How does one get a hundred million in their IRA?

[jackoroe]

More red herrings. You should do some studying so you can be a good example of a communicator.

If he's paying at a lower rate than other Americans, he's avoiding his obligations. Hiding behind laws written by the wealthy to give advantages to the wealthy is a right-wing device for making corruption look respectable. And it merely shows that you don't want to see the deficit or debt tackled.

You accused Romney of being a thief and you've been called on it. If he's paying tax at a lower rate than some other Americans that's a function of the tax code. Not an indication that he's somehow stealing money that you feel belongs to the state.

Yes, we have a problem with the deficit and debt. Obama has spent $5,000,000,000,000 that he's put on the Bank of China credit card since he's been in office. He's engaged in crony capitalism with our money, not his own.

 

[jackoroe]

You don't consider it wrong that a man who claims to love America ships millions of dollars to other nations so as to avoid paying his share of federal taxes? You don't consider it wrong that a man with a DISCLOSED wealth of more than a quarter billion dollars pays less than 15% tax on his annual income? You don't consider it wrong that a 65 year old man has amassed an Individual Retirement Account of over $100 million dollars from share holdings that would otherwise be subject to taxation? You don't consider it wrong that he has offshore investments in his IRA (tax free!) that are in turn re-invested back in the US, thus avoiding Unrelated Business Income Tax he would have to pay if he made those US investments directly?

It must be great to be rich enough to have the best guys in the business finding the loopholes to protect your bags of cash. It must be even better to have presided over a company who is one of the biggest political lobbyists on record - a company who successfully lobbied to change taxation laws that you PERSONALLY made millions of dollars from.

Maybe he hasn't broken the law. This is not a question of law, Jack, it's a question of ethics. If Romney loves the nation enough to be its leader, why has he done his best for decades to avoid paying his share of taxes, even at a time when US federal tax rates are the lowest in a half century? Does the US want a President who has shown he puts his own interests above his nation's?

What do the tax laws say and has he complied with them? That's all that's relevant. He's paid "his share" as required by law. He paid $6.2 million in tax last year. I'll really go out on a limb and suggest that's more than our regular posters back here combined. Now does that make him more patriotic than me or anybody else? Of course not. There is no ethical component paying taxes. It's reading the tax code and plugging in the numbers.

 

[JayHawk]

You accused Romney of being a thief and you've been called on it. If he's paying tax at a lower rate than some other Americans that's a function of the tax code. Not an indication that he's somehow stealing money that you feel belongs to the state.

Yes, we have a problem with the deficit and debt. Obama has spent $5,000,000,000,000 that he's put on the Bank of China credit card since he's been in office. He's engaged in crony capitalism with our money, not his own.

SO since China only owns 8% of our debt are you saying that Obama ONLY borrowed money from China during his Presidency in complete violation of the House holding the purse strings?

I would like you to post a cite or two to indicate that Obama borrowed 5 Trillion from China. All on his own.

 

[Kulindahr]

You accused Romney of being a thief and you've been called on it. If he's paying tax at a lower rate than some other Americans that's a function of the tax code. Not an indication that he's somehow stealing money that you feel belongs to the state.

Romney is a thief. Just because he uses the law to achieve his thievery doesn't make it less so.

 

[Kulindahr]

What do the tax laws say and has he complied with them? That's all that's relevant. He's paid "his share" as required by law. He paid $6.2 million in tax last year. I'll really go out on a limb and suggest that's more than our regular posters back here combined. Now does that make him more patriotic than me or anybody else? Of course not. There is no ethical component paying taxes. It's reading the tax code and plugging in the numbers.

Do you equally argue that hanging gay youths in the Middle East is acceptable, because the law says that's the thing to do?

You're confusing law with right and wrong. Laws are supposed to describe right and wrong, not define it. Yours is the argument of the Pharisees in the New Testament, who paid attention to the rules, but totally missed the point.

 

[andysayshi]

^ Exactly! Well said.

Romney is not only unethical, he's complicit in creating the laws that protect his secret fortunes.

 

[chance1]

^ Exactly! Well said.

