Willard M. Romney - 15%

[autigeremt 7,133]

Point of this thread: Do you think it's right for a millionaire like Mitt Romney to pay a lower tax rate than you do?

The Democrats had a supermajority for two years but didn't move on this, so it must not be all that important until campaign season.

That said, Romney paid what the law requests of him. No one is sending in more than they owe to the IRS, so all this crap is a bunch of class warfare rhetoric since OBama can't run on his terrible record.

[autigeremt 7,133]

RIR, so much for people sticking to the topic at hand. As people in Washington often say, "people don't vote based on the income level they are, they vote based on the income level they wish to become." That motto is illustrated by many in this thread.

For those of you non-millionaires who feel like the millionaires and billionaires need your help in lobbying on their behalf, feel free to carry on...

Speaking of the original post/topic -- what is it? To point out that Romney is wealthy and seeking public office? That's hardly unusual. Quite a few of those millionaire/billionaire "class" members are politicians: Lank1 Lank2

It's the nature of the beast to have wealthy people seek higher office in the US. I guess the real issue is to question if they have earned their money honestly or if they just inherited it a la Kennedy (pick any of them,) or married into it like John Kerry, or have enriched themselves while in office like the late Sen Robert Byrd or Nancy Peolsi, etc.

See, my beef is the fact that this guy says that millionaires are already taxed too much, and he pays an effective rate that's much less than my husband and I, and we are hardly rich. I believe he should be paying a higher effective rate than me. When someone thinks that $300,000 is "not that much" than paying a higher tax rate is "not that much".

How much of your own money did you invest in the marketplace that allowed the opportunity for others to thrive? He's being taxed on revenue generated through investment, which had allowed trillions of dollars to be created in this country for decades. My God this country is losing it's compass.

[AFTiger 282]

Actually, it's not 15%. It's 15%+35%, or more. Romney's paying more like 50%.

Thats not how taxes work, so thats either incredibly dishonest or uninformed.

The money is taxed twice.

Corporate tax rate is 35%. Capital Gains tax rate is 15%

The dollar that is gained by the investor has already been taxed at 35% before the investor pay the 15%.

[Justin5 20]

Actually, it's not 15%. It's 15%+35%, or more. Romney's paying more like 50%.

Thats not how taxes work, so thats either incredibly dishonest or uninformed.

The money is taxed twice.

Corporate tax rate is 35%. Capital Gains tax rate is 15%

The dollar that is gained by the investor has already been taxed at 35% before the investor pay the 15%.

It was taxed once at 35% over a decade (2 decades? more?) ago. 15% is what he is paying yearly, and currently.

[arnaldoabru 11]

Does Romney get taxed on his money in the Cayman Islands?

[channonc 466]

RIR, so much for people sticking to the topic at hand. As people in Washington often say, "people don't vote based on the income level they are, they vote based on the income level they wish to become." That motto is illustrated by many in this thread.

For those of you non-millionaires who feel like the millionaires and billionaires need your help in lobbying on their behalf, feel free to carry on...

Speaking of the original post/topic -- what is it? To point out that Romney is wealthy and seeking public office? That's hardly unusual. Quite a few of those millionaire/billionaire "class" members are politicians: Lank1 Lank2

It's the nature of the beast to have wealthy people seek higher office in the US. I guess the real issue is to question if they have earned their money honestly or if they just inherited it a la Kennedy (pick any of them,) or married into it like John Kerry, or have enriched themselves while in office like the late Sen Robert Byrd or Nancy Peolsi, etc.

See, my beef is the fact that this guy says that millionaires are already taxed too much, and he pays an effective rate that's much less than my husband and I, and we are hardly rich. I believe he should be paying a higher effective rate than me. When someone thinks that $300,000 is "not that much" than paying a higher tax rate is "not that much".

How much of your own money did you invest in the marketplace that allowed the opportunity for others to thrive? He's being taxed on revenue generated through investment, which had allowed trillions of dollars to be created in this country for decades. My God this country is losing it's compass.

