Romney stands by message in secret video

[ringil]

So was I, and donated handsomely to her campaign. Beat my head against the wall when Obama got the nod. Still think she was and would be better than he on all counts.

I’m not sure that American is ready to elect a female President.

We wont even vote for a bald President!

Short guys don’t do so well either.

 

[austenbosten]

I apologize for my sarcasm.

If you recall, though, this debate started with the issue of progressive taxation. None of the countries you give have anything like a progressive tax scheme in practice. Or if they do they don’t ‘transfer’ enough wealth back to the bottom so that they can spend it sending it back to the top.

Communism and socialism are not related other than some historical ties. Not that I am a socialist by any stretch of imagination. Socialism typically wants more control over the details, I just want to keep the wealth moving from where it likes to stagnate to where it can be quickly pumped back up to the top. I don’t want to destroy nor control capitalism I just want to tame it a little and keeping its more destructive side under check.

List of Socialist nations and their Capitalist counterparts in the same region.

Income Tax Rates (%):
GDP (PPP)total(the entire wealth of the economy)
GDP (PPP)per capita(per person)

Cuba] = 25,30,35,40,45,50
total = $114.1 Billion
per capita = $9,900​

Bahamas] = 0
total = $10.785 Billion
per capita = $30,958

PRC China] = 5,10,15,20,25,30,35,40,45
total = $11.299 Trillion
per capita = $8,382​

Hong Kong] 2,7,12,17
total = $351.119 Billion
per capita = $49,137

Venezuela] 6,9,12,16,20,24,29,34
total = $374.111 Billion
per capita = $12,568​

Chile]
total = $299.786 Billion
per capita=$17,380

Zimbabwe] = 0,20,25,30,35
total = $6.127 Billion
per capita = $487​

Seychelles] = 15
total = $2.245 Billion
per capita = $24,726

As you can see the Capitalist nations overall are poorer than their Socialist counterparts, but their people are far more well-off…essentially the poor are better off in the poorer Capitalist countries than in Socialist ones.

No matter what you say, the facts prove people are wealthier and better off in Capitalist nations than Socialist Also you need to read up on your Marx and Engles Tony, Communism and Socialism all derive from Marxism and are all inter-related, but instead of correcting you philosophically, I’ll just let the facts prove themselves.

 

[exoflare]

There were so many people that hated Bush they would have voted for Mickey Mouse over the Republican candidate.

Well we’d certainly be in better shape right now if they had.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Anyonew know where I can find one of these.

I work for 4 of them, presently.

 

[qui_est_ce]

You rang?

 

[CMatt25]

Tell me anyone voted for Obama due to a careful analysis of his positions, his accomplishments, and his specific plans for America and its people.

I believe and think statistics show that people voted for whom they thought Obama was, for his race, for the idea of having a black president and assuaging our collective racial guilt, for his speechmaking abilities, and mostly because he was NOT GEORGE BUSH.

The euphoria, thrill up my leg response to Obama (something that baffled me from day one) reminds me of members of a cult or fans as in rabid fans.

Not a lot of brain cells went into the 2008 decisions by millions of people…just listen to the interviews and you hear emotion not thought.

Lisa

Hmmm… While I don’t know why you feel a need to continue to be uncharitable in your posts, now talking about the lack of people’s brain cells, I for one along with many others, carefully analyzed positions and plans. I first became a supporter of Obama 3 mos after he announced his run for the Presidency in Feb 2007. Both Hillary and Obama supported doing something about healthcare in this country and were similar on many issues. The deciding factor for me was Obama’s position of opposing the war in Iraq from the beginning, his plan to end it, and Hillary originally supporting the war. His race had nothing at all to do with it. Given other choices in 2016 if Hillary were running, I might very well support her.

 

[austenbosten]

Hmmm… While I don’t know why you feel a need to continue to be uncharitable in your posts, now talking about the lack of people’s brain cells, I for one along with many others, carefully analyzed positions and plans. I first became a supporter of Obama 3 mos after he announced his run for the Presidency in Feb 2007. Both Hillary and Obama supported doing something about healthcare in this country and were similar on many issues. The deciding factor for me was Obama’s position of opposing the war in Iraq from the beginning, his plan to end it, and Hillary originally supporting the war. His race had nothing at all to do with it. Given other choices in 2016 if Hillary were running, I might very well support her.

