• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you have a higher effective tax rate than mitt romney

Do you have a higher effective tax rate than mitt romney?

  • Yes

    Votes: 21 53.8%

  • No

    Votes: 18 46.2%
  • Total voters
    39
Keridan said:
The death tax is for another thread
Click to expand...

You are the one that asked what tax cuts the rich got, the inheritance tax cut is one of them.

It's time to look at capital gains again, I have said that many times, but those cuts did increase revenue at the time.
Click to expand...

No, the tax cuts prevented the revenues from rising as much as they would have otherwise. There is no doubt that capital gains tax rates need to be increased.


Help me with your reference to outsourcing incentives, please.
Click to expand...

The Democrats even tried to stop it and the GOP blocked them:

GOP, U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Beat Back Bill To Combat Outsourcing



So, my argument is that they did a poor job of handling our money and your counterpoint is that they should be leading the world?
Click to expand...

The majority of Democrats voted against the war in Iraq, and are calling for increasing spending on the military again, unlike the Democrats have proposed cutting spending for the military. I think we need spending cuts rather than the spending increases that Romney is calling for.


My position is that those funds should be locked away and you are saying that we might as well throw it into FIT because the government overspent and use it as another way to tax people more for the general fund.
Click to expand...

I was for Gore's plan for locking SS funds when he first brought it up but people decided to go with the guy they thought they would rather have a beer with instead.
I understand the Democrats have a new plan to lock the SS funds, I am glad to hear that you are in support of their plans for locking the funds!
 
Edit to post above: It is Romney that is proposing increased spending on the military industrial complex and the Democrats who are proposing cutting spending on the military industrial complex.
 
Keridan said:
Do you work in food service?
Click to expand...

:D Active Duty Military.


Mind you, the benefits aren't taxed, and they include living on base and $323 a month for eating.
 
TurtleDude said:
I wonder how many of the 21 who said yes are actually paying a federal income tax effective rate of 15%.

I bet not many of them
Click to expand...

given that only 3% of America pays a higher rate than Romney does, I would bet you are probably correct.
 
using maggie's calculation i would pay 12.5% in federal tax. I make 50k a year and have no dependents. My state income tax is 5 percent. Add on fica and you get an effective rate of 23.15%
 
99percenter said:
using maggie's calculation i would pay 12.5% in federal tax. I make 50k a year and have no dependents. My state income tax is 5 percent. Add on fica and you get an effective rate of 23.15%
Click to expand...

massive fail, FICA is not part of the federal income tax. and it doesn't include the death tax either
 
TurtleDude said:
massive fail, FICA is not part of the federal income tax. and it doesn't include the death tax either
Click to expand...

Fica is a mandatory tax paid by all wage earners and employers. Tell the IRS you want to opt out and see what they say. If i die i don't get the money i paid into it. Epic fail on your part. Besides my effective rate is higher without Fica.
 
99percenter said:
Fica is a mandatory tax paid by all wage earners and employers. Tell the IRS you want to opt out and see what they say. If i die i don't get the money i paid into it. Epic fail on your part. Besides my effective rate is higher without Fica.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is a tax, you're right. BUT it is also insurance. It's really not too hard to see the parallels. There are far more benefits from Social Security than simply a guaranteed retirement sum. All the while one is working, they are insured against disability. If a worker dies with minor children, those children are entitled to benefits...widows are entitled to early benefits. It's not "just" a tax.
 
When Romney released his tax records he created a sticky wicket for himself and the GOP. They have turned the presidential election focus to this question:


Why is investment income taxed less than wages?

"Why do Mitt Romney and other wealthy investors pay lower taxes on the income they make from investments than they would if they earned their millions from wages? Because Congress, through the tax code, has long treated investment more favorably than labor, seeing it as an engine for economic growth that benefits everyone.

President Barack Obama and the Occupy Wall Street movement are challenging that value system, raising volatile election-year issues of equity, fairness — and Romney's tax returns.

Romney, who released his 2010 and 2011 tax returns this week, has been forced to defend the fact that he paid a tax rate of about 15 percent on an annual income of $21 million. His tax rate is comparable to the one paid by most middle-income families. His income, however, is 420 times higher than the typical U.S. household."
Why is investment income taxed less than wages? - CBS News
 
99percenter said:
Fica is a mandatory tax paid by all wage earners and employers. Tell the IRS you want to opt out and see what they say. If i die i don't get the money i paid into it. Epic fail on your part. Besides my effective rate is higher without Fica.
Click to expand...

that is a stupid argument. its not an income tax
 
Catawba said:
When Romney released his tax records he created a sticky wicket for himself and the GOP. They have turned the presidential election focus to this question:


Why is investment income taxed less than wages?

"Why do Mitt Romney and other wealthy investors pay lower taxes on the income they make from investments than they would if they earned their millions from wages? Because Congress, through the tax code, has long treated investment more favorably than labor, seeing it as an engine for economic growth that benefits everyone.

