What, exactly, are "we" looking for in Romney's tax returns? [W:85, 252]

[Conservative]

How would it be "out there by now" if Mitt hasn't released his tax returns? But don't worry... Does the term "October Surprise" mean anything to you? The Dems wouldn't want to leak it too soon, and give the Republicans time to nominate a new candidate.

Do you actually believe that if Romney took the Amnesty agreement that someone doesn't know that and wouldn't have it out there today? You are really reaching and wouldn't vote for Romney regardless of what he shows. As for the October surprise we all know how dispicable this Administration is and Democrats have been over the last few election cycles. They will throw a lot of crap out there to see what sticks. That is what happens when you don't have a record to run on and an incompetent in the WH

 

[avusbluem5]

Do you actually believe that if Romney took the Amnesty agreement that someone doesn't know that and wouldn't have it out there today? You are really reaching and wouldn't vote for Romney regardless of what he shows. As for the October surprise we all know how dispicable this Administration is and Democrats have been over the last few election cycles. They will throw a lot of crap out there to see what sticks. That is what happens when you don't have a record to run on and an incompetent in the WH

Well, who would know?

The IRS... Not allowed to disclose that kind of info.
Romney's attorneys... also not permitted to disclose.
Romney's accountants... not permitted to disclose.
Members of Romney's campaign... not likely to leak this you would hope.
Various members of the Govt... Not allowed to disclose this kind of stuff...
Romney's bank... Probably not going to tell anyone except the IRS.
Romney, and members of his family... not likely to release this either.

Here is how I see it playing out...

Early October... A reporter directly asks Romney... Did you accept tax amnesty in 2009 for failure to disclose foreign bank accounts? Romney will give a weak denial, which fuels the MSMs interest in this story.

MId October... Some one leaks Romney's tax return which clearly shows he took the amnesty deal in 2009. All hell breaks loose, and Romney eventually withdraws from the race. Paul Ryan will make an attempt to get on the ballot in Romney's place, but fails. Obama walks into White House unopposed.

 

[Conservative]

Well, who would know?

The IRS... Not allowed to disclose that kind of info.
Romney's attorneys... also not permitted to disclose.
Romney's accountants... not permitted to disclose.
Members of Romney's campaign... not likely to leak this you would hope.
Various members of the Govt... Not allowed to disclose this kind of stuff...
Romney's bank... Probably not going to tell anyone except the IRS.
Romney, and members of his family... not likely to release this either.

Here is how I see it playing out...

Early October... A reporter directly asks Romney... Did you accept tax amnesty in 2009 for failure to disclose foreign bank accounts? Romney will give a weak denial, which fuels the MSMs interest in this story.

MId October... Some one leaks Romney's tax return which clearly shows he took the amnesty deal in 2009. All hell breaks loose, and Romney eventually withdraws from the race. Paul Ryan will make an attempt to get on the ballot in Romney's place, but fails. Obama walks into White House unopposed.

Wow, another conspiracy theory. You probably believe 9/11 was an inside job.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

A friend of Harry Reid knows, let's ask him to testify about Romney's dirty dealings. That should be entertaining.

 

[avusbluem5]

Wow, another conspiracy theory. You probably believe 9/11 was an inside job.

Which is more believable? Mitt is hiding his tax returns for no reason at all... or, Mitt is hiding activity in his returns which would make him unelectable?

 

[Conservative]

Which is more believable? Mitt is hiding his tax returns for no reason at all... or, Mitt is hiding activity in his returns which would make him unelectable?

Seems like it is only a major concern for you whereas most of the country is more concerned about the economy and no jobs. Romney paid 4.6 million in taxes in 2010 and gave 3 million to charity. That is what matters to most, he got a 1.6 million dollar tax refund for giving the govt. an interest free use of his money.

 

[Jryan]

Wow, another conspiracy theory. You probably believe 9/11 was an inside job.

I think him not showing his tax records isn't a reason to hide. He is just embarrassed that he payed 13% while my middle class parents payed 40%.

 

[Conservative]

I think him not showing his tax records isn't a reason to hide. He is just embarrassed that he payed 13% while my middle class parents payed 40%.

I don't think you have any idea what percentage your parents paid in Federal Income Taxes and until you do you have no credibility. There is no one in the country paying 40% in FIT or if they are, they really are part of the problem and why so many support govt. handling social issues and charities.

