Forum Post: Mitt Romney's tax rate is about 14%
Posted 12 years ago on Jan. 17, 2012, 12:04 p.m. EST by jssk
(170)
from Naperville, IL
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
While I'm paying 30%. He makes millions and I don't care how he made it, he only pays 14% of it.
Is this the America we set out to build?
By the way, this is not against Romney personally, I'm just sick of this system that provides so many hidden loopholes only the rich are able to exploit. Is this what the "land of opportunities" meant? So sad. Not the America I was told about.
It's the Golden Rule. Those with the Gold make the Rules.
And we the majority of the people should do something about it.
Would I want a president who pays more tax than he owes? Perhaps not... but I know what I want even more than a president who knows how to use a calculator or hire a good accountant...
I want a president who gives a shit... about the little guy...
I want a president with the stones to veto shit bills that take away civil liberties and empower corporations...
I want a president with a plan that does not rely on the 'inherent good will' of the rich... who uses a stick... not just carrots... to bring jobs back home... to raise tariffs and wages that allow domestic products to be competitive again...
I want a president who brings the promise of real capitalism... where no one is too big too fail... where no one can BE too big to fail... where the CONSUMER is number 1... This used to be the land where they said that the customer is always right... guess what... banks and insurance providers have spat on that slogan for decades now...
Mitt knew that showing the 15% rate on his returns would tick people off... that is why he hid it for so long... not that it did him much good...
Come to think of it...
I go to work everyday... I use my body and mind to do my job... things which are mine... things which I nourish with food I pay for with my money (which I already paid taxes on) ... i.e. the product of my mind and body is the product of my investment of my money (which I already paid taxes on) into my body... So.. can I call my wages a capital gain now?
Yes... much of this post is rambling and ranting... but there's probably some good in there somewhere... if not worthy of contemplation... it may be worthy of a smile...
Thanks for smiling.
oh, no,no, it was ALL good, very good. Every point was excellent
Instead of categorizing income as 'earned income' and 'capital gains' taxes should be based on primary sources of income. If I make a million investing in the stock market and 30k at my job, tax my 30k at 15% and the million at 35%...
Obtaining capital gains is Mitts 'job' just like being an engineer or a waiter is a 'job.'
That's a very good point and good idea. I always thought they should tax total income altogether, regardless of source. But your idea sounds pretty good too.
I think all income is income and It ALL should be taxed at the same rate. It doesn't matter if it's interest income, capital gains, dividends, or earnings from labor. And the marginal rate should be steeply progressive if it is to be equitable.
Kenny Rogers' The Gambler on the Muppet Show
http://occupywallst.org/forum/romney-pays-15-income-tax-hes-not-the-only-one/
Tell that to all the retirees that survive on income investments.
If they are 'surviving' then they are probably already in the lower tax bracket. The 35% rate would apply to people making > than the 388k or whatever the IRS tax bracket is...at that point... I would say theyre doing more than 'surviving'...
Why do you all keep confusing Income Tax and Capital Gain Tax? And why are you so envious of anyone that does better than you?
Capital gains are income and envy is not part of the equation.
You are clearly one of 13% that thinks you are the 1%.
Wrong again.
"Why do you all keep confusing Income Tax and Capital Gain Tax? And why are you so envious of anyone that does better than you?"
Did you bother to read the 1st post in this chain...? and no... its not about envy... my grandfather lives off his investments and I am making some myself...
What makes you think that I am "not doing well"?
P.S. So when I said I am not beating up on retirees who are 'surviving' you say I am envious of ones who do better than me? Geez... make up YOUR mind...
could there be more resources ?
american is in a Russian bread line
he also gave 15% to charity. how much did you give?
If I make $45 million I will give just as much. That's a complete different thing. If you really want to use charity as an excuse how about you pay 35% tax then we will shut up about rich people not doing charity?
I gave 0. It still doesn't change the fact that his tax rate is too low.
[Removed]
It takes a genius to to want to raise taxes on someone else. How did you figure that out? How about we lower your income tax to 15% to make it the same as the short term cap gains rate? Would that make you happy?
Actually it raises my taxes too... (raising the capital gains tax)...
yes I know - so you are for raising taxes on everybody then. Smart give the government even more power to redistribute money to their special interest groups. Brilliant Idea
Or cut the deficit... bring back value to the dollar... make the ones we have left worth that much more... agreed that we cannot trust the government to do that...
Starve the beast.
not true thats just the federal tax rate you are considering, what about state, tax, what about tax on everything we buy, what about forced taxation on our homes, and our cars, and insurance, and inspection certificates for our vehicles, etc.... etc.... did I miss anything, are are people so blindly following their government overtaxation they have become numb to it.
It's not about how much tax we pay as a whole society (of course we want to lower that too), it's about within the current taxation, the rich is evading too much.
well ill tell you what, the government has never done anything for me, so id rather the rich keep it than the government and let me tell you why. one time I had a toothache after serving 10 years in the military, and i was only making $5 an hour, so i went to welfare services, and they said they couldnt help me cause I didnt have any children living with me. I swear it really happened like that, the only time I wanted aid, boy did I get the picture of how things worked, luckily I lived close to mexico so I used my child support payment money (i should have made) to get my tooth fixed. The poor suffer, and no one gives a shit. Ask me how often I got to see my kids in the past 20 years.
I give a shit. A lot of people here give a shit. The only thing is, we don't have anybody to speak for us, to fight for our interest in the government decision making process any more. It's all for the rich, they control it to their own favor. All we can do is just vent on this stupid website, but how many can hear us?
