• 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!

Mitt Romney: 'I Never Paid Less Than 13 Percent' In Taxes

How would his tax records from the IRS prove he did anything illegal.......

If it does..... wouldn't the IRS have already found that out by now?

Nope, not unless he is audited.
 
So you think Obama is running against Bush?
No, but the tax policy we are debating was passed by Bush and the repub congress in 2001 and 2003, don't you remember? It was re-approved for 2 years in 2010 when it was set to expire, Obama wanted to extend the cuts for everyone making less than 250K but the repubs refused and Obama extended all the cuts. The current debate is the same one from 2010, Obama wants to extend all the cuts except for those over 250K and end the preferred treatment of dividends and long term capital gains.
 
It is terrorfying to think one citizen in this country is not aware of how our politicians operate. FACT:All politicians lie, cheat and steal. Is Romney the only wealthy politician? Any one remember the Kennedys? Is miss Nancy Pelosi poor? My God, they are all crooks so when you are waving your banners and listening to the speeches that are all the same for the past 300 years remember they are "leaders" and you are "followers". Or as sheep say, "bah-h-h-h-h-h.
 
You don't even understand the issue. It is not whether I pay the same rate on like income.

The tax system is SUPPOSED to be PROGRESSIVE. Richer people are supposed to pay a higher percentage of their total income in taxes, because they can better afford to pay the taxes and still be rich.

I am a wage earner who earns much less than Romney. Romney earns almost all of his income from long term capital gains, which is also true of many other very wealthy people.

Income from wages and income from long term capital gains are BOTH INCOME. They should be taxed at the same rate. The rich should not be given special privilege over the wage earner.

Because I earn a proportionally larger part of my income from wages does not mean I should pay tax at an overall rate higher than a rich person who makes most of his income from long term capital gains.

But that is what is happening, I pay an overall tax rate higher than Romney, and that's wrong.

It is not moronic to support Obama because he advocates a fairer tax model than the republicans, rather, it's the right thing to do. It's not the only reason I support Obama, he didn't blow up a bubble in housing, he didn't preside over a collapse of the banking system, he didn't start a trillion dollar war over WMD that didn't exist, and he is taking steps to correct the most egregious abuses of health insurance companies like allowing them to drop paying customers who get seriously ill or refusing to cover them at all.

the tax system is NOT SUPPOSED TO BE PROGRESSIVE-some TYPES OF TAXES are some are not so stop the lies.

The only people being given privileges are people like you who pay far less and still get the same citizenship benefits.

Many rich people have mainly salary income yet they pay far more of that in taxes than you do
 
the tax system is NOT SUPPOSED TO BE PROGRESSIVE-some TYPES OF TAXES are some are not so stop the lies.

The only people being given privileges are people like you who pay far less and still get the same citizenship benefits.

Many rich people have mainly salary income yet they pay far more of that in taxes than you do

That's not true at all...when all taxes are taken into account the % paid is closer to a camel hump and actually pretty flat.
 
That's not true at all...when all taxes are taken into account the % paid is closer to a camel hump and actually pretty flat.

so you are saying that most people over 200K don't have salary inco0me

and why are you trying to use non-progressive rates to determine how progressive things are

the progressive rates of a tax are based on that tax itself

and how do you deny that rich people pay more tax than you do-tax dollars
 
so you are saying that most people over 200K don't have salary inco0me

and why are you trying to use non-progressive rates to determine how progressive things are

the progressive rates of a tax are based on that tax itself

No...I wouldn't say most people. I think that most people above 200k receive income and upper middle income class individuals bear a bulk of the taxes in the country. The richer you are though the more income you generally receive from investments.

The reason I use non-progressive taxes is the fact that all individuals in this country pay some sort of tax. Federal income tax is generally the most progressive tax in the country (except for mega wealthy) but at the end of the day...if someone pays 20% of their income in local/state/city/federal/payroll taxes they pay 20% of their salary to fund government. It doesn't matter to the individual paying how it's split up and to what entity it goes to. Everything I've seen from broadining the base or this idea that individuals at the lower rungs don't pay into society is just false.
 
There's nothing wrong with Romney not releasing his tax return info. Nothing.

He was asked to, he apparently doesn't want to, so deal with it. Don't vote for him if it bothers you so much.

The real issue here is the tax laws. We don't need Romney's tax returns to discuss that. Romney's tax return results will not change anyone's mind on that issue, though.

Does anyone think that if Romney got away not paying anything at all in 2003 Turtle Dude is suddenly going to say, "Well, if Romney made $20 million in 2003, but didn't pay anything at all in taxes, that means the tax laws should be changed. I'm voting for Obama"? anyone? Show of hands?

Conversely, does anyone thing that if Romney paid $10 million on a $20 million dollar income in 2003 Disney dude is going to say "Well, since Romney made $20 million in 2003 and he paid 50% of that, teh tax laws appear to have some fairness in them. I'm voting Romney"? anyone? show of hands?


So why the **** is this such a goddamned issue? It's just like Obama's grades or long form birth certificate. They distract from legitimate discussions that probably still won't lead anywhere fruitful, but at least they aren't totally retarded.
 
There's nothing wrong with Romney not releasing his tax return info. Nothing.

He was asked to, he apparently doesn't want to, so deal with it. Don't vote for him if it bothers you so much.

The real issue here is the tax laws. We don't need Romney's tax returns to discuss that. Romney's tax return results will not change anyone's mind on that issue, though.

Does anyone think that if Romney got away not paying anything at all in 2003 Turtle Dude is suddenly going to say, "Well, if Romney made $20 million in 2003, but didn't pay anything at all in taxes, that means the tax laws should be changed. I'm voting for Obama"? anyone? Show of hands?

Conversely, does anyone thing that if Romney paid $10 million on a $20 million dollar income in 2003 Disney dude is going to say "Well, since Romney made $20 million in 2003 and he paid 50% of that, teh tax laws appear to have some fairness in them. I'm voting Romney"? anyone? show of hands?


So why the **** is this such a goddamned issue? It's just like Obama's grades or long form birth certificate. They distract from legitimate discussions that probably still won't lead anywhere fruitful, but at least they aren't totally retarded.

A legitimate issue is, "Who put these jokers in charge?" Obama's grades and Romney's tax cheat records is part of these legitimate issues.
 
There's nothing wrong with Romney not releasing his tax return info. Nothing.

He was asked to, he apparently doesn't want to, so deal with it. Don't vote for him if it bothers you so much.

The real issue here is the tax laws. We don't need Romney's tax returns to discuss that. Romney's tax return results will not change anyone's mind on that issue, though.

Does anyone think that if Romney got away not paying anything at all in 2003 Turtle Dude is suddenly going to say, "Well, if Romney made $20 million in 2003, but didn't pay anything at all in taxes, that means the tax laws should be changed. I'm voting for Obama"? anyone? Show of hands?

Conversely, does anyone thing that if Romney paid $10 million on a $20 million dollar income in 2003 Disney dude is going to say "Well, since Romney made $20 million in 2003 and he paid 50% of that, teh tax laws appear to have some fairness in them. I'm voting Romney"? anyone? show of hands?


So why the **** is this such a goddamned issue? It's just like Obama's grades or long form birth certificate. They distract from legitimate discussions that probably still won't lead anywhere fruitful, but at least they aren't totally retarded.

Thank you for come common ****ing sense in here.
 
A legitimate issue is, "Who put these jokers in charge?" Obama's grades and Romney's tax cheat records is part of these legitimate issues.

Tax cheat records?

That right there tells me everything I need to know on whether or not your opinion would change much from the release of those records.

Tucker was Correct, again.... (damnit).
 
No...I wouldn't say most people. I think that most people above 200k receive income and upper middle income class individuals bear a bulk of the taxes in the country. The richer you are though the more income you generally receive from investments.

The reason I use non-progressive taxes is the fact that all individuals in this country pay some sort of tax. Federal income tax is generally the most progressive tax in the country (except for mega wealthy) but at the end of the day...if someone pays 20% of their income in local/state/city/federal/payroll taxes they pay 20% of their salary to fund government. It doesn't matter to the individual paying how it's split up and to what entity it goes to. Everything I've seen from broadining the base or this idea that individuals at the lower rungs don't pay into society is just false.

Half your list above is no business of the FEDERAL government.
 
My post has nothing to do with power between local/state/city vs Federal government. It has to do with the total taxes by individuals to fund government.

This thread pertains to a federal government election.
 
Tax cheat records?

That right there tells me everything I need to know on whether or not your opinion would change much from the release of those records.

release of those records would confirm many people's opinions, wouldn't change them. Yup.

Tucker was Correct, again.... (damnit).

Correct about what?
 
release of those records would confirm many people's opinions, wouldn't change them. Yup.



Correct about what?
There is no point in releasing records because people have their minds made up already, and the issue isn't about Romney specifically...... If you want to have a discussion about taxes then have one, you don't need Romney's personal tax records to talk about taxes.

This is nothing more than a way to get votes by using the "class warfare" tactic.
 
There is no point in releasing records because people have their minds made up already, and the issue isn't about Romney specifically...... If you want to have a discussion about taxes then have one, you don't need Romney's personal tax records to talk about taxes.

This is nothing more than a way to get votes by using the "class warfare" tactic.

Aren't you the guy who made like half a dozen threads about Obama's birth records and being born in Kenya? Or was that Rev? I get my birthers confused sometimes so I apologize if it wasn't you.
 
Aren't you the guy who made like half a dozen threads about Obama's birth records and being born in Kenya? Or was that Rev? I get my birthers confused sometimes so I apologize if it wasn't you.

Your getting me confused.

Im just the guy who said Obama wouldn't have been elected if he were white.

Ive also jokingly spoken about the Birth Certificate thing, sarcastically.
 
Your getting me confused.

Im just the guy who said Obama wouldn't have been elected if he were white.

Ive also jokingly spoken about the Birth Certificate thing, sarcastically.

Well to be honest, the majority of the other 44 guys wouldn't have been elected if they were black so I'm not sure what your point is. Do you think George Washington would have been president if he looked like Obama? Be serious Caine.
 
Well to be honest, the majority of the other 44 guys wouldn't have been elected if they were black so I'm not sure what your point is. Do you think George Washington would have been president if he looked like Obama? Be serious Caine.
Nope... we lived in different times then. Be serious Hatuey.
 
Nope... we lived in different times then. Be serious Hatuey.

Which means what? All you have is supposition about why Obama got elected. I have tangible evidence as to why the other guys wouldn't have been president. :shrug:
 
Why? What do those forms have to do with his ability to be a leader of this nation?

What possible information could be contained within that would cause him to withdraw?

Cant answer that until we see them :)
 
Back
Top Bottom