President Barack Obama and the Occupy Wall Street movement are challenging that value system, raising volatile election-year issues of equity, fairness — and Romney's tax returns.

Romney, who released his 2010 and 2011 tax returns this week, has been forced to defend the fact that he paid a tax rate of about 15 percent on an annual income of $21 million. His tax rate is comparable to the one paid by most middle-income families. His income, however, is 420 times higher than the typical U.S. household."
Why is investment income taxed less than wages? - CBS News
Click to expand...


why do people who pay less income taxes in a lifetime than Romney pays in a year whine so much about tax rates when Romney's tax rate on any type of income is higher than theirs?
 
Jerry said:
I don't know for certain, I'll try your link tomorrow...but I don't pay income tax at all and I get a hefty return every year, so I have confidence I'm paying less than 13%.

In either case, I don't care about politicians doing shady things like hiding money...they're politicians, this is what they do. Obama isn't exactly blameless himself. I know that when I begin building wealth I'll be looking for ways to keep it away from Uncle Sam, too.
Click to expand...

My brother once decided to take the route of minimizing his withholding as much as he was able and then he just didn't file a tax return. ...For 5 years. He was all self righteous about the bull****. He managed to avoid prison by getting a lawyer and approaching the IRS with his wallet in his hand and an apology on his lips. Between paying back the state and the feds plus penalties, he ended up going bankrupt over the whole mess.

There's a lesson hiding in there somewhere.

The feds will come down on you like a ton of bricks if you appear on their radar.
 
TurtleDude said:
why do people who pay less income taxes in a lifetime than Romney pays in a year whine so much about tax rates when Romney's tax rate on any type of income is higher than theirs?
Click to expand...

The working class who pay a higher tax rate then those whose income is primarily from investment income see no advantage for continuing tax cuts for the rich which results in higher debt that the working class then have to suffer reduced benefits to repay.

Since the last cutting of the Capital gains tax rate didn't create US jobs, there is simply no reason for the working class to continue to vote for them.
 
Catawba said:
The working class who pay a higher tax rate then those whose income is primarily from investment income see no advantage for continuing tax cuts for the rich which results in higher debt that the working class then have to suffer reduced benefits to repay.

Since the last cutting of the Capital gains tax rate didn't create US jobs, there is simply no reason for the working class to continue to vote for them.
Click to expand...

1) that is a lie if you make fair comparisons. maybe 3% of Americans pay a higher effective income tax rate than the 15% Romney pays on his income-mainly investment income.

2) including non-progressive taxes into the "working class" (BTW to have an effective federal income tax rate of 15% you need to be pulling in 200K or more a year, if you have dependents, a mortgage and such you are approaching the top 1% if you have an effective federal income tax rate of 15%) tax rate is dishonest since you are no longer comparing federal income tax rate with Romney's federal income tax rate


3) Romney's actual tax payments are several million dollars-more taxes in one year than thousands pay in their lifetime of federal income taxes. Romney sure doesn't get anymore for paying more in year than you will pay in your lifetime and he sure doesn't use more government in that one year than you will use in your life

perhaps taxes ought to decrease in terms of rate as the actual dollars you pay increases.that would clearly be more fair
 
TurtleDude said:
1) that is a lie if you make fair comparisons. maybe 3% of Americans pay a higher effective income tax rate than the 15% Romney pays on his income-mainly investment income.

2) including non-progressive taxes into the "working class" (BTW to have an effective federal income tax rate of 15% you need to be pulling in 200K or more a year, if you have dependents, a mortgage and such you are approaching the top 1% if you have an effective federal income tax rate of 15%) tax rate is dishonest since you are no longer comparing federal income tax rate with Romney's federal income tax rate


3) Romney's actual tax payments are several million dollars-more taxes in one year than thousands pay in their lifetime of federal income taxes. Romney sure doesn't get anymore for paying more in year than you will pay in your lifetime and he sure doesn't use more government in that one year than you will use in your life

perhaps taxes ought to decrease in terms of rate as the actual dollars you pay increases.that would clearly be more fair
Click to expand...

'Tax rates on capital gains have fluctuated over the past century, sometimes matching the rates for ordinary income but more often substantially below them. The current top gains tax rate is 15 percent, less than half the 35 percent top rate on ordinary income and lower than at any time since the depression. But if Congress does not change the law, the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts and imposition of taxes associated with the 2010 healthcare legislation will boost the maximum tax rate on gains to 25 percent in 2013."
Tax Rates on Capital Gains
 
Catawba said:
'Tax rates on capital gains have fluctuated over the past century, sometimes matching the rates for ordinary income but more often substantially below them. The current top gains tax rate is 15 percent, less than half the 35 percent top rate on ordinary income and lower than at any time since the depression. But if Congress does not change the law, the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts and imposition of taxes associated with the 2010 healthcare legislation will boost the maximum tax rate on gains to 25 percent in 2013."
Tax Rates on Capital Gains
Click to expand...


so what? 97% of the US do not pay as high an effective rate as Romney does and few people pay as much actual tax dollars as he does
 
Catawba said:
"The tax rate that Romney paid both in 2010 and 2011 is less than what most middle-income Americans were required to pay, mainly because a majority of Romney's earnings were derived from investments rather than wages."