And I agree the government sucks, that's why we are trying to make it better. But really the government has never done ANYTHING for you? You better hope you roads never break, you never get robbed and anybody you do business with not be fair on good conscience.
appreciate the sentiment, but i could care less about the roads, a horse has 4 wheel drive, and doesnt cost a thousand dollars amonth to ride it, but the government took away my right to own a horse, saying, its against, zoning ordinance now. i only wish the oil in the earth would dry up, how much money would we save if we didnt waste it on roads, cars, gas and oil and overtaxation of the same? Some day men will realize they werent smarter than God. And as for getting robbed, i have gotten robbed alot in my life, (last thursday night a ladder was taken off my truck) and the cops dont usually catch them nor returned any of my goods when they did. They caught guy with my wallet on him but sold my goods thru their auction of buracracy. Id prefer to enact my right to bear arms and protect myself, why it would even be a pleasure, just think about all the money id save the taxpayer, if i stayed outside by my vehicle cocked and ready to fire the next time a robber came. This is what I love about Texas, you have the right to defend PROPERTY, also, and not just your life.
Um, are you against cars? Are you saying we should all ride horses?
i spend a thousand a month to drive my van and my truck, just think how much money i could save if i rode my horse instead, of course, id have to have a wagon, to haul my tools and generator, welder in, but hey what a marketing concept, id be the only mobile gate welder on horse and buggy.
Probably more realistic would be to convert my truck to natural gas, or water powered, but thats another story.
bottom line is this, if i have to pay for it, then i dont want, it, id rather save my money for my family and make do. God forbid that we should start making do, and stop going into trillions of debt, wow what a concept, i wonder why no one ever though of it, oh ya, their brains stopped progressing. its so depressing to try and share the earth with you my brothers. LOL
No disrespect, but if you have to pay for it you don't want it? Then where did your money come from? You don't believe in Capitalism?
im self employed, a.k.a. self reliant, the proud the few. LOL
Well, good for you then. I always admire people that grow money out of a tree.
It really isn't his fault. He was granted these three wishes you see? And his first was for a company that could use leverage to takeover other companies and strip them of their assets. And sure enough it was granted, and then the second was for a way that he could dump all of the worker's pension responsibility on the Federal government to pay so he could pocket that money too. And again, it was granted. So he thought, "How can I keep this money? I know, I'll ask for a carried interest and capital gains loophole for me and my buddies." and sure enough, that was granted too.
And, then he wished, "I want to be president." And a voice said, "What? I should make a dumb ass who can't count President? Give me a break!"
he made roughly $370,000 dollars last year. do you want him to keep paying taxes on money that is just sitting in his bank?
No just on the interest he collects. The interest wasn't money sitting in the bank.
how much was accumulated in interest?
14% of what his income or his property
Income.
hardly a complete picture of the wealth this candidate owns
Hi dear Friends Do you know why USA keep about 27000 nuclear weapons, But Iran has no right even to have peaceful nuclear technology?
Because their government are f---ing terrorists.
terrorist government "disappear" people
hold them indefinitely without disclosure
Oh yah, Iran with 8' years Imposed war with Iraq and 17 other countries is the real terrorist, and USA with about 1000000 Killed peoples in Iraq and Afghanistan is the real peaceful country in world!!!
Who killed hundreds of thousands of peoples in Japan and Vietnam?!!! Who is killing our nuclear scientists in this time?!!!
Do you know with 27000 nuclear weapons, the Earth can be completely destroyed about 67 times??!!!!!
And, the tax plan he is proposing would cut his taxes by 40%! Not my America, either.
pay rates are sufficiently low and unavailable that tax rates are hardly significant when accessing the plight of the poor
Yeah, but with a proper tax system we can use the money to provide help for the poor to get out of it. But now clearly too much of the tax burden is carried by middle class, who could easily become poor again. Rich people have effectively taken themselves out of the equation.
indeed
if taxes are necessary to keep the current money system going,
that money must come from areas that are holding the current currency
I call this vulture taxism !
I paid a bit more than 1/5th of my income in taxes after all was said and done last year.
That's more than most multi-millionaires.
I paid about 5,300 dollars in income taxes, after getting my tax return of a little over a 1,000 dollars, I paid about 4,300. I made a 30 grand in 2010. I factored in my necessary spending with sales taxes as well which is how I got the number 1/5th. Otherwise my income tax rate is 15%, the same as Mitt Romney who apparently makes 250,000,000.
Sounds fair to me. What's the problem?
I think taxes are too high considering the money doesn't go to much of what I approve of it to be spent on. If my tax dollars, and everyone else's tax dollars, were better appropriated, I wouldn't mind the high tax rate. More roads, schools, and other societal benefits would be nice. Less wars and fraudulent wasteful spending.
why do you care? How does your life improve if you raise Mitt Romney's tax rate?
So I can pay less.
so who's greedy now?
Everybody's greedy. We are talking about fairness here. Wake up.
ah so we should capitulate to your greed in the name of fairness lol!
i JUST WISH YOU fallow through with your threat and leave this nation, find yourself a little gulch and disappear. But capitulation to the new majority is all right with me too.
You are just playing a word game.
Much better $7 Million in charitable donations than wasted by federal government bureaucrats.
Well paying more tax doesn't prohibit you from doing charity. Two different things.
Exactly!!!!!!! I agree 100%
[Removed]
I read the article and it says that Romney gave $7 million in charitable donations, about 16.5 percent of his income so that would put him at 30.5%.
He actually gave more to charity than he gave to the government. If you ask me I prefer he give his money to charities since they most often are better at spending it wisely on thise that need it.
charities dont help people, they only help themselves, look up their form 990 and see where it is really spent. and dont be fooled when it says they spend 60% of it on "programs" i know st. jude hospital spent hundreds of millions on "programs" but only 15k went to patient care, while paying hundreds of millions of dollars to themselves each year in salaries. This type of spendature is common in charities thruout, u might as well say they are as corrupt as the wall street and bankers. Just waiting for you people to see it.
You are full of Bull.
St Jude spent 81% on research and treatment, 13% on fundraising and 6% on administration. http://www.stjude.org/SJFile/annual_report_10.pdf
I have volunteered fro Habitat for Humanity and trust me they absolutely do HELP PEOPLE.
