Rmoney and Taxes

[Woodruff]

What's utterly hypocritical is that now the media is lampooning him because he paid MORE money than he had to pay since he waived some of his deductions.

If that is true (I haven't seen it, but it wouldn't surprise me), that simply works to Romney's advantage in my opinion, so why would you be complaining about it?

[Night Strike]

What's utterly hypocritical is that now the media is lampooning him because he paid MORE money than he had to pay since he waived some of his deductions.

If that is true (I haven't seen it, but it wouldn't surprise me), that simply works to Romney's advantage in my opinion, so why would you be complaining about it?

There is the video of the exchange on the webpage.

After calling on GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney to release more of his tax returns, the left got their wish on Friday when he did exactly that, publishing his complete tax filings from 2011. However, instead of giving Romney credit for paying all his taxes (14.1 percent) and giving 30 percent of his $13.7 million income ($4 million) to charity, the hosts of MSNBC’s “The Cycle,” with the exception of TheBlazeTV’s S.E. Cupp, remained unimpressed.

Co-host Steve Kornacki, a political writer at Salon, argued, somewhat jokingly, that Romney disqualified himself from being president based on his “own criteria” because he paid more in taxes than he needed to. Cupp later clarified that Romney merely waived some of his tax deductions on his charitable donations, bringing his effective tax rate to 14.1 percent.

Romney previously said he always pays exactly what he owes in taxes, adding that paying more taxes than he is required to would disqualify him from becoming president.

“I’m sorry, it’s just comical if nothing else,” Kornacki added, most of his co-hosts laughing. However, Cupp was clearly not amused and sat in her chair stone-faced until he finished his rant.

“I think you’re better than this,” she told Kornacki. “This is a man who was lambasted as a cheat and a liar, someone who was dishonest for months. Harry Reid said he paid no taxes. That’s shameful. He owes him an apology.”

“Not yet. Not yet,” co-host Toure interjected, seemingly calling for Romney to release even more tax returns.

Kornacki went on to say that Romney has only released two years of tax returns, which does not satisfy Democrats’ desire to see a decade worth of his returns.

“The story you want is not that he actually paid 14.1 percent in 2011 or that he gave away 44 percent of his income to charity and taxes in 2011. The story you want to make is that one day he said, ‘I’d be disqualified if I voluntarily paid more,’” Cupp said.

Toure said Romney would have paid just around 9 percent in taxes if he didn’t “artificially inseminate” his tax rate.

This is when Cupp explained that Romney didn’t voluntarily pay more taxes, he merely waived his tax break on some of his charitable donations.

“So, when he doesn’t release it he’s a liar and he’s got something to hide, and when he does he’s out of ideas,” Cupp added, visibly annoyed. She went on to say the real story is that Romney is “generous,” a story her co-hosts were trying to bury.

Toure then attempted to cheapen the significance of Romney’s charitable giving and what it says about his character. Just for the record, the amount of money Romney gave to charity in 2011 doubles what President Barack Obama donated.

“The rich man giving a bunch means less than the poor person giving a penny,” Toure said, actually referencing the Bible.

“That’s really cheap,” Cupp replied.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/s-e-cupp-clashes-with-co-hosts-on-the-cycle-over-romneys-tax-returns-thats-shameful/

[Woodruff]

What's utterly hypocritical is that now the media is lampooning him because he paid MORE money than he had to pay since he waived some of his deductions.

If that is true (I haven't seen it, but it wouldn't surprise me), that simply works to Romney's advantage in my opinion, so why would you be complaining about it?

There is the video of the exchange on the webpage.

After calling on GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney to release more of his tax returns, the left got their wish on Friday when he did exactly that, publishing his complete tax filings from 2011. However, instead of giving Romney credit for paying all his taxes (14.1 percent) and giving 30 percent of his $13.7 million income ($4 million) to charity, the hosts of MSNBC’s “The Cycle,” with the exception of TheBlazeTV’s S.E. Cupp, remained unimpressed.

Co-host Steve Kornacki, a political writer at Salon, argued, somewhat jokingly, that Romney disqualified himself from being president based on his “own criteria” because he paid more in taxes than he needed to. Cupp later clarified that Romney merely waived some of his tax deductions on his charitable donations, bringing his effective tax rate to 14.1 percent.

Romney previously said he always pays exactly what he owes in taxes, adding that paying more taxes than he is required to would disqualify him from becoming president.

“I’m sorry, it’s just comical if nothing else,” Kornacki added, most of his co-hosts laughing. However, Cupp was clearly not amused and sat in her chair stone-faced until he finished his rant.

“I think you’re better than this,” she told Kornacki. “This is a man who was lambasted as a cheat and a liar, someone who was dishonest for months. Harry Reid said he paid no taxes. That’s shameful. He owes him an apology.”

“Not yet. Not yet,” co-host Toure interjected, seemingly calling for Romney to release even more tax returns.

Kornacki went on to say that Romney has only released two years of tax returns, which does not satisfy Democrats’ desire to see a decade worth of his returns.

“The story you want is not that he actually paid 14.1 percent in 2011 or that he gave away 44 percent of his income to charity and taxes in 2011. The story you want to make is that one day he said, ‘I’d be disqualified if I voluntarily paid more,’” Cupp said.

Toure said Romney would have paid just around 9 percent in taxes if he didn’t “artificially inseminate” his tax rate.

This is when Cupp explained that Romney didn’t voluntarily pay more taxes, he merely waived his tax break on some of his charitable donations.

“So, when he doesn’t release it he’s a liar and he’s got something to hide, and when he does he’s out of ideas,” Cupp added, visibly annoyed. She went on to say the real story is that Romney is “generous,” a story her co-hosts were trying to bury.

Toure then attempted to cheapen the significance of Romney’s charitable giving and what it says about his character. Just for the record, the amount of money Romney gave to charity in 2011 doubles what President Barack Obama donated.

“The rich man giving a bunch means less than the poor person giving a penny,” Toure said, actually referencing the Bible.

“That’s really cheap,” Cupp replied.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/s-e-cupp-clashes-with-co-hosts-on-the-cycle-over-romneys-tax-returns-thats-shameful/

I'm curious what someone outside of a right-wing news source desperately looking for traction might say about the situation.

[bedub1]

They are released now....and thank God! I didn't think people were ever going to shut up! The media must have spent thousands of hours questioning Mitt's taxes. Let's see how much time they spend on the subject now that they have what they wanted ohhhh soooo badly.

So, go ahead and plug the information in. You spent a lot of time asking those questions, I must assume you really wanted an answer to all of them. I did my part in helping solve the mystery of someone elses tax returns. Please, let us know what you find!

I'm curious...you believe that Romney's 2011 tax returns answer the questions that were being asked? Perhaps you don't know what the questions being asked were?

Woodruff I laughed my ass off at that too.


Romney said paying more taxes than he is required to would disqualify him from becoming president.

rMoney could have paid a 9% tax rate for 2011, but instead choose to pay a higher 14.1% tax rate. Didn't he just disqualify himself from being president, by his own words? The reason he choose to pay the higher rate is because he had previously stated he never paid less than a 13% tax rate. He had the option of either lying, or lying. Just goes to show he's a lying sack of shit.

He want on to state that he agrees it's correct for somebody making 50k to pay a higher tax rate than himself. He wants to lower his own tax rate, and to pay for it, will raise taxes on people making 50k a year.

[Night Strike]

In 2011, 44% of Romney's income went to either the government or to charity. Why's isn't THAT the main point instead of painting him as an evil-rich-person?

[thegreekdog]

In 2011, 44% of Romney's income went to either the government or to charity. Why's isn't THAT the main point instead of painting him as an evil-rich-person?

I actually agree with you Night Strike. I don't understand the problem people are having with this.

[Woodruff]

In 2011, 44% of Romney's income went to either the government or to charity. Why's isn't THAT the main point instead of painting him as an evil-rich-person?

Because POLITICS!!!!

(Although the argument can be made that in 2011, he was already seriously planning a Presidential run, so could theoretically have set himself up to look good in this way just for that year.)

[BigBallinStalin]

In 2011, 44% of Romney's income went to either the government or to charity. Why's isn't THAT the main point instead of painting him as an evil-rich-person?

Because POLITICS!!!!

(Although the argument can be made that in 2011, he was already seriously planning a Presidential run, so could theoretically have set himself up to look good in this way just for that year.)

SOROS' EVIL TWIN!

(Repuboros?)

[Night Strike]

[thegreekdog]

Yeah, but he got it through hard work - marriage.

[Phatscotty]

In 2011, 44% of Romney's income went to either the government or to charity. Why's isn't THAT the main point instead of painting him as an evil-rich-person?

I actually agree with you Night Strike. I don't understand the problem people are having with this.

I am perplexed about this too.

PERPLEXED!

[thegreekdog]

In 2011, 44% of Romney's income went to either the government or to charity. Why's isn't THAT the main point instead of painting him as an evil-rich-person?

I actually agree with you Night Strike. I don't understand the problem people are having with this.

I am perplexed about this too.

PERPLEXED!

You know what people should really have a problem with? He didn't release any tax returns prior to 2011. And I bet his 2011 return was done with the knowledge that it would be released on a run for president.

That being said, I don't think he should have to give any of his tax returns up. The dude is rich. Everyone knows he's rich. What are the tax returns going to show? That he paid the same tax rate as all other rich people?

[Phatscotty]

Just another club to bash him with. I hope he realizes it doesn't matter what he does, it will never be good enough, nothing will ever satisfy anyone.

[Night Strike]

Yeah, but he got it through hard work - marriage.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

You know what people should really have a problem with? He didn't release any tax returns prior to 2011. And I bet his 2011 return was done with the knowledge that it would be released on a run for president.

He released the 2010 ones earlier this year as two years are the requirement by law.

[GreecePwns]

It's not the fault of the man, but of the tax system that treats capital gains and income differently.

So the rich can shift all their income to capital gains and use various loopholes to pay a lower tax rate, and the poor don't pay taxes from being unemployed and/or receiving gov't benefits. The middle class is left with a disproportionate burden.

The solution being proposed? The so-called Fair Tax.

A flat consumption tax which has regressive effects, since the poor spend a higher percentage of their income while the rich save a higher percentage. This is made up with "rebate payments" which help the poor. The middle class is left with a disproportionate burden.

Change we can all believe in. An actual solution?

Treating capital gains and wages should be taxed the same, because the results are the same: Income is generated. Income is income and should be taxed as income.

[Night Strike]

Then stop taxing capital gains at the corporate level before they're even passed on to the individual. Every single dollar of capital gains money was already taxed at the corporate level before it is also taxed at the individual level.

[GreecePwns]

Dude, I stomped on that line of rhetoric the last time you brought it up in this very thread. Drop it, you're making yourself look stupid.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=176256&p=3849746

[Night Strike]

Dude, I stomped on that line of rhetoric the last time you brought it up in this very thread. Drop it, you're making yourself look stupid.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=176256&p=3849746

So in other words people should hope that their stocks do poorly (barely profitable) lest their gains get turned over to the government, if they decide to even invest in the first place. What's the point of taking the risk of losing your investment when 40% or more of your earnings are turned over to the government?

[GreecePwns]

Yup. They should hope their stocks do poorly so they don't gain anything.

To a capitalist attempting to maximize profits, gaining nothing is better than gaining something and paying a portion of it in taxes.

That is exactly what you're saying in that post. Please try again.

[Night Strike]

Yup. They should hope their stocks do poorly so they don't gain anything.

To a capitalist attempting to maximize profits, gaining nothing is better than gaining something and paying a portion of it in taxes.

That is exactly what you're saying in that post. Please try again.

Except that you assume the only two options are no change or profit. Loss is a real component of the equation. The only reason people choose to get involved is because they believe the potential payout is greater than the risk of loss. When the government doubles (or more) the amount that they take out from the profit, it drastically lowers the potential payout of the investment, meaning the amount of risk could become too great for some people.

[GreecePwns]

I didn't assume anything. Your comment says this:

"people should hope that their stocks do poorly (barely profitable) lest their gains get turned over to the government"

When you consider that capital gains is tax paid on the selling of shares in a company (not dividends paid while owning the stock), and that investors make money by the rise of their investment's value, why would anyone wish for their investment's to not rise in value as much as possible?

Your comment makes absolutely no sense. No one ever wishes for their investment to go bad. Ever. You're being very out of touch here.

[Woodruff]

Hell, I thought he was out of touch.

[Woodruff]

Yeah, but he got it through hard work - marriage.

Heh...the hardest work.

[Woodruff]

Just another club to bash him with. I hope he realizes it doesn't matter what he does, it will never be good enough, nothing will ever satisfy anyone.

Gosh, I can't think of a single political individual for whom you hold the same view of nothing ever satisfying you.

[Woodruff]

You know what people should really have a problem with? He didn't release any tax returns prior to 2011. And I bet his 2011 return was done with the knowledge that it would be released on a run for president.

He released the 2010 ones earlier this year as two years are the requirement by law.

Which is fine and all (I honestly don't care one way or another), but neither year's tax returns are relevant to the questions that were being asked about his past.