Vote for Mitt...he feels your pain.

[Shang]

Romney's 1/3 ownership of the dancing horse gave rise to a $77,000.00 Tax Deduction.
Mitt’s deduction is about two and a half times the annual median wage in the U.S.: $26,364,

[Gerarddm]

Can't blame them for taking a legal deduction. The fault is in the system itself.

BTW, does Mitt feel pain? I did not know that.

[Durnik]

Can't blame them for taking a legal deduction. The fault is in the system itself....

This is one of those 'facts' that needs some 'splainin.. The 'system' was set up by people like Romney to work in their favor, to the dis-advantage of the common worker.

Legal is not necessarily Right.

I expound on this point as it is all too easy to forget that the foxes are guarding the hen house.

enjoy
bobby

[Kaa]

Romney's 1/3 ownership of the dancing horse gave rise to a $77,000.00 Tax Deduction.

So, um, he lost money. I don't see your point -- do you want to disallow losses as tax deductions?

Or are you simply trying to whip up some class warfare demagoguery?

Kaa

[ccmanuals]

Jon Stewart,

"How in the world do you, Mitt Romney, justify making more in one day than the median American family makes in a year -- while paying the same tax rate as the guy who scans shoes at the airport?"

Stewart also brought up a related point: that in 2007, Romney's Bain Capital was one of the companies who lobbied against a bill that would have made private equity owners pay a 35% tax rate (instead of %15, which is still higher than what Romney pays now). And yet, on the campaign trail, Romney has called the 47% of americans who pay no income tax because they are underemployed or otherwise disabled, "unfair."

"Poor people have sh*tty lobbyists," Stewart lamented.

[Shang]

So, um, he lost money. I don't see your point -- do you want to disallow losses as tax deductions?

Or are you simply trying to whip up some class warfare demagoguery?

Kaa

Perhaps you haven't heard, Kaa, economic times are tough for a huge number of people. Mr. Romney wears Mom jeans and a blue work shirt, and contends that he understands the problems of the poor, and that he will solve the situation when he is elected (although he won't say how until after the election).
Somehow it is difficult to believe Mitt's perspective when he piddles money on a dancing horsey and elevators for his cars in his several mansions.

[Durnik]

So, um, he lost money. I don't see your point -- do you want to disallow losses as tax deductions?

Or are you simply trying to whip up some class warfare demagoguery?

Kaa

Lord, no! We don't want any "class warfare demagoguery"! The wealthy have a Gawd Given Right (enshrined right there in The Constitution) to create a governing/tax structure which benefits themselves to the exclusion of the common person!

No Siree (or Mamee, as the case may be..), we be good ni__as & work some more for masta & missus - who must struggle with the horrible stress of finding suitable & sufficient deductions for more wealth (taken from workers) then they'll ever need!

enjoy
bobby

[Kaa]

Perhaps you haven't heard, Kaa, economic times are tough for a huge number of people. Mr. Romney wears Mom jeans and a blue work shirt, and contends that he understands the problems of the poor, and that he will solve the situation when he is elected (although he won't say how until after the election).

So what else is new -- he's a politician. You don't expect your politicians to be honest and straightforward -- do you? Americans don't elect those.

Kaa

[bobbys]

So, um, he lost money. I don't see your point -- do you want to disallow losses as tax deductions?

Or are you simply trying to whip up some class warfare demagoguery?

Kaa

.

Their going after the Richie Rich angle..

This is after the going after Sarah because she did not have enough money.

Get it?

[Kaa]

Lord, no! We don't want any "class warfare demagoguery"! The wealthy have a Gawd Given Right (enshrined right there in The Constitution) to create a governing/tax structure which benefits themselves to the exclusion of the common person!

No Siree (or Mamee, as the case may be..), we be good ni__as & work some more for masta & missus - who must struggle with the horrible stress of finding suitable & sufficient deductions for more wealth (taken from workers) then they'll ever need!

enjoy
bobby

I seem to recall historically successul attempts to strip the rich of their ill-acquired wealth and distribute it to common people. A real workers paradise it was! Worked out very well :-D

Kaa

[Cuyahoga Chuck]

BTW, does Mitt feel pain? .

