6 years of hard work, knowing that at end of the 5-6 years you might not be paid even $1?

Of course you wouldn't, you are union that has to have everything guaranteed.

That is the difference between the union guys, most Americans and the entrepreneurs, equity guys, etc. ..... risk.

That is the reason there is a difference in the tax rate ..... risk.

And that is what Rob was talking about Forrest.

You whine about the tax rate for capital gains.

Guess what .... they apply to you too. There is nothing unfair.

If you are as intelligent, as well educated and as talented as Romney ... you will be fine.

You got the balls Forrest?

.... then go for it.

Oh boy. the buffet rule will increase our revenues so much that all of our spending will be covered because now everything will be "fair". <end sarcasm>

Of course obama is using it as a political ploy to misdirect the general populace into thinking he (obama) is for the average joe, just like FR liberal/progressive radicals use misdirection on FR every day. I find it interesting that the libs here rarely talk about general tax reform but just love denigrating the wealthy (of course only the wealthy of the right persuasion.

Think about this, obama during one of his early 1Q 2012 speeches talked about our tax codes being over 5 ft high and that they should be simplified/reduced. So what does he propose? More tax code based on income qualifiers vis a vie policies like his proposed "buffet" rule which in an election year is unlikely to even be discussed except by obama in exploiting the poor and middle class for votes.

To bad obama thinks ultimately only of himself rather than unifying America moving forward with tax and spending reforms.

You definitely know who the conservatives are here, facts be damned full speed ahead.

Romney has not released his 2011 return, but he has released an estimation of that return. It shows that the Romneys made $20,901,075 in 2011, gave 19% away to charity and paid 16% in federal taxes.

Just out of curiosity, does the amount Romney claims he gave to charity include the tithe he gave to the Mormon church? Or does he count that separately?

Being wealthy enough has nothing to do with being able to get your taxes on time.

Tax places work on a first in first out basis. IF it is a reputable firm, they will have several people look at the return to avoid mistakes. Quite often the first person gets the return, fills in what they can, then may call to get more info. People who have a full schedule like Romney may take time to get the information especially if the questions require tracking down investment brokers, partnerships, Trusts.

Nice try, DB, but a person of Romney's wealth would have to employ a full time staff of accountants and financial advisors. Romney is not standing in line at H&R Block to get his taxes done. Tax planning takes place year round for the wealthy. Investments are made with an eye to tax advantage, deductions and write-offs. Romney is not running around gathering information to do his tax return.

Romney is not like you and me. He's one of the filthy rich.

Romney can spin this any way he likes--and I'm sure he will-- but the fact is he probably gave more money to the Mormon church than he paid to the federal government in taxes.

ST. LOUIS — Under pressure by President Obama's re-election campaign to release them, Mitt Romney's campaign announced Friday that the former Massachusetts governor had filed for an extension in his 2011 taxes.

Making money while being white....You wont win this one Romney! Success is a sin! White devil, white devil!!!!

Why bring race into it, Kornfed?

Romney can spin this any way he likes--and I'm sure he will-- but the fact is he probably gave more money to the Mormon church than he paid to the federal government in taxes.

I wish the government used its money as prudently and for the benefit of the truly needy as the Morman church does. Or the other charities that received millions from Romney.

Oops, I had to catch myself...it's not the governments money it's my money that they waste.

Just for the record...

1) The top 1% pay 47% or all federal income taxes collected

2) The top 1% pay BILLIONS of dollars in charity each year. (which is where I prefer their money go instead of the govnmt black hole.

3). The 1% pay anywhere from 10,000 to 50,000 a plate at Barack Obama fundraising events.

The class warfare canard is simply that. A distraction from the real threat facing the country...out of control entitlement spending. The country is doomed as long as progressives waste time on this distraction. Where is the progressive plan on sound fiscal management? They don't have one because they don't want one. After their done soaking the rich, they will be coming right back to the middle class to soak them even more!

Pure and simple. STARVE THE BEAST. Not a penny more not from anyone.

kaybeetoys

Why bring race into it, Kornfed

Are you joking with me K?

Thank you Don't Carry it all, John, and Northstar, and thank you from Mrs. Grump Northstar she says hello to you.

@Bob you bet I like the security of my union, I like knowing I will be paid well and will have health insurance and some retirement funds, if I work hard for it. I was never into risking the well being of my wife and kids. I'll bet most Americans wish they had that kind of security I don't believe they are as into risk as you seem to think. I never put my family at risk, but I did risk a hefty chunk of change at least for a guy like me and a lot of years of work above and beyond my regular job, to develop my patents and subsequent business. This was 100% my cash, 100% my ideas, 100% my effort, and now 100% percent mine, and affords me some income even when I do not work at my union job. I don't have a Harvard education, but I have some brains, I have made some new and unique contributions to my industry, and I have huge gigantic balls. You can check with some of the hardworking, talented union men and women I have worked with and represented over the years, Ha or you can even check that out with the owners, I think they will vouch for my brains and my balls Bob.

... has to roll in it for a few more days before sending two or three of them in as his "tax pittance".

... and, seriously, would you pick the wife of a multimillionaire that has someone that shops, nannies, cooks, and drives for her to represent women's economic issues?

Don't get me wrong. I believe that work-at-home moms are the best, have the most to contribute to a stable society, and ultimately work as hard or harder than those that work for others on much less important projects... but please tell me how a hugely rich mother even comes close to that description. She stays at home because she can. She has help beyond what most can even imagine with her "chores".

Does she see groceries going up? Does she grouse about the cost of gas? The cost of daycare? Is she aware of women's job suppression and issues in the workplace OR at home? Women's wage suppression? No, but she knows "other things" you say? WHAT? Name it!!!

And Romney's lame attempt at cashing in on the uproar is to immediately misquote, misinterpret, and to draw incorrect ECONOMIC conclusions about what percentage of job losses were women? "93% of the job loss was by women" has to be the stupidest statement I've ever heard.. defies facts, logic, and reason. Just shows that he's always willing to lie when necessary to make a political point.

I hope Romney's wife IS good with numbers and the economy, because he sure the hell isn't.

Ummm... so just what is a "moonbat", anyway? Sounds like some kind of Michele Bauchmann derivation.

Look, we know the truth, there is no arguing with the Fox/Limbaugh/holier than thou/racist/need to feel superior crowd of Republican, conservative and tea party...why waste your time. Let them rant to each other, they are so closed minded that they will never change, they are afraid of change and that is what much of their whole argument is really about...hate and fear. They would vote for a guy like Romney, who simply can't be trusted, and is no where near capable of actually being President of the United States just to get the black man out of office. All their arguments are really just justifications, total BS. They are justifying their hate and fear... There is no substance to it...its a shame, they are an embarrassment to this country and make us look like a bunch of idiots to the outside world...vote the Tea Party and Republicans out...all of them, and lets actually get something done (because they will continue to obstruct everything. Obama 2012.

Snow... you have to send the money in with the extension. Your "why pay early" comment doesn't hold water. Maybe we should be snide like others and claim you never send in a return?

Hey Rob, lets get back to the tax thing. Don't try and change the subject now.

You seem to have a hard time grasping the difference between taxes on capital gains and taxes on income.

Forrest asked you a really good question that you dodged.

Why is Romneys income from investments taxed at a lower than than Forrests? I'm in the same boat as Forrest. If I cash out my 401K now, I would pay a 10% penalty on top of my 28% income tax.

Since you are so obviously more informed than anyone else on this blog, pleae enlighten us to the difference.

Kornfed, I've provided and saved my share of jobs and opportunities for others.. as if that has anything to do with the conversation.

Your "she provides jobs" comment is indicative of all the "trickle down" jobs created by giving the rich more tax breaks... thanks for the reminder.

Yes, she represents a segment of the women's workforce. 1%. I put her in the same grouping as Romney... I don't begrudge their wealth, and we actually NEED venture capitalists, but don't pretend they are "in touch" with most of America. They are not.

Not to worry, Willard will release his taxes on the Monday b4 the election. He'll be taking his queue from the SCOTUS in their down to the last second decision on the 2000 Pres. election. Keep dragging your feet & whine a lot Willard, the Teabaggers will be proud of you.

I'm asking you Rob.

And really, bob who says he isn't an accountant and then lectures Forrest on accounting. I didn't see one thing in bobs post that answered the question

So again. I'm asking you Rob.

other than trying to embarrass a politician what is the point of seeing their tax returns?

is the suggestion that they are cheating? are folks simply voyeuristic and want a glimpse into someone's private life? will seeing a tax return change your view of a candidate?

i think the country would be better served if the politicians on both sides stopped all of this nonsense about the buffett rule and the like and simply adopted a flat tax with no deductions or loopholes. what is wrong with that? eliminates all the favoritism introduced by Congress over the years based on external influences.

President Obama could have shown leadership in this area but chose to pander to the base instead. Very disappointing.

LMarcT

Kornfed, I've provided and saved my share of jobs and opportunities for others.. as if that has anything to do with the conversation.

Maybe we should chastise you then eh? Are you a white devil too?

Your "she provides jobs" comment is indicative of all the "trickle down" jobs created by giving the rich more tax breaks... thanks for the reminder

When you hired someone, didnt your money "trickle" down to another in exchange for a service you were in need of?

Yes, she represents a segment of the women's workforce. 1%. I put her in the same grouping as Romney... I don't begrudge their wealth, and we actually NEED venture capitalists, but don't pretend they are "in touch" with most of America. They are not.

Do you want him to give his money away to the black hole we call the Federal Government? How is that going to make your life, or any others any better? Or is it just about being "fair." Perhaps we should bump up the capital gains to 40% or so to placate you and your ilk? There might be some consequences to that of course, but hey, if it feels good eh?

You think O'bama is "in touch" with most of America? hahaha. Come on man, none of these guys are!

The liberal media is showing its BS slime throwing again. So what if Romney asked for an extention on his tax return? I almost did and I'm poor, I just had not gathered everything up in time and didn't know if I'd made the deadline. I did but some years I have not and had to use and extention. What the Heck is wrong with Romney being rich? This is America, when did we start hating rich people? Oh, I remember, with this administration. I am glad Romney has lots of money, he won't have to make his money by back room deals selling out America like so many politicians have.

John Kennedy was very rich from a very rich family, I don't remember Democrats holding that against him and neigher did I. I voted for him. This 1% hyped up by this administration is pure bull crap. Obama made $900,000.00 last year, that doesn't make him at poverty level that is for sure. So shut up about Romney's money. And while you are at it shut up about Romney's religion. Kennedy was the first Catholic President and there is plenty of dirt in recent years there but I don't hear Democrats saying they would not have another Catholic President. I am really sick of the hypocritical Democrat crap, Rom Immanual's wife is a stay at home wife, don't hear the Democrat strategists making nasty comments about her. I have come to the conclusion that this party has turned into a liberal bunch of lying, back stabbing ,hypocrits

james-1937467

You are absolutely right, scrapping the tax code and going to a flat tax would be really fair. That won't happen with Obama. It would mean his contributors could not get favor deductions and his base would have to pay taxes. Most for the first time in thier lives and many would no longer get a refund for taxes they never paid. That is why all you hear from him is "tax the rich". Translation: Give me more money to spread around to get more votes.

I think that Romney filing for an extension could only be considered as a calculated maneuver to keep his 2011 earnings out of the public eye for as long as possible. Obviously, he has a private firm doing his taxes and obviously they could have got them filled on time. Since it would have created less controversy about, what, if anything, he was trying to conceal, it would have been more beneficial ( as far as public opinion) for him to have filled on time and provided the figures. That being said, the only rational explanation can be that he doesn't want to reveal those figures, or the figures for prior years, if at all possible. He is fighting a losing battle to ditch the rich guy persona and revealing the extent of his yearly gains and the percentage of taxation could just fuel further controversy.

As far as this argument about Romney's wife. I agree, being a stay at home mother and raising five boys probably would be a lot of work for most mothers. However, when you are taking in over 20 million per year. You have maids, drivers, cooks, grounds keepers and probably a personal accountant who oversees all these employees. Therefore, compared to your average, American women, she is somewhat out of touch. I doubt that she even knows how much a loaf of bread cost. She is not qualified to give an expert opinion. Her opinion is irrelevant.

Which one of Obama's social security numbers was used for his recent tax disclosure? The one he received as a child, the one released after pressure from Trump, or the one from Conneticut that was borrowed? It's so hard to get them straight....

Rob...

Actual fact and valid argument do not work on this website, where anyone who has worked to make a buck is viewed as evil. If this site is any indication, America has become a place where tremendous success has become something to be reviled.

You see references made to a time 50. 60 years ago when tax rates were higher and the fact that the economy was experiencing growth at that used is used as justification that our nation would be better off with higher taxes that would produce national growth.

This argument is rubbish. Folks tend to forget that back in those supposedly good old days of high tax rates AND growth, the United States had almost zero competition across the planet. World War ll had left Japan and much of Europe as not much more than trash heaps...their manufacturing plants leveled as targets of production of wartime goods.

You see the tax policies...which reduced tax rates...of Ronald Reagan ridiculed, yet people forget that that was the time when Japanese automobiles began to replace American built autos on our roads, as foreign manufacturing began to roll again, bringing lower cost and well built products from foreign lands that were lapped up by American buyers due to their lower costs. American car manufacturers were no longer the only kings of the road. Soon global competition came from everywhere and the US...the only nation involved in WWll whose infrastructure stood unscathed...saw it's manufacturing dominance start it's decline.