So unless you directly invest money in a company, you are not a contributing member of society? Interesting benchmark we now have going on. Basically, I should pay more in taxes than a millionaire because I am not one? Pretty screwed up thinking if you ask me.

[autigeremt 7,133]

RIR, so much for people sticking to the topic at hand. As people in Washington often say, "people don't vote based on the income level they are, they vote based on the income level they wish to become." That motto is illustrated by many in this thread.

For those of you non-millionaires who feel like the millionaires and billionaires need your help in lobbying on their behalf, feel free to carry on...

Speaking of the original post/topic -- what is it? To point out that Romney is wealthy and seeking public office? That's hardly unusual. Quite a few of those millionaire/billionaire "class" members are politicians: Lank1 Lank2

It's the nature of the beast to have wealthy people seek higher office in the US. I guess the real issue is to question if they have earned their money honestly or if they just inherited it a la Kennedy (pick any of them,) or married into it like John Kerry, or have enriched themselves while in office like the late Sen Robert Byrd or Nancy Peolsi, etc.

See, my beef is the fact that this guy says that millionaires are already taxed too much, and he pays an effective rate that's much less than my husband and I, and we are hardly rich. I believe he should be paying a higher effective rate than me. When someone thinks that $300,000 is "not that much" than paying a higher tax rate is "not that much".

How much of your own money did you invest in the marketplace that allowed the opportunity for others to thrive? He's being taxed on revenue generated through investment, which had allowed trillions of dollars to be created in this country for decades. My God this country is losing it's compass.

So unless you directly invest money in a company, you are not a contributing member of society? Interesting benchmark we now have going on. Basically, I should pay more in taxes than a millionaire because I am not one? Pretty screwed up thinking if you ask me.

Talk to your representative because it's not Romney's fault that the tax code isn't what it should be. Don't blame people making money through investment in the economy for that. Typical of those who only see it through a pin hole. I agree that the tax code needs to change, but to trash a man (or thousands of others) for paying what is in the tax code is wrong. We should be trumpeting capitalism and not tearing it down. If not for capitalism, you'd be lucky to have a sharecroppers salary.

[Grumps 3,706]

Point of this thread: Do you think it's right for a millionaire like Mitt Romney to pay a lower tax rate than you do?

I don't have a problem with taxing capital gains at 90% if that's what the powers that be want to do. If that happens then the rich will find other things to do with their money, which will ultimately be bad for everyone. Everyone acts like the wealthy don't have a choice, but they do. If you increase the tax rate in the U.S. then money goes overseas. We all know that. Is that good for the U.S.? I would say no. The mentality should not be to punish the rich but instead should be to encourage them to help everyone else.

Specifically addressing Romney...if Romney is paying the amount he is obligated to pay based on the tax laws then I am fine with it. My guess is that his income tax rate is the same or higher than mine and that if had had capital gains like he does then they would be taxed the same for me as they are for him. We ARE all playing by the same rules, just most of us aren't as rich.

[Tigermike 3,657]

Point of this thread: Do you think it's right for a millionaire like Mitt Romney to pay a lower tax rate than you do?

Did he break the law? Did he cheat on his taxes?

I think there are a couple of guys in Obama's administration who did cheat on their taxes isn't there?

[AUloggerhead 2,507]

RIR, so much for people sticking to the topic at hand. As people in Washington often say, "people don't vote based on the income level they are, they vote based on the income level they wish to become." That motto is illustrated by many in this thread.

For those of you non-millionaires who feel like the millionaires and billionaires need your help in lobbying on their behalf, feel free to carry on...

Speaking of the original post/topic -- what is it? To point out that Romney is wealthy and seeking public office? That's hardly unusual. Quite a few of those millionaire/billionaire "class" members are politicians: Lank1 Lank2

It's the nature of the beast to have wealthy people seek higher office in the US. I guess the real issue is to question if they have earned their money honestly or if they just inherited it a la Kennedy (pick any of them,) or married into it like John Kerry, or have enriched themselves while in office like the late Sen Robert Byrd or Nancy Peolsi, etc.