 

[Jryan]

I don't think you have any idea what percentage your parents paid in Federal Income Taxes and until you do you have no credibility. There is no one in the country paying 40% in FIT or if they are, they really are part of the problem and why so many support govt. handling social issues and charities.

K, I asked them but Yeah...

(It wasn't true 40% but about 40%, I tend not to post things as exact figures when it comes to this)

 

[Conservative]

K, I asked them but Yeah...

(It wasn't true 40% but about 40%, I tend not to post things as exact figures when it comes to this)

Sorry, that makes no sense at all. Now they may have overpaid their taxes but they would then get a refund which reduces the rate. I stand by my statement, there is no one in this country paying 40% FIT rates as the highest rate 34% gross. Deductions are taken from that rate. Further if your Parents were getting investment income then they are paying the same rate as Romney. I pay 15% on my investment income too

 

[Jryan]

Sorry, that makes no sense at all. Now they may have overpaid their taxes but they would then get a refund which reduces the rate. I stand by my statement, there is no one in this country paying 40% FIT rates as the highest rate 34% gross. Deductions are taken from that rate. Further if your Parents were getting investment income then they are paying the same rate as Romney. I pay 15% on my investment income too

Cool story, so why should you pay less than income taxes? Is that not a source of income for you?

 

[avusbluem5]

Seems like it is only a major concern for you whereas most of the country is more concerned about the economy and no jobs. Romney paid 4.6 million in taxes in 2010 and gave 3 million to charity. That is what matters to most, he got a 1.6 million dollar tax refund for giving the govt. an interest free use of his money.

Most people are not aware of it.... Yet. When it breaks, Romney will go down fast. It won't be pretty.

 

[Conservative]

Cool story, so why should you pay less than income taxes? Is that not a source of income for you?

Because that is the thread topic. That is what you want Romney to show. You realize that other taxes are mostly use taxes? If you don't use something you don't pay any taxes? Cool Story? Let's be real here, your parents don't pay 40% FIT and you know it, I know it, and the forum knows it

 

[Conservative]

Most people are not aware of it.... Yet. When it breaks, Romney will go down fast. It won't be pretty.

What isn't pretty are the Obama results. Keep promoting your conspiracy theory. Let me know when you find JFK's killer

 

[Jryan]

Because that is the thread topic. That is what you want Romney to show. You realize that other taxes are mostly use taxes? If you don't use something you don't pay any taxes? Cool Story? Let's be real here, your parents don't pay 40% FIT and you know it, I know it, and the forum knows it

Does it matter as long as my point is that Income tax is generally higher than corporate gains? (AKA Romney Income)?

Anyways, if we were a legitimate country we would make all politicians (including Nancy Polosi (My hero)) to be transparent.

For any of them to be so opaque is insulting, especially from a man demanding transparency from the government.

 

[Conservative]

Does it matter as long as my point is that Income tax is generally higher than corporate gains? (AKA Romney Income)?

Anyways, if we were a legitimate country we would make all politicians (including Nancy Polosi (My hero)) to be transparent.

For any of them to be so opaque is insulting, especially from a man demanding transparency from the government.

This country was built on risk taking so now you want to penalize it? Investment taxes are lower to encourage investment and risk taking. Why would you want to discourage risk taking and investment in new opportunities?

 

[Jryan]

This country was built on risk taking so now you want to penalize it? Investment taxes are lower to encourage investment and risk taking. Why would you want to discourage risk taking and investment in new opportunities?

Wow, just wow... The risk taking has NEVER been a risk for the rich.. First of all, I shall point out the early 1900s in which you could have someone invest in your business with which they could have no repercussions if they failed. So if I invested 10k I and you went broke I owed nothing, but if I invested 10k and you got rich I got rich also.

Anyways, the point I"m trying to make Conservative is that why should someone who has a college degree and makes good investments pay less taxes in their gains then someone who has a college degree and makes good middle class pay should pay more (percentage wise) than the capital gains. Trust, capital gains is an easier income than a blue/white collar worker. Why reward the rich even more? They are already rich... (Most people that this will effect their effective tax rate are going to be rich, so don't go there girlfriend )

 

[Conservative]

Wow, just wow... The risk taking has NEVER been a risk for the rich.. First of all, I shall point out the early 1900s in which you could have someone invest in your business with which they could have no repercussions if they failed. So if I invested 10k I and you went broke I owed nothing, but if I invested 10k and you got rich I got rich also.

Anyways, the point I"m trying to make Conservative is that why should someone who has a college degree and makes good investments pay less taxes in their gains then someone who has a college degree and makes good middle class pay should pay more (percentage wise) than the capital gains. Trust, capital gains is an easier income than a blue/white collar worker. Why reward the rich even more? They are already rich... (Most people that this will effect their effective tax rate are going to be rich, so don't go there girlfriend )

Nothing ever gets by you, Tell that to Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and the thousands of other self made millionaires and billionaires who also made their employees millionaires and in some cases billionaires.

It is all about risk taking, something you don't understand. This country was built on risk taking with many losing everything. If there wasn't a risk reward why would anyone invest their own money? You are really very naive, everyone pays the same capital gains taxes as it should be. Sorry you don't feel that way, maybe you will when you age a little more.

 

[Jryan]

Nothing ever gets by you, Tell that to Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and the thousands of other self made millionaires and billionaires who also made their employees millionaires and in some cases billionaires.

It is all about risk taking, something you don't understand. This country was built on risk taking with many losing everything. If there wasn't a risk reward why would anyone invest their own money? You are really very naive, everyone pays the same capital gains taxes as it should be. Sorry you don't feel that way, maybe you will when you age a little more.

So being a billionaire/millionaire isn't enough for someone who takes a risk?

:facepalm:

 

[Conservative]

So being a billionaire/millionaire isn't enough for someone who takes a risk?

:facepalm:

Any time you invest your own money it is a risk regardless of how much you make or lose. You seem to ignore that thousands of people worked hard, took risk, and earned millions. Not all inherited their money. Tell me how some rich person hurt you or anyone else by keeping more of what they earned.

 

[Jryan]

Any time you invest your own money it is a risk regardless of how much you make or lose. You seem to ignore that thousands of people worked hard, took risk, and earned millions. Not all inherited their money. Tell me how some rich person hurt you or anyone else by keeping more of what they earned.

Subject change, no thanks...

Lets stick with capital gains.

Thanks...

 

[Born Free]

Wow, just wow... The risk taking has NEVER been a risk for the rich.. First of all, I shall point out the early 1900s in which you could have someone invest in your business with which they could have no repercussions if they failed. So if I invested 10k I and you went broke I owed nothing, but if I invested 10k and you got rich I got rich also.

Anyways, the point I"m trying to make Conservative is that why should someone who has a college degree and makes good investments pay less taxes in their gains then someone who has a college degree and makes good middle class pay should pay more (percentage wise) than the capital gains. Trust, capital gains is an easier income than a blue/white collar worker. Why reward the rich even more? They are already rich... (Most people that this will effect their effective tax rate are going to be rich, so don't go there girlfriend )

It's such and easy answer, first for anyone to obtain capital they had to work for it. Yes, that's right they had to work and save to obtain capital to invest. So both are starting from the same point. You talk about two college people but one is an investor and one is a worker B. What you are missing is they both started out as worker "B's" one save his money to be able to invest and the other did not. Huge difference. The one who saved his money, no has the opportunity to invest at a big risk. There is an old saying the higher the risk the higher the reward. But there is no guarantee of success, far from it. How many loss all they have in a stock that goes broke, or how many bond holder lose everything when a company goes into default. Take GM both all the stock and bond holders lost their entire investment. But the worker "B" never loses is paycheck. But of course I would never expect you to understand.

Now you will say, well one inherited his money and never had to work to save money, I never said life was fair. But what is fair is both college kids you refereed to started out the same.

 

[Conservative]

Subject change, no thanks...

Lets stick with capital gains.

Thanks...

What do you think capital gains are? Risk taking and where does the money go that you or anyone else invests?

 

[Jryan]

wow

It's such and easy answer, first for anyone to obtain capital they had to work for it. Yes, that's right they had to work and save to obtain capital to invest. So both are starting from the same point. You talk about two college people but one is an investor and one is a worker B. What you are missing is they both started out as worker "B's

They are not worker "b's"

To go to college is to obtain something that no one else has. To go to college is to make a commitment to society that you WILL contribute. Why would I pay, or anyone, such a stash to do so?

So why then are they up the ladder tier from someone else.

Hint^^^ look above this rep.

SIgh
Sigh
Sigh

 

[Jryan]

What do you think capital gains are? Risk taking and where does the money go that you or anyone else invests?

What do you think going to college into a certain field is?
DEFINITELY NOT RISK TAKING THAT IS SURE.