I don’t think the Republicans can really blame people for voting Obama in 2008…especially when they put up McCain of all people to run against him.

 

[LisaA]

Hmmm… While I don’t know why you feel a need to continue to be uncharitable in your posts, now talking about the lack of people’s brain cells, I for one along with many others, carefully analyzed positions and plans. I first became a supporter of Obama 3 mos after he announced his run for the Presidency in Feb 2007. Both Hillary and Obama supported doing something about healthcare in this country and were similar on many issues. The deciding factor for me was Obama’s position of opposing the war in Iraq from the beginning, his plan to end it, and Hillary originally supporting the war. His race had nothing at all to do with it. Given other choices in 2016 if Hillary were running, I might very well support her.

I can judge your thoughtfulness and analysis of issues by your many posts. But thank you for reiterating the obvious.

Lisa

 

[LisaA]

I don’t think the Republicans can really blame people for voting Obama in 2008…especially when they put up McCain of all people to run against him.

McCain was a terrible candidate and the worst of the group to run against Obama. What a contrast…a cranky old white guy who was criticized by the Left and the Right versus a modern day Proteus in a slick package, sweet talking and the Anti Bush.

As I looked over the field in 08, McCain was at or near the bottom. I think the problem was the quick decision making that resulted in a couple of tiny states making the decision for us. This year we probably went overboard in length of the race, multiple debates, and a lot of infighting. I have to give it to the Dems, they know how to keep their people in line!

I still maintain there were as many votes against Bush as for Obama. I can understand that as I would vote for a potted plant over Obama this year. Although Romney was my candidate from 08 on, I would have voted for anyone nominated. I have a serious Obama derangement syndrome issue so I feel the pain of the Bush Haters of 08.

Lisa

 

[_Abyssinia]

Campaign says Romney’s average effective tax rate was 20 percent over 2 decades

Romney is releasing his tax information today for 2011 along with a summary for the last 20 years that includes his average tax rate of just over 20%:

Fox news

– Mitt Romney’s campaign, in its latest attempt to respond to calls to release more years of tax returns, announced Friday that the Republican candidate averaged a 20 percent effective tax rate for the years in question and never paid less than 13.66 percent.

But the campaign is sticking by the candidate’s vow not to release more than his last two tax returns, which critics have made into a potent campaign issue.

Romney plans to release his final tax return for 2011 on Friday. That document will show the Romneys paid $1.9 million in taxes on nearly $14 million in income, mostly from investments, giving them an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent, the campaign said in a blog post

Here’s the lowdown from Mitt Romney’s website. Note the charitable giving for 2011:

Regarding the newly-filed 2011 Tax Return:

• In 2011, the Romneys paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 in mostly investment income.
• The Romneys’ effective tax rate for 2011 was 14.1%.
• The Romneys donated $4,020,772 to charity in 2011, amounting to nearly 30% of their income.
• The Romneys claimed a deduction for $2.25 million of those charitable contributions.
• The Romneys’ generous charitable donations in 2011 would have significantly reduced their tax obligation for the year. The Romneys thus limited their deduction of charitable contributions to conform to the Governor’s statement in August, based upon the January estimate of income, that he paid at least 13% in income taxes in each of the last 10 years.
• That is a massive amount of charitable giving. I even looked up his 2010 charitable giving and it was over 3 million higher at over 7 million. Dude is a charitable guy. If that doesn’t say something about the man, I don’t know what does.