See, my beef is the fact that this guy says that millionaires are already taxed too much, and he pays an effective rate that's much less than my husband and I, and we are hardly rich. I believe he should be paying a higher effective rate than me. When someone thinks that $300,000 is "not that much" than paying a higher tax rate is "not that much".

How much of your own money did you invest in the marketplace that allowed the opportunity for others to thrive? He's being taxed on revenue generated through investment, which had allowed trillions of dollars to be created in this country for decades. My God this country is losing it's compass.

So unless you directly invest money in a company, you are not a contributing member of society? Interesting benchmark we now have going on. Basically, I should pay more in taxes than a millionaire because I am not one? Pretty screwed up thinking if you ask me.

Is Romney skirting tax laws? No, no indication he's cheating on his taxes or even failing to even pay them. I bet you could find many more examples just like him who pay a lesser tax rate than you do -- on both sides of the aisle. The issue then is the tax code. It needs to be rewritten. How are you on the Fair Tax plan?

[autigeremt 7,133]

BTW.....most people who earned the money to invest paid 32% of income tax on it the first time before paying another 15% off the returns of the money gained through investing it. Therefore, it's more than likely that Romney paid twice in taxes on the money he used to invest.

But who cares when it comes to attacking capitalism and tearing down the country.

[Grumps 3,706]

This is intended to be a serious question:

Is there a country out there who tries to be capitalistic and thinks of it as a good thing? I sure did love it when this country felt that way. I trust the free market WAY more than I trust businessmen and politicians.

[Justin5 20]

This is intended to be a serious question:

Is there a country out there who tries to be capitalistic and thinks of it as a good thing? I sure did love it when this country felt that way. I trust the free market WAY more than I trust businessmen and politicians.

Who is attacking capitalism?

• Romney (and others) have made fortunes in capitalism.
  
• The system has worked great for them. Im happy for them.
  
• You would think they would like to help preserve the system that had benefited them
  
• Therefore they should gladly contribute back into the system to keep their good ride going.
  

No one is asking that the money be taxed at 100 or 90 percent. That would be attacking capitalism. Asking those at the top to pay 40% of their top income to keep teachers in the classroom, people from dying from lack of healthcare, and proper equipment for troops in the field of battle is the definition of fair.

[Tigermike 3,657]

This is intended to be a serious question:

Is there a country out there who tries to be capitalistic and thinks of it as a good thing? I sure did love it when this country felt that way. I trust the free market WAY more than I trust businessmen and politicians.

Who is attacking capitalism?

• Romney (and others) have made fortunes in capitalism.
  
• The system has worked great for them. Im happy for them.
  
• You would think they would like to help preserve the system that had benefited them
  
• Therefore they should gladly contribute back into the system to keep their good ride going.
  

No one is asking that the money be taxed at 100 or 90 percent. That would be attacking capitalism. Asking those at the top to pay 40% of their top income to keep teachers in the classroom, people from dying from lack of healthcare, and proper equipment for troops in the field of battle is the definition of fair.

And continuing to spend this country into oblivion is the definition of stupid.

[Grumps 3,706]

This is intended to be a serious question:

Is there a country out there who tries to be capitalistic and thinks of it as a good thing? I sure did love it when this country felt that way. I trust the free market WAY more than I trust businessmen and politicians.

Who is attacking capitalism?

• Romney (and others) have made fortunes in capitalism.
  
• The system has worked great for them. Im happy for them.
  
• You would think they would like to help preserve the system that had benefited them
  
• Therefore they should gladly contribute back into the system to keep their good ride going.
  

No one is asking that the money be taxed at 100 or 90 percent. That would be attacking capitalism. Asking those at the top to pay 40% of their top income to keep teachers in the classroom, people from dying from lack of healthcare, and proper equipment for troops in the field of battle is the definition of fair.