Romney is not only unethical, he's complicit in creating the laws that protect his secret fortunes.

what a mockery of a sham of a thread

Romney is rich - stone Romney

rich = evil

rich = unethical ????

and he's complicit in creating laws? how so? he was governor of a state?

if a rich guy can get this country working again .......... i'll take the rich guy

i don't begrudge someone for being rich

not sure why anyone would

unless it's just an attack job (yes)
or envy
or ........ socialist mentality

rich is not bad

it's actually good

 

[jackoroe]

SO since China only owns 8% of our debt are you saying that Obama ONLY borrowed money from China during his Presidency in complete violation of the House holding the purse strings?

I would like you to post a cite or two to indicate that Obama borrowed 5 Trillion from China. All on his own.

Let's listen to the Dear Leader himself on this very subject.

If Obama felt it was true of Bush then, it must also be true now. You don't argue with the Dear Leader.

 

[JayHawk]

Romney is rich - stone Romney

rich = evil

rich = unethical ????

None of us have stated nor is it implied that rich = evil or unethical.

What is unethical is being the leader of a party THAT claims they want everyone to pay a fair share of taxes and yet he hides his money to avoid doing exactly that - pay his fair share. I am taxed on very little of what I am paid thanks to the structure of PAY versus Allowance. Yet that also allows them to pay me equally less in retirement. Regardless I barely clear 100k in my day job. I pay 18% taxes on that amount and would pay more but I 'relocated' to Tennessee where there are no state taxes. All perfectly legal and without a question I pay my share.

I did not relocate to another country and place my assets there because it would invalidate my security clearance for one and for two i really dont have any fucking money to put overseas.

Now we are talking about granting the highest classification of a security clearance to a man who has not just one but multiple overseas accounts for the purpose of shielding his tax burden AND probably to hedge himself against American failure.

I am all the way in. I will serve a Commander and Chief who is all the way in as well.

 

[jackoroe]

Do you equally argue that hanging gay youths in the Middle East is acceptable, because the law says that's the thing to do?

You're confusing law with right and wrong. Laws are supposed to describe right and wrong, not define it. Yours is the argument of the Pharisees in the New Testament, who paid attention to the rules, but totally missed the point.

I really could care less what the savages in the Middle East do. Not my problem. So, in your mind Romney is a thief for following the tax codes and keeping as much of the money he earned as is possible. What then, are Messrs. Geithener, Rangel and Buffett who actually had a tax liability and failed to pay? Are you prepared to admit that our Secretary of the Treasury, the congressman previously responsible for writing the tax laws and the patron saint of paying his "fair share" are all thieves?!

There is no moral component to paying your taxes anymore than there is in paying your bill at the grocery store. If you feel compelled to give more than you owe because Obama can't scrape by on the measly $2,000,000,000,000 we give him plus the $1,500,000,000,000 he borrows from elsewhere, be my guest. The Federal government is more like a crack whore that feels it's owed to them. They've shown absolutely no fiscal restraint since the mid to late 1990's and are undeserving of another dime until they can prove they've done all they can to eliminate waste fraud and abuse.

If any American wants to keep as much of their money from the wasteful leviathan that is then Federal Government, more power to them!

 

[jackoroe]

None of us have stated nor is it implied that rich = evil or unethical.

What is unethical is being the leader of a party THAT claims they want everyone to pay a fair share of taxes and yet he hides his money to avoid doing exactly that - pay his fair share. I am taxed on very little of what I am paid thanks to the structure of PAY versus Allowance. Yet that also allows them to pay me equally less in retirement. Regardless I barely clear 100k in my day job. I pay 18% taxes on that amount and would pay more but I 'relocated' to Tennessee where there are no state taxes. All perfectly legal and without a question I pay my share.

I did not relocate to another country and place my assets there because it would invalidate my security clearance for one and for two i really dont have any fucking money to put overseas.

Now we are talking about granting the highest classification of a security clearance to a man who has not just one but multiple overseas accounts for the purpose of shielding his tax burden AND probably to hedge himself against American failure.

I am all the way in. I will serve a Commander and Chief who is all the way in as well.

Again with the talking point. Define "fair share". What is it? How much? Or is it just more until you say so?

 

[JayHawk]

Let's listen to the Dear Leader himself on this very subject.