Well, you can buy a lot of remediation from pain when you have as much as $250 million salted away in overseas accounts.
But it should be remembered that Willard is a penny-ante piker when you compare his wealth to those that send him $10 million checks from their petty cash accounts.

[ccmanuals]

.

Their going after the Richie Rich angle..

This is after the going after Sarah because she did not have enough money.

Get it?

Sarah, really? Bobby's...... life just hasn't been the same for you since that fateful day when she winked at you through the tube.

[Cuyahoga Chuck]

I seem to recall historically successul attempts to strip the rich of their ill-acquired wealth and distribute it to common people. A real workers paradise it was! Worked out very well :-D

Kaa

We really don't know what you can recall or why you are so vague. With some specifics we can test the veracity of what you think you can recall. Have no fear. Your keyboard won't go up in smoke if you blow us a much more detailed epistle.

[Kevin T]

Were doomed when one half of the electorate asks for a little balance.

And the other half, who really are part of the 99%, automatically equates that balance with erecting onion domes in DC

[Kaa]

Were doomed when one half of the electorate asks for a little balance.

And the other half, who really are part of the 99%, automatically equates that balance with erecting onion domes in DC

Onion domes came up in response to #7 :-)

And about half US households do not pay any income taxes (as in, have no federal tax liability even if they fill out their 1040s). Is that the half which wants "a little balance"?

Kaa

[Cuyahoga Chuck]

So, um, he lost money. I don't see your point -- do you want to disallow losses as tax deductions?

Or are you simply trying to whip up some class warfare demagoguery?

Kaa

I don't know what a "dancing horse' does that merits a deduction but I do know the wealthy have access to tax lawyers that are very inventive and produce contrived enterprises just to get a tax break.

[Kaa]

I don't know what a "dancing horse' does that merits a deduction but I do know the wealthy have access to tax lawyers that are very inventive and produce contrived enterprises just to get a tax break.

Surely you do -- it's right there in the picture of the tax document -- the word "LOSS". A dancing horse loses Mitt Romney money :-D

The solution to tax lawyers and contrived enterprises is to have a simple tax system. Any of the politicians you prefer ever did anything serious to simplify the tax code?

Kaa

[Cuyahoga Chuck]

Onion domes came up in response to #7 :-)

And about half US households do not pay any income taxes (as in, have no federal tax liability even if they fill out their 1040s). Is that the half which wants "a little balance"?

Kaa

I don't know for certain what they want. It might be three meals a day and a roof to huddle under.
Of course we could utilize the method common in the old Ottoman Empire. The tax collector went from hovel to hovel with a group of skilled torturers to make certain everyone payed. Those that payed to avoid torture might then die of starvation but that was of no concern of the sultan.

[ccmanuals]

Onion domes came up in response to #7 :-)

And about half US households do not pay any income taxes (as in, have no federal tax liability even if they fill out their 1040s). Is that the half which wants "a little balance"?

Kaa

Yep, those people living in poverty and seniors living on SS need to get off their asses and pull themselves up by their boot straps. Freeloaders, all of them.

[Cuyahoga Chuck]

Surely you do -- it's right there in the picture of the tax document -- the word "LOSS". A dancing horse loses Mitt Romney money :-D

The solution to tax lawyers and contrived enterprises is to have a simple tax system. Any of the politicians you prefer ever did anything serious to simplify the tax code?

Kaa

If I go to Google and punch in "dancing horse" I want something more pictorial than word "loss".

Get serious. Right now if the Democrats proposed life everlasting for everyone the Republicans would vote against it.

[Kaa]

If I go to Google and punch in "dancing horse" I want something more pictorial than word "loss".

I am sure you'll get it :-) Go ahead, try it :-D

Kaa

[wardd]

how do you lose money on a pet?