Here’s the info on his 20 year summary:

Regarding the PWC letter covering the Romneys’ tax filings over 20 years, from 1990 – 2009:

• In each year during the entire 20-year period, the Romneys owed both state and federal income taxes.
• Over the entire 20-year period, the average annual effective federal tax rate was 20.20%.
• Over the entire 20-year period, the lowest annual effective federal personal tax rate was 13.66%.
• Over the entire 20-year period, the Romneys gave to charity an average of 13.45% of their adjusted gross income.
• Over the entire 20-year period, the total federal and state taxes owed plus the total charitable donations deducted represented 38.49% of total AGI.

therightscoop.com/campaign-says-romneys-average-effective-tax-rate-was-20-percent-over-2-decades

The Romneys owed and paid state and federal income taxes every single year stretching back to at least 1990. Harry Reid’s imaginary friend

is unavailable for comment. Their effective tax rate, on average, was over 20 pecent (nearly double the average effective rate in America, according to the non-partisan Tax Foundation). Does this qualify as a “fair share”? In the last two decades, the Romney’s donated 13.45 percent of their adjusted gross income to charity. This totally dwarfs the long-term giving of the Obamas and the Bidens, in case anyone in the class warfare camp is keeping score. But remember, Mitt Romney is callously dismissive and uncaring toward poor people and the ‘47 percent.’ Overall, the Romney family paid every cent they owed – and more – forking over nearly 40 percent of their income to either the government or charitable organizations, including their church. I’ve got to hand it to the Romney campaign: They played a long game here, and did so masterfully. One of the most obnoxious and relentless arrows in Democrats’ attack quiver has been the tax returns issue. See how greedy and secretive Romney is? Even his own father released 12 years of returns! He’s probably a tax cheat! That’s all gone now, and the whiners look petty, small, and stupid. And Mitt Romney looks like the remarkably generous, law-abiding, productive member of society that he is. Bravo.

townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/09/21/democrats_media_get_punkd_romney_releases_tax_returns

 

[iohannes13]

Please check the actual statistics instead of demonizing capitalism. “Come on, didn’t you read this " I just understand that no man made system is perfect.”

"The other systems you mention have the same problem. The advantage capitalism has is that it provides chances of lifting yourself out of poverty.

Capitalism is part of the system isn’t it? Until capitalism evolves into something better, it’s going to contribute to the problem.

Lisa

 

[_Abyssinia]

The Romney camp sends out this statement from former IRS Commissioner Fred Goldberg, who reviewed the Romneys’ tax documents:

These returns reflect the complexity of our tax laws and the types of investment activity that I would anticipate for persons in their circumstances. There is no indication or suggestion of any tax-motivated or aggressive tax planning activities. In my judgment, they have fully satisfied their responsibilities as taxpayers

. They have done so by relying on a highly reputable return preparer and other advisors, who have in turn relied primarily on information provided by third parties to them and to the IRS. The end result of that process has been returns that include a multitude of schedules, IRS forms and accompanying statements that provide appropriate transparency and the proper payment of taxes that Governor and Mrs. Romney owe under current law.

Now what happens to all those Obama ads claiming that Romney “probably” pays a lower rate “than you”?

townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/09/21/democrats_media_get_punkd_romney_releases_tax_returns

Additionally, there are now physician letters for both Gov. Romney and Rep. Ryan, making public their physical condition and medical history. These letters are being provided in the interest of public disclosure

mittromney.com/disclosure

 

[LisaA]

Come on, didn’t you read this " I just understand that no man made system is perfect."

"The other systems you mention have the same problem. The advantage capitalism has is that it provides chances of lifting yourself out of poverty.

Capitalism is part of the system isn’t it? Until capitalism evolves into something better, it’s going to contribute to the problem.

Again reiterating the obvious. Of course no system is perfect but capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty, created more prosperity, resulted in great advances in technology and medical care etc etc etc.

Socialism, communism have resulted in death, torture and misery. Show me a capitalistic system that has murdered more of its own citizens than the communists in China and the Soviet Union? Heck we don’t even have to get into the National SOCIALISTS to find abject misery. Why do people flee communist countries to America?

There is a famous saying that capitalism is the worst of all systems…except for all of the others. You have set up a strawman and set him ablaze. Capitalism is the source of prosperity and opportunity.

Lisa

 

[Al_Moritz]

Castellanos on tax summary: Is this a joke?