If Obama felt it was true of Bush then, it must also be true now. You don't argue with the Dear Leader.

Oh isnt that cute you have devolved into Rush Limbaugh Dear Leader talk. It's special to see true sources emerge for trains of thought.

The difference between Bush and Obama and the sizeable debt BOTH accumulated?

Obama desires to set into place a tax mechanism to pay the debt instead of ignore it and pretend trickle up economics works.

Bush and the republican congress were complicit in HIDING the war budget for years and not having the discussion WITH the overall budget talks which would have made the issue much more clear and striking to the American people. Oh and coincidentally the Republicans also voted 61 times to increase the debt ceiling WHILE their guy was in office. Yet the day anohter guy relieves the watch it is a issue.

Obama placed everything spent on the budget, hence we are having these discussions in the first place and the criminals in the republican party are trying to convince folks it was all Obama. Only the ignorant believe that.

The economic crash occurred because of loosening regulations that both parties enjoyed. ALL known economist indicate spending needs to occur by the government to hedge lack of spending by private interest to mitigate the impact of a recession. Republicans believe in the free market until it fails and then they break out chicken bones and lies. The bottom line is this economy IS recovering due mostly to government programs and not due to the Trillions being held by republican backing corporate fucks.

So most Americans do understand that we MUST pay our bills. Here is an easy example. If your credit card gets triple the balance do you cut your payments to it or increase your payments to it? Last i checked the President does not have carte blanc budgetary powers. SO since he was the adult in the room and added it to the budget Republicans had to agree to fucking pay it by passing budget resolutions. Why resolutions because they can't actually do their job and pass a budget.

This has nothing to do with Romney or rich hate. It has to do with FAILED policy and not repeating that failed policy. This has to do with being totally honest with the American People if you intend to lead them. Hiding your money IS NOT HONEST. Changing your position every ten minutes to meet the next breaking story IS NOT HONEST.

You cannot be this naive? Can you?

 

[JayHawk]

Again with the talking point. Define "fair share". What is it? How much? Or is it just more until you say so?

Fair share is locating your money inside the united states and paying for the profits in the tax system. You don't even wonder why Romney is not open about all of this? Not even in the least? Really? Very trusting you are.

 

[Kulindahr]

For starters, fair share is paying at least the same percentage as the people below you.

 

[jackoroe]

Oh isnt that cute you have devolved into Rush Limbaugh Dear Leader talk. It's special to see true sources emerge for trains of thought.

The truth hurts sometimes, doesn't it?

The difference between Bush and Obama and the sizeable debt BOTH accumulated?

Obama desires to set into place a tax mechanism to pay the debt instead of ignore it and pretend trickle up economics works.

Untrue. In order to reduce debt you first need to stop adding to it. Please cite for me the year that any of the Dear Leader's budgets actually balance. Not that it matters, becuse he can't seem to dupe anyone into voting for his budgets.

Bush and the republican congress were complicit in HIDING the war budget for years and not having the discussion WITH the overall budget talks which would have made the issue much more clear and striking to the American people. Oh and coincidentally the Republicans also voted 61 times to increase the debt ceiling WHILE their guy was in office. Yet the day anohter guy relieves the watch it is a issue.

And Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling as being unpatriotic. Now he's got the credit card and the sky should be the limit. Question. Was he lying when he was a senator, or is he lying about the need to increase the debt ceiling as president?

Obama placed everything spent on the budget, hence we are having these discussions in the first place and the criminals in the republican party are trying to convince folks it was all Obama. Only the ignorant believe that.

The economic crash occurred because of loosening regulations that both parties enjoyed. ALL known economist indicate spending needs to occur by the government to hedge lack of spending by private interest to mitigate the impact of a recession. Republicans believe in the free market until it fails and then they break out chicken bones and lies. The bottom line is this economy IS recovering due mostly to government programs and not due to the Trillions being held by republican backing corporate fucks.

We were promised that unemployment would be 5.6% by now if we borrowed and spent the $800,000,000,000 stimulus package. I believe today's number was 8.2%. Another lie. How much money did the Dear Leader hand over as crony capitalism? How many companies went belly up taking our cash with them? Would you really give any of your own money to Obama to invest? You'd be nuts if you did.