[Kaa]

I don't know for certain what they want. It might be three meals a day and a roof to huddle under.

Half the households in the United States.

Are you really going to tell me that half the households in the US lack three meals a day and a roof to huddle under?

Kaa

[Donn]

Romney's 1/3 ownership of the dancing horse gave rise to a $77,000.00 Tax Deduction.
Mitt’s deduction is about two and a half times the annual median wage in the U.S.: $26,364,

I'm certain Shang did not intend to mislead with this post, but the fact is, the Romneys were only able to deduct $50 from this year's taxable income.



The rest will carry over to future returns, if, and only if, they are able to make some income on the horse.

[wardd]

Joseph Stiglitz: The Rich Have Become Experts At Advancing Their Cause



Joseph Stiglitz says the rich have got America right where they want it.




The Nobel Prize-winning economist writes in Salon that the super-rich have never been better at advancing their cause -- that being the obtainment of a larger slice of the pie.




“What is different today," he writes, "is that the 1 percent now has more knowledge about how to shape preferences and beliefs in ways that enable the wealthy to better advance their cause, and more tools and more resources to do so."




He has two friends in Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, two political scientists that argue in their book “Winner-Take-All Politics" that corporate America and the wealthy people that run it have twisted Washington to their advantage since the late 1970s. You know, Citizens United, etc. Stiglitz also argues that the richest Americans have successfully obscured how much inequality has truly risen, citing a study that found most people think the wealthiest fifth of society holds 60 percent of the nation’s wealth, when that percentage lies closer to something around 85 percent.




Yet there's evidence that income inequality has actually become something of a mainstream issue in recent years. A January survey by the Pew Research Center, for example, found that more than half the country saw signs of "strong conflicts" between the rich and poor. The percentage had risen 50 percent from just a few years prior.




What's certain is that America's rich have been the biggest beneficiaries of the U.S. economy since the 1970s, with the nation's richest one percent watching their incomes rise an average of 275 percent between 1979 and 2007 -- gains that significantly outperform any other income bracket.




Look at CEO pay rates for a specific example of this process. Even as the wages of everyday workers fell 2 percent last year, CEO pay grew by 15 percent, The Guardian reports.




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1606116.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1606116.html

[MiddleAgesMan]

Romney's 1/3 ownership of the dancing horse gave rise to a $77,000.00 Tax Deduction.
Mitt’s deduction is about two and a half times the annual median wage in the U.S.: $26,364,

I won't comment on the substance of your post Mr. Shang but I will have to call you out on the title, Vote for Mitt, he feels your pain.

How can you justify this suggestion/command?

I had you pegged as a moderate liberal-leaning academic, now I just don't know what to think....




























Touche!

[MiddleAgesMan]

.... are you simply trying to whip up some class warfare demagoguery?

Kaa

Pure, unadulterated (and smelly) Kaa Kaa.

[Kaa]

Pure, unadulterated (and smelly) Kaa Kaa.

I prefer to be pure and unadulterated :-P

Smelly -- I don't know, have you seen Donn's post? What does Shang's post smell like to you? :-D

Kaa

[Gerarddm]

This is one of those 'facts' that needs some 'splainin.. The 'system' was set up by people like Romney to work in their favor, to the dis-advantage of the common worker.

Legal is not necessarily Right.

I expound on this point as it is all too easy to forget that the foxes are guarding the hen house.

Indeed.

[Durnik]

Onion domes came up in response to #7 :-)

And about half US households do not pay any income taxes (as in, have no federal tax liability even if they fill out their 1040s). Is that the half which wants "a little balance"?

Kaa

Essentially, admitting that half of U.S. households have inadequate income to incur a tax debt is the same as admitting the system is biased to keeping half of its citizens at or below the poverty level. Just to put this in some sort of perspective, the 'poverty level' is the (minimum) amount of income needed to simply survive. Are there actually people who are all right with this?

Now, from experience, I can tell you that it is hard work to survive when you know not where your daily bread is coming from.. Much harder than, say, Mitt & Ann suffering over onerous tax forms.. when _all_ of their wealth is from others..

Also from experience I can say that driving thru the rural south one can see many homes with campers in the back yards. Campers with lights on at night.. Torn tarps (attempting to) cover leaks.. people in The Wealthiest Country In The World (proud, are ya?) just trying to find shelter.

Mitt feels their pain.. in a pigs eye, he does..

And everything you may believe you 'know', both pro & con, about successful (or no) 'workers paradises' was filtered thru an indoctrinational system which was designed to produce one line of thought.. That may be worth keeping in, well, mind.


This, BTW,

The solution to tax lawyers and contrived enterprises is to have a simple tax system.

might well fall under the category of 'a belief' - esp if by 'simple', you mean 'flat'. As I know not your meaning, I leave it hanging.

enjoy
bobby

[Donn]

[Shang]

I won't comment on the substance of your post Mr. Shang but I will have to call you out on the title, Vote for Mitt, he feels your pain.

How can you justify this suggestion/command?

I had you pegged as a moderate liberal-leaning academic, now I just don't know what to think....




























Touche!

Well played, MiddleAgesMan! You caught the sarcasm exactly.

Mister Kaa doesn't seem to grasp the plight of more than half of our citizens who will live under the poverty level at some time during their lives...

...while the two percent or so of multimillionaires squat on their rumps and "create jobs."

How can any intelligent person vote Republican?

[ccmanuals]

Approximately 15% of Americans are below the poverty line.

That's so impersonal. Let's just say 46.2 million people.

[Durnik]

That's so impersonal. Let's just say 46.2 million people.

That's all?? _Only_ 46,200,000 people?? Just (roughly) the combined populations of Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina, New Jersey & Virginia.. Well, the heck with them. Let them starve - Mitt needs a new horsey!

Damn, feels weird channeling a conservative.. ;-)

enjoy
bobby

[Shang]

That's all?? _Only_ 46,200,000 people?? Just (roughly) the combined populations of Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina, New Jersey & Virginia.. Well, the heck with them. Let them starve - Mitt needs a new horsey!

Damn, feels weird channeling a conservative.. ;-)

enjoy
bobby

Not at all, bobby, you're do'ning fine.

[Donn]

Please notice Shang completely ignores the fact his opening post is a outright lie, and not a single fact-checking liberal hypocrite calls him on it.

Anything for attention, eh Shang?

[Durnik]

^ Please note that none of what follows Shang's post loses any significance based or not on Shang's statement. But, hey, conservatives will avoid an issue any way they can, eh? To satisfy your carnal cravings, yes, Mitt's deduction for his play horsey was less than Shang originally posted.. but the facts of ridiculous taxation still exist.. Mitt still has waaaay too much of other peoples money.. & waaay too many people (in The Wealthiest Nation In The World) are still dirt poor & struggling to simply stay alive.

BTW, 46,200,000 is also (roughly) the combined populations of

Wyoming, Vermont, N. Dakota, Alaska (Yah, Sarah! Go bobbys! ;-)), S. Dakota, Delaware, Montana, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine, Hawaii, Idaho, Nebraska, West Virginia, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, Kansas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Iowa, Connecticut, Oklahoma & Oregon (Hey bobbys, you're right up there with Sarah! ;-)) - as of July 2011..

But hey, let's not quibble about a few poor losers.. This is getting easier, Shang. I's a gettin' nervous.. Think I might go 'hole hog & just stop thinking..





Ooo,






Ok, I'm back - that was weird! Let's not do _that_ again! ;-)

enjoy
bobby

[ChaseKenyon]

Go bobby!!!!!!!

I have so much to do that I have had to limit myself to no more than 1.5 serious thread rebuts per day averaged by month.

[Keith Wilson]

Or are you simply trying to whip up some class warfare demagoguery?

Oh, yes. the way things are going, we could use some more good old-fashioned class warfare. "Class warfare" is what they call it when the rest of us try to defend ourselves.

[hokiefan]

I'm certain Shang did not intend to mislead with this post, but the fact is, the Romneys were only able to deduct $50 from this year's taxable income.



The rest will carry over to future returns, if, and only if, they are able to make some income on the horse.

I'm no Mitt Romney fan, but has anyone read this post by Donn? Mitt may have gotten a 70K deduction at one point on the form. But only $50 was allowable at the end. I'm thinking no one read it myself.

Cheers,

Bobby

[Durnik]

Damn, Keith, those charts are scary.. & so many people just don't get it. To (mis) quote Jon Stewart, the Koch Bros have good propaganda people - the best our money can buy! ;-)

enjoy
bobby

[Durnik]

I'm no Mitt Romney fan, but has anyone read this post by Donn? Mitt may have gotten a 70K deduction at one point on the form. But only $50 was allowable at the end. I'm thinking no one read it myself.

Cheers,

Bobby

I suspect we read it, Bobby - I know I did. Still, see this post for my comment..

thanks for bringing it up, tho.

enjoy
bobby (lower case.. ;-))

[hokiefan]

I suspect we read it, Bobby - I know I did. Still, see this post for my comment..

thanks for bringing it up, tho.

enjoy
bobby (lower case.. ;-))

I have no problem with frying Mitt, its just more effective with facts.

Cheers,

Bobby

[Keith Wilson]

I have no problem with frying Mitt, its just more effective with facts.

Indeed. $21,700,000 income in 2010, 13.9% total federal tax rate. Check your next paycheck and see how much tax you're paying. Include all federal taxes.

[Durnik]

I have no problem with frying Mitt, its just more effective with facts.

I agree! I'm also more concerned with 'frying' the conservative attack machine, of which Mitt is just a Lt.. & Cheney was a Major.. Ok, Mitt might have made Captain.. but he's no where near as evil as Darth Cheney! ;-)

enjoy
bobby

[Durnik]

Indeed. $21,700,000 income in 2010, 13.9% total federal tax rate. Check your next paycheck and see how much tax you're paying. Include all federal taxes.

One way to look at it is he paid $3,000,000 in taxes.. A perhaps more realistic way to look at it is he had $18,700,000 to spend..

Hmmm.. he really _is_ in touch with the average American.. who has (& worked for) a median income of $41,000...

sarcasm tags apply.. ;-)

enjoy
bobby

ETA: that's 41k _before_ taxes.. but let's not worry 'bout the poor..

[Keith Wilson]

And about half US households do not pay any income taxes (as in, have no federal tax liability even if they fill out their 1040s).

The first part is true. The second part is certainly not. Social Security tax and Medicare tax is withheld from all wages, (capped at just over $100K). This regressive tax is very significant for most people, but is nothing at all to the very rich. The total rate is 15.3%, greater than Mr. Romney pays on his entire $20-plus million of income It's as large a share of federal revenue as income tax.





Source.

[Todd D]

Hey, don't forget that Mitt is a job creator. Just consider the jobs he will create when he installs a horse elevator in the horse barn

[Kaa]

Essentially, admitting that half of U.S. households have inadequate income to incur a tax debt is the same as admitting the system is biased to keeping half of its citizens at or below the poverty level.

ROFL... There is a minimum taxable income, make anything below that and you don't pay any taxes. Let's imagine that this minimum got raised. Less people will pay any taxes. By your logic, this would push more people into poverty :-D

Just to put this in some sort of perspective, the 'poverty level' is the (minimum) amount of income needed to simply survive.

No, it's not.

First, because if it were true people under the poverty level would not survive and they obviously do.

Second, because I have lived under the poverty level and, to your discomfort, I'm still alive.

Third, because the poverty statistics generally do NOT include federal and state assistance.

Fourth, because all of this ignores the gray economy which is flourishing among the poor.

Kaa

[Kaa]

Oh, yes. the way things are going, we could use some more good old-fashioned class warfare.

Really?

Kaa