Last week Obama directly attacked capitalism in a speech. I will try to find it for you. By the way capitalism and greed are not synonyms. Capitalism has worked great FOR EVERYONE THAT I KNOW (including you).

[Justin5 20]

This is intended to be a serious question:

Is there a country out there who tries to be capitalistic and thinks of it as a good thing? I sure did love it when this country felt that way. I trust the free market WAY more than I trust businessmen and politicians.

Who is attacking capitalism?

• Romney (and others) have made fortunes in capitalism.
  
• The system has worked great for them. Im happy for them.
  
• You would think they would like to help preserve the system that had benefited them
  
• Therefore they should gladly contribute back into the system to keep their good ride going.
  

No one is asking that the money be taxed at 100 or 90 percent. That would be attacking capitalism. Asking those at the top to pay 40% of their top income to keep teachers in the classroom, people from dying from lack of healthcare, and proper equipment for troops in the field of battle is the definition of fair.

Last week Obama directly attacked capitalism in a speech. I will try to find it for you. By the way capitalism and greed are not synonyms. Capitalism has worked great FOR EVERYONE THAT I KNOW (including you).

Link please, to speech.

[channonc 466]

RIR, so much for people sticking to the topic at hand. As people in Washington often say, "people don't vote based on the income level they are, they vote based on the income level they wish to become." That motto is illustrated by many in this thread.

For those of you non-millionaires who feel like the millionaires and billionaires need your help in lobbying on their behalf, feel free to carry on...

Speaking of the original post/topic -- what is it? To point out that Romney is wealthy and seeking public office? That's hardly unusual. Quite a few of those millionaire/billionaire "class" members are politicians: Lank1 Lank2

It's the nature of the beast to have wealthy people seek higher office in the US. I guess the real issue is to question if they have earned their money honestly or if they just inherited it a la Kennedy (pick any of them,) or married into it like John Kerry, or have enriched themselves while in office like the late Sen Robert Byrd or Nancy Peolsi, etc.

See, my beef is the fact that this guy says that millionaires are already taxed too much, and he pays an effective rate that's much less than my husband and I, and we are hardly rich. I believe he should be paying a higher effective rate than me. When someone thinks that $300,000 is "not that much" than paying a higher tax rate is "not that much".

How much of your own money did you invest in the marketplace that allowed the opportunity for others to thrive? He's being taxed on revenue generated through investment, which had allowed trillions of dollars to be created in this country for decades. My God this country is losing it's compass.

So unless you directly invest money in a company, you are not a contributing member of society? Interesting benchmark we now have going on. Basically, I should pay more in taxes than a millionaire because I am not one? Pretty screwed up thinking if you ask me.

Is Romney skirting tax laws? No, no indication he's cheating on his taxes or even failing to even pay them. I bet you could find many more examples just like him who pay a lesser tax rate than you do -- on both sides of the aisle. The issue then is the tax code. It needs to be rewritten. How are you on the Fair Tax plan?

Look again at my posts... never said he was breaking the law. I am just pointing out that it is rather self-serving of him to think that millionaires "already pay their fair share" when in fact they pay a much lower effective rate then most of the middle class.

[channonc 466]

BTW.....most people who earned the money to invest paid 32% of income tax on it the first time before paying another 15% off the returns of the money gained through investing it. Therefore, it's more than likely that Romney paid twice in taxes on the money he used to invest.

But who cares when it comes to attacking capitalism and tearing down the country.

Assuming he worked his way up, but knowing Romney's background I don't think that's the case.

[channonc 466]

This is intended to be a serious question:

Is there a country out there who tries to be capitalistic and thinks of it as a good thing? I sure did love it when this country felt that way. I trust the free market WAY more than I trust businessmen and politicians.

Who is attacking capitalism?

• Romney (and others) have made fortunes in capitalism.
• The system has worked great for them. Im happy for them.
• You would think they would like to help preserve the system that had benefited them
• Therefore they should gladly contribute back into the system to keep their good ride going.