So most Americans do understand that we MUST pay our bills. Here is an easy example. If your credit card gets triple the balance do you cut your payments to it or increase your payments to it? Last i checked the President does not have carte blanc budgetary powers. SO since he was the adult in the room and added it to the budget Republicans had to agree to fucking pay it by passing budget resolutions. Why resolutions because they can't actually do their job and pass a budget.

The first thing you do, my friend, is to STOP spending. Even if you increase payments and continue the spending orgy, you'll never get caught up. In addition, the House of Representatives has carried out their Constitutional obligation and passed budgets. The Senate, controlled by democrats, has not. Oh, and they only need 51 votes to pass a budget. So the filibuster bullshit doesn't wash on that, OK?

This has nothing to do with Romney or rich hate. It has to do with FAILED policy and not repeating that failed policy. This has to do with being totally honest with the American People if you intend to lead them. Hiding your money IS NOT HONEST. Changing your position every ten minutes to meet the next breaking story IS NOT HONEST.

We are living in the worst excuse for a recovery in the history of the republic. 8% or higher unemployment if you use the overly optimistic U3 number, for over 40 months now. If you bother counting those who simply gave up looking for work, as we once did, the U6 number is closer to 15%. And we want more of this why, exactly?!

You cannot be this naive? Can you?

If you like persistently high unemployment and negligible economic growth, step right up and be my guest. That sound like a pretty naive act, though.

 

[jackoroe]

Fair share is locating your money inside the united states and paying for the profits in the tax system. You don't even wonder why Romney is not open about all of this? Not even in the least? Really? Very trusting you are.

No, I actually don't care because it's his money to do with whatever he likes. He isn't the thief in all of this. The government who taxes and spends outside of the powers granted by the Constitution are the thieves.

 

[JayHawk]

If you like persistently high unemployment and negligible economic growth, step right up and be my guest. That sound like a pretty naive act, though.

The facts tell otherwise.

Seems to me the policies you endorse re-enacting with the Romney election would deliver the same results as the Bush Admnistration and those were not very promising. Why pray tell do you ignore facts when offering opinions? I was and am a staunch supporter of why we went to war and what we got out of it. However it is time to pay the bill. So instead of rhetoric why don't you offer some factual evidence to support your claims?

No, I actually don't care because it's his money to do with whatever he likes. He isn't the thief in all of this. The government who taxes and spends outside of the powers granted by the Constitution are the thieves.

Again besides baseless claims please provide at least one partisan inaccurate cite for your claims.

Honestly Jack operating two wars off the books was fairly criminal and you weren't squawking then?

 

[andysayshi]

The first thing you do, my friend, is to STOP spending. .

How's that working in Europe right now?

 

[jackoroe]

The facts tell otherwise.

Seems to me the policies you endorse re-enacting with the Romney election would deliver the same results as the Bush Admnistration and those were not very promising. Why pray tell do you ignore facts when offering opinions? I was and am a staunch supporter of why we went to war and what we got out of it. However it is time to pay the bill. So instead of rhetoric why don't you offer some factual evidence to support your claims?



Again besides baseless claims please provide at least one partisan inaccurate cite for your claims.

Honestly Jack operating two wars off the books was fairly criminal and you weren't squawking then?

A cherry picked fact does not an argument make. The awful truth is the Obama recovery is dismal compared to the last 10 recoveries. We're 6.5 million jobs shy of an average recovery. That's OK, I know your doing your best to put lipstick on the pig that is this jobless recovery.

Obama's 'Extraordinary' Economic Recovery Actually 6.5 Million Jobs Below Average - Investors.com

And what policy did I endorse exactly?!

 

[JayHawk]

Hey here is another point of view. Well two more about the job creation...

The first indicates that Obama is hampered by the massive govt job cuts being implemented by Republicans. Because cutting govt jobs in a recession is a good way to spur the economy. Who needs teachers, cops and fireman anyways right?

The second is fact check indicating Obama is inflating his message on the campaign trail. That would be a mistake. i can understand his angst but stay honest Mr president. Of course the fact check piece also endorses the idea that government job cuts are what is making Obama record equal to Bush's record on Job (so far and in half the time as Bush)