I want Mitts rate. 13% really?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/tax-reality-check/millionaire.html?hpid=z2

Instead of worrying about who they are stealing more money from, I wish they would stop stealing all money from anyone.

Things are always simple when someone includes or omits facts to shape their argument. Just a few to start:

1. The whole idea of lumping all of the various taxes into a nonsensical stew called "taxes" and arriving at meaningless percentages. If we're talking federal income tax, let's discuss. Social Security/Medicare taxes, let's talk. Capital gains? Let's hear opinions. To pretend we can mash them all together and have a meaningful discussion of "taxes" is enormously ignorant, dishonest, or both.

2. The implication that capital gains tax being lower than regular income is unfair because investment income wasn't earned through work is nonsense. Again, people who put such ideas forward either don't understand that the money invested that yielded capital gains was overwhelmingly earned by the recipient from working, or worse, they do know and choose to pretend otherwise, The technical term for this is "bald-faced lie".

3. Percentages are what they are. In terms of dollars, Mr. Romney pays more in taxes in a year than over 100 randomly selected members of this forum pay in a lifetime. How in the hell do you say things about "fair share" with a straight face? You can't without sounding completely ridiculous.

Romney is a smart guy and if he only paid 13% good for him. That's more than 50% of the country right off the top and if we look at the amount instead of the % he's probably paying taxes in the top 1% of the country.

Bigdogg;1249128 wrote:I want Mitts rate. 13% really?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/tax-reality-check/millionaire.html?hpid=z2

The national average is 11%. Why is it Mitt's fault that you suck at doing your taxes?

queencitybuckeye;1249152 wrote:Things are always simple when someone includes or omits facts to shape their argument. Just a few to start:

1. The whole idea of lumping all of the various taxes into a nonsensical stew called "taxes" and arriving at meaningless percentages. If we're talking federal income tax, let's discuss. Social Security/Medicare taxes, let's talk. Capital gains? Let's hear opinions. To pretend we can mash them all together and have a meaningful discussion of "taxes" is enormously ignorant, dishonest, or both.

2. The implication that capital gains tax being lower than regular income is unfair because investment income wasn't earned through work is nonsense. Again, people who put such ideas forward either don't understand that the money invested that yielded capital gains was overwhelmingly earned by the recipient from working, or worse, they do know and choose to pretend otherwise, The technical term for this is "bald-faced lie".

3. Percentages are what they are. In terms of dollars, Mr. Romney pays more in taxes in a year than over 100 randomly selected members of this forum pay in a lifetime. How in the hell do you say things about "fair share" with a straight face? You can't without sounding completely ridiculous.

The example cited involves federal income taxes only. The tax code is too complex and has too many loop holes that the average American can not take advantage of.

I truly doubt Mitt paid anywhere near 13% in income taxes...since 00. If he did, then he and his accountants are idiots. People that make, 10, 20, 30 million a year, simply don't.

There are several multi billion dollar corporatations that pay their CEO's more in payroll, then they pay the US in taxes. Yet, look at all the people on this board, like Gut for example, that somehow think the US has the highest corporate tax structure in the world.

There is so much misinformation floating around out there...mind boggling really.

Bigdogg;1249334 wrote:The example cited involves federal income taxes only. The tax code is too complex and has too many loop holes that the average American can not take advantage of.

If you paid more than 13% in federal income taxes only last year, then you either need to stop doing your own taxes or fire the guy who did them.

Mitts doing very well dodging taxes for his income bracket.

umber of Returns with Positive AGI	AGI ($ millions)	Income Taxes Paid ($ millions)	Group's Share of Total AGI	Group's Share of Income Taxes	Income Split Point	Average Tax Rate
All Taxpayers	[RIGHT]137,982,203[/RIGHT]	$7,825,389	$865,863	100.0%	100.0%	-	11.06%
Top 1%	1,379,822	$1,324,572	$318,043	16.9%	36.7%	$343,927.00	24.01%
1-5%	5,519,288	$1,157,918	$189,864	14.8%	22.0%		16.40%
Top 5%	6,899,110	$2,482,490	$507,907	31.7%	58.7%	$154,643.00	20.46%
5-10%	6,899,110	$897,241	$102,249	11.5%	11.8%		11.40%
Top 10%	13,798,220	$3,379,731	$610,156	43.2%	70.5%	$112,124.00	18.05%
10-25%	20,697,331	$1,770,140	$145,747	22.6%	17.0%		8.23%
Top 25%	34,495,551	$5,149,871	$755,903	65.8%	87.3%	$ 66,193.00	14.68%
25-50%	34,495,551	$1,620,303	$90,449	20.7%	11.0%		5.58%
Top 50%	68,991,102	$6,770,174	$846,352	86.5%	97.7%	> $32,396	12.50%
Bottom 50%	68,991,102	$1,055,215	$19,511	13.5%	2.3%	< $32,396	1.85%

http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-individual-income-tax-data-0#table1

Abe Vigoda;1249464 wrote:Mitts doing very well dodging taxes for his income bracket.

umber of Returns with Positive AGI	AGI ($ millions)	Income Taxes Paid ($ millions)	Group's Share of Total AGI	Group's Share of Income Taxes	Income Split Point	Average Tax Rate
All Taxpayers	[RIGHT]137,982,203[/RIGHT]	$7,825,389	$865,863	100.0%	100.0%	-	11.06%
Top 1%	1,379,822	$1,324,572	$318,043	16.9%	36.7%	$343,927.00	24.01%
1-5%	5,519,288	$1,157,918	$189,864	14.8%	22.0%		16.40%
Top 5%	6,899,110	$2,482,490	$507,907	31.7%	58.7%	$154,643.00	20.46%
5-10%	6,899,110	$897,241	$102,249	11.5%	11.8%		11.40%
Top 10%	13,798,220	$3,379,731	$610,156	43.2%	70.5%	$112,124.00	18.05%
10-25%	20,697,331	$1,770,140	$145,747	22.6%	17.0%		8.23%
Top 25%	34,495,551	$5,149,871	$755,903	65.8%	87.3%	$ 66,193.00	14.68%
25-50%	34,495,551	$1,620,303	$90,449	20.7%	11.0%		5.58%
Top 50%	68,991,102	$6,770,174	$846,352	86.5%	97.7%	> $32,396	12.50%
Bottom 50%	68,991,102	$1,055,215	$19,511	13.5%	2.3%	< $32,396	1.85%

http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-individual-income-tax-data-0#table1

If he was "dodging" taxes, the IRS would probably be crawling up his ass. He's likely paying everything he's legally obligated to.

I love this chart though...it literally kicks the shit out of the "rich don't pay their fair share" meme.

Footwedge;1249346 wrote:I truly doubt Mitt paid anywhere near 13% in income taxes...since 00. If he did, then he and his accountants are idiots. People that make, 10, 20, 30 million a year, simply don't.

There are several multi billion dollar corporatations that pay their CEO's more in payroll, then they pay the US in taxes. Yet, look at all the people on this board, like Gut for example, that somehow think the US has the highest corporate tax structure in the world.

There is so much misinformation floating around out there...mind boggling really.

Cracks me up every time you try to pretend you know something. I'm starting to understand your bitter view of the world since you clearly got ripped-off on your education.

When the staff of the alleged "most transparent Administration in American history" comes clean on their own tax obligations and when Barry coughs up his collegiate academic records, then I'll understand the obsession with Mitt's tax returns.

Seriously, the tried & true leftist tactic of painting the opposition as "the eeeeevil rich" is predictable yet extremely boring.

It stuns me that the MSM and the Barry Campaign are attempting to convince us that we need to be angry with how Romney deals with his money while ignoring how Obama is spending ours.

believer;1249510 wrote:When the staff of the alleged "most transparent Administration in American history" comes clean on their own tax obligations and when Barry coughs up his collegiate academic records, then I'll understand the obsession with Mitt's tax returns.

Seriously, the tried & true leftist tactic of painting the opposition as "the eeeeevil rich" is predictable yet extremely boring.

It stuns me that the MSM and the Barry Campaign are attempting to convince us that we need to be angry with how Romney deals with his money while ignoring how Obama is spending ours.

Now this is a fair rebuttal. Obama has flippin cabinet members that were hauled in by the IRS...includer Geithner. I don't understand how the little guy gets thrown in the slammer, and the fat cats running the gobblement carry on.

gut;1249490 wrote:Cracks me up every time you try to pretend you know something. I'm starting to understand your bitter view of the world since you clearly got ripped-off on your education.

Says the guy with not one...not two....but three degrees in financials, and will never cite a credible link when he posts his nonsense.

Do other people come here for the free entertainment? Love reading your stuff, Gut. Laughter makes you live longer...and healthier too.

As a registered democrat, I have no problem with Mitt paying 13% on his taxes. His charitable giving is very high and I am sure he paid what he is legally responsible for. Millionaires should not have to pay a higher percentage than anyone else. Get the welfare bums to work harder and pay their fare share.

mella;1249627 wrote:. Millionaires should not have to pay a higher percentage than anyone else. .

You are not a registered democrat if if you believe this. No country in the world refutes a graduated tax.

Footwedge;1249642 wrote:You are not a registered democrat if if you believe this. No country in the world refutes a graduated tax.

I actually think a flat tax combined with a consumption tax is the best way to go. There are too many people who don't pay anything. My wife and I spent a long time working hard and making personal and monetary sacrifices to get to where we are today. At times we could have qualified for government assistance but we never wanted to go down that road. We have paid all of our bills, we never thought simply declaring for bankruptcy was an option. The 2 parties have veered off course in the last 20 years. There is no single party that represents me, I vote for the best person not the party at the state and national level.

mella;1249670 wrote:I actually think a flat tax combined with a consumption tax is the best way to go. There are too many people who don't pay anything. My wife and I spent a long time working hard and making personal and monetary sacrifices to get to where we are today. At times we could have qualified for government assistance but we never wanted to go down that road. We have paid all of our bills, we never thought simply declaring for bankruptcy was an option. The 2 parties have veered off course in the last 20 years. There is no single party that represents me, I vote for the best person not the party at the state and national level.

You have changed your post haven't you? Like I said, you cannot be a registered Democrat. Probably 90% of all Republicans don't believe in a flat tax either. We have had income tax since 1913....no legislator has ever tabled such a ludicrous idea. And neither have other countries across the globe. And most definitely, not a registered Democrat.

Footwedge;1249573 wrote:Says the guy with not one...not two....but three degrees in financials, and will never cite a credible link when he posts his nonsense.

Do other people come here for the free entertainment? Love reading your stuff, Gut. Laughter makes you live longer...and healthier too.

It's not my fault you don't have the mental capacity and understanding to read something with some real meat to it. I understand your struggles with something written on a higher level than the Guardian or Enquirer. Because like your posts, what you "cite" as "proof" is usually similarly lacking in knowledge and actual insight.

I occasionally provide links. You're free to do some research on your own (a capability you've never demonstrated) to discredit me. But we all know you enjoy playing the idiot to troll, but I suspect you're actually well-intentioned but simply don't know any better.

gut;1249806 wrote:It's not my fault you don't have the mental capacity and understanding to read something with some real meat to it. I understand your struggles with something written on a higher level than the Guardian or Enquirer. Because like your posts, what you "cite" as "proof" is usually similarly lacking in knowledge and actual insight.

I occasionally provide links. You're free to do some research on your own (a capability you've never demonstrated) to discredit me. But we all know you enjoy playing the idiot to troll, but I suspect you're actually well-intentioned but simply don't know any better.

Link?

Footwedge;1249881 wrote:Link?

Like I said...If what I say is wrong, then prove it. Otherwise, go sit down and let the adults discuss solutions.

And it's two finance degrees, not three. Not like you every post BS.

Bigdogg;1249334 wrote:The example cited involves federal income taxes only. The tax code is too complex and has too many loop holes that the average American can not take advantage of.

Taxes, plural. That the federal income tax, capital gains taxes, the self employment tax, and a number of others are reported on a 1040 doesn't mean they're the same. They aren't. Again, to attempt to lump them together is ignorant, dishonest, or both.

Footwedge;1249642 wrote:You are not a registered democrat if if you believe this. No country in the world refutes a graduated tax.

With all do respect, fuck off. That level of thinking is what is wrong with politics. Even though I consider myself an indy, I am technically registered D and I very much believe that what rate you pay should not be determined by how much you make.

Now, do I think the capital gains tax should be raised? Yes. But I also think the Income Tax levels should come down. I think they should be about the same, somewhere around 18-20%, for everyone.

If we truly want to expand the private sector and create a growing economy, then we need to eliminate the punishment for succeeding and eliminate the Capital Gains tax and it's double-taxation partner, The Death Tax. I know this flies in the face of the "but it isn't fair" gang, however we will create more entreprenuers, more risk-takers and more winners if they see they won't be punished for succeeding as well as failure. I'm aware that there is a substantially growing amount of people that believe economic growth comes from public employees and completely forget whom pays for said employees, so this task of turning the private sector loose is likely approaching a fatal end.

I am also for a consumption tax or flat tax that virtually eliminates the IRS. Either is the ultimate in fairness, but it doesn't allow for the government to attempt to hand-pick winners, give tax incentives for their donors, re-write tax policy yearly and give free loans to financially-corrupt corporations. We've allowed crony capitalism to live, breath, flourish, and now become uncontrollable such that the tax code will always be subservient.

As long as you have a culture favoring a progressive tax code, including corporations, you're tax system is going to be complex. Changing the system will do nothing without changing the culture/mindset, because otherwise the new system will just be altered and adapted to suit those goals.