In terms of Mr. Romney...well his incredible business acumen and success must certainly be reviled by the green-eyed crowd. Mr. Romney would have been more acceptable to the folks on this site if he had invested in failing companies that could no longer compete and let them run until the final breath of collapse, bankrupting him and the companies at the same time. On this website, Mr. Romney would be far more appreciated if he had lost every dime thru stupidity and ended up holding a goofy sign at some sloppy 'occupy' tent city encampment railing against the evil "1%". He'd be a beloved man to Newsviners.

It is amazing that incredible success in the business world has now become a negative. And since there has been absolutely no dirt dragged up on Mr. Romney...there are no other negatives to exploit. So what do the Newsviners turn to ??? "His wife doesn't work." "His sons aren't serving in the military". "He hasn't turned over his tax returns from the days he was mowing lawns as a teenager." "His house is too glitzy". "How many nannies, chauffers, butlers, and cooks did the Romneys have, anyway ???"

Quite frankly, I'm shocked that the Newsvine crowd hasn't yet demanded the see Mrs. Romney's medical records, so that Newsviners can determine if she was really as sick as she says she was, or are the Romney's exaggerating her illnesses to get the sympathy vote of others who have battled major illnesses !

And how dare Romney challenge Mr. Obama for the presidency !!! After all, Mr. Obama is the man who has done what he told us he would do on the day he was sworn into office...that's the day when, because of Mr. Obama's election, "the Earth began to heal and the seas began to rise" (Mr. Obama's words, not mine).

Despite all of Mr. Romney's talents and successes...how dare he even think of running against a president who has accomlished all of that !

FrankH - I believe you are asked Rob "why does Romney pay less on his investments than Forrest does? The easy, and only, answer is BECAUSE THE TAX CODE SAYS SO. You don't like it then I suggest you lobby congress to change the tax codes. I have been calling for everyone on here that keeps arguing about taxes to ask congress to revise the whole tax code. This little gimmick by Obama on the tax increase for millionaires is nothing but a political ploy by a desperate President playing the class warfare card. Even Obama admitted it's not about playing down the deficit but a matter of FAIRNESS.

To paraphrase truedoubter:

Her opinion is irrelevant because it dose not correspond with my opinion.

It is my understanding that Mrs. Romney was not stating an opinion; she was recounting statements made to her by the majority of women she has met on the campaign trail. So you are actually attempting to devalue the opinions of the many by discrediting an individual reporting a fact.

President Obama and his wife, Michele, gave a total of $48,000 in tax-free gifts to their daughters, according to tax records made public on Friday.

The president and his wife separately gave each daughter a $12,000 gift under a section of the federal tax code that exempts such donations from federal taxes.

There is nothing illegal about the president’s taking advantage of this tax shelter, but it does raise eyebrows given that he has lamented the myriad tax exemptions used by the wealthy—“millionaires and billionaires” like himself—to pay less in taxes. He has yet to propose a comprehensive plan to reform the byzantine tax code."

http://conservativebyte.com/2012/04/obama-kids-get-48000-tax-free/

By the way....we are still waiting for Obama to release his college transcripts, theses and finanial aid forms, documenting how it was such a poor kid paid for all that expensive tuition.....

I wanna' see Romney's birth certificate.

And I think that by now Romney's returns have been doctored more than Dick Cheney's reputed "heart".

Maybe they can strike a deal, truedoubter...Romney will show his financial records if O'bama releases his Harvard grades! Compromise is the essence of nobility!

And those are really the important points, true.

Vulture Capitalist Romney doesn't want us thinking about just how easy it is for the rich to get even richer in comparison to the middle class whose incomes have been stagnant to falling since the dawn of Reagan.

NEITHER Romney has a clue how the rest of us live, and they couldn't care less.

Still don't understand that "Magna Cum Laude" is top 25% of the class, do you, kornfed?

Let me see if I can help. If there are 4 people, and one of them does better than the other 3...

This little gimmick by Obama on the tax increase for millionaires is nothing but a political ploy

No sfcret, it's a TAX CODE REVISION, exactly what you just told us to request from our representatives.

I'm requesting it from my representatives. It's a revision that 60% of Americans favor.

See how that works?

Still don't understand that "Magna Cum Laude" is top 25% of the class, do you, kornfed?

Let me see if I can help. If there are 4 people, and one of them does better than the other 3...

Break it all down for me John! Educate me! I dont want to miss any details, lets us know everything!

Now that Obama's tax return has been made public, it shows that he paid a lower rate than his secretary. I wonder what the regressive left will have to say about that.

I suspect that Buffett will remain silent.

Birth certificates, tax returns, college transcripts! Geez people, if you don't already know enough about these guys to make you wanna vote Third Party, what the hell will it take!

FrankH-1860605

I'm in the same boat as Forrest. If I cash out my 401K now, I would pay a 10% penalty on top of my 28% income tax.

A 401K is set up with PRE-tax money for use when you retire. It also allows you to reduce your current tax bill since contributions to your 401K don't apply to your current income tax up to around $16,500 ($21,500 if you are over 50 and in a 401K catch up plan). You only pay the tax when you access it after retirement and your income is lower so you would pay a lower effective tax rate on it.

As for the 10% penalty, that applies if you take the money out before you are 59 1/2. If you are older, then no problem. There are also hardship situations that allow access without penalty.

Hope this explaination helps you and Forrest.

John B, It's a political ploy and anyone with common sense knows it. It will not do a thing for the deficit which even Obama admitted. If it was to pass, which it won't, it would only add to a complex tax code instead of actually revising the complete code. Like I said Obama says it's really only about "FAIRNESS", but he can't even define what fairness is.

An the contrary, it's a recognition that fixing our budget will require a combination of revenue increases and spending cuts...something that most people who exist outside the Conservative rabbit hole realize. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/10/new-cnn-poll-majority-want-tax-increase-for-wealthy-and-deep-spending-cuts/

And he has defined his vision of fairness...it's for the wealthy elites to pay at least the same proportion of their income in taxes as do the middle class, and preferably just a little more. The majority of Americans agree with that as well.

Kornfed - I raise you, Obama's school records for Romoney's tax forms, his educational records, everything erased from his term as Gov of Mass and before I forget his and his families birth certificates going back six generations. How I love compromise!

Frank our retirement money was personal income, and it was not taxed when it was put into an IRA account, it's tax deferred. However what you earned, should be taxed as capital gains, but it is not. If you put money in after taxes, what it earned should be capital gains but it is not because it is not accounted for separately its lumped in your IRA. If you take out when you retire, 25k or less you will be in the 15 percent or less tax bracket or less, but then who can live on that. If you put the money in a savings account, the interest is added to you personal income and is not considered capital gains, nor are dividends from stocks. So if you are wealthy enough to be able to make a living by trading stocks you basically get a special tax rate that effectively almost no one else will ever have access to. These people are not rewarded for risk, everybody that has money in the market has the same risk, they are simply being rewarded for being wealthy.

I'm so sick and tired of the mental midget right wingers on this site claiming no one else works. I'm pretty sure all of us work and frankly, some of us do quite well for ourselves. As to the morons who are still whining about President Obama's college transcripts - get a life. He graduated in the top of his class; headed Harvard Law Review (you HAVE to have the grades to do that but I am guessing most of you little right wingers don't have a clue about it) and passed his bar exams.

He has released his taxes which dear little Mitts can't get done - even with the gaggle of accountants he has. But, of course you don't see a problem with that because you can't do anything but hate the man in the White House. You really all need to grow up. President Obama won by a LARGE number of votes. He will win again in November so you'll be able to whine and pout for another four years. Why don't you get lives or actually work - since my guess is most of you on the right don't. And, if you really want to do something productive, volunteer to help those less fortunate.

WHOA! Sorry, I lost my mind there. I forgot it is beneath you to help anyone who is less fortunate - you just like calling them names and pointing them out. What a pathetic group the GOP has become.

Forrest and John B -- Excellent posts throughout this thread. Facts are powerful things indeed.

Have a great weekend.

I fail to see the obsession with these tax returns, Romney's or Obama's. These are both wealthy people and as such their returns aren't done with TurboTax or any other such do-it-yourself software. These returns are done by tax accounts and tax lawyers and I find it difficult to think those that are clamoring for them could understand the returns without the benefit of their own tax experts.

If the IRS is fine with their returns, what are they looking for? Something they can propagandize?

No doubt Romney's return is complicated with all his investments. We own a small amount of rental property, which makes doing taxes very difficult ( Thanks IRS!). We file an extension every year.

Perfectly legal. The final return must be filed by October 15.

If the return is done, he should release it sooner rather than later. It would not be wise to file and release on October 15, three weeks before the election.

Get it out there. The silly liberal hypocrites will scream regardless. Those of us with a slightly higher IQ will be impressed with his success ( sorry victims, America likes winners) and record of charitable giving.

Obama gives a lot to charity now, but before he was elected, he gave something like 1% to charity.

Clearly liberals are hoping for another distraction from Obama's record of failure. Debt, deficits, employment, GDP all are far worse than when Barry took over.

I would love to be in Mitt's position. Paying only 15% in capital gains. That means you don't work, live off of gains. And one more thing that is important to social justice, If you make all your money on capital gains and show no earned income you also don't pay SS and Medicare. Another 17% of income that working slobs like me have to pay.

Forrest Grump 2.0

In your example you show $25,000 from a 401K as income. You also have your SS which is probably around the same for a total of $50,000. Added to that you have your union pension and dividend/investment income from your $1,000,000 in the stock market (less your 401K). It looks to me as though you could be making around $100,000 plus in retirement. I think you realize that most people pulling in around $100,000 in retirement aren't paying a significant amout in taxes after their deductions for mortgage interest, real estate taxes (assuming they still have one), state taxes, charitable donations and personal exemptions, probably around 15%. With a good accountant and some investments in triple tax free bonds I would bet that number is even lower. I suspect you'll be living quite well for yourself.

In any event, it seems to me that everybody would like to be rich as evidenced by the number of people who entered the lottery a few weeks ago. If being rich and having enough money to live life as you want to wasn't important, that wouldn't have happened but of course it did which proves my point.

The fact that Romney and Obama and just about every politician in Washington has enough money already to live like that is testament to the fact that if you work hard (although some of those Washington pols might be an exception), you can get ahead.

It is always easy to give people other people's money like the Obama administration wants to. It is easy to say he doen't need the money he makes yet he looks for as many legal ways as he can to avoid the tax man just like everybody else does. I also noted tht he didn't donate his $24,000+ refund to the US Treasury but instead had it set to pay part of next years taxes. All very legal and above board just as the gifts to his kids and his charitable donations were. I don't begruge him anything including the fact that he will still live like a king when he leaves the White House with his pension, staff allowances, medical care etc. etc. etc.

The only thing I'm saying is we shouldn't begrudge anybody the money they worked for and we shouldn't envy them either and try to take it and give it to somebody that didn't even make the effort. Some people were born rich (the Kennedy's come to mind) and others earned their money (Obama and Romney come to mind). It still is THEIR money and not the government's.

john-737278 - I don't think Mitt cares about the SS. By not contributing to it he gets less out. My guess is though in his whole career he might have paid in more than was necessary to max out his payment if he chooses to take it which of course he doesn't have to.

Gary - what an idiotic assumption you've made. Many of us with high IQ's are Independents and Democrats. In fact, my guess would be the GOP has fewer with high IQ's. And, don't know where you get your misinformation but, the Obama's have always given a great deal to charities. The 1% is just a flat out lie!

Independents, Democrats and caring Americans don't have to detract from our very good President who is doing a good job of fixing the mess Bush left. But you low IQ Republicans will never admit that because you just don't have the spine.

And he has defined his vision of fairness...it's for the wealthy elites to pay at least the same proportion of their income in taxes as do the middle class, and preferably just a little more. The majority of Americans agree with that as well.

John, the rich do pay more! Surely a man of your superior intelligence realizes that we are talking about investment income. Liberals love to muddy that water I tell ya.

Why is "investment income" somehow different than other income? Other than the fact that the wealthy elites get most of their income as "investment income", of course. Doesn't seem like a good reason to treat it preferentially.

THAT is muddying the waters.

amused but not distracted

Kornfed - I raise you, Obama's school records for Romoney's tax forms, his educational records, everything erased from his term as Gov of Mass and before I forget his and his families birth certificates going back six generations. How I love compromise

Sold! I want to know it all! Herm, you seem to think I like Romney haha. He is a moderate, nothing more than a "anything but O'bama" vote for me.

"John, the rich do pay more!"

Then Etch-A-Sketch should be proud to show off his tax return! He shouldn't think it's necessary to hide it, should he?

John B, Des Moines, IA

I somewhat agree. Why shouldn't money you don't have to work for, actually be taxed at a higher rate than standard income that you do? It seems a little backwards.

SeekingSanity

From the NY Times so it must be true.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/26/us/politics/26taxes.html

In 2004, before Mr. Obama entered the Senate, he and his wife gave $2,500 to charity, 1.2 percent of the taxable income. The next year, the donations jumped, to $77,315, or nearly 5 percent of the taxable income.

“Their charitable giving only went up when it looked like he was campaigning for the presidential office,” said Paul L. Caron, a professor at the University of Cincinnati College of Law and editor of the TaxProf Blog, which examines tax questions and has posted the returns.

Ms. Obama’s income from the University of Chicago Hospitals, where she was a top administrator until going on leave, more than doubled when Mr. Obama was elected to the Senate in 2004. The couple’s 2004 return showed Mrs. Obama earning $115,889 from the university. Her income rose to $317,000 the next year and was $274,000 in 2006.