Mitt Romney Made $42 Million, Paid Less Than 14 Percent in taxes - ABC News
Click to expand...

ABC news-the bag men for Obama

and its a lie

they are taking into account more than federal income taxes when stating what average people paid-
we have already proven 97% of America pays a lower income tax rate

it might fool the idiots and those who want to see Obama win but not those who are either honest or understand the prevarication

and there is no citations to prove the ABC assertions
 
Last edited:
Beware False Claims: 'Romney's Tax Rate Is Below That of Most Wage-Earning Americans' | NewsBusters.org


The reality is that in 2009, the most recent year that records are available, 97 percent of Americans paid less than the 13.9 percent Romney did in 2010.

As demonstrated by Romney's 2010 return, the media are using Adjusted Gross Income to determine his tax rate. On line 37, the Romneys reported $21.6 million in AGI. This is the figure used Tuesday in press reports concerning this matter.

As you can see from the first table at the bottom of this article, people that had an AGI of $100,000 and under $200,000 in 2009 had an average tax rate of 11.9 percent. All those making under $100,000 had tax rates that were even less. The only people paying more than this were those that made over $200,000 paying at rates between 19.6 percent and 25.8 percent.
 
TurtleDude said:
ABC news-the bag men for Obama

and there is no citations to prove the ABC assertions
Click to expand...

"The average taxpayer, earning a little over $65,000, likely paid about 9 percent in income taxes and 16 percent in payroll and income taxes combined last year, according to the Tax Policy Center, a think tank in Washington."

Romney earned more than $42 million in last two years; paid about 15 percent in taxes - Business Updates - Massachusetts business news from The Boston Globe

That versus the 13.9% in combined federal taxes that Romney paid.
 
Catawba said:
"The average taxpayer, earning a little over $65,000, likely paid about 9 percent in income taxes and 16 percent in payroll and income taxes combined last year, according to the Tax Policy Center, a think tank in Washington."

Romney earned more than $42 million in last two years; paid about 15 percent in taxes - Business Updates - Massachusetts business news from The Boston Globe

That versus the 13.9% in combined federal taxes that Romney paid.
Click to expand...

wait, social security is a tax? I thought it was "my" contributions to "my" retirement, thereby giving me a moral demand on a social security pay out no matter what the effect on the nations' fisc was?
 
99,

A CLARIFICATION you may not like it, but hear me out.

The lower tax rate that Mitt and W. Buffett, etc... have been attacked for taking advantage of is the capital gains tax rate. That rate IS lower than many people's income tax rate.. I think it is in the ball park os 20%. ALL TRUE!!

The thing is, those investments that yield capital gains were initially acquired with AFTER TAX DOLLARS. So, Mitt and Warren purchased large quantities of bonds (for example), with dollars that were taxed at normal income tax rates. Then, those investments yield gains that are taxed for a second time at this publicized lower rate.

So, those lower rates you refer to can be quite misleading. The earnings of those men we are discussing have actually gone through two levels of taxation, and possibly three levels of taxation, depending on how those initial earnings were acquired.

This detail is conveniently glossed over. So, the good leftist has a wonderful class-envy talking point with this argument, the problem is that it is so easy to mislead with it.

By the way, low capital gains taxes are good for the economy, they incite investment, growth and employment. Legislators like Schumer would jake those rates up significantly (like they have with our corporate tax rates... now the highest in the world).

Peace, Comment_guy
 
cpwill said:
wait, social security is a tax? I thought it was "my" contributions to "my" retirement, thereby giving me a moral demand on a social security pay out no matter what the effect on the nations' fisc was?
Click to expand...
Whether SS is a tax is completely dependent on whether you classify SS payments, Medicare, & etc as entitlements. If you continuously call SS et al entitlement spending in arguments and discussions then, yes, as far as you're concerned FICA is indeed a Federal tax. If you don't want FICA included in tax discussions then you should not refer to SS et al as entitlements.

In other words, you can't have it both ways. Either it's a tax and entitlement or it's contributions to a retirement/insurance system and is not an entitlement. You choose.
 
Last edited:
MoSurveyor said:
Whether SS is a tax is completely dependent on whether you classify SS payments, Medicare, & etc as entitlements. If you continuously call SS et al entitlement spending in arguments and discussions then, yes, as far as you're concerned FICA is indeed a Federal tax. If you don't want FICA included in tax discussions then you should not refer to SS et al as entitlements.

In other words, you can't have it both ways. Either it's a tax and entitlement or it's contributions to a retirement system and is not an entitlement. You choose.
Click to expand...

Please don't encourage useful facts to be introduced into the discourse. We can't handle the truth...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom