Paul Ryan Discussion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Al_Moritz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
manualman said:
Here’s the problem Edwin. You’re examining Ryan in a vacuum instead in comparison to the alternative. Much as I find “Ayn Rand” (a phony name even) pathetic, I’d still have to vote for her if the only other viable candidate running against her were Margaret Sanger. Face facts, christians will continue to have zero influence on American politics for as long as we fail to prioritize our issues and pick them off in order of seriousness. For decades we’ve all canceled each other out and failed to have the influence we should while smaller, but more organized interest groups vote as a bloc and dictate public policy. There’s a REASON that the entire Democratic Party jumps whenever Planned Parenthood calls. Because they deliver votes. It’s time we stop canceling each other out and start knocking our issues off one by one.
Click to expand...
But… But… But… I thought grandma will get booted from her apartment because the GOP got elected.
 
ComputerGeek25 said:
But… But… But… I thought grandma will get booted from her apartment because the GOP got elected.
Click to expand...
Maybe she will. But if so, you can take her in and she’ll live through it.

But when the girl next door gets dragged to Planned Parenthood by her boyfriend and manipulated into killing her child there’s NOTHING you can do about it. In fact, you’re probably paying PP’s electric bill in your taxes via their shell game funding.
 
epan said:
It is a criminal act, if it constitutes tax evasion, which it usually does.

What a cop out by Dolan at the end of that article.
Click to expand...
You are confusing tax avoidance with tax evasions .The Supreme Court ruled in 1918 that :The legal right of an individual to decrease the amount of what would otherwise be his taxes or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits, cannot be doubted."

Putting money in an offshore account is not illegal , setting it up so it limits your tax lability is not an illegal act.
 
estesbob said:
You are confusing tax avoidance with tax evasions .The Supreme Court ruled in 1918 that :The legal right of an individual to decrease the amount of what would otherwise be his taxes or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits, cannot be doubted."

Putting money in an offshore account is not illegal , setting it up so it limits your tax lability is not an illegal act.
Click to expand...
Thank you for explaining yet again Bob. The only problem here is that many are economically illiterate.

Many people don’t realize that if they have 401k’s, IRA’s, etc. they:
  1. Most likely have investments offshore
  2. The money is sheltered from taxes.
So in order to not be hypocritical, people complaining about what Romney is doing would have to fogro all their deductions and pull their money out of thier investments.
 
ComputerGeek25 said:
Thank you for explaining yet again Bob. The only problem here is that many are economically illiterate.

Many people don’t realize that if they have 401k’s, IRA’s, etc. they:
  1. Most likely have investments offshore
  2. The money is sheltered from taxes.
So in order to not be hypocritical, people complaining about what Romney is doing would have to fogro all their deductions and pull their money out of thier investments.
Click to expand...
If they look at the 1099B they receive at the end of the year for their investments AND its shows a foreign income tax credit that means they too have “offshore” accounts. Most people who are invested in mutual funds do

401Ks and IRAs are deferred from taxes until the money is taken out.
 
estesbob said:
401Ks and IRAs are deferred from taxes until the money is taken out.
Click to expand...
Again, it’s money that isn’t taxed now - that’s my point. I can put more money into my 401k and reduce my current tax burden for 30-40 years. If someone looked at my tax returns, they would most likey say I’m not paying as much as I could be paying.
 
ComputerGeek25 said:
Again, it’s money that isn’t taxed now - that’s my point. I can put more money into my 401k and reduce my current tax burden for 30-40 years. If someone looked at my tax returns, they would most likey say I’m not paying as much as I could be paying.
Click to expand...
I can tell you after 30+ years of preparing tax returns that everyone is convinced of two things:
  1. They pay too much in taxes
  2. Their neighbor doesn’t pay enough.
 
ComputerGeek25 said:
There is no easy way to solve this other than voting for people who would nominate strict Constitutionalist judges to the Supreme Court. The people who are most likely to do this is the GOP.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry to say I do not put as much faith in the GOP. And judging from the comments I was referring to, many are hoping the GOP put more ideologues in the court as if that would be a good thing. When I say the whole country has lost it, the GOP is first to come to mind.
 
DeSanto said:
I’m sorry to say I do not put as much faith in the GOP. And judging from the comments I was referring to, many are hoping the GOP put more ideologues in the court as if that would be a good thing. When I say the whole country has lost it, the GOP is first to come to mind.
Click to expand...
As a catholic i can not ignore the fact that the current president :
  1. Has attacked my church and all catholic employers
  2. Supports unrestricted abortion on demand
  3. Supports homosexual marriage.
Romeny was not my first choice but there is no way i can sit this one out and it is morally imperative that Obama be defeated.
 
estesbob said:
You are confusing tax avoidance with tax evasions .The Supreme Court ruled in 1918 that :The legal right of an individual to decrease the amount of what would otherwise be his taxes or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits, cannot be doubted."

Putting money in an offshore account is not illegal , setting it up so it limits your tax lability is not an illegal act.
Click to expand...
what about failing to disclose all accounts?
 
epan said:
It is a criminal act, if it constitutes tax evasion, which it usually does.

What a cop out by Dolan at the end of that article.
Click to expand...
estesbob said:
You are confusing tax avoidance with tax evasions .The Supreme Court ruled in 1918 that :The legal right of an individual to decrease the amount of what would otherwise be his taxes or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits, cannot be doubted."

Putting money in an offshore account is not illegal , setting it up so it limits your tax lability is not an illegal act.
Click to expand...
People who promulgate false information should be banned.

Suddenly everybody is an expert at taxes and foreign bank accounts.

How do we know Romney has offshore accounts? He reported it in his tax returns. If it’s illegal, the IRS would have caught him by now. People with his income are red flags to the IRS auditors.
 
qui_est_ce said:
People who promulgate false information should be banned.

Suddenly everybody is an expert at taxes and foreign bank accounts.

How do we know Romney has offshore accounts? He reported it in his tax returns. If it’s illegal, the IRS would have caught him by now. People with his income are red flags to the IRS auditors.
Click to expand...
Hate to continue the Bush did it meme, but he did abolish the department in the IRS whose job it was to look into the high rollers. I suppose he was doing a few favors in the process.
 
threedogday said:
Hate to continue the Bush did it meme, but he did abolish the department in the IRS whose job it was to look into the high rollers. I suppose he was doing a few favors in the process.
Click to expand...
So you are saying “high rollers” don’t get audited? I find that hard to believe. They might have cut the number of agents, but I assure you, the more income you have, the more you are likely to be audited.

Do you have tax experience?

My original post was referring to people spreading false rumors about Mitt doing illegal things.
 
DeSanto said:
see, that’s what I’m saying. why are we ok with the idea of supreme court justices ruling based on who’s “team” are they on? they should not be on any side except the side of justice. even if they decide on something I don’t agree with ie…campaign finance. I have to respect their decision was made based on the law not on their own self interest. otherwise one must come to the conclusion that there is no real justice in this land.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. The Supreme Court is tainted, for the most part, by partisan ideologues both on the Right and on the Left. While it is virtually impossible, and perhaps not even desirable, for humans to be totally neutral in their perceptions, thinking, and motivations due to their own childhood socialization, cultural background, and personal life experiences, they should at least attempt to operate on the basis of fair-mindedness and, for justices, on the basis of a fair-minded interpretation of the law. This is most important in the case of Supreme Court justices since this court is the final resort for justice in the land when all other appeals have been unsuccessful. If any portion of the judiciary should be exempt from executive and legislative explicit or implicit pressure, the Supreme Court should be. Unfortunately, perhaps today more than ever, this does not appear to be the case. If any litmus test should be applied to Supreme Court justices, the test might be that their political leanings are neither Right nor Left but centrist.
 
estesbob said:
As a catholic i can not ignore the fact that the current president :
  1. Has attacked my church and all catholic employers
  2. Supports unrestricted abortion on demand
  3. Supports homosexual marriage.
Romeny was not my first choice but there is no way i can sit this one out and it is morally imperative that Obama be defeated.
Click to expand...
Romney doesn’t support all these things - he’s done them!
Just look at his record: prolifeprofiles.com/mitt-romney-abortion

It’s like the pot calling the kettle black - plus, most of his foreign policy advisers are the architects of the “Bush Doctrine”, which was responsible for the United States waging an unjust war against Iraq. Are you OK with that too?
 
bellasbane said:
Romney doesn’t support all these things - he’s done them!
Just look at his record: prolifeprofiles.com/mitt-romney-abortion

It’s like the pot calling the kettle black - plus, most of his foreign policy advisers are the architects of the “Bush Doctrine”, which was responsible for the United States waging an unjust war against Iraq. Are you OK with that too?
Click to expand...
As to Romney: Past history, or present day?

As to the war, you mean the one that Obama escalated? Yeah, that one…
 
po18guy said:
As to Romney: Past history, or present day?
Click to expand...
Meh…doesn’t matter. The link Bellasbane provided lists misrepresentations of Romney that have been refuted several times. There is no need to take it seriously.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top