That year, Mrs. Obama also earned $51,200 as a director of TreeHouse Foods, a Wal-Mart supplier whose board she left after Mr. Obama had made critical comments about Wal-Mart.

The 2006 return also show a charitable deduction for a $13,000 donation to the Congressional Black Caucus. It is illegal to deduct political contributions as charitable contributions. The campaign said Mr. Obama had filed an amended return to eliminate that item as a deduction.

John B, Des Moines, IA

Why is "investment income" somehow different than other income?

You do not see a distinction? What do you think would happen to investment if you raised capital gains? Why, you get less of it sir. I have no doubt that the liberal class warfare is working...it is. You will get a lesson on unintended consequences first hand in the near future. Pay attention, perhaps you will learn something.

Understand that in order to invest, you had to have earned that money previously...which has been taxed. Those gains you receive later are a reward for your risk. It is taxed at 15% as well, hardly a free ride. If investment looks like too good of a deal for you, why dont you invest? You are free to do so John.

Ronald Reagan believed it was wrong to treat investment income differently than regular income. Was he wrong?

Did investment stop during times when investment income was treated the same as regular income? (hint: no)

The last part of your comment is a great embodiment of the "let them eat cake" mentality for which Conservatives are rightly famous. Do I have the option of telling my employer to pay me in stock options, as does the CEO class? Do people who aren't getting along much better than paycheck to paycheck have a lot of money to invest?

The GOP has worked very hard to create an aristocratic society in which the only thing you need to get richer is lots of money to start with. The American middle class can just lump it in that society. They're just lucky some rich guy deigns to employ them.

John B, Des Moines, IA

Ronald Reagan believed it was wrong to treat investment income differently than regular income. Was he wrong?

Yes, and he was wrong when he granted amnesty to illegals at the time. The man was a great conservative, but not perfect.

REB - so you're harping on one year - 2004? Wow! That certainly sets a precedent! Not! When they began to make more they gave more. The "assumption" of why they began to give more was Paul Caron's and nothing more - just an assumption. A lot of people increase their charitable giving when they can afford to. You DO understand that, correct????

The last part of your comment is a great embodiment of the "let them eat cake" mentality for which Conservatives are rightly famous. Do I have the option of telling my employer to pay me in stock options, as does the CEO class? Do people who aren't getting along much better than paycheck to paycheck have a lot of money to invest?

How about a flat tax? That would make it fair! People who arnt getting along much better than paycheck to paycheck should put their heads down and work like mad for a few years, save their money, and then invest!!! If investing is such a free ride, then strap in and take it! You are free to do so in this country!

Yeah Reb I should be fine, my example was that you would have to limit your income from your retirement accounts to 25K to be in the 15% tax bracket. It has nothing to do with envy or taking rich peoples money away from them, they take my money away and I am not rich, it's about fairness and equitable treatment. If I take in 100K a year when I retire I will pay more than 15% in taxes, I will not get the capital gains rate. You take that million in my account I would say that well under $300,000 was actually contributed by me and the rest is the "interest" accumulated over the years, how come the $700,000 I gained in the market is not considered capital gains and simply taxed at 15 %. How come I am not rewarded with a special low tax rate "for taking the risk of capital investment", how is it that when some people risk or make money in the market it is capital gains but the money I risked (like millions of others) and made in the market is not. It has nothing to with begrudging anybodies wealth, I don't begrudge their wealth, and I hope nobody begrudges what I have earned hour by hour, day in day out for a lot of years. It is simply about a special lower tax rate for some people who have taken the same risk by investing their money as I have with mine, it is about fairness Reb, it's that simple. I am not asking for anything other than I be treated as they are or they be treated as I am. If you make $700,000 in the market in a month, or if you make $700,000 thousand over decades it should be taxed in the same fashion. Why should some people in America get a way better deal built into the tax code than others when it comes to taxing the exact same type of investment income? What is different about the dollars they invest and the dollars I invest?

"The man was a great conservative..."

The standards have shifted until Reagan would not be able to run as a conservative...or even as a Republican...these days. The right wing would be calling him a socialist and a Marxist just as they hurl those epithets at our current president.

Six month extension? He's running for President,for crying out loud. That will put him one month before elections. Nothing but transparency from Mitt.

The common theme throughout this incredible string of BS is the liberal hatred of success, envy and paranoia. In their silly world, people only succeed by cheating others.

I use products brought to market by billionaires like Michael Dell, Bill Gates, and Steve Jobs. Not sure about Dell, but am pretty sure Gates is a dem and Jobs was as well. I am glad these guys got rich. I don't envy them. They worked hard had good ideas made a bundle and paid a bundle in taxes.

They didn't cheat anyone, although some of the products are higher priced and lower quality than I would like.

Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Cyrus McCormick, etc. These guys built this country and also funded foundations, hospitals, universities.

And the liberals despise anyone who has made money. Especially if the guy is a Republican.

I am glad Romney is a success. He should be proud of the money he made legally and the 10s of millions of taxes he paid and his vast sums given to charity.

In the meantime, we have a guy with no accomplishments and no record to run on in the White House.

Can't wait until November 8!

You live in a dimly lit fantasy world, don't you, Gary?

Damn.

The standards have shifted until Reagan would not be able to run as a conservative...or even as a Republican...these days. The right wing would be calling him a socialist and a Marxist just as they hurl those epithets at our current president.

How do you come up with this assessment? Besides his ill advised war excursions, Bush was quite moderate. Romney, the likely nominee, a moderate. Please explain.

Say Kornfed I have money invested I took the same risk as any investor how come my investment income is not treated and taxed as a capital gain?

Is there something different about the dollars I invest or is there just something different about me?

Forrest Grump 2.0

Say Kornfed I have money invested I took the same risk as any investor how come my investment income is not treated and taxed as a capital gain?

Maybe you should have done some research into what kind of investment to make? Explain what kind of investment you made, and why it is not a capital gain....

Forrest Grump 2.0

I suspect that while you were making that $700,000 in interest/dividend income, your accountant was taking long term capital gains and then you would have been charged at the lower rate. You were also able to write some of that income off with loses as well.

You and I are in the same boat but I know that at the end of the day when you (and I) start to withdraw money from your accounts, I suspect that you (and I) will be withdrawing those interest/dividends instead of reinvesting like you (and I) do now. In that case you (and I) will still be charged at the lower rate. It's when you start taking the principle that you pay the higher rate. That is just like any other investor from Romney to Obama to Buffett and Kennedy.

If your accountant doesn't know this then you need a new one.

SeekingSanity

You said "The 1% is just a flat out lie!".

I just showed you that you were wrong. I expect that all the years before 2004 were equally about the same 1%.

I think you are just upset because Gary insulted you. I didn't have anything to do with that so don't get mad at me becaused I proved you wrong.

Bush is only considered moderate in comparison to today's current crop of so-called conservatives. Compared to old school Republicans like Everett Dirksen and even Barry Goldwater, Bush, Boehner, Ryan, Santorum, Perry, Bachmann, and others of their hate-filled ilk are off the charts into the lunatic fringe. Reagan would not stand a chance in today's Republican Party.

I am genuinely hoping the GOP suffers a humiliating defeat in November because maybe a debacle of huge proportions will force the Republican Party to reform itself into a party that values more moderate and less extreme principles and perhaps then they can attract men and women of integrity and moral courage to represent it instead of the losers, cranks, clowns, and crooks we have been watching compete to become their #1 loser in November. Until that happens, the GOP is a force for ultra-conservative extremism and it will marginalize itself until it ceases to be a political power.

Kornfed

You don't get taxed twice on the same money. You get taxed on the gain. Basis is always taking into consideration when figuring gain. So, the gain should actually be taxed as income at the same rate as earned income because you didn't have to work to get it. It should also be subject to SS and Medicare.

I am genuinely hoping the GOP suffers a humiliating defeat in November because maybe a debacle of huge proportions will force the Republican Party to reform itself into a party that values more moderate and less extreme principles and perhaps then they can attract men and women of integrity and moral courage to represent it instead of the losers, cranks, clowns, and crooks we have been watching compete to become their #1 loser in November. Until that happens, the GOP is a force for ultra-conservative extremism and it will marginalize itself until it ceases to be a political power.

Well, Republicans may suffer a defeat, but it wont be because of its "severe" conservatism haha. The defeat will only be possible because a large portion of conservatives do not feel they are being represented by the Republican establishment...due to its moderation, not radicalism haha. This is how McCain lost, and how Romney may suffer a defeat as well. You have been brainwashed I am afraid Sailcat.

It is not considered a capital gain simply because it is a retirement fund, it is invested in stocks, my dollars provide the exact same benefit of capitalizing businesses and the exact same risk to me as any other investors dollars. The only difference is that if I make a buck on my investment I don't get a special low tax rate, when I take that money out I will pay the going rate of personal income tax based on how much a year I take. It won't be 15% that's for damn sure.

Kornfed

You don't get taxed twice on the same money. You get taxed on the gain. Basis is always taking into consideration when figuring gain. So, the gain should actually be taxed as income at the same rate as earned income because you didn't have to work to get it. It should also be subject to SS and Medicare.

I realize you only get taxed on the gain. You also have risk of loss. You did have to work to get it...the original investment money that you were compensated for is the work. You didnt use that money to go have fun with, thus, the compensated work is put at risk to make more without the gratification of cashing in for the "work" you had originally put in. Again I ask you, why not a flat tax if you are so concerned about fairness?

john-737278...(#1.106))...First you say "I would love to be in Mitt's position."

Then you say why.."Paying only 15% in capital gains. That means you don't work, live off of gains.

You just described the 3rd.Stage of Income.....They are:

1.) You get a job and work for your money

2.) Start making some investments and some of your money goes to work for you.

3.) Make enough investments ( over time ) and your money works instead of you.

So far so good....and then you go and spoil it by saying this:

"And one more thing that is important to social justice"

"Social Justice" ???....Please define that and while you're at it define "Economic Justice".....

Sounds like Legislated or Court Ordered " Equal Results, regardless of effort" to me. And then tell me where it says you're entitled to anything more than Equal Opportunity.....

They used to teach kids in school how to succeed, now they teach them how to apply for Government Benefits....

Forrest Grump 2.0

I suggest you see what effective rate you are paying now. I know you know how to figure it out but if you haven't done so in the past and it a form 1040 take the total tax on line 61 and divide that by the adjusted gross income (AGI) you show on line 37. That is your effective tax rate and I bet it isn't much more than 15% unless you make over $250,000 and have few deductions.

You may be quite surprised at what you see - at least I hope so.

As I said before, when you start taking the principle then you get charged at a higher rate. If you live off the dividends then you pay the lower rate just like all of the rest of the millionaires.

John 1.106

I would remind you that for someone to live off of capital gains, that money had to first be earned and taxed as income.

I wish the government used its money as prudently and for the benefit of the truly needy as the Morman church does.

One of the best disillusioned comments I have read here .. like the money used for the truly needy used for political purposes to defeat Prop 8 in California?

Well thanks for the advice Reb. It will be awhile yet before I retire.

Yes, excellent posts Reb.

If investing is such a free ride, then strap in and take it!

Who said I don't own stocks? I do own stocks...doesn't change the fact that treating capital gains as some sort of magic talisman that requires different treatment from regular income is unfairness, and the root mechanism behind undertaxing the 1%.

We're voting for the guy who has the fewest birth certificates, doesn't employ Eric Holder, doesn't need 37 plus Czars that are exempt from Congressional approval, has no friends that hate the USA (bill ayers, bernadette dohrn, et al), has not added $5 trillion+ in additional debt (in 2 years) to the country, hasn't increased the size of the government over 14%, has business experience and is capable of creating jobs, and a guy who won't apologize for the USA every time he makes a speech outside of the USA! Romney 2012!

"Mitt Romney's campaign announced Friday that the former Massachusetts governor had filed for an extension in his 2011 taxes."

Completely understandable!

After all, the bank statments from Switzerland must first be translated into English, and mail from the Cayman Islands can be notoriously slow in reaching the U.S.

I am voting straight democratic right down the line I will never vote for a republican again, for anything.

Say Kornfed I have money invested I took the same risk as any investor how come my investment income is not treated and taxed as a capital gain?

One more time.

The operative word in capital gains tax is ... is capital (money). A capital gain is the difference between what you paid for an investment and what you SOLD that investment.

A capital investment is the purchase of a capital asset, such as a stock, bond, mutual fund, equity, real estate, precious metals, art, coins ....

Wages, interest, dividends are ordinary income.

Your pension/retirement is tax deferred. You have paid no income tax on the money you have invested. If you were a conservative, a clueless lib could argue that you have used a loop hole in the tax code to avoid paying your fair share of taxes because .... again ... you have paid -0- taxes on the money you invested.

If you wany to pay capital gains taxes - pay income tax on your earnings, then invest your capital in a capital asset, sell the capital asset and pay 15% on your gain.

Your patents and consultation is ordinary income. You want to pay capital gains taxes on your little business .... account for all the capital you have invested in your business, then SELL your business and realize your capital gain.

Realize that Romney was a consultant, he paid ordinary income tax (Bain & Company). He then started a private equity firm (Bain "Capital"). He bought companies that were in deep trouble / dying. He risked losing his investment in the belief that he could save the company. He lost a great deal but ultimately saved more than he lost, and then sold those companies for a profit which he paid capital gain tax.

Forrest, you are a consultant, you have your patents and expertise, you have the vast resources and support of your union buddies .... find one of the companies you consult, that is trouble and buy the company. Apply you talent, knowledge, skill and turn the company around. Then SELL the company and you and all your union buddies can pay 15% while saving people's jobs!

You want to pay what Romney pays .... do what Romney does. Free country (for the time being at least).

What is really amazing is that the libs excoriate Romney and capital gains .... yet no lib on this thread seems to even have a clue, or capacity to even understand what a capital actually is.

Really sad.

There's a famous quote from the Movie "Forrest Gump"

And Bob even after that well explained post they still won't get it. They just want to paint Romney as doing things that others aren't allowed to do or are precluded from trying to do. Like there's special rules that only apply to Romney or people like him.

Regarding all the peeing in the pants over Romney filing an extension ...

You don't have to file the final return on April 15th .... you have to pay the taxes.

Romney overpaid his 2010 taxes by $1.6 million when he filed for an extension.

He will do doubt overestimate his liability this year, pay more than he owes ... to avoid penalty and interest.

The refund will be applied to next year's liability.

If anyone benefits from the extension, it is the federal government that has use of the $1.6 million for 6 months.

Rob,

You got it.

Thanks for your fight, nonetheless.

"Well, Republicans may suffer a defeat, but it wont be because of its "severe" conservatism haha."

You are conveniently forgetting the GOP could not get registered Republicans to approve its more right wing extremist candidates during the primary process. The country is obviously does not share the ultra-conservative principles you appear to embrace, Kornfed. Haha.

You guys miss the big picture. Mitt is 'of the rich'. They don't have to follow the rules that apply to us. File taxes on time - hah. That is only for the peons. Mitt will file when he feels like it.

Do you think that he fired his accountant for not having the taxes done on time (remember that he bragged about enjoying the firing of peons)? Or gave him a bonus for delaying this information...

You are conveniently forgetting the GOP could not get registered Republicans to approve its more right wing extremist candidates during the primary process. The country is obviously does not share the ultra-conservative principles you appear to embrace, Kornfed. Haha.

Which takes us back to your original argument...

The standards have shifted until Reagan would not be able to run as a conservative...or even as a Republican...these days. The right wing would be calling him a socialist and a Marxist just as they hurl those epithets at our current president.

that today's Republicans make Reagan look like a socialist...which you now admit is not true? Romney got the nomination it appears. Wouldnt that make todays Republicans moderate?

It brings us back to the fact that right wing extremism is not a principle that attracts Americans. Reagan did not embrace your extremist politics when he was President. Furthermore, the right wing lunatics the GOP was trying to foist upon registered Republicans were the butt of jokes and derision in this year's primary race and they were utterly rejected by the voters. Finally, President Obama will be reelected precisely because the American people are going to reject the GOP's failed political ideology. With luck, after a crushing defeat at the polls in November, the Republican Party will abandon the neo-fascist turn it made a few years ago and return to its roots. Perhaps it will even come back to a political position that would have appealed to Reagan, Dirksen, Eisenhower, and other old-school Republicans. We can only hope.

Sailcat-2064101

It brings us back to the fact that right wing extremism is not a principle that attracts Americans. Reagan did not embrace your extremist politics when he was President

Maybe we should define these "extremist" positions you refer to so that we could discuss them, and why Reagan would reject them.

Mike in Delray

I will try to explain my thoughts.

I fully believe you should be able to keep what you earn. That is the American way (50 years ago)

Social and economic justice both would dictate that you should not get a break on taxes just because you did well. That is the current 15% rate compared to 28% or 35%. Why should you be able to pay less taxes than anyone else. People complain about the rich getting richer, this is part of the reason, the system is aligned in their favor.

A bunch of the rich never get jobs. They inherit it, live their life and never pay more than 15%. They are as bad as some on welfare abusing the system. They will do the same, give the money to their kids who will do the same thing.

The people who get screwed are the people in the middle, and especially the upper middle who pay 35%. Not rich enough to stop working and get into the 15% tax bracket, but make enough to get royally screwed.

I am not writing about social justice for the poor, screw them, they should at least clean up our cities for their free meals. It is social and economic justice for the middle class.

Maybe a flat tax would be a good idea. If your a citizen, you reap the benefits, you should pay your share.

One big thing that distinguishes Reagan from the current crop of so-called conservatives is that he communicated with Democrats and he was willing to compromise when the need arose. In other words, President Reagan was prepared to find common ground when it came to achieving his goals while the obstructionist GOP is prepared to disrupt the business of government when it suits their purposes, even when it has negative consequences for the people of the country. I recently heard a radio interview with Boehner in which he refused to even use the word compromise when he was describing his working relationship with the White House. I think Reagan and especially Eisenhower would be appalled by the lack of cooperation the GOP displays these days.

One big thing that distinguishes Reagan from the current crop of so-called conservatives is that he communicated with Democrats and he was willing to compromise when the need arose.

Not sure in what instance you are talking about here. You must have loved O'bama's comment early on in his Presidency that Republicans can 'ride on the bus, but they will have to sit in the back'

I have heard President Obama also call to GOP lawmakers in joining him to come up with solutions to the problems that afflict this country and he has said he received not a single response from them. The obstructionist GOP has one aim, and that is to reclaim power, even if they harm the people in the country in the process. The people in this country recognize them as being selfish and and destructive and they will express their dissatisfaction with the GOP at the polls in November.

Another example is the unconscionable delays the GOP are causing in the approval of judges...sometimes for months at a time...even in cases where the judges are satisfactory to them. It is causing harm to judicial districts and it is serving no practical purpose except to give the GOP potential bargaining chips. This is inexcusable behavior for public servants.

Sailcat-2064101

I am not Republican, but I do see their point to a degree. Why should they offer up tax increases for the wealthy when the wealthy sees what the government does with the money. We spent nearly a trillion dollars last year on welfare, and healthcare for welfare. Fraud prevention is pretty much non-existent. If they want to raise taxes, prove that they can spend "our" money wisely, and people would be much more likely to not have a problem with higher taxes. I say, until responsible spending comes back, not another dime. Personally, I think we should repeal the Sixteenth Amendment and make the federal government beg for money, and change their attitude about who's money it is.

Bottom-line is that Romney will pay about a 15% tax rate on his income and that is a lower rate than somebody making $50,000 a year, and the majority of Americans do not see that as fair.

Here's an interesting item for everyone to consider with taxes. If I or anyone else files for an extention of his or her taxes..it is for 4 months..not 6. by my figures that would make Romney's taxes due by august or sept. not Oct as stated in theis article.

ivan, NC...(#1.159)...From the IRS Website...

"If you are not able to file your federal individual income tax return by the due
date, you may be able to get an automatic 6-month extension of time to file. To
do so, you must file Form 4868, Application for Automatic Extension of Time To File
U.S. Individual Income Tax Return by the due date for filing your calendar
year return (usually April 15) or fiscal year return."

http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=98155,00.html

I guess everyone can stop considering now.....

john-737278

Why should they offer up tax increases for the wealthy when the wealthy sees what the government does with the money.

That's a straw man argument at best.

We've tried supply-side "trickle-down" voodoo economics, and it doesn't work. Why would Americans want to elect Teapublicans like Romney who want not only to continue the Bush tax cuts for the rich, but add even more tax cuts for the rich? We've seen that movie -- Making the rich richer only makes the rich richer.

Without fairness in our system, morale goes down along with incentive, productivity and everything else. When the middle class does well, everyone does well including businesses and the rich -- the demand part of supply and demand comes from disposable income of the many not the few. A lot of rich people realize this and that's why they support the Buffet (Reagan) Rule.

And to have fairness we must have a progressive income tax rate. Flat, as in no tax credits--fine, but not a flat tax percentage for everyone because the working class must pay a larger percent of their income on basic needs. Also a mix of taxes are good, with basic needs at a lower percent (e.g., luxuary tax only on luxury items), but once again not a consumption tax only.

Most people with complicated tax returns apply for an extension. If you have brokerage accounts. like Romney, it's crazy to file early. It's almost traditional for brokerage houses to disregard the interests of their investors. It's gone on for years. In my 2011 case with Fidelity they sent me an undated Tax Reporting Statement received around Jan 31, 2012. I filed my tax return based on that. On February 27, 2012 I received a back dated Tax Reporting Statement purported issued Jan. 28, 2011. What a bunch of crap. Who will pay for the required preparation of an amended return? Not Fidelity, I guaranty you that!! I could tell you another 15 reasons why not to get involved with Fidelity but that's not the subject here.

Forrest Grump 2.0...(#1.158)....", and the majority of Americans do not see that as fair."

And some people can hit a baseball far enough often enough to make $$ MILLIONS $$ playing a silly game of Baseball.....Is that UNFAIR to me because I can't.....or do they just have a different ability and skill set ?? Someone that knows how to make more money than others...isn't because it's unfair....unless you believe life in general is unfair.... Remember this ???

"Momma always said....Life is like a box of Choc-o-lates...you never know what you're gonna get"

TruePatriot-445959...(#1.161)..."We've tried supply-side "trickle-down" voodoo economics, and it doesn't work."

Now we have tried 3 1/2 years of "trickle-up" poverty and that ain't working.....I think I would still rather ask a rich guy for a job than a guy who is even poorer than me.

So many people are stuck on that "FAIR" word and it's sucking their pride right out of their souls.....me, me, me.....Where's mine ???

TruePatriot-445959

The only "fair" that is acceptable to uber liberals is that they pay nothing for the benefits of living in America. You can go on all day and night about what is "fair" and it will never be "fair"enough. We will never fix the problems we face without one group or another getting hurt. It is just basic math. And putting off the inevitability just makes the problems worse and will only cause more and more pain throughout our society.

To fix our problems, the rich are going to have to pay more, the bottom feeders are going to have to be forced off welfare to become taxpayers, corporations are going to have to pony up for the benefits of doing business in the US, and the middle classes are going to have to do what they have always done, suck it up, go to work, and pay their taxes. These are the harsh realities we face, like it or not. Trying to play the blame game and protect one group or another will not continue to work as our debt heads to 23 trillion in another four years. In another four years, if that is the case, the US will not be a fit place to live any longer. It will look like scenes from Soylent Green.

Gary 420

The common theme throughout this incredible string of BS is the liberal hatred of success, envy and paranoia. In their silly world, people only succeed by cheating others.

The politics of envy, manufactured class warfare, blah, blah, blah. Perhaps you've heard of the American Dream, where if a person does the right things and works hard s/he can get ahead, move up from poverty into the middle class, from the middle class to the upper class? The American Dream is only possible when there is a level playing field, equal opportunity, and no one gets special breaks.

I use products brought to market by billionaires like Michael Dell, Bill Gates, and Steve Jobs. Not sure about Dell, but am pretty sure Gates is a dem and Jobs was as well. I am glad these guys got rich. I don't envy them. They worked hard had good ideas made a bundle and paid a bundle in taxes.

These are great examples of people who started out as average Americans, and who you'll note were innovative and actually made something that now provides good paying jobs for others. Romney with his inheritance and family connections, Bain "vulture capitalism," not so much.

Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Cyrus McCormick, etc. These guys built this country and also funded foundations, hospitals, universities.

Exactly. These guys "paid it forward" for the infrastructure, security, and quality workforce this nation provides. And thankfully President Obama preserved what Henry Ford built, and has tried to expand upon innovations like those of Thomas Edison. Romney, not so much.

And the liberals despise anyone who has made money. Especially if the guy is a Republican.

Really! I guess this is why Buffet's name was chosen for the tax rule (sarcasm)

In the meantime, we have a guy with no accomplishments and no record to run on in the White House.

Riiight. The "guy in the White House" never overcame all odds of being a mixed-race child of a poor single mother with a strange name, yet went on to graduate from Harvard Magna Cum Laude, to practice and teach law, to become a Senator in the US congress -- no accomplishments at all.

Can't wait until November 8!

Forrest Grump 2.0

Did you caculate your own Effective Tax Rate (ETR) like I showed you? Is it much more than 15%?

If not don't worry. If yes find another investment firm. They aren't doing you justice.

Fair is in your mind. My wife and my ETR was 24.5% this year thanks in part to the AMT. That was greater than both the President and Mitt Romney. Am I pissed - a little, but don't come and ask me for more. I feel I am paying a fair portion plus I pay my state and city (NYC) income tax. All in I am over 40+%. That my friend is enough.

Your thoughts?

Your analogies make no sense Mike in Delray, people who make millions playing baseball still don't pay their taxes at the capital gains rate, the argument is not about special talents, it is about fairness with regard to the taxes you pay regardless of how you generate your income and no matter how much you generate. Plus rich people don't provide you with a job out of the kindness of their heart, lots of people with average incomes in need of goods and services is what provides you with a job, the rich man only hires you to facilitate the delivery of those goods and services to turn more profit for him. You are only offered a job directly by and for a rich person if you are a butler or lawn and garden man. Lastly I have a lot more pride than to consider myself subservient to, my efforts less worthy, and generally less than equal to somebody just because they have a lot of money. I have never asked for anything but equal treatment and I do not have a dime I did not earn for myself in the process of earning for others. Life may be unfair but their is no reason unfairness should be codified in the tax laws of America. Since you are into movie quotes her is one for you "stupid is as stupid does".

TruePatriot-445959...(#1.161)..." A lot of rich people realize this and that's why they support the Buffet (Reagan) Rule."

If it's such a great idea, why do they need a change in the tax laws to force them to do it ???

Why is Buffet fighting the IRS for 10 year over a Billion dollars in back taxes.