Our entire family also supports Americas Grow a Row another great charity. http://americasgrowarow.org/
Most food pantries, soup kitchens, and homeless shelters are reun by churches and charities.
research and treatment is just another fancy term for fancy medical jobs, if those hundreds of millions of dollars were being useful, why was there only 15k spent on people who were not employed by st. jude, (patient care) Im telling you with a closer look, its self evident thanks to form 990 information. Its like cancer research, they also spent a trillion dollars over the last few decades on research, but when someone actually has cancer, rarely, if ever do they fit the bill. its always consumed by these internal scientists consuming the funds saying, "im on the hunt for the lost city of gold" type mentality.
Another example is the leukemia society, they also say they spend hundreds of millions on medical advancement and research, but when a person donates, dont they think they believe their donation is actually going to help pay for another person with leukemia? Fact is it doesnt. if you visit their website, it says, they dont use the money for paitent care. Im telling you I see somehting that others dont in this.
Children are never turned away from St. Jude Children's Research Hospital because of their parents' inability to pay.
if that were true, we would see a hundreds of millions of dollars listed as patient care, but the 2011 form 990 shows 15k as a single line item. and 236 million dollars in salaries, ranging from 500k up to 1.5 mil, and the rest being consumed by "research and medical b.s." i bet with further study, you can find it being handed over to medicine manufacturers, i bet without even looking my soul tells me that these types of charities are in bed with medicine manufacturing companies, which I just remembered seeeing several line items of this proof also on their form 990.
You are either misinformed or a liar?
http://www.stjude.org/SJFile/990form-stjude-fy10.pdf
Or maybe you just cannot read. It says they provide 15k DAYS OF CARE.
15k days of what, how does 15k of care add up to a dollar amount, again is something missing here? im pretty sure it said 15k of inpatient care not days when i read it yesterday. besides, the fact that they make outrageous sums of money in salary, $236,000,000 for 30 people that averages out to 7.8 million per person, come on u cant see it yet? if people knew they were paying themselves that much would they continue to donate? whats really bad is that alot of these rich charities, get corporations to ask for a donation to unsuspecting citizens at toys r us, radio shack, and mall advertising so corporations are tied into it. and they have the gall to say their net profit was - $5k for the year, OMG, it speaks volumes if you open up your eyes. heres the link http://www.stjude.org/SJFile/990form-stjude-fy10.pdf
• No family ever pays St. Jude for anything.
• St. Jude has treated children from all 50 states and from around the world.
• On average, 7,800 active patients visit the hospital each year, most of whom are treated on an outpatient basis.
• St. Jude has 78 inpatient beds and treats upwards of 260 patients each day.
• St. Jude is the first institution established for the sole purpose of conducting basic and clinical research and treatment into catastrophic childhood diseases, mainly cancer.
• Research findings at St. Jude are shared freely with doctors and scientists all over the world.
• St. Jude has developed protocols that have helped push overall survival rates for childhood cancers from less than 20 percent when the hospital opened in 1962 to 80 percent today. The current St. Jude survival rates for selected childhood cancers now include:
• St. Jude pioneered a combination of chemotherapy, radiation and surgery to treat childhood cancers.
• St. Jude researchers and doctors are treating children with pediatric AIDS, as well as using new drugs and therapies to fight infections.
• St. Jude was the first institution to develop a cure for sickle cell disease with a bone marrow transplant and has one of the largest pediatric sickle cell programs in the country.
it says no child shall be turned away based on race or religion or income, not that they will take every child
on page 30 of their form 990 it says, only a nickel from every dollar donated went towards helping others (aka charity)
nearly half the money went to pay fat cat executives, just like the boy scouts of america who claim to not have enough money to go do things
nearly half went to do research, like looking for the lost city of gold, as far as ive heard after trillions of dollars of wasted money later, they havent found it yet.
81% of the money they raise goes to saving lives. Like I said below I would choose them over many other projects the government takes my money and gives it to...
$11,270,000 for the East-West Center in Hawaii
$825,000,000 for mine resistant ambush protected all terrain vehicles
$10,400,000 for the Great Lakes Fishery Commission
$29,992,000 by Senate Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Thad Cochran (R-Miss.)
$17,000,000 for the International Fund for Ireland
$4,841,000 for wood utilization research
$2,000,000 for the Appalachian Fruit Laboratory
$2,573,000 for potato research
$1,000,000 for wheat genetic research
$4,000,000 for the Dairy Forage Agricultural Research Center
$3,000,000 for Chesapeake Bay oyster restoration
I think you get the idea.
Your information is inaccurate AGAIN 30 people... you have no clue at all what you are taking about and you cannot a 990 read very well.
St Jude's employs more than 3,200 people.
15k days means that since there are 356 days in a year that on average 42 rooms occupied at whatever the cost a day it is for the room: nurses, equipment, doctors, cleaning crew, heat, electricity, computers, food...
I am not sure why you want to hate a hospital that focuses on treating children with cancer.
By the way research is not just for a cure for cancer. It includes Chemical Biology, Hematology, Infectious Diseases, Oncology, Pathology, Radiological Sciences, Structural Biology. They publish a ton of information that they share with other institutions and hospitals.
oh i know they employ alot of people, just look at where the other 220 million went, employing people who are on the hunt for the lost city of gold, why i might as well start a business under the false pretense of charity, and have people donate to me under the false pretense and use the funds to pay people who work for me, 60 percent for employees, 20 percent for buildings, 10 percent for campains, 5 percent for legal, and insurances, and only 5 percent to do what I actually said I would do and that is help people, (trickign all those who donated, I know when i donate I think it goes to hellping people, but again if you look at the break down, it doesnt say, donate to create jobs, it says, it will help people who have need of medical treatment.
Look at it from mathematical point of view, on page 30 of the form 990 (http://www.stjude.org/SJFile/990form-stjude-fy10.pdf ) it states that only 5.86% of their revenue went for charity care. Their "donations to help others was nearly 600 million dollars, yet they only helped others to the sum of 36 million. Hmmm, do we really see helping others, or helping themselves. the point is if they were helping others, they wouldnt be paying themselves millions of dollars a year in salary out of our donations given to help others. about 30 execs paid themselves 236 million in salaries, 257 million went to paying their staff of doctors and research team on the hunt for the lost city of gold (aka cancer, and all the other mumbo jumbo) and only 36 million for helping people. the rest was consumed on leasing buildings, insurances, etc...
It is all good. Saving lives and curing terminal diseases is a worthy endeavor.
Call it a lost city of gold but I would give my money to them before giving it to Solyndra, Ener1, or other crony capitalism projects. Of course I don't have a choice in the latter since the government takes my money and gives it to those companies.
I would assume that 10% of the 16.5 % was given to the mormon church. You have to give 10% minimum to be a member in good standing.
I am OK with that. They do a lot of good work.
In 2011, LDS Charities built wells and spring water systems for one million people on three continents.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxdNxt8rfRA
That's cool. They do some good stuff. I just suspect that it is far less than most churches. Hard to say though because they don't disclose any financial information to their members.
Why do you suspect it is far less than most churches?
I was raised mormon, but left. When I started attending protestant churches, I was struck by the much greater emphasis in protestant churches in giving to charitable endeavors.
I also find the lack of financial disclosure in the mormon church troubling. If the church is really giving a substantial percentage of it's income to humanitarian endeavors, I would think they would want to give an accounting to their members. I know they are very wealthy and currently building a 2 billion dollar shopping mall/condo development.
Nonetheless, I am glad for whatever contributions they make to help people in need. That's always a good thing. I am rather skeptical about the charitable inclinations of the church leaders, but the mormon people are really good about lending a helping hand to others.
The Protestant church was responsible for almost as many atrocities as the Catholic church. I was raised Catholic. I went to a Baptist church for a while. I don't go to church anymore. I like the teachings of Buddhism.
Ah, so we were both raised in one of the 'only true' churches. ; )
I've been attending a Presbyterian church I found through the Center for Progressive Christianity. http://tcpc.org/template/index.cfm I really don't know much about the history of Presbyterians, but I like what this one is doing now. They are actively involved with helping the hungry and homeless and advocating for social justice.
I don't know much about Buddhism, but I am a huge fan of Thich Nhat Hahn.
so now you want to decide which charities he can donate to hahaha! It has to meet your approval hahaha! What a loser!
Hundreds of Capitol Hill Staffers Didn't Pay Taxes in 2010
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/24/hundreds-capitol-hill-staffers-didnt-pay-taxes-in-2010/#ixzz1kOvmKZXW
What would happen if all income was taxed at a flat rate with no loopholes or deductions. How much revenue would the U.S. bring in each year. Anyone out there have any sources for that answer?
The extra revenue can be used for cutting tax for the working class to encourage consumer spending and cutting corporate tax to attract business.
I hope that that would be the result. I have not found viable sources that will state this. This does not mean that those sources are not out there. I just have not found them.
We need to push them towards this direction.
Even at 15% Mitt Romney is paying over 6 million in taxes. Forget the 35% bracket! Keep everyone at 10-15% and shrink government. Obama and his gang's notion of fair share ought to scare everyone out there who wants to own more than the bare minimum to survive.
By the way, I am not voting for romney. too mainstream.
Well, you can get scared all you want. I'll take all the extra income and pay 35%. Give me all your wealth and let me suffer the punishment.
If you bust your ass to earn what qualifies as a wealthy bracket, why shouldn't you keep it?
Nobody's gonna take it.
35% taxation sounds like robbery to me
Then stop robbing the middle class first. Then save the rich guys.
Sigh! A 10 or 15% flat tax will not rob the middle class. Combine a flat tax with a 1 page tax code and reduced government and you will have the ingredients for a rejuvinated nation. Class warfare is a dead issue.
That all good but reducing the overall size of government is another topic. Before you can do it, let's make sure everybody pays the same tax rate. That's no excuse for the rich to keep taking advantage.
Ok. how about a 10% flat tax rate, regardless of income?
Whatever the rate is, in order to balance out, the people who are paying too little, their tax needs to be raised, and the other end reduced.
Nope, flat tax across the spectrum. Please define balance out. I respect your desire to bring fairness to the picture, but whose standard of fairness will be used?
Fairness is everybody paying same tax rate. Capital gain and income should not be separated. If we raise the rich's rate to the same as the rest of us, the government will have too much revenue. So the overall resulting rate should be lower, but certainly higher than 15%.
It's like if you connect two lakes with different water levels, the resulting water level will be lower than the high, and higher than the low, while the total amount of water remains.
In our case, it means the overall size of the government remains.
I will support lowering your taxes to 15%.
This is such bullshit. It's like you got the big piece of the cake, leaving everybody else a mall one. Now you are saying you support me getting a big piece too, only if I can find more of it. How about you spit out your cake that was supposed to be ours first?
I got the big piece of what cake? I said I would stand side by side with you to lower taxes on the vast majority of Americans. You tell me that you stand against lowering taxes on the 99%?
The entire size of the government's revenue is one thing. (I agree it needs to be reduced.) The proportion of taxation on the rich and the rest is another. Before progress is made in reducing the size of the government, the only way to make it fair between the rich and the rest of us is to raise their tax, at least to the SAME level as us.
The extremely low tax rate the rich have been enjoying is the bigger piece of the cake, and now they just refuse to give it back.
Wouldn't it make it fair to lower the tax burden on the 99%? Wouldn't that help the most people?
Yes, that's the ideal scenario. But where is this money gonna come from? The government can run on zero dollars? Before you can find things to cut, rich people need to pay higher tax. This is NOT taking anything away from them, they have been enjoying a MUCH lower tax rate than the working class. We are just taking some of it back.
But you aren't taking anything back, you are only taking. If you fight to lowers taxes, you are actually forcing the government to reduce its' spending and keeping more money in your own pocket.
Look we all want to have a smaller government. We all want to reduce our own tax. But now the fact is, the rich reduced theirs, and now we are stuck. All I am saying is, they come back up a little, and the rest of us (the working class, the non-rich) can go down some.
Of course we want to reduce government spending, but that's another topic. Before we can achieve that, let's not have only one group of people enjoying the good deal. And who's this group? The richest and most powerful who need the least help.
So, why not reduce the tax pressure on everybody else? Why do you want the people who are not rich to have to pay more of their money? I would understand if I was suggesting that we drop the cap gains down to 5%, but I am not. Why are you against dropping the tax rate for ordinary Americans?
Because I'm not an anti government anarchist without common sense. The money has to come from somewhere. If everybody pays zero tax (you don't think I want that?) how could we maintain the government? Yes I want it smaller. But that not the topic here, big or small, everybody has to do their fair share, and the rich, at 14% tax rate, clearly are not!
So, you are for the government screwing the little guy.
where did you see this? i want to see the link for myself. also his investment firm created hundreds of thousands of jobs.
You don't believe one politician's bullshit but you do believe another's? Talk about deluded ...
what?
A massive stinking pile of bullshit. Tasty, isn't it?
"his investment firm created hundreds of thousands of jobs"
120,000 jobs between four companies that he help start.
He didn't help start them. Bain Capital wasn't one of the initial nor the largest investors of Staples, where the majority of Romney's claimed jobs figure came from. How can he take the credit for all 90,000 job positions there? It's beyond bullshit. It's down right shameless.
he never said they were the biggest nor the first investors. he invested the money when they needed it the most. w/o the money who knows what would have happened to staples and all those jobs.
look, romney is not my first choice for president by far, but you guys need to not trust everything you here on the TV.
Who's trusting everything they hear on TV now? Trust me Staples would've been just fine. Bain wasn't a major investor at all, and the office supply super store idea was very popular with the investors at the time.
All he did was provide a little money. Even if you call that creating jobs, he still didn't create all of them. Look I really don't think it needs too much explaining why Romney is not a very honest guy.
ill trust you that staples would have been just fine? im sure you know all the ins and outs of staples and all their financial. every investor, big or small, can take credit for creating jobs, its american. but what gets me after reading some peoples posts, is that they contradict what you are saying. you say you are implying that bain capital wasnt one of the major investors in staples and im guessing you are saying that for all the other companies that bain invested in? then where did bain get all their income to pay their employees. you guys say that romney is some rich dude that makes 20 mil a year and doesnt pay his fair share of taxes. bain had to have put millions into these companies. romney just didnt get millions of dollars out of thin air, and you cant say that the government was paying because you and i both know thats not true.
so if i just have a "little money" to invest in a few companies, i can become a millionaire like romney? make up your mind on what you believe. either romney got his millions by investing a lot of money into these companies that succeeded and created a bunch of jobs OR he is one smart muther fucker when it comes to fiscal responsibility and knowing how a little money can go along way and that is the type of person we need right now to run our country.
and you cant hate on him for only paying ~15% in income tax. you know you would do the same thing if you were in his position, and dont even say that isnt true. also, he didnt do anything illegal.
Bain was not Staples' major contributor doesn't mean Staples wasn't Bain's main customer. I don't know anything about other companies they invested in. But Staples' 90,000 jobs are the major part of the 100,000 Romney is claiming, that's what he said himself. It's no secret. All I'm saying is you can't say you created something when you were just a part of a big group. Not fair to the other investors.
then exactly how much did they invest compared to how much the other people invested at that time? you are just stating a very vague answer that you probably heard on the tv.
and im guessing since you didnt respond to the rest of my post, that you agree with me on everything else.
Here, this one gives you a pretty good idea. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-215_162-57364603/when-will-the-real-mitt-romney-stand-up A little googling will give you an even better picture how Staples became successful.
I didn't respond to all of them because it would've been even longer than your post. Then your response would be even longer...
Look, I understand you like Mitt. It's okay. I don't hate him, I just think he exaggerated his achievement in a self congratulatory and dishonest manner. And why do you think the republican voters don't like him if the guy was perfect?
Yes, I don't hate him for paying 14%. Yes, it's all legal. I hate the laws. I want the tax code changed so if I make millions I have to pay the same as the working class too. Doesn't matter if you are Mitt, Nick or Dick. The conservatives' last defense is always "it's nothing illegal", then change the stupid law. Isn't that what we sent these jerks to Washington for?
And by the way, "nothing illegal" is a pretty low standard for someone trying to be a political leader.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/18/us/politics/facing-pointed-attacks-romney-urges-focus-on-obama.html
It's from New York Times, and pretty much everywhere if you read any news. Meanwhile, still no proof that his company created those jobs.
Here is another one from The Atlantic http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/01/the-real-scandal-in-private-equity-its-the-taxes/251463/
helped the companies succeed that created the jobs.
Here is a pretty good report on how he "helped the companies succeed": http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-215_162-57364603/when-will-the-real-mitt-romney-stand-up/
listening to FOX .. I see ...
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/mitt-romney-defends-record-bain-capital-du
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-20/romney-as-job-creator-clashes-with-bain-record-of-job-cuts.html
and where do you get your news from?
Obama's list of failed policies. Sad http://obamafailedpolicies.com/
That link starts with his birth certificate ... hahahaha
hell.. no.... the rich should pay zero taxes... they are the job creators.... how can they create jobs if they have to pay taxes....
we should privatize everything ... hospitals, fire stations, roads, schools, dams... etc... everything.... think about how many new jobs that will create ...as "toll booth" attendants ....get with it OWS ... stop complaining .... we're here to help you.... ;)
Yes! Instead of the wealthy paying taxes, they should keep more of their money in order to use it to buy even BETTER representation in government! Because I'm certain the government isn't doing as much for the wealthy as they could be.
Why pay taxes when it's far more productive to give your money directly to your elected officials to get what you want. It's just more efficient. Cut out the middle man, government red tape and all of those useless social programs that do nothing to improve the life of the wealthy!
No wonder the wealthy are pissed about the idea of paying higher taxes.
do u understand the reason behind imposing only 15% tax rate on investments?
Yes, it's to maximize profit on paper pushing that's only purpose is to create profit.
First of all, It's not on investments. It's on this so called carried interests. These investment fund managers get paid a percentage of the profit for the investors, which is clearly a payment for service, but they get taxed only 15% as if it were capital gains. It's the equivalent of a movie star's earnings from a movie's profit counted as investment returns. Ridiculous.
wrong. in case of mitt romney he isnt investing other people's money anymore. and no its not like a movie star's share of profits
Of course he is investing his own money, he already got filthy rich from these loopholes. But he still gets paid from Bain for the accounts he managed. Regardless of where it came from, his income should be taxed at the same rate as everybody else's. This low rate on investment returns is nonsense. The false claim of "double taxing" is a just trick rich people use to take advantage.
'Double taxation' is not a trick. Say I run a restaurant and I am the sole owner and I employ 1 cook and 1 waiter. What I (or the restaurant)pay to the cook and waiter are salaries. What remains after everything has been settled is the profit from the restaurant.Let us say the profit is $100 (just assume). The restaurant now will pay 35% corporate tax on it (again I know no business makes $100 and it sure wont be taxed at 35% in real life. But this is just an example). So whats left with the restaurant is $65 and say the restaurant pays all of it as dividends to the shareholder (in this case the sole owner). Now if you consider it as the salary of the owner you would tax it at 35% therefore the owner makes $42. Or you would put a dividend tax of 15% on it and the owner makes $55. Do the math. You are in effect taxing the same pool of money twice. In fact, I would say that capital gains should not be taxed at all.
No, that's wrong.
Corporate tax is borne by both the employee and the owner. So you can't say the owner already paid 35% corporate tax. Corporate tax, essentially, is a taxation on the activity of collaboration between labor and capital (the essence of Capitalism), it's on the activity, therefore carried by both parties involved, not just the owner/investor. Just like how sales tax is, in effect, more or less split between buyers and sellers.
If, like many conservatives believe, corporate tax is effectively carried only by the investors, then with corporate tax decreased or removed, all of the resulted profit jump should go to the investors. But the reality is, the free market will certainly push part of the increased profit into pay raise for the labor side. Therefore to let the capital side take all the credit for corporate tax is wrong. And it should not be factored in the income tax on capital returns.
I do not expect to convince anybody with a clear answer, because this is a matter of fundamental philosophy. But with proper explanation, one can eventually see why the deal was sweetened for the rich a little too much.
That's why I think the best solution is to just eliminate all corporate tax, and increase the steepness, and maybe to some level, the overall level of income tax, and treat interests and salary all the same. This way nobody can have any false excuse to evade, and investment is encouraged with no corporate tax.
And assume that I did not employ anyone and it was me doing everything. Say I am a freelance designer and I have a registered my own company. So the money my company makes is effectively my money. What logic is there to apply tax twice on the same income? It's crazy
It would only be taxed twice if you were stupid enough to set it up that way. Reading to your bullshit, I can image you doing just that. Most people would opt for a business setup that would reduce their taxes instead of increasing them.
For a sole proprietor, an S-corp would be ideal. There are plenty of tax strategies for doing just that. You would think that a self-proclaimed "smart" finance guy would know that.
That's a very good question. First of all, that's not a corporation when you hire yourself. And even it's your own money, part of your earnings is your salary, for the work you have done, the rest is the return on your capital. You can do the paper work however you want, but it's not crazy.
And the salary and the dividends would be taxed at different rates.
Which is the problem. Taxing labor at a higher rate than dividends devalues labor and penalizes those who perform it.
Exactly.
actually it (investment, and by extension, dividends) enables those who perform labor.......labor's value is in it's result, with investment in tools, and machinery, and creation of systems of enterprise the value of labor is increased, not decreased...and rewards those who perform it, it does not penalizes them.....
Investment created machines, tools, systems, facilities, and computerization for labor to produce....the labor of men may have produced them, but it was investment and capital that enabled their production......
Investment and the rewards of investment are more important to advancing society than labor, labor holds fast, investment moves things forward.....sorry if you don't like that, but, it's true....mankind has always had labor, but has only advanced through investment and capital resources that enable more efficient, productive, labor...
Your claim that "Investment and the rewards of investment are more important to advancing society than labor" is conclusively dis-proven by the state of the world economy, the state of the US economy, the unemployment rate, income inequality and the concentration of vast amounts of wealth in a very small segment of the population, Romney's tax returns, etc., etc.
Labor creates everything, investment without labor creates nothing, unless of course you can eat, wear or live under a big pile of stocks and bonds.
labor cannot advance without investment, you are a fool to try and suggest otherwise, until a man invented a shovel, found investment or a marketplace to sell it, men dug with sticks or their hands.....tell me how labor produced or made the shovel available to the bulk of those who labor at digging?
It didn't investment did that, by compensating labor in the production of the shovels, without the compensation provided by investment the laborer would have had to spend their time digging, not making shovels for others to dig with.....
I know you will never get it, or understand.....you just hate success, plain and simpel
Man advanced for countless millennia without investment of anything other than labor and ingenuity.
He didn't need someone to pay him to make a shovel. He took a piece of wood, or a seashell, or contrived some other device out of ingenuity to accomplish the task at hand.
"Success" is not taking the most you possibly can at the expense of everyone else. There is a different terms for that ...
Besides, judging from this part in Wikipedia, I would guess the case you just presented will not be taxed at a corporate level. "In the United States, any person is considered self-employed for tax purposes if that person is running a business as a sole proprietorship, independent contractor, as a member of a partnership, or as a member of a limited liability company that does not elect to be treated as a corporation."
that depends whether u r talking of a partnership (LLC) or a corporation.
