Romney, The Inevitable Nominee

[blueblood]

So why is it that the wealthy don't bear a share of the cost of reducing the deficit? Why is it that lower and middle class citizens are being told they must give up programs that are important to their bottom line, while the tax cuts for the wealthy are deemed non-negotiable?

And when that question comes up, the response is always something along the lines of "these are the risk-takers! these are the job-creators! Small business creates most jobs in America! We need to get America working again! We need to reward initiative!" etc etc.

But this doesn't correspond to reality.

I am highly skeptical the idea that "the wealthy" and "small business owners" are the same people. I don't think the Mitt Romneys and Hank Paulsons of the world are going to out there and start small businesses if we reduce their taxes.

The assumption is that if rich-guys get to keep more of their money, they will use it to do something that will create jobs. The theory is that they will invest it in ways that put Americans to work.

The reality is that they will will invest it in ways that generate profits for them. That doesn't necessarily put any Americans to work at all. For example:

-shareholder profits often come at the *expense* of American jobs (ie, finding ways to increase corporate profit by outsourcing, or just plain shutting down American operations that are unprofitable. Sure, these are legitimate business decisions, but let's not pretend that shareholder profits = American jobs.)

-investment profits sometimes come from investing in activities that only actually occur on paper (or in e-space...) such as the guys who made vast fortunes shuffling hot air around in the form of derivatives.

What if, instead of giving tax cuts to rich-guys in the hope that they might use the extra money in ways that create jobs, what if they paid their taxes, and they got the breaks when they *actually do* use their money in ways that put Americans to work? Pretty radical idea, huh?

-k

What is it with you people and thinking wealthy people stick their money in a hole in the ground? Sheesh!!

These types of arguments are the slippery slope to a breaking point in which the wealthy people say screw you guys I'm going home. The wealthy people already do a lot to contribute to society. They make products, have investment companies that generate more wealth by helping finance startups and other projects, save in banks, and buy a lot of stuff.

Hugo chavez is trying to wage a war with wealthy people, as a result they're saying screw you there are other places in the world I can live in. Last I checked the rest of the world is catching up to north america as far as living standards go, keep playing that game and richie rich takes his ball and goes and plays with the new kids in town. Where did that attitude get venezuela, they're floating on oil and all they've amounted to is a pile of monkey crap, that's embarassing.

The reality is that the working class needs to take their ass hats off because its not 1950s anymore, there are other countries willing to work and they may not be able to afford things they feel entitled to.

A better idea for reducing the deficit is closing the loopholes in the tax code, getting those 46 percent of americans who don't pay income tax to start paying, and gut the red tape that chokes off small business and only benefits the likes of General Electric and the like.

The rich people already do their fair share of contributing to society, how about the middle class stops their credit card and 30 year mortgage debt spree.

[Argus]

It's nice people get criticized because they come from "privileged" backgrounds. Maybe we should also look at all "poor" people and tell them they'll never be able to accomplish anything in life.

Well, people who come from poor backgrounds know what it's like to be poor. And since no poor people make it into congress, they also know what it's like to work hard, and then to be middle class. Some of them are even lucky enough to know what it's like to be rich.

People who come from rich backgrounds only know privilege, only know what it's like to be rich. And when you have two rich boys fronting a party which has been resolutely focused on cutting EVERYTHING to the poor and middle class, but only cutting the taxes for the rich, I think it's fairly honest to point out that these might not be the people anyone but rich people want in charge.

[Argus]

What is it with you people and thinking wealthy people stick their money in a hole in the ground? Sheesh!!

Of course they don't. They stick in investments in China and Indonesia, and funnel the profits into offshore bank accounts to hide it from taxes.

How much in taxes did rich guy Romney pay again in the last ten years? Nothing?

July 23, 2012. Switzerland. A new study just release claims the world’s super-rich are hiding at least $21 trillion dollars from governments and tax collectors. The report’s author warns the actual amount could be as high as $30 trillion. With Americans making up one-third of the world’s wealthiest individuals, US tax-dodgers could be secretly hoarding roughly $10 trillion from Uncle Sam and the IRS.

Super Rich hiding Trillions

But of course, all those tax breaks for the big corporations at least generate massive investment in job growing expansion, eh?

Nonfinancial companies held more than $2 trillion in cash and other liquid assets at the end of June, the Federal Reserve reported Friday, up more than $88 billion from the end of March. Cash accounted for 7.1% of all company assets, everything from buildings to bonds, the highest level since 1963.

Companies shun investing, hoard cash

[blueblood]

Of course they don't. They stick in investments in China and Indonesia, and funnel the profits into offshore bank accounts to hide it from taxes.

How much in taxes did rich guy Romney pay again in the last ten years? Nothing?

July 23, 2012. Switzerland. A new study just release claims the world’s super-rich are hiding at least $21 trillion dollars from governments and tax collectors. The report’s author warns the actual amount could be as high as $30 trillion. With Americans making up one-third of the world’s wealthiest individuals, US tax-dodgers could be secretly hoarding roughly $10 trillion from Uncle Sam and the IRS.

Super Rich hiding Trillions

But of course, all those tax breaks for the big corporations at least generate massive investment in job growing expansion, eh?

Nonfinancial companies held more than $2 trillion in cash and other liquid assets at the end of June, the Federal Reserve reported Friday, up more than $88 billion from the end of March. Cash accounted for 7.1% of all company assets, everything from buildings to bonds, the highest level since 1963.

Companies shun investing, hoard cash

And what's wrong with a richer china and indonesia? That's more customers to buy products, more places to invest money and get a return on it which helps ordinary people investing/saving their money.

Romney contributed to society through bain capital, an example of which is the staples office store. What's wrong with providing jobs and a vehicle to invest money? Did you make a contribution like that to society? Didn't think so.

So what is that 10 trillion doing out of government hands? Is it in a hole in the ground or is it working funding projects/in a bank for others to borrow and pay interest on, etc.?

Given the massive boom in countries like brazil, china, india, mexico, etc. I'd say those tax breaks are working extremely well and have reduced poverty worldwide and given american companies more customers for their products. But guys like you would rather see them poor and funnel tax money at them in foreign aid.

Maybe north america should focus on specializing in what we can do instead of being luddites and trying to compete with countries who can manufacture things better than we can.

[punked]

And what's wrong with a richer china and indonesia? That's more customers to buy products, more places to invest money and get a return on it which helps ordinary people investing/saving their money.

Romney contributed to society through bain capital, an example of which is the staples office store. What's wrong with providing jobs and a vehicle to invest money? Did you make a contribution like that to society? Didn't think so.

So what is that 10 trillion doing out of government hands? Is it in a hole in the ground or is it working funding projects/in a bank for others to borrow and pay interest on, etc.?

Given the massive boom in countries like brazil, china, india, mexico, etc. I'd say those tax breaks are working extremely well and have reduced poverty worldwide and given american companies more customers for their products. But guys like you would rather see them poor and funnel tax money at them in foreign aid.

Maybe north america should focus on specializing in what we can do instead of being luddites and trying to compete with countries who can manufacture things better than we can.

And while you are at it let the auto industry go BANKRUPT there is no way they could have ever make a comeback if the government helps them.

[Argus]

And what's wrong with a richer china and indonesia?

Nothing, I suppose. But if you're going to try to make the case that Americans shouldn't mind their rich people not paying taxes and instead investing in job creation overseas, well, good luck with that.

Romney contributed to society through bain capital, an example of which is the staples office store. What's wrong with providing jobs and a vehicle to invest money? Did you make a contribution like that to society? Didn't think so.

From what I've heard about Bain it killed more jobs than it ever created. And no, I haven't done that.

Given the massive boom in countries like brazil, china, india, mexico, etc. I'd say those tax breaks are working extremely well and have reduced poverty worldwide and given american companies more customers for their products. But guys like you would rather see them poor and funnel tax money at them in foreign aid.

Again, your position is that we should be magnanimous and not care if we got bankrupt or don't have enough money for health care as long as the rich are creating lots of sweatshop jobs in China and India?

I guess most of us just aren't as generous as you...

Maybe north america should focus on specializing in what we can do instead of being luddites and trying to compete with countries who can manufacture things better than we can.

Or we can start taxing companies that do business here and forget about trying to get money off the shareholders who have such easy times hiding it.

Edited August 13, 2012 by Argus

[blueblood]

Nothing, I suppose. But if you're going to try to make the case that Americans shouldn't mind their rich people not paying taxes and instead investing in job creation overseas, well, good luck with that.

From what I've heard about Bain it killed more jobs than it ever created. And no, I haven't done that.

Again, your position is that we should be magnanimous and not care if we got bankrupt or don't have enough money for health care as long as the rich are creating lots of sweatshop jobs in China and India?

I guess most of us just aren't as generous as you...

Or we can start taxing companies that do business here and forget about trying to get money off the shareholders who have such easy times hiding it.

Rich people already pay their bills. When the top 1 percent pays close to 30 percent of total tax revenue is that not enough. How about the 46 percent who don't pay anything and take finally start paying up. But no people like you want rich people to build offices and pay people to hang out by the water cooler so that everyone has jobs.

So america is worse off with bain? Take bain away and you tell me if there is more dollars or less dollars. Staples store provides a service, we are better off with a staples store system than without one. Yet that's not enough for you people.

So you would rather have the chinese and indian people with no jobs and scratching a living off rocks. Do you think the chinese liked living through the fifties when they had nothing? There are crappy jobs that need to be done, if north americans are too pretentious to take them, that's their problem.

Oh those ordinary people saving for retirement and their swiss bank accounts. You go after the companies, everyone gets screwed, ask chavez!

Rich people do pay their way and contribute to society, this is more of a jealousy and scapegoat game than anything. Steve jobs ran a successful company, introduced many products and services that improved many peoples lives and provided jobs to many people, yet that's not enough, people in similar situations should have to pay an enormous tax bill on top of it. That's garbage.

Would you work for 30 cents on the dollar yes or no?

[August1991]

So why is it that the wealthy don't bear a share of the cost of reducing the deficit? Why is it that lower and middle class citizens are being told they must give up programs that are important to their bottom line, while the tax cuts for the wealthy are deemed non-negotiable?

Huh?

In Canada, about 1/3 of tax filers pay no federal income tax whatsoever. Link (This is 2002 data. The percentage in the US now is probably higher.)

IOW, we are quickly moving to a society where less than half the population pays all the taxes for the government services received by the entire population. The majority can vote itself whatever public service it desires because the entire cost is borne by someone else.

And when that question comes up, the response is always something along the lines of "these are the risk-takers! these are the job-creators! Small business creates most jobs in America! We need to get America working again! We need to reward initiative!" etc etc.

By definition, kimmy, anyone who sets up a business and makes a profit is creating value for society. The money earned through revenues is greater than the cost of operating the business - assuming, of course, that the revenues were obtained voluntarily through market transactions.

But this doesn't correspond to reality.

I am highly skeptical the idea that "the wealthy" and "small business owners" are the same people. I don't think the Mitt Romneys and Hank Paulsons of the world are going to out there and start small businesses if we reduce their taxes.

The assumption is that if rich-guys get to keep more of their money, they will use it to do something that will create jobs. The theory is that they will invest it in ways that put Americans to work.

I recently bought strawberries "produced in Quebec". The strawberries may have been grown on Quebec soil but the workers who picked them were probably from Mexico. Do I care? No. Do I care that the owner of the strawberry farm probably spends nothing on R&D? No. Do I worry about whether his "profits" trickle down or not? No.

Whether it's Goldman Sachs, Bain or a strawberry farmer, our main concern should be whether they turn a profit or not. Why? Because a society that does not generate value will not long exist.

----

Kimmy, yours is the terrifying logic of misguided common sense. If Obama wins this election (and I suspect that he will), it will be because of such reasoning - due in part to the Occupy gang, and Obama's mother. P. J. O'Rourke wrote a book about such logic: "Eat The Rich".

Your logic impoverished billions of ordinary people for a century longer than need be. Heaven help us if America goes down that misguided path.

Edited August 13, 2012 by August1991

[August1991]

How much in taxes did rich guy Romney pay again in the last ten years? Nothing?

He paid the tax on the money earned before it was invested. Romney took advantage of the equivalent of a TFSA.

How would you feel about paying tax on your RRSP when you put the money in and when you took it out? How would you feel about a 50% income tax rate and a 50% HST - that applied only to you?

Argus, are you suggesting that Romney pay tax twice on the same income?

Edited August 13, 2012 by August1991

[Michael Hardner]

IOW, we are quickly moving to a society where less than half the population pays all the taxes for the government services received by the entire population. The majority can vote itself whatever public service it desires because the entire cost is borne by someone else.

Oddly, this result has been highlighted by economists as a disadvantage to the inequality that you appear to embrace. Namely, the majority will have to vote itself government benefits as salaries fall.

Tell us, then, how you want to address the problem. Maybe you're smarter than the critical mass of western economists.

[jbg]

So why is it that the wealthy don't bear a share of the cost of reducing the deficit? Why is it that lower and middle class citizens are being told they must give up programs that are important to their bottom line, while the tax cuts for the wealthy are deemed non-negotiable?

I think the subtext is that the wealthy have the means and the incentive to avoid taxes. That behavior tends to reduce productive investment.

[blueblood]

Oddly, this result has been highlighted by economists as a disadvantage to the inequality that you appear to embrace. Namely, the majority will have to vote itself government benefits as salaries fall.

Tell us, then, how you want to address the problem. Maybe you're smarter than the critical mass of western economists.

Its simple, "we're broke! We can't afford anything and its short term pain for long term gain."

If you cook the golden goose, everyone gets burned. One only needs to look at venezuela to see how this experiment plays out.

People are different some are more talented than others. Why punish those who freely use their talents to benefit others?

[Shady]

Kimmy, yours is the terrifying logic of misguided common sense. If Obama wins this election (and I suspect that he will), it will be because of such reasoning - due in part to the Occupy gang, and Obama's mother. P. J. O'Rourke wrote a book about such logic: "Eat The Rich".

Your logic impoverished billions of ordinary people for a century longer than need be. Heaven help us if America goes down that misguided path.

Well said. It's not about raising the bottom, it's about pulling down the top to these people. The American tax code needs to be reformed, many of the deductions and loopholes need to be fixed, but raising tax rates doesn't fix the underlying problem of unsustainable government programs. I don't think it's too much to ask to means test programs like Medicare and Social Security. But people like this do. I don't think it's too much to ask for retirement ages to be adjusted to the current life expectancy, instead of staying with the age devised back in the 1930s. But people like this do. And these proposed changes, like the retirement age, wouldn't effect anyone retired or close to retirement. But apparently that's too much to ask. It's really scary how the entitlement mentality has so permeated our societies.

[Shady]

From what I've heard about Bain it killed more jobs than it ever created. And no, I haven't done that.

Really? How did you calculate that?

[Shady]

Argus, are you suggesting that Romney pay tax twice on the same income?

I've noticed that when it comes to American politics, Argus is probably the most ignorant person in the forum. He has no idea what taxes pay for what programs, such as the specific taxes funding Medicare and Social Security for example. And this is what he said of Paul Ryan a couple of years ago...

Well, he should. He's being paid enough to fight against public health care. His biggest campaign contributors are the Insurance industry, the hospital and nursing home lobbyists, and the pharmaceutical lobbyists.

Ryan has simultaneously attempted to both abolish medicare, and to lower taxes on the wealthy.

Which, btw, includes him. He's a millionaire.

Niiiice guy.

Paul Ryan's a millionaire? That's probably news to him and his middle-class family. As for campaign contributors being the insurance industry, hospital and nusring lobbyists and pharam lobbyists, are you sure you don't mean Obama? Cause that would be true if you do. Otherwise, you're just illustrating your complete and utter ignorance of American politics. And btw, suggesting that Medicare be means tested, isn't tantamount to abolishing it. Again, you have no idea what you're talking about. Do you ever care?

[waldo]

notwithstanding the Mitt refuses to release his tax returns... other than his single 2010 release, it now surfaces that key documents associated with that 2010 tax return were not a part of what was released. In particular, Romney failed to disclose the documents he filed with the IRS in 2010 that detail his former Swiss Account holdings... the former Swiss Account as Romney closed it... and only closed it... while keeping his like tax haven accounts open in the Cayman Islands and Bermuda. Now, some are speculating, certainly not the waldo, that Romney received an amnesty from the IRS for income tax evasion related to his former Swiss Account holdings.

end the speculation Mitt! Release the hounds tax returns!

*** bump *** to reinforce a shady-style false assertion concerning the release of Romney's tax returns. No! Contrary to the false assertion, Romney has not released both 2011 and 2010 tax returns. More pointedly, the single year released, 2010, was not a full & complete release... as stated, Rmoney "failed to disclose the documents he filed with the IRS in 2010 that detail his former Swiss Account holdings"...

what's the Mitt hiding?

[Shady]

*** bump *** to reinforce a shady-style false assertion concerning the release of Romney's tax returns. No! Contrary to the false assertion, Romney has not released both 2011 and 2010 tax returns. More pointedly, the single year released, 2010, was not a full & complete release... as stated, Rmoney "failed to disclose the documents he filed with the IRS in 2010 that detail his former Swiss Account holdings"...

what's the Mitt hiding?

You're wrong, the 2010 was fully detailed. But it's irrelevant. The IRS sees his tax returns each and every year.

Btw, when will Obama release his college records? Why did he have them sealed? What's the Barack hiding?

[waldo]

You're wrong, the 2010 was fully detailed. But it's irrelevant. The IRS sees his tax returns each and every year.

citation request

Btw, when will Obama release his college records? Why did he have them sealed? What's the Barack hiding?

sealed college records! Citation request

[August1991]

Sorry for the potential thread hijack.

Oddly, this result has been highlighted by economists as a disadvantage to the inequality that you appear to embrace. Namely, the majority will have to vote itself government benefits as salaries fall.

In all honesty, Michael, I have read this several times and I still don't know what you mean. Maybe it's the double negative. "... advantage of the equality that I oppose... " Huh?

----

Look, when half the voting population pays no taxes then it seems to me that a democracy is open to the tyranny of the majority. The start down this path would begin with buying more on credit: someone else will pay. Then it takes a politician capable of pandering to the majority with claims that "other people should pay". It's an old line and it has impoverished more than one society.

Sadly, Kimmy seems to accept this pandering.

[waldo]

You're wrong, the 2010 was fully detailed. But it's irrelevant. The IRS sees his tax returns each and every year.

citation request

Btw, when will Obama release his college records? Why did he have them sealed? What's the Barack hiding?

sealed college records! Citation request

Shady, further to the citation request concerning your unsubstantiated assertion that Romney release a complete 2010 tax return:

Mitt Romney Taxes For 2010 Not Fully Disclosed

Mitt Romney has not released his full tax records from 2010, including key documentation connected to his Swiss bank account.

Romney released his 2010 tax return in January of this year, a document that first informed voters about the existence of his Swiss bank account and financial activities in Bermuda and the Cayman Islands. But people who own foreign bank accounts are required to file a separate document with the IRS that provides additional details on such overseas bank holdings, and Romney has not released that form to the public.

Tax experts say it is almost certain that Romney did file the form, known as a Report on Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts, or "FBAR" in accountant slang. The penalty for not filing an FBAR can be severe, and the IRS would have expected to receive the form since Romney listed the Swiss bank account on his tax return. Listing the account on his tax return and then failing to file the subsequent FBAR would have been asking for a hefty fine, and would probably have heightened IRS scrutiny of prior tax filings.

Nevertheless, Romney's omission of the form from the earlier disclosure raises questions for tax policy experts about the function of his Swiss bank account, and whether or not Romney used other offshore bank accounts that did not generate interest.

Mitt! Release the 2010 FBAR... what are you hiding?

[Shady]

sealed college records! Citation request

Shady, further to the citation request concerning your unsubstantiated assertion that Romney release a complete 2010 tax return:

Mitt Romney Taxes For 2010 Not Fully Disclosed

Mitt! Release the 2010 FBAR... what are you hiding?

Nothing. The IRS sees his tax returns every year.

However, why won't Obama release his college records? What's he hiding?

[waldo]

Shady, further to the citation request concerning your unsubstantiated assertion that Romney release a complete 2010 tax return:

Mitt Romney Taxes For 2010 Not Fully Disclosed

Mitt! Release the 2010 FBAR... what are you hiding?

Nothing. The IRS sees his tax returns every year.

oh my! The IRS 'sees Romney's returns every year'!!! Now... assuming Romney has even filed , surely you must not be so blinded as to realize just filing doesn't constitute a return without problems/concerns/issues/penalties, hey? What's Mitt hiding, Shady?

[waldo]

Btw, when will Obama release his college records? Why did he have them sealed? What's the Barack hiding?

sealed college records! Citation request

However, why won't Obama release his college records? What's he hiding?

oh, hey now! Is this you walking it back? Is this you now realizing you've bumbled over your earlier claim that, "Obama had his college transcripts sealed". Walking it back, lil' buddy?

by the by, in your nonsensical distraction mode, do you equate Obama's decades old college transcripts to Romney's most recent 10 years of tax returns?

[punked]

Paul Ryan's a millionaire? That's probably news to him and his middle-class family.

No his family already knows he is a millionaire. It seems you are the only one in the world who doesn't know. Playing the fool again Shady?

Mitt Romney’s newly announced running mate reported assets in the range of $2 million to $7.7 million. The largest was the interest that his wife, Janna, holds in a trust resulting from the 2010 death of her mother, Prudence Little. Her interest in the trust falls in the range of $1 million to $5 million, Ryan reported.

Ryan also reported investment income that, along with a distribution from the inheritance, supplemented his $174,000 congressional salary – somewhere between $168,000 and $1.2 million.

Ryan the Rich man

Edited August 13, 2012 by punked

[jefferiah]

Who cares if Romney and Ryan are millionaires? It's irrelevant.