" must have a progressive income tax rate. Flat, as in no tax credits--fine, but not a flat tax"

No EIC (Earned Income Credit)

No Credit for dependent child care

No Credit for State Income taxes paid

No IRA Contribution Credit

No Credits for the Elderly or Disabled

No Education Credits, Hope Credit, Lifetime Learning Credit

The list goes on...You realize that the 47% of tax filers that pay no Federal Income Taxes now, will have to pay if the credits are eliminated..........And you'll be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail...if you're lucky

A Consumption Tax...." luxury tax only on luxury items".....of course....Will a $40,000 Chevy Volt that most Americans can't afford to buy be subject to the Luxury Tax ??...or will Government Motors cars be exempt ??

This is your solution to the Tax Code ???

My tax rate is at least 10% higher than the 15% they pay, I am not asking you for more I simply feel they should pay what you pay on your income and not get a special low rate solely based on the manner in which they generate their income. Income is income, and once that bottom-line of income is determined then the amounts should be taxed the same regardless of the manner in which it was generated.

Perhaps an easy solution would be that if you make over 75% of your income from investing and making capital gains, you should be re-classified as self-employed in governance of assets, and then the tax rate goes to whatever you make plus pay SS and Medicare, especially since our harshest obligations come in SS and Medicare.

Say Rob the last time the government had a surplus was when Clinton was president, he handed Bush a huge surplus and Bush gave it away, he did not pay down the debt or fund SS or invest in infrastructure he used the surplus for his tax rebate checks and as justification for his tax cuts, so save the the spin about republicans being more responsible it simply is not true. Bush turned a huge surplus into a huge deficit that's a fact.

Forrest Grump 2.0

That is simply not true. Clinton had a budget surplus, but we did not reduce our national debt, which was still in the trillions. Clinton did that with a Republican controlled Congress. Congress makes the laws and pays the bills. The President only enforces the law.

So during Clinton it was the Republicans that balanced the budget. Yes Bush was an idiot in some things, but his Congress was Democrat, and our debt skyrocketed. Then, Obama, Democrat controlled Congress, debt skyrocketed even higher until the Republicans took over the house.

This is neither here nor there since our debt will not go down under either, and only will due to catastrophe.

Forrest Grump 2.0

Bush may have increased the deficit during his terms but Clinton was no saint either and the surplus concept is an urban myth.

Clinton ran deficits throught all 8 years of his term, and one can go to the US Treasury Department and look through the history of the total outstanding debt through Clinton's terms.

Every year Clinton was in office, the total national debt continued to climb.

How Clinton managed to claim a surplus was that while the general operating budgets ran deficits but Clinton borrowed from numerous off budget funds to make the on budget fund a surplus.

For example, in 2000, Clinton claimed a $230B surplus, but Clinton borrowed
$152.3B from Social Security
$30.9B from Civil Service retirement fund
$18.5B from Federal Supplementary Medical insurance Trust Fund
$15.0B from Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund
$9.0B from the Federal Unemployment Trust Fund
$8.2B from Military Retirement Fund
$3.8B from Transportation Trust Funds
$1.8B from Employee Life Insurance & Retirement fund
$7.0B from others

Total borrowed from off budget funds $246.5B, meaning that his $230B surplus is actually a $16.5B deficit. ($246.5B borrowed - $230B claimed surplus = $16.5B actual deficit).

If there is ever a true surplus, then the national debt will go down. The national debt did not go down one year during the Clinton administration.

Did you actually check your effective Tax Rate? Is it over 25%? If so blame the tax code and your accountant, not the Republicans who want to reduce your taxes.
Please think about it.

Mike in Delray

Now we have tried 3 1/2 years of "trickle-up" poverty and that ain't working.....

Have we? Because last I heard the Bush tax cuts, including the 2003 cuts for the rich (breaks on dividends, etc.) are still in place. And there's a whole list of voodoo economics still in place like not reinstating Glass-Steagall to prevent "too big to fail," and "deficits don't matter" spending on wars. I'm still waiting for the "Obama Economic Policies" to begin.

john-737278

The only "fair" that is acceptable to uber liberals is that they pay nothing for the benefits of living in America.

We realize that's what FOX Noise and Hate Radio broadcast 24/7.

But by all means, let's throw those dang Republican elderly off Social Security and Medicare, and the Republican unemployed who think they should get a measly insurance check for a few months while they look for a new job. It's not like anyone paid into this stuff -- damn freeloaders. And by all means let's stop the handouts and cut off all those Red States that receive more from the feds than they send in.

We will never fix the problems we face without one group or another getting hurt.

Another straw man. Gees, why bother trying to do anything at all? Such doom and gloom!

I don't believe life is fair , nor should it be. I do however believe the tax code should be. And clearly it isn't. I think everyone should pay something, or at least not get money back that was never paid in. But I also think the wealthy should pay at a rate that is the same as what middle class pays. No more, no less. I don't care how they get their wealth and I don't care that they are rich. I care that they pay the same rate. And even more than that, I care that they have more of a say in our government than the rest of us. A wealthy person should have the same power in government that I have.

Am I jealous or envious of the rich? Probably. But that isn't the issue here. I think someone who worked hard to get rich, or even someone who was handed the money should be able to enjoy it. I just want them to pay the same tax rate that I do, and I don't want them to be able to control the politicians the way they do.

And as for Romney, he is running for President of the United States. He wants to represent us. How is he going to represent us when he can never understand our way of life and he doesn't seem to be even attempting to try to understand.

TruePatriot-445959

I have stated repeatedly, and I believe on this thread that I am not a Republican so please don't try to label me.

SS and Medicare should be need based.

Unemployment should go back to the original limits to provide motivation.

And hey I live in Minnesota. We are the sixth highest taxed state and the 46th in receiving our funds back. We'd be better off by secession.

Yes, Doom and Gloom because instead of playing blame games I want solutions, and closed minded people don't listen.

"That is simply not true. Clinton had a budget surplus, but we did not reduce our national debt, which was still in the trillions. Clinton did that with a Republican controlled Congress. Congress makes the laws and pays the bills. The President only enforces the law."

So then Obama is not responsible for our debt as many here like to proclaim, and if you say he is then Clinton gets credit for the surplus you can't have it both ways.

Forrest Grump 2.0.... Is it FAIR that the head of your Union makes a whole lot more money than you and gets all those incredible perks, the car, the per diem, travel, the conferences with other Union leaders in exotic destinantions. Is it Fair that he makes investments with his 1%er salary and earns money on Capital Gains....

Is any of that fair...If not....why....If it is.....why ??

Does the Union invest any of its pension funds in the stock market.....do they own stock in Exxon/Mobile ??....Do you know what happens to your pension fund if people lose the incentive to invest in the Stock Market that the 15% Capital Gains rate gives them ???

I got it now.....you're a Union Man

john-737278

Good points John. Can I get the SS and Medicare premiums that I paid into them back (with interest) if I don't use them?

The Feds will have made interest income on my payments over the 40+ years I was in the workforce.

I don't believe I have ever blamed Obama exclusively for our debt. I blame them all and the dysfunction of far right/far left crap when nobody is representing the 80% in the middle.

And in truth, the President does sign the laws so he is complicit, but not directly responsible. Most of America wants one person to blame, but the truth is Congress makes the budget decisions, so the President is pretty much a unic when money is concerned, because he can't do anything about it.

REB-1013231

I actually have a problem with the government being able to borrow from what I have paid in. The stats are scary though for Medicare. The average couple retiring with a $80,000 income next year will have paid in $114,000 in Medicare. They will pull out over $350,000 through their retirement. Those numbers are not sustainable. Sometimes I think actuaries should be doing our budget and not politicians.

And the feds are paying interest on our debt, so basically all your money is not growing interest in theory.

john-737278

Agreed.

Well we have been at it all day. No minds changed and no progress toward agreement. Sounds like the House vs the Senate and Congress vs the President.

That's it for me. I am out of here. To those of you real die hards good luck and get some sleep.

Cheers

john-737278-- I'm not labeling you, rather in responding to the term "uber liberals" I make the point that just as many conservatives (Republicans) use social safety nets if not more. I have family in the military who enlisted due to the recession (not patriotism) -- Though I still appreciate their service, they are benefiting from the government, and so are folks with kids who go to public school, etc.

When I said I am still waiting for the Obama Economic Policies to begin, I don't mean the stimulus, auto bail-out, or unemployment extensions because all of this was necessitated by the Great Recession that was caused by his predecessor and Republicans -- And thankfully these small but helpful measures have kept us from a double-dip recession so far.

Trust fund/entitlement programs should be means tested for anyone earning above the cap on FICA who therefore did not pay into the system on their entire income, and unemployment should return to normal limits once jobs are created and unemployment drops to normal levels. Positive solutions are more likely to be listened to, see?

REB-1013231-- As I don't have the time to fisk your stats, I'll accept these as legitimate, and therefore not give as much credit to Clinton and balancing the budget... However, per the point already made by Forrest Grump 2.0, you can't have it both ways.

Where was your outrage when Dubya left the cost of the wars off the books? Where is your outrage now when Republicans at the state level like Chris Christie take federal funds intended to create jobs by building a train system and diverts those funds to balance his budget, or Scott Walker who cut worker benefits to balance his budget because of corporate tax cuts, and on and on? It's bad enough leaving an IOU in the Social Security trust fund box, but to thwart job creation or hurt workers during a deep recession, that's horrendous.

No, you can't have the insurance premiums you paid into Social Security back. These premiums are in case you make a claim (retire).

Now what was the topic of this thread? Oh right, the rich paying a 15% tax rate and how this is absurd.

LA99999 -- Interesting that people are beginning to realize that Romney is not interested in them. Remember the NOT "Curious George" problem with Dubya? Romney just wants to be President for Pete's sake, like his father. It's about him, not you.

Mike the international head of a union does not make a 1% salary by any stretch of the imagination, the head of my local union makes 52 hours pay per week at scale wage rate, plus a car allowance, the salary of all my local union officers is set by the rank and file membership and is written into the by-laws of the union, don't act like it is a license to steal or akin to finding a gold mine. It's very fair. No my local union does not invest in stocks too volatile and risky monies are invested in guaranteed insurance contracts and bonds or bank CD's, much less return but much less risk those funds are all in trusts with a minimum of three trustees from the union and 3 trustees from management, it takes a minimum of six signatures to move monies or cut a check from those funds. That's the way my union rolls Mike, it's all designed to ensure careful and prudent stewardship of members benefit funds, even though at times more money could be made on stocks, and of course at times those funds were spared the loss on stocks. Talk about a good investment I pay 2% of my gross in union dues and make about 38% more in wages and benefits than the average non union person doing what I do, that's a 36% return on my investment of union dues. You bet I am a union man! It would be stupid for me not to be in my industry. I'll tell you something else it is a pleasure to work with extremely talented businessmen who are the low cost bidder to their customers, make a profit for themselves, and still believe in paying the best wages and benefits to acquire the best talent available to them. Those businessmen are fine Americans and our members work damn hard to see that they and themselves are both successful. Those members pay taxes, they have a little disposable income to spend in the community, their hospital bills are paid when they or their families get sick, and they will retire with a little nest egg after a lifetime of hard work. You act as if there is some kind of downside to all that. Certainly no republican would be jealous or begrudge a man making the most he can make for himself out there in the world by his own hard work everyday, hell that is good old fashioned personal capitalism.

I'm out too fellas, it's Saturday night I got to go to the Casino and watch Mrs. Grump relieve some kitchen table poker champs of their money, and here is the good news we won't pay any taxes on those capital gains.

It will take 2 years to figure out how much he spent on his presidential campaign, so it is bound to take longer than 4 and 1/2 months to figure out how much he made last year.

Willard, earned his money the old fashioned white way - he inherited it!

Willard, earned his money the old fashioned white way - he inherited it!

I've never worked for a poor person

Neither have I, however being an accountant, I have worked for plenty of right wing TAX CHEATS!

And in order to keep my JOB, have had to compromise MY integrity!

Well obviously you have no integrity fiesty

Mitt + 14% = 1%, Romney "Magic"

Yes, most of us HAVE worked for poor people...they're called "customers". Contrary to Conservative myth rich people don't exist in a vacuum. Without customers the economy screeches to a halt, and stays there.

If you don't think so look at most of the developing countries. They too have "rich people" in every village. They are so rich by comparison to those around them that they live in something a little like a post-WWII ranch house and own a car...an old car.

But they aren't rich by our standards, are they? These people are in fact POOR by our standards. Almost none of them can be rich by our standards because there's no economy to support that level of wealth. There's no one for whom THEY can work, no one with whom to trade.

And that's the biggest failing of today's Libertarian Conservative radicals. They actually believe that man is an island. We aren't. We can only accomplish in relation to the society around us. People with talent, drive, and intelligence will always tend to be more accomplished than those around them. The question is, will they be more accomplished in comparison to a society in which most are economically stable, living a comfortable, middle class life? Or will they be accomplished in comparison to a mass of unwashed poor, people driven to desperation by a relentless Vulture Capitalism?

In that second world there won't be many "rich" by comparison to today. Ultimately by killing the American middle class trickle down economics will kill the golden goose upon whose eggs today's wealthy feast.

Seeking....

"Low IQ Republicans". How quaint.

In Connecticut, in the 2010 election for governor, the Democrat candidate won the election by just over 6000 votes out of 1.3 million votes cast. In th six poorest cities in the state, large or small, the same Democrat candidate won by about 75,000 votes...handing him the job.

I suppose that those were the votes of "High IQ Democrats".

If you actually took an honest look at how politicians you support win elections, perhaps you'd be a bit less snooty about voters who think and vote the same way you do.

John B, Des Moines, IA

Thumbs up.

Two thumbs up!