Look, I'm sure the one-man-company situation is well covered in the law. And really, we didn't have this unfair tax system because we couldn't figure out how to deal with the self-employed people. It's because rich people have power and they maneuver the system into their favor, in a way that's hard for general public to tell.
the one man thing was simply an example, the most basic example.
Under the current law yes, but it's not fair. They should be treated the same. Otherwise you can always claim your wage is very low, and most of your earnings is the capital return, and get away with paying very little tax.
And, while you used the one man shop as a case for lower tax on investment return, it actually is a perfect example why it's a loophole.
Corporations are tax dodges. An S-Corp pays no tax, allows more deductions, and allows a portion of what would otherwise be taxed as self-employment income to be taken as a dividend at 15%. C-Corps have many, many strategies for avoiding taxes.
All you need is a savvy accountant and enough money to pay him (which is also a write-off).
If you want to make the argument that corporations are people, they should be taxed at personal income rates.
with the exception of...
because it's very general. The point you make is beautifully simple.
Wow, are you clueless!
Clueless? Look at Romney's tax returns.
Yeah, he paid more taxes in 1 year than you will pay in 10 lifetimes.
If Romney paid the same tax rate I do he would have paid twice as much in taxes. But he makes $57,000 per day and pays a lower tax rate than someone making $80,000 a year.
If you think that's good I've got some tasty Kool-aid here for you ...
Nonsense. Actual tax rate for 50,000 income is a max of 11.9%. If you are married with 2 children, tax rate is ZERO. Yes, Nothing. propagating myths isn't helping anybody.
NOT propaganda, typo. Sorry, - $80,000.
My bad. I stand corrected. It is my hope that We can get to the place where we all pay the same low rate; simple, honest, and fair. In the meantime, I would much rather have the Bill Gates of the world giving their money to charity (Bill and Milinda Gates Foundation) that giving it to the Washington bureaucracy. I have seen the fraud, waste, and abuse of government spending and have lost all faith in big government.
Government is driven by corporate interests, and serves them exclusively at the expense of citizens. Government is 1/2 the problem. Changing the players will not fix anything, it is the system that has to be corrected. It can't be "fixed" because it already is.
The Washington bureaucracy you hate so much is controlled by the exact rich people whose unjust interest you are trying to protect.
You lost faith in big government, or did you lose faith in government, I think you need to make that clear to yourself first?
You lost me. "rich people ...trying to protect?". I'm a 99%er who is working hard and taking care of my family. I believe in limited government, low taxes for everyone, and empowering individuals.
First of all the 15% rate is on investment income. That investment income was originally taxed as earning at 36%. Then - for putting the moeny at risk if you make a wise decision you make a Capital gain. That is then taxed @ 15% if taken within one year or 25% if taken after one year. So effectively the taxes paid are 36 + 15 = 51%. Make wise investment decisions & you can get the same treatment.
Manure Romney minimizes his taxes, no way he paid 35% BEFORE he paid 13.9%.
Grow a brain, if it's not already too late.
if his net income was above 347K he paid 36% Fed tax where did you get information to the contrary? Or is it just whats been spoon fed to you? Go to the IRS & Look up the tax code.
The depth of your ignorance is profound. I would say it is astounding but it is way beyond that.
Ever hear of deductions?
Romney himself announced that his taxes were about 15%. It turns out it was a bit lower. It has been reported in every major newspaper in the country.
Btw, capital gains is PROFIT. It is therefore INCOME. Taxes on capital gains are not double taxation as it does not tax the investment but only the profit. If I work for a salary I am taxed on my earnings. If I do a great job and get a bonus, taxing me on that bonus is not double taxation, but taxation on additional earnings.
cap gains is taxed as cap gains not income that's the difference. if you have mo earnings from a job but only cap gains for the year - hence 15% - then you have some deductions like charity etc - 14% .
Then wouldn't it be a better plan to lower YOUR tax rate instead of raising his and have gov stop the crazy, wasteful spending?
Why have government at all? If less government is good, no government must be best.
It is impossible to understand how you can ignore the influence of money on the political system and focus solely on government as the problem. There is a two way street between corporate power and political action that completely bypasses citizens. Do you really not understand that factual reality?
One minute you want big government and the next, no government. Are you a Socialist or Anarchist? Make up your mind, please.
Classic. Misdirection in a desperate attempt to salvage a defeated argument.
Please point out exactly where I said I wanted "big government".
You lose.
Raise taxes on the rich. Income re-distribution by the government.
I own an S-Corp and I have to pay taxes on company profits on my personal return.
As dividends at a lower rate instead of as personal income at a higher rate. Also dividends (and interest) are sheltered from FICA (15.6% for the self-employed).
I'm sure you use some other "strategies" as well, and I'm sure you have an S-corp primarily - if not solely- because of the tax advantages it provides.
Like I said: Corporations are tax dodges. Thanks for proving my point.
I get paid a salary, just like any of my employees. I have to pay both sides of my payroll and income taxes. We follow the letter of the law. How is that dodging? You are making a fool of yourself AGAIN.
Try not to be such a blatant hypocrite. Why do you have an S-Corp? To avoid taxes.
Saving Business Taxes with an S Corporation: A Short Primer
S corporations, or Subchapter S corporations, produce several tax benefits as compared to sole proprietorships, partnerships, and C corporations.
The big benefit--and the one that people usually talk about--is the payroll tax savings. To understand how this works, let me compare two alternatives: A sole proprietor making $90,000 a year and an S Corporation making $90,000 a year.
Of course, the taxes that a sole proprietor pays depends on his or her filing status, itemized deductions and family size, but typically such a person might pay about $12,000 in federal income taxes. The person might also pay another chunk in state income taxes.
In addition to these income taxes, the proprietor also pays a 15.3% self-employment tax on the $90,000 of business profits. Roughly, this self-employment tax (which is equivalent to Social security and Medicare tax) equals $13,000.