No one is asking that the money be taxed at 100 or 90 percent. That would be attacking capitalism. Asking those at the top to pay 40% of their top income to keep teachers in the classroom, people from dying from lack of healthcare, and proper equipment for troops in the field of battle is the definition of fair.

Justin, you are spot on. I am all for getting rid of waste, fraud and abuse, but there is some necessary government spending that helps all of us.

[Tigermike 3,657]

BTW.....most people who earned the money to invest paid 32% of income tax on it the first time before paying another 15% off the returns of the money gained through investing it. Therefore, it's more than likely that Romney paid twice in taxes on the money he used to invest.

But who cares when it comes to attacking capitalism and tearing down the country.

Assuming he worked his way up, but knowing Romney's background I don't think that's the case.

But working your way up from community organizer to POTUS is a normal progression.

[Grumps 3,706]

To me this is an excellent speech that clearly outlines the presidents agenda. The main part I am referring to starts at about the 4 minute mark.

[autigeremt 7,133]

BTW.....most people who earned the money to invest paid 32% of income tax on it the first time before paying another 15% off the returns of the money gained through investing it. Therefore, it's more than likely that Romney paid twice in taxes on the money he used to invest.

But who cares when it comes to attacking capitalism and tearing down the country.

Assuming he worked his way up, but knowing Romney's background I don't think that's the case.

Since you know the man so well I guess it's for sure he rode the coat tails of his father. BTW, he didn't. But you don't care, so why even make the statement?

[autigeremt 7,133]

This is intended to be a serious question:

Is there a country out there who tries to be capitalistic and thinks of it as a good thing? I sure did love it when this country felt that way. I trust the free market WAY more than I trust businessmen and politicians.

Who is attacking capitalism?

• Romney (and others) have made fortunes in capitalism.
• The system has worked great for them. Im happy for them.
• You would think they would like to help preserve the system that had benefited them
• Therefore they should gladly contribute back into the system to keep their good ride going.

No one is asking that the money be taxed at 100 or 90 percent. That would be attacking capitalism. Asking those at the top to pay 40% of their top income to keep teachers in the classroom, people from dying from lack of healthcare, and proper equipment for troops in the field of battle is the definition of fair.

Justin, you are spot on. I am all for getting rid of waste, fraud and abuse, but there is some necessary government spending that helps all of us.

Within the guidlines of the Constitution, define necessary government spending.

[RunInRed 18,113]

BTW.....most people who earned the money to invest paid 32% of income tax on it the first time before paying another 15% off the returns of the money gained through investing it. Therefore, it's more than likely that Romney paid twice in taxes on the money he used.

Not necessarily, particularly for private equity funds and hedge funds. The carried interest provision (tax loophole) allows the managers of the fund to be compensated with a profits interest in the fund ... resulting in the bulk of its income from the fund to be taxed not as compensation for services (ordinary income) but as a return on investment.

And this is the very likely the scenario for Romney as he built his wealth these past few decades. In short, he's been paying no more than 15% on his income. Again, I bet you and most wage earners pay a higher rate...

[Grumps 3,706]

BTW.....most people who earned the money to invest paid 32% of income tax on it the first time before paying another 15% off the returns of the money gained through investing it. Therefore, it's more than likely that Romney paid twice in taxes on the money he used.

Not necessarily, particularly for private equity funds and hedge funds. The carried interest provision (tax loophole) allows the managers of the fund to be compensated with a profits interest in the fund ... resulting in the bulk of its income from the fund to be taxed not as compensation for services (ordinary income) but as a return on investment.

And this is the very likely the scenario for Romney as he built his wealth these past few decades. In short, he's been paying no more than 15% on his income. Again, I bet you and most wage earners pay a higher rate...

Don't you see that the answer is to close the loopholes? Demonize the lawmakers who come up with the rules, not the people who follow the stupid rules.