"Doesn't see himself as rich"? WTF. How does anyone believe that statement? Hundreds of millions in net worth and doesn't see himself as rich? That is either 1. Delusional 2. A lie or 3. Just shows everyone how out of touch he is. It illustrates exactly how uncomfortable he is in his own skin. Instead of just saying with pride "Yes I am extremely rich" and "I pay all the taxes that the tax codes say I owe" he pedals this BS. I don't have a problem with anyone reducing the amount of taxes they owe as long as the follow the law. The problem isn't the person (although Romney had a hand in the current tax code) it is the tax code. All income should be taxed at the same rate. How is investment income taxed less than income made from working? Because the rich want it that way.

"Doesn't see himself as rich"? WTF.

He does not see himself as anything for more than about a day or so, he sees himself as anything and everything, whatever you want to hear.

Those magic underwear must be flame resistant otherwise they would catch fire, however you can still easily see the smoke blowing out of his ass.

Small wonder that "Smokestack Romney" does not like the EPA.

Nothing but a left wing biased media reporting a perfectly legal request for an extension as something sinister. No mention of Obama paying a lower tax rate then his secretary. This is just another diversion, a manufactured cause for concern in order to deflect everyone's attention from the lack of positive results from Obama's first term. Obviously graduating from Harvard Law and Community Organizing does not prepare you to be president. Since Obama desperately wants to keep the job for the perks and benefits, he has the mainstream media to help distract the public from his disastrous first term.

People see the lack of positive results, and they rightfully blame republicans in Congress. This Congress is seen as the all time biggest turd in a whole pile of turds. Their approval rating has never been lower in the history of the poll, never.

Obama made &50 grand last year ($400k as the POTUS and the rest off of capital gains from his books). Romney probably made 100 million. Obama paid 26% total (35% of the adjusted gross from his $400k salary, and 15% of the $350k in Cap gains). he just released his 1040 and schedules last week.

750 Grand

It's not like Mittens is going to take time off from his campaign to sit with pad, pencil and a 10 key calculator to do them himself.

Well, this was just precious.

One day Romney is gushing to the NRA that "all moms are working moms" (as he pouts about a comment that rich women like his wife don't worry about juggling work and family because she "never worked a day in her life").

And the next he's telling us that welfare moms need to put their kids in daycare and get a job because he "wants the individuals to have the dignity of work." (So welfare moms aren't moms, they're individuals? And therefore they don't already "work", unlike rich (real) moms?)

Is doublethink hereditary or learned? Inquiring minds want to know.

It's all part of the Conservative tendency toward aristocracy, RAF. People with a lot of money are our betters, they're admirable for staying at home. The rest of us are leeches and moochers, at no point do we work hard enough to be admirable.

Did you know a military grade satellite-under cover of FBI investigations-destroys citizens by manipulating their health without the target even knowing and sometimes using the same program the FBI can use a series of perfectly synchronized investigative pretexts to derail the target from employment, relationships, friends, ect also usually without the target ever knowing it where war time powers are concealed within the safety of national security investigations...

If that statement were to be true, what do you think the public's reaction to it should be?

As others have posted, the returns from the last decade 2000 to 2009 will be just as enlightening and should be no trouble at all to produce. If he wants to become POTUS, the least he can do is offer some transparency about his wealth.

"As others have posted"?? Based on what most have posted they wouldn't have a clue as to what anyones tax return meant, but they sure would like to try making an issue of it.

"Transparency of wealth"? Seems that the DoJ and the IRS are the ones to determine this and please don't try telling us all that someones path to wealth and incomes haven't already been scrutinised by these agencies and local ones as well.

Why should he have to offer transparency about his wealth? I mean seriously it's HIS money, he earned it and pressumably didn't do anything illegal to get it.

Why should he have to offer transparency about his wealth? I mean seriously it's HIS money, he earned it and pressumably didn't do anything illegal to get it.

Transparency isn't an issue? Then please explain why conservatives are calling for Michelle Obama to release her college transcripts?? That's completely irrelevant.

Read athe tax laws. Jeez

ORB 1943

I would rather have a president that knows how to make money than one who only knows how to spend it. Or is that too hard of a concept for you to grasp?

ORB 1943

I would rather have a president that knows how to make money than one who only knows how to spend it. Or is that too hard of a concept for you to grasp?

Where are all of you who cried and carried on about President Obama producing a birth certificate? We expect the same rants and demands in this instance for Romney's tax returns... Come on!

Don't be so hypocritical Donald & company. If American voters hate anything, it is HYPOCRITS and LIARS!

We are SOOOO over that Republican/Tea double standard!

Snow, Romney was born a rich man and is still a rich man.

President Obama managed to get himself from a childhood where sometimes he was fed by food stamps to law school, constitutional law professor, President, and millionaire.

Who hasn't figured out how to make something of himself?

kama - That would be a big assumption as to whether or not his wealth was attained legally. A special prosecutor is in order to get to bottom of this matter. Ken Starr need not apply! As is well known "to assume could makes an ass out you".

sailcat - even with an extension, Romney would have to file by October 15th. Of course, that would leave little time for them to be looked at but my guess is that is what Mitt will do. Although, I don't know why. We know he made a lot of money and paid little in taxes. We know, like a great American, he keeps most of his money in offshore accounts - the first presidential candidate to do so. So, where is the surprise for anyone?

Snow - by your few posts it is clear you're a product of Glen Beck and Faux News. Please - just go away!

seeking -- what will you do any differently after Governor Romney shows his tax return? what is the point?

i have asked in several places today and nobody can answer.

what difference does it make? what difference did it make when President Obama showed his?

james - it is something that has been done by every candidate for some time now. Why is it so difficult for Romney? He is supposed to be a shrewd businessman. You would think he would be prepared to participate in the same way other candidates have. Anyone running for President for many years has shown their returns. He knew this was coming so, you tell me, why isn't he prepared to show them? If he's smart enough to run the country he should be smart enough to know this was a given!

I guess Romney can issue his Tax returns whenever Obama decides to issue his college transcripts. It only took him almost three years to finally issue a copy of his birth certificate. Why aren't you screaming for Pelosi, Reid, Boxer,and all the other multimillionaires tax returns? Oh that's right their democrats!

Why sadie, did we all miss it when Romney issued his birth certificate and college transcript?

I haven't ever seen anyone ask for them, I'm sure Obama won't bring that up since there is something in there he doesn't want us to see.

That's right...only one candidate has EVER been asked for his birth certificate.

Hmmmm, why could that be???

You're a Birther, why don't you enlighten us.

John.....Exactly how do you know that no other candidate has been asked to supply a birth certificate??? You just make crap up....In modern times, Obama is the only president who has made his past secret and the only one that the media will protect by hiding the truth.....It is very normal for all kinds of history to be studied of anyone running for president........except for Obama.....

Sadielady is the one who said she's unaware of any other candidate being asked for his birth certificate...are you aware of one?

I love it when Birthers come crawling out from under their rocks! It just highlights the insanity run rampant in the Conservative Movement.

Mitt Romney paid his fair share in taxes, which is what he is legally required to pay. Then in addition to this he gave away 10% of his money to his church, then about another 5% for fast offerings, then other misc amounts that i shant try to add up.

There's a reason that investments are taxed at 15% because if you tax it higher people don't invest and that hurts the economy. Even better they've already done this stuff before and the last time the government raised the investment tax rate all that happened was those people invested less money resulting in not only LESS government taxes collected but also in less INVESTMENT INTO BUSINESS which hurts the economy.

This attitude is sad, Mitt Romney has contributed farm more to our society than basically everyone who complains about this kind of stuff. Im not just talking about MONEY either, he's donated time and empathy to help many people through is life. Did we forget that when someone daughter went missing in NYC he took the entire company paid for them all to be flow to NYC and their job was to put up flyers and go LOOKING for this girl! Did we forget that? Long before he went into politics, not trying to score points he just wanted to help a man find HIS DAUGHTER!!!!!!!!!! Very literally he saved her life by being willing to mobilize himself and everyone he worked with to go save her!

But apparently he has something to be ashamed of right?

Yeah, Google says your full of it.

Is that all you can do it google? Cannot research anything for yourself. Typical! Has a computer but does not know how to use it.

But apparently he has something to be ashamed of right?

Nice try at deflection - but, unlike Mitt, I paid 30% last year. We're the type of family that keeps this country afloat, kama. We make good income and we pay our fair share. We also buy necessities, instead of houses in other countries. We keep our money here for the banks to draw interest off of, instead of off-shoring in the GCM and Switzerland.

So you tell me, who's a better citizen, me and my family, or Mitt and his? If it helps, I'm like Ann - a homemaker and proud of it. Although, I didn't think Hillary Rosen attacked me in the slightest. I guess wealth breeds thin skin - another negative of that species.

I believe that it really doesn't matter who you vote for because both parties owe so much to their ultra wealthy sponsors that they will have to do their bidding no matter how high the candidates ideals may have been originally. The poor and the middle class will probably be better off under a Democratic president because the sponsors aren't concerned with social issues that do not directly effect their bottom line, so they will allow some of them to make their way through Congress. The Republicans, on the other hand , although they have the same, ultimate agenda, could care less about the poor or the middle class and are far more transparent about their goals.They have a more immediate time table. The ultimate goal, as far as I can determine from countless hours of research, is, as crazy as it sounds, to create a complete monetary and social collapse,( through fear and division), eliminate most of the government,( by convincing America that this will be in their best interests), privatize areas where huge profits can be made and eliminate areas completely if they provide no source of profits or present hurdles to achieving the ultimate goal ( by convincing America that they can do a better job and that we just need to get rid of useless restrictions and excessive taxation). So, if I have formed the correct analyses, Romney's job skills make him the most qualified to promote this agenda.

euterpe - nice post but neither karma or snow will understand it as they only follow the GOP talking points.

truedoubter -you would actually be right that Romney is the best person for the job of totally destroying the United States. And, didn't you hear? Ann Romney doesn't consider herself wealthy!

Yes Rob we do believe you are that stupid. You prove it every time you open your mouth. You are so caught up in liberal bashing that you could not see the truth if it bit you on the nose. Turn of Fox news and go outside of mommies basement. Try to learn some reality instead of media spun bullcrap.

Its funny instead of refuting my points you just argue that i only listen to fox news. i actually watch several news networks and do RESEARCH into the topics...

Mitt Romney has paid more in taxes than any of you people yet somehow he's the bad guy for paying what he's legally required to pay. Honestly how much you pay in taxes means nothing, because lets be honest you all pay the absolute least you can because no one REALLY thinks the US government spends THEIR money well. But if you look at charitable donations not only in time but in dollar amount you find that conservatives blow liberals out of the water, the irony being the first major study of donations due to political affiliations was done by a democrate who was flabergasted to discover the truth, since you know liberals always talk about helping people. Turns out conservatives put their money where their mouth is...

One question but may be too basic but churns out alot of election commercials, here goes : How can someone who can't keep up with his own tax records fix the tax system??

What a fu**ing weasel ! I can not believe that ANYONE would want this Mormon jerk off as President ! I didn't think it would be possible but it looks to me like the worst president in U.S. history will be re-elected. Anyway you slice it we are all screwed. I know come election time I will be going to the polls and casting a vote for the ass clown we already have,then I will throw-up in the parking lot. We as a nation must come up with better people to chose from so that we can once again be proud of our president and not sick to out stomachs with just the mention of their names. WE CANNOT LET THIS MORMON SCUMBAG BE OUR PRESIDENT !!! MORMONS ARE CRAZY ASS NUTS !

Voted McCain, from your picture reveals a perverted sexist / wish I had one, from your comments reveals a racist a-hole. I thank God McCain never made it or we would be eating boiled leaves in the woods watching the nuclear winter snow showers........

seven2Seven, maybe you should go and get your GED,then come back and post a comment. Until them shut the f up.

Really Seven, I guess you have never owned a business. My husband and I both own our own small businesses, and we end up having to file an extension on our taxes almost every year. It takes alot of time to get everything together for the CPA, and run a business.

For the people that keep saying Mitt was born rich, you are the ones that believe whatever the media says. I never heard any of you bash the Kennedy's and they made their money illegally. But they are treated like royalty in this country, you people are so two-faced!

How long ago did he know he was going to have to release this information? How long does it take to do his tax return? Could he be stalling for some reason? Maybe he doesn't want people to know how little he pays in taxes. Unfortunately for Mitt if he had released it he could get the discussion about it over with and maybe even deflect or change the conversation. The longer he delays the worse it will be. Later people will be, once again, reminded of how rich he is and how little tax he paid in comparison to middle class and poor people.

No, he's just waiting for the W-2 from his after-school job.

You know what they say about assuming right? Most likely his tax preparers didn't get it done so they filed for an extension. My mother had this happen when my dad died because of all the extra estate stuff and the preparers dropping the ball, so they just extended it. For all we know Romneys guy had a heart attack so someone entirely new is coming in not knowing whats up so he's filing for an extention so he has the time to figure it out.

Right, so he cant delegate properly or check to see if taxes are done hes got my vote.

Last year 10.5 million taxpayers requested, and were granted, an extension to file their tax returns. Its not that unusual an event, especially for taxpayers with complicated returns.

Baldeagle - Romney does not HAVE to release his tax returns - he is under no legal obligation to do so. This is merely political game playing that has become a tradition. The idiotic among us believe that if the presidential candidates don't pay enough taxes they're bad people. Frankly, I want a president smart enough to use every legal means to pay the minimum tax owed to the government because that's certainly what I do. The only question of value for either the president or Romney is whether or not they cheated on their taxes and broke the law. If they didn't, I could give a rat's a$$ what they actually paid in taxes and Buffet's secretary should get a better accountant.

Ooooh! Jason, maybe you can google that?

He's chosen to play the political game, he'd better be prepared to live with those traditions.

Then again the 1% are used to not having to play by the same rules as the rest of us.

kama and Joemike - this is a man who claims he can lead this country. Let's see - tax returns are always due 4/15. Even Romney knows that. He knows he is running for President (though none of us know why). He knows this would be an issue. So, yes, many people ask for and get extensions each year. But, for the logical (clearly I'm assuming WAY too much about Romney) candidate, it would benefit them to get their taxes in by 4/15 the year they are running for President. Just makes good sense. Oh wait! Now I see the problem for Mitt - good sense. My bad!

Carpenter---Mitt's got a team of highly paid accountants breaking their own hearts and figuring out a way to get his effective tax rate above 20%.

seeking -- it is perfectly legal and acceptable to file for an extension as long as you pay the tax expected to be owed.

romney is doing nothing different than many other Americans:

"According to the IRS, more than 10 million of us procrastinate every year and file a tax extension. So don’t let embarrassment be an excuse. Go ahead and file and get an extra 6 months to file your taxes!"

and i imagine that using your thought process observed from your postings that these are all republican.

maybe spending day after day berating the wealthy makes sense. maybe the buffett rule makes sense.

maybe a true leader would press for tax code simplification rather than further obfuscation as President Obama is now doing.

It is so odd that liberals all claim superior intelligence and education.....and yet cannot understand even the most basic information....You all apparently think this is a criminal situation...because it inolves a republican...

james - yes it is legal but not logical this time. He is running for President and he knew it would be an issue. The fact that he has chosen to extend shows he doesn't think rationally and is somehow missing the boat intellectually. Where were his handlers that they didn't get him to file by 4/15?

And you arrogant buffoon, I spend time with the wealthy every day. Your stupidity and overt condescending nature are showing. They don't impress me but you do end up looking like a total arrogant moron. I don't spend day after day berating the wealthy. Your assumptions make you look like the a** you are!

J.A. - we understand basic and non-basic information very well. It is YOU who are having trouble grasping intelligent choices.

seeking -- why do you always resort to juvenile behavior?

you are so predictable but ever hoping that you do find your sanity here is a question that no one on the left is able to answer or maybe just simply unwilling to do so. have you the courage?

Would you care to demonstrate some intellectual honesty and share with me what you will do with the information in his tax return?

james - why do you have to resort to avoiding the answer. He knew he should be releasing his returns. Period. You are playing the same game he is.

You are the one - along with Romney - avoiding the answer.

Tax returns show income and taxes paid and have been perused for every Presidential candidate for as long as most of us can remember. Why is Romney avoiding them?

And, I am seeking sanity in the GOP but you have proved there is none to be found. YOU are the one avoiding the answers. You clearly don't have any answers as to why this man is so ill-prepared to even RUN for President. You're not even being juvenile. Just totally stupid! You KNOW he should be showing them and you're making excuses for him. Pathetic your candidate puts you in that position but it's all the GOP has!

seeking -- i don't know where his handlers were and pretty much don't care. i don't care to see anyone's tax returns.

i understand what tax returns show. my question is what will you do with the information in Romney's return?

What did you do with the information in President Obama's tax return? I read that he made a bunch of money, took a bunch of legal deductions to reduce his tax burden, gave a bunch to charity (good for them). But nothing changed for me.

a rather non-event.

Maybe a non-event but he did show the returns. And, we all know if he hadn't the Republicans would be standing on their ears - screaming!

seeking -- so i guess you forgot to answer what i think is a pretty simple question.

so repeating -- what will you do with the information from romney's return?

by the way, were you disappointed that the Obama's elected to reduce their taxes using legal deductions? he has often said he should be paying more. this was his opportunity.

james - I have repeated, as everyone else has, told you that we would like to see for Romney what everyone has been able to see for Obama - what he claims in income, his taxes and his write-offs.

Why do you have a problem with that? Why did Romney not plan ahead since he has known for AGES he would run for President?

And, no, I don't have a problem with Obama's returns as I know he will pay more in the future. I don't expect anyone to just give the government an additional check. But I am impressed that he - as well as others who make significant incomes - are willing to pay more when the rules are changed.

I see james is now silent - why am I not surprised?

I have to go meet with a client while James tried to figure out some argument that makes sense - not going to happen.

To everyone - have a great weekend!

Feisty - have one at the DDI for me!

seeking -- i have no problem with anyone showing their returns. i also don't see any value. it simply is of no importance in my opinion.

you would have to ask Romney the question. i certainly don't know why.

last thought for the day.

after making a big deal about his willingness to pay more the President chose not to. he is well within his right to do exactly as he did.

but can you imagine the impact on his candidacy and that of his opponent if he had. it may have been a huge opportunity now lost forever.

he had a chance to back up his words with action but failed.

have a nice weekend.

This garbage is getting just down right stupid.

YOU HAVE NO CLUE WHY ROMNEY FILED AN EXTENSION, NONE OF YOU DO.

So unless you have talked to Mitt Romney or his tax preparers (which wouldnt be legal unless he gave permission anyways) why don't you stop speculating?
Seriously this partisanship is just foolish, he's a Republican GUESS WHAT? THAT DOESNT MEAN EVERYTHING HE DOES IS ILLEGAL!

For all you know everything was done and prepared and ready to be filed on time and there was a fire that destroyed the tax office that was doing his work KILLING the person DOING the taxes and destroying all the documentation! Would that be a reasonable reason to file for an extention? Wouldn't you feel like a bad person if that turned out to be WHY he filed for an extention? Here you are talking smack and it turns out people died and there is a completely reasonable reason for the extention! But like i said YOU DONT KNOW SO STOP SPECULATING!

kama...

"...he's a Republican GUESS WHAT? THAT DOESNT MEAN EVERYTHING HE DOES IS ILLEGAL!"

So, only SOME of the things he does are illegal? WOW...!

Thank you for proving my point Kardy you know full well what i meant. If you can't find common ground with the other side then it's a sad day for the world... because some GOP ideas are good and some democrat ideas are good. Plus seperated sides tends to make sure nothing to extreme from either camp get passed.

If he doesn't see himself as a "rich guy"---what does he see himself as? A poor person? He makes $57,000 per day--what does that make him? He thinks over $300,000 for giving speeches "isn't very much"---what does that make him? And he wonders why we might think he can't relate to the problems facing average Americans.

JoAnne,

I think the closing paragraph of the above article points to a real truth as to Mr. Romney's apparent discomfort and inability to "say the right thing" in regards to his wealth. In my line of work I deal with a lot of the uber-wealthy and as a general rule they do not use their wealth as an identity such as to the extent as is being pinned on Mr. Romney by his opposition. Normalcy is relative - car elevators just do not seem a hideous extravagance if that kind of thing is normal to you. While the lifestyles of the rich and famous are considerably different than you and me I believe Mr. Romney saying he does not see himself as a "rich guy" to be a genuine statement.

Genuine, but very poorly timed.

I understand Mr. Romney is running for president and everything he says or does will be scrutinized. As far as I can see he has done nothing illegal and though many disapprove of his methods, he has broken no laws. That being said a presidential candidate needs credentials much more impecable than just going about one's business legally. I see Mr. Romney's big mistake being his attempts to identify, and be identified with "normal people." He's not, and that's OK - he should have focused more on his business acumen and how he could, as president, benefit the country using what he does. Too late now, though, I think he has given his opposition (and potential supporters) way too much negative ammunition.

I have said this many many times ill say it again and it won't be the last time either

The human psyche is a very strange thing

Mark, excellent points...

Yeah i know it's so crazy that he considers himself to be "normal" and not the millionair that he truely is... Sorta like Obama presenting himself as a community organizer and not the multi millionair that he is...

FYI Obama giving a speech will pull 6 figures to, just like Clinton, just like Bush, because thats generally what former presidents get for giving a paid speech...

The problem is hes clueless as to the answers much less the problems we face and it shows. Rehashing failed Republican policies will go real well in the general elections, not to mention his gaffes and famous quotes.

Jason, if anyone is clueless it's Obama, just look at the debt he has rack up in just three years time. He knows nothing about running a business much less the United States. He spends more time campaigning and spend our money then being a President. He has never stopped being in campaign mode since elected.

All his campaign promises turned out to be lies, where is all the transparency we where promised? Every bill would be on the internet, and cspan at least 72 hours before being voted on. Heck 90 percent of the time the don't even bother to read them before there voted on. Where are the cuts in pork- barrel spending? Lies,Lies and more Lies, it's sad

Great bunch of Conservative talking points...but you forgot teleprompter and vacations.

So instead of refuting the central points you just say they are conservative talking points and therefor aren't worthy of discussing...

I would be very unhappy if i lived in a world where everyone always agreed with me.

I'm fine with people who don't agree with me...but casually throwing around lies that have been thoroughly and frequently debunked over a period of YEARS just doesn't deserve respectful treatment.

Republicans are responsible for the vast majority of our national debt.

GW Bush was the "CEO President" and he was a disaster.

The "campaign mode" complaint is just talking point...especially for Conservatives, who applauded the previous administration for running every single decision past Karl Rove.

Where's the proof that "all the campaign promises were lies."

Transparency, yet another empty talking point. I don't see anyone duplicating the unprecedented claim of "Vice Presidential privilege" invented by the last administration.

Congress runs Congress...the President isn't responsible for how they run their business, in fact doesn't even have a say in the matter.

There, happy? I responded to a bunch of Conservative BS. Let's move on.

Steeler Fan,

Now that is irony. I did not know that little fact.

Maybe Mitt takes after his mother's side of the family?!?

Actually FDR was the first President to release his tax returns. 7 of the 34 candidates in the past 35 years did not release their tax returns.

I doubt if very many left wing posters could understand the tax return if they saw it. I looked at Obama's and it was 48 pages (federal and state), and I am sure Romney's will be more than that. Romney released his 2010 returns (all four of them). He has said he will release 2011 within 6 months.

He has said he will release 2011 within 6 months.

sfc - In 6 mths Mittens will be history and nobody will care....

sfcret,

Why did you have to put in that snide remark about "leftt wing posters"?

First of all it is not a true statement, secondly, it adds nothing to the rest of your post.

Northstar, I agree the comment was a little out of line, but come on so are most of the stupid comments on this blog. Eveyone assuming there is a sinister reason for an extension. If you are going to call out someone call out your buddies from the left also.

sfcret---I'm a left wing poster and I most certainly could understand his return. I used to work for the company he has prepare it. I have also taught tax courses to people who aren't in the tax field so I think I could explain it to those who aren't well versed in taxation. And I know I'm not alone---there are plenty of people who could do the same.

And why not release returns prior to 2010? Every other candidate for President has.

sfcret, I am not a "left wing" person, though I do tend to lean a bit more liberal than conservative. I was a mortgage underwriter for a number of years before becoming medically disabled. It was my JOB to understand tax returns and how they showed wealth - all forms of the tax return. I studied many a tax return with capital gains, capital losses, business income, rental income, investment income etc. You would be surprised at what people in the "left wing" may understand since you seem to not understand that liberals and conservatives equally have business people and intelligent people. Just as both "sides" have people who blindly follow one political party and demonize the "other side" simply because of what the talking heads on TV have said and distorted. Your comments about the intelligence and ability to understand complicated tax returns are offensive as they are a broad generalization and an attempt to minimize an entire group of people.

Snow - your ignorance is beyond belief! Anyone with a brain would know that the year you are running for President you would release your tax returns on time. Oh sorry - the brain part - didn't mean to offend you!

Cat - sfcret thinks that because he/she could not understand them that none of us could. You're right - bad assumption.

seeking -- were the dnc directions today to keep hammering on this meaningless exercise.

if so, you are executing nicely.

Um, Snow---I would be a liberal blogger and I just suggested that I didn't think there was anything unusual about Mitt's request for an extension. I believe that he is probably missing key elements of information for his return and can't get it done on time.

Of course, the whole thing could be done and he's waiting for a Friday afternoon, maybe before a holiday like Memorial Day, to file it and publish it, hoping people are distracted and don't pay attention. I can assure him that won't happen. And it still doesn't answer my question of why he hasn't released the past 8 years' returns? We know he gave 23 years' returns to the McCain campaign so why not release them now?

james - clearly your worship of the GOP stupidity is controlling you. You are meaningless in your responses (if they can be called that) as you keep harping on the same nonsense over and over. You fail to show any intelligence but you continue with your "put downs."

seeking -- oh my, "put downs" from someone that just called me an "arrogant buffoon?". you are joking, right?

what nonsense. i paid you a complement.

harping on what? seeing if anyone will answer my question about Romney's tax return? that one?

if you would be kind enough to share what you will do with the information in his tax return we can try and have a discussion.

james - since you don't seem to understand the reason behind wanting him to release his taxe returns, let's approach this differently. Why would he NOT be able to do what every other candidate in modern time has done and release his tax returns by 4/15? Why should he get a pass? You and I both know if it was President Obama you and the rest of the right wingers would be screaming! So, explain to me why Romney should get a pass?

Deflection that's all it is.

Meanwhile our country is dying on the vine. Who cares, because its so important to see those birth certificates, tax returns, college transcripts, and what ever else they want to throw into the mix. This is life or death situation, we need these documents to fix our economy, we need these documents to reform our tax systems, we need these doucments to reform entitlements, we need these documents to create JOBS, and without these documents, all will be lost.

Oh yea, by the way, this country is not divided, any fool can see that.

Dishonesty always good right?