Alex Castellanos, the former Mitt Romney strategist from 2008 who has alternately been critical and praising of the current campaign, left no doubt where he stands on the decision to release a summary of the candidate’s tax rates over 20 years.

“At first I thought this was an April Fool’s Joke,” said Castellanos, who tweeted something to that effect at me earlier. “But it isn’t April. I can’t imagine that David Axelrod will now say, I’m glad Mitt put this issue behind him. This will drag Mitt’s taxes back into the debate. And there’s not many days left. I just can’t imagine why they would do this. There are 40 days left and you have now made more of them about Mitt’s taxes…you don’t serve a life sentence and then confess afterward. They’ve taken their beating on this (already) … I just don’t understand how a (being) ‘little pregnant’ strategy (works).”

Other Republican operatives have emailed in with a similar reaction - that the summary is going to revive, instead of settle, questions on an issue where what had seemed to be the worst was already behind Romney.

politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/09/castellanos-on-tax-summary-is-this-a-joke-136321.html

 

[rlg94086]

Castellanos on tax summary: Is this a joke?

Alex Castellanos, the former Mitt Romney strategist from 2008 who has alternately been critical and praising of the current campaign, left no doubt where he stands on the decision to release a summary of the candidate’s tax rates over 20 years.

“At first I thought this was an April Fool’s Joke,” said Castellanos, who tweeted something to that effect at me earlier. “But it isn’t April. I can’t imagine that David Axelrod will now say, I’m glad Mitt put this issue behind him. This will drag Mitt’s taxes back into the debate. And there’s not many days left. I just can’t imagine why they would do this. There are 40 days left and you have now made more of them about Mitt’s taxes…you don’t serve a life sentence and then confess afterward. They’ve taken their beating on this (already) … I just don’t understand how a (being) ‘little pregnant’ strategy (works).”

Other Republican operatives have emailed in with a similar reaction - that the summary is going to revive, instead of settle, questions on an issue where what had seemed to be the worst was already behind Romney.

politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/09/castellanos-on-tax-summary-is-this-a-joke-136321.html

I don’t think it will help or hurt him. Most people are bright enough to have already surmised that Romney makes a lot of money and pays a lot of taxes. Only the dim-witted and envious folks have a problem with the amount he pays in taxes.

 

[Dawnia]

In 2011, the Romneys paid $1,935,708 in taxes on $13,696,951 in mostly investment income.

I’d pay 2 million if it meant I could earn 13.7 million. I’d even be willing to pay a little more. I’m not greedy.

 

[scipio337]

I’d pay 2 million if it meant I could earn 13.7 million. I’d even be willing to pay a little more. I’m not greedy.

But that’s not a “fair share”!!

 

[JustNotSure]

But that’s not a “fair share”!!

Probably more like $5M would be fair, but who said the world was fair.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Castellanos on tax summary: Is this a joke?

Alex Castellanos, the former Mitt Romney strategist from 2008 who has alternately been critical and praising of the current campaign, left no doubt where he stands on the decision to release a summary of the candidate’s tax rates over 20 years.

“At first I thought this was an April Fool’s Joke,” said Castellanos, who tweeted something to that effect at me earlier. “But it isn’t April. I can’t imagine that David Axelrod will now say, I’m glad Mitt put this issue behind him. This will drag Mitt’s taxes back into the debate. And there’s not many days left. I just can’t imagine why they would do this. There are 40 days left and you have now made more of them about Mitt’s taxes…you don’t serve a life sentence and then confess afterward. They’ve taken their beating on this (already) … I just don’t understand how a (being) ‘little pregnant’ strategy (works).”

Other Republican operatives have emailed in with a similar reaction - that the summary is going to revive, instead of settle, questions on an issue where what had seemed to be the worst was already behind Romney.

politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/09/castellanos-on-tax-summary-is-this-a-joke-136321.html

Romney always said he would release his 2010 and 2011 tax returns so why would Castellanos think Romney put the taxes behind him before he released his 2011 returns?

 

[scipio337]

Probably more like $5M would be fair, but who said the world was fair.

36%+ of your earnings to Caesar? You know that most charitible contributions are deductible, right?