Things usually work differently for the S corporation, however. To make calculations easy, assume the S corporation is owned by a single shareholder. In this case, the S corporation must break the $90,000 of profit into two buckets: wages and the leftover (which is called a distributive share). If the wages equal $40,000 and the leftover distributive share equals $50,000, the business pays Social Security and Medicare taxes (equivalent to self-employment tax) equal to roughly $6,000.
In this case, even though the two businesses make the exact same amount of money, the S corporation pays roughly $7,000 less in tax each year.
Why did OWS form a 501c3? Talk about a tax dodge!
[Removed]
"Why do you have an S-Corp? To avoid taxes. "
No. To avoid over-taxation!
If I wanted to avoid taxes all together, I would either do cash only side jobs or sell stuff on the black market.
Greed knows no bounds.
Your blatant ignorance knows no bounds.
I doubt you pay one cent more than you are required by law to pay to the IRS. Until you start stroking a check for 5-12K over and abouve the amount you are required to pay by laws set down by our government, you have no standing to criticize someone who pay their taxes as required and takes every deduction available to them. Just because you are so lacking in motivation that you cannot muster the huevos to work for yourself instead of punching a time clock, is no reason to denigrate someone who does work for themselves and is resourceful at being able to keep THEIR OWN MONEY, THE MONEY THEY HAVE EARNED!
I take every deduction available to me and still pay DOUBLE Romeny's rate. The system is fixed to reward those with the most.
Until you morons wake up to that very simple fact you will continue to vote and act against your own self-interest. That is the very definition of stupid.
Unlikely you pay double Romney's rate. If you do, you are part of the 1%. Even at 100K you still only pay slightly less than 20%...
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1040tt.pdf?portlet=103
Just my my FICA (15.6%, self-employed) is more than the rate Romney paid.
That is pathetic. Do they even pay FICA on capital gains? No. Right?
FICA is not income tax. If you are paying FICA because you are self employed, you really ought to look into establishing an "S" corp. I dropped my tax responsibility over 6K because of that (and I didn't and don't make all that much money)
Well said. Thank you.
I have my business designated as an "S" Corp also. I congratulate your accountant on his tax acumen. I hope you get every deduction and savings you are entitled to.
God bless you.
Did you pay over 3 million dollars? I didn't think so.
Nope. And he didn't make over $21 million either. Funny how you are awed by the amount of tax but totally oblivious to the amount of money being taxed.
That's because I detest the class warfare bullshit that Obama and his brain deficient supporters so greedily drone on and on about. Can't wait for the divisive speech in a couple hours. I know exactly who that big eared wannabe tiger woods is going to piss on. If that doesn't make you sick, nothing will.
Class warfare is the brainchild of Republican strategist Frank Lutz and it has been repeatedly echoed across the corporate airwaves by Beck Limbaugh, O'Reilly and the entire wingnut support system.
See - brainwashing works!
[Removed]
But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity for falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute responsibility for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the catastrophe which he had foreseen and to save the nation from that hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsibility for the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous enough to be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the Fatherland to Justice. All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true within itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. —Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X[1]
"That is of course rather painful for those involved. One should not as a rule reveal one's secrets, since one does not know if and when one may need them again. The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous." -Joseph Goebbels, "Aus Churchills Lügenfabrik" ("Churchill's Lie Factory"), 12 January 1941, Die Zeit ohne Beispiel (Munich: Zentralverlag der NSDAP., 1941), pp. 364-369
"That is of course rather painful for those involved. One should not as a rule reveal one's secrets, since one does not know if and when one may need them again. The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous." -Joseph Goebbels, "Aus Churchills Lügenfabrik" ("Churchill's Lie Factory"), 12 January 1941, Die Zeit ohne Beispiel (Munich: Zentralverlag der NSDAP., 1941), pp. 364-369
Youre a freethinker. You believe wholeheartedly in theft through excessive taxation with no representation. I call it greed.
The wealthy have plenty of representation, as much as they can afford to buy. Regular citizens have none, because they can't afford it.
That is the real theft.
Class warfare has been operated on us for a long time. Now every time we want to fight back they start yelling "class warfare". He is already the President, he doesn't need to "wannabe" anything. Pathetic.
I didn't break up companies and lay off people then collect "carried interest"either.
People are supposed to get payed to do nothing? Why not.
Romney's income was not earned income. It was the other kind ...
Are you jealous, or bitter?
Disgusted that I pay a far higher tax rate on a far smaller income, and that people like you, who are clearly neither rich nor intelligent, avidly support something that is not in your own self-interest.
I am neither jealous nor bitter like you. I am content with what I have, even though it is not much. Whether one has little or much, his life does not consist of his possessions.
Good for you. But clearly there are people never content with what they have and they are taking too much advantage of people like you and me and making this society unhealthy. And now they want to be the President.
He's already the president and is campaigning right now.
If you mean President Obama, I don't think he pays 14% tax and he's not collecting "carried interest" as a investment fund manager.
I am quite irritated over the success that scumbag repelicans have clearly had taking over this forum
We ARE part of the 99%. You'll have to change your slogans if you don't want republican types to be a part of the movement :-)
Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster that Ron Paul is rapidly fading from view.
I haven't seen any of you protesting the keystone pipeline, the closing of post offices, or other issues of import to the Occupy Movement
YOu are a fraud and a liar
and I hate liars and frauds
Well, if YOU haven't seen us, I guess that makes it a fact. But can you explain where I lied or attempted to defraud? You are impossible to debate with since your response to anyone that questions you are insults. You add very little of value to this forum.
Bwa waaaa waaaa. Did you get any snow in your area last night? Plows were out in full force here, making money overtime! Lots of cash for the body shops too with all the fender benders. Bad for those greedy auto insurers.
fuck you scumbag
global warming is here
right outside the door
and the repelican party is DONE
[Removed]
I love global warming. Global cooling is bad. If we go back to that, Seattle will be under a mile of ice. I guess it would be good for your plowing business though.