He has no hidden offshore accounts, all his offshore accounts are reported and all legally owed taxes are paid on them. In fact the complexity of dealing with it may be WHY an extension was filed.

The reason he has offshore accounts is because it's cheaper to do so... That's why many people operate offshore accounts, they still pay all legally owed taxes on income, but by using it in another country can save on much of the hassle and COST of doing business in the USA.

Which is why the US needs to change it policies because it encourages people to leave the country (IE manufacturing, banking, technology companies, ect)

And yet the center of the financial world is still in New York City.

And yet we're still the largest economy in the world.

And yet the 1% is NOT fleeing the US in droves for tax havens in third world countries.

Time for a new talking point, Conservatives.

Funny that you avoid my central point John.

Your right the 1% aren't fleeing the US in droves, BUT THEIR MONEY IS... Why does the USA make the best steel in the world (highest quality) yet no one buys it anymore? Because no ones willing to pay that much for slightly higher quality steel, they can use cheaper steel and it works amount just as well... How bout manufacturing in general? Heck WE DONT EVEN MAKE LIGHTBULBS ANYMORE!

That's my point, Romney didn't do anything illegal but you people try to crucify him for it. He did what most Americans do, which is find every legal means to pay the least he could on taxes. There's nothing wrong with that. But because our tax system is the way it is all those 1%ers take their money ELSEWHERE!

All raising the investment income taxes on the rich will do is make them put their money into municiple bonds and pay ZERO taxes on the money; is that what you want?

Nice reductio ad absurdum. We make the best stuff, but don't make any. If we ask the 1% to pay ANY more taxes they'll just take their ball and go home. If we reduce ultra high yields in any way they'll switch to the lowest yields possible. Such is the black and white world of Conservatism.

I've got news...if all those folks flee for the fantasy of Galt's Gulch others will step into the fray and welcome the opportunity. The free market abhors a vacuum just as much as does nature.

alvinaalvin,

The difference between Biden and Romney in charitable contributions:

Catholic do not tithe, Mormons do. And that is 10% of your gross is considered tithing.

The difference isnt that Biden is Catholic, the difference is Biden is a hypocrite who only cares about the poor if he can bribe them with taxpayer's money to vote for him.

Probably, the BIGGEST difference is neither President Obama nor V.P. Biden has a monetary WORTH over $250,000,000! (two hundred fifty MILLION)

Obama likely pays a lower percentage than his secretary (oops!). If he thinks that's unfair, why not just pay more???

He's trying. It's called the Buffett Rule...maybe you've heard of it.

There you go again John B not presenting actual facts, just shooting from the hip. If you would look at Obama's tax return you would see that if the "Buffett Rule" was passed it would have no effect on Obama's taxes based on his 2011 return. He didn't have an adjusted gross income of over 1 million, in fact he didn't even have a million or more in total income.

Bob in Virginia - again with your stupid accusations which are so totally false. But, it's all you've got isn't it? You continue to be a buffoon.

sfcret - and your point would be? Once he makes over $1 million it will apply to him. And, in 2017 when he is no longer President - he will make over $1 million.

So where's your proof that Barack Obama paid a lower effective rate than his secretary?

He's still working to get the effective tax rates of the wealthy elite up to the level of the middle class...while Romney would drop his own tax rate even lower.

john b. -- then why is he wasting time with the buffett thing. a courageous leader would dive in and get the tax code fixed, preferably by throwing the whole thing away and using a flat tax.

that way people would not get any special treatment, no one, not just the ones with whom you disagree

You're talking from both sides of your mouth. "the buffett thing" is designed to increase fairness in the tax code by ensuring that the 1% won't pay a dramatically lower effective tax rate than does the middle class.

It isn't that he doesn't want to take action as you claim. It's that his proposed action would increase fairness in the tax code, something which Conservatives can't stand.

A flat tax is regressive, and calling it a "fair tax" doesn't make it less so.

john b. -- i disagree. it is not designed for fairness at all, it is a political stunt that raises the taxes on a few Americans resulting in about an additional $5B additional tax collections.

ok, how will we decide which deductions / loopholes to keep? the mortgage deduction is not available to the poor -- why is it available at all? and deducting moving expenses? why should the government pay for that? and rebates for buying certain cars? that is astounding.

regardless of how you do it if there are deductions then there some are denied while others are rewarded.

i am curious if you could tell me your definition of rich and why you select that number.

Yes, government is the process of jointly deciding what our society should look like. It's the process of debating what would be beneficial to our society, rewarding that, and what would be harmful to our society, and penalizing that.

Tax policy is part of that. We decided as a society through the mechanism of government that it would be beneficial to have more people owning homes rather than fewer. We also decided to give our mineral, forestry, grazing, and water rights away for very low fees. Somewhere along the line we even decided there should be tax breaks for shipping jobs overseas.

Should these tax breaks be up for debate? Absolutely! My Conservative brother has a great idea...that all tax breaks, government programs, and regulations be up for periodic review to make sure they're working as intended and providing beneficial results. I'm all for that.

What I'm not for is simple-minded, ideologically-driven deregulation for the sake of deregulation and privatization as a matter of religious devotion. It doesn't work. Simple as that.

...LOL!

Feisty, do you ever get sent to detention, or it is just that your posts are always full of love and bipartisanship?

Or do you have friends in high places?

Or do you have friends in high places?

That is for me to know and you to find out little buddy...

Like I said previously, your vomit deserved a time out...

Now give me a BIG moonbat *hug*... lmfao!

Hey V-Bob, Its Friday night, and "Realtime with Bill Maher" is on. Are you going to watch the show?

Now give me a BIG moonbat *hug*..

Feisty, You actually want to hug that "funky little sucker"? LoL

Ask Mitt what he gives to his 5 children.

Oh Bobby McDee had a time out. You naughty naughty boy. ; )

It's interisting to me that GT and fiesty are attacking Bob in Virginia rather than addressing his rather clear and valid points. (Being that Romney didnt do anything illegal and why would you overpay to the government when you already give money through your church to help people (not counting OTHER contributions that they have undoubtably given))

I make a STRONG effort to avoid attacking people personally but i have to wonder if some of the people who are posting in this forum realize that not only do 1/2 their comments get compressed because so many people report them, but that they are doing damage to their own side when a calm rational indepentant reads what they poest, or more to the point HOW they phrase their posts...

You're wrong about the gifts to the President's daughters, Bob. The gift tax is completely separate from the income tax and the gifts had NO impact on the President's tax rate. Gifts to family members are NOT deductible.

Gloria---I have read that Mitt's 5 sons each have trusts worth at least $20 million.

Bob in VA-

I have no problem with most of your statement. YET,...The problem that I have with your statement is in you saying that Obama should,

"shut the heck up about the millionaries who "take advantage of tax shelters" and dont pay their "fair share"..and Romney's overseas bank accounts."

Why should he? The right has denounced everything that he has done, especially when it comes to taxes. In the beginning of his administration, he tried to address the issue of the rich hiding their money in overseas accounts, NOT paying taxes on it. Mitt Romney, himself has plenty of money in these accounts that he's not paying taxes on, up to $32 million in the Cayman. So when Obama speaks of it, it's true. And the only reason it went nowhere was that the right cried about how unfair it would be to tax people for money they hid in accounts, sorry they made. If the average person has to pay for money, even when its in a bank account, why shouldn't the rich in their version of a bank account?

Another problem is that Romney's sons don't pay taxes. Their father, Mitt pays it for them. So how is that fair for other people having to pay their own taxes but Mitt's sons get to slide on that? Just as Ezra Klein said, "If you don't shield your money, the tax code isn't that complicated." Then why do they shield their money?

If everyone did that, there would be no revenue from the taxes that are collected. Why can't we go back to the Clinton era taxes? From what I remember, that was good. yet it seems they do not want to do this because the "poor, helpless" rich people need to be protected.

Listening you keep saying he has money in the islands he's not paying taxes on and even list an amount. So this obviously shows your either lying or believing facts without thinking it through. Let me break it down for you.

If Romney DID have money he wasn't paying legally owed taxes on... and IF we know the amount... Then why hasn't he been arrested for tax evasion?

The answer is because he does what a lot of people do, including me when i had money before i spent it all on college, he put it into an overseas account because they charge less to do a variety of things with HIS money.

You so blatantly say how the right says it's not fair to pay for money hidden in accounts... Well you obviously haven't talked to any of the GOP members in congress because i'd bet everything i own that they say we should not be overtaxing people but if they are illegally hiding money they should be arrested for tax evasion (like Wesly Snipes) Don't believe everything just because a talking head on the news says it... I know for a fact that no GOP member in congress would say not paying legally owed taxes is ok, and if you were honest you would know it was true too, because no matter how much you may dislike the other side, dumb people don't get into congress.

BTW the top 1% pays 20%

The top 10% pays 50% (that's a little higher than the people who make 250k a year)

The top 50% pays about 97%

All figures can be found with a little searching on IRS.GOV websites/

Bob in Virginia - again with the "class warfare" accusation. Class warfare has been declared by the GOP - no one else - and you prove it with your biased posts every day. You are so ignorant and you insist on showing it over and over and over .....

SeekingSanity i've seen no less than 6 posts where you has personally attacked people over their views. You are aware that MSNBC stories and forums are read by more than Democrats and Republicans right? You make your side look bad when all you do is insult the person and not their ideas.

Now as to bob's phrasing i don't agree with how he said it but he IS RIGHT. You say there is no class warfare and it's all a GOP construct. Then how do you explain the ENTIRE OCCUPY WALLSTREET MOVEMENT, which unarguably is supported by the Democrats.

How about when the president keeps saying the rich need to pay their fair share? When you can go to the IRS WEBSITE and find that those 1%ers paid about 20% of the income taxes? How about the FACT that the top 10% paid about 50%. Or the best figure of all that the top 50% paid about 97% (or in other words basically everything).

My favorite thing to do is read the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx. Do you know why? Because it's amazing how many leaders of our country QUOTE IT DIRECTLY. So when i hear Obama talking about the Buffest rule and how people like Romney aren't paying their fair share i pick up that book and i start seeing the quotes. If you don't believe me why don't you try it? Go read it and tell me that the whole "class warfare" idea is a GOP construct.

kama...

Ever read Mein Kampf there kamy? Won't it be interesting to see where the Nazi Party's lobby money and other "donations" go to?

Why is it bad to live the american dream? Romney's a millionaire and that's awesome. It's what most people hope to achieve..

moneyos1 - Nothing's wrong with being a Millionaire. Its about everybody paying their fare share.

He's hiding them with a extension,That means late Oct. before he shows them! well i'am sure most of us are just shocked at that,NOT.

In 2010, Mitt Romney paid $3 million in federal income taxes. Where is he not paying his fair share? How much did you pay? Was it more than $3 million? And yes, I agree, everyone should pay their fair share. EVERYONE should pay taxes..

Its great to be a millionaire,Its not ok to rub your money in peoples faces like Romney,& the likes of D.Trump.

After all, lots of us could make that mark if we were born into it,You get the best education & perks in life,Romney gave all 5 of his sons $100 million each! If you can't make it on your own,daddy will give you $100 million to start.

He paid 14%, moneyos, vs 24% for the average member of the middle class.

That doesn't make him overtaxed by any rational measure.

moneyous

Hell yes - I"d be damn happy to pay $3 million on the $20 million Romney made or 13.9%....that sounds fair to you?

It's not fair that people like Romney foot the bill for the 48% of americans that pay no taxes. If you leftists want tax equality, then what's wrong with a flat 17% tax? If Romney makes $20 million, then he pays $340,000 in taxes and if you make $20,000, then you pay $340. It's fair and equal.

Sorry, I did my math wrong. I went to an inner-city public school...

The right wing throws that "not fair" line around a lot without any thought of what fairness is. Is it fair that the laws of our country have been skewed for decades in favor of the rich and powerful? Is it fair that Mittens is proposing that the rich get even more tax breaks and that what isn't added to the debt will be deducted from the benefits that people who work for a living have earned? Is it fair that the ultra rich pay a lower effective tax rate than working people. As for your your 48% who pay nothing line - if the ultra rich hadn't shipped so many jobs overseas and driven wages down below poverty level than more people would be paying taxes.

MONEY: It was a Republican, Teddy Roosevelt who created the original income tax and it was specifically intended to be a graducated tax, those with the most paying at least as high a rate. I'm sure you'd love to tax some single mom working a minimum wage job at Wal Mart, who can't feed her kids as it is. Let's throw her her under the bus so Willard can give more tax breaks to his rich cronies.

And no, a Flat Tax is the most unfair of all for working class people. Just because a snot nosed punk like Stever Forbes is an advocate doesn't mean it's good for the country. It's great for guys like Forbes, they laugh all the way to the bank. What never fails to amaze me is the "compassion" people like you have for the uber rich, but the working poor you'd just as soon let starve. During the Eisenhower years the top bracket was 93% and even after all deductions they paid over 50%. Guess what? The country thrived and the uber rich somehow managed to muddle through. They still lived in mansions and drove fancy cars and vacationed on Martha's Vineyard and Europe. None of the rich went without.

As for your snotty remarks regarding public schools, let me set you straight. What makes this country great is our middle class and our middle class was largely created by our public school system and the union movement of the early 20th Century. The Right just loves to demonize these things because they have very short memories. If indeed our inner city schools are as bad as you mock them to be, and most of them are, all the more reason to tax the rich more so we can provide ALL AMERICANS, not just rich ones, with a decent education.

moneyosi,

I too think it's awful that that 48% pay no taxes. We need to increase minimum wage, so they can contribute to the nations revenue too.