Ted Rall for August 03, 2012

Only a Republican would be insane enough to make such a statement without expecting to be dragged to the guillotine. What’s next, Mitt? Let them eat cake?

rotfl

Socialism is not dead!

"What Mr. Romney was saying was – If I paid more then the minimum required would categorize me as stupid . . . "That’s all very reasonable. Why then, does Romney refuse to release his tax returns? If what you say is true, doesn’t it make sense that Romney would release his returns and show that he’s taking advantages of deductions like we all do?Yet – despite great pressure – even from his own party – he does not. What is so shameful in his returns that he cannot show them??

“There is nothing UnAmerican about doing what you can to minimize your tax burden if you are operating within the laws.”Agreed. Then why won’t he release his tax returns?

“. . . operating within the laws. I have every reason to believe that Mr. Romney did exactly that. If you have proof that he committed Tax Fraud then show it or SHUT UP.”NO ONE has any proof either way. He won’t release his tax returns. You have NO reason to believe that he operated within the laws OR outside the laws.Of course, he could end the entire discussion by releasing his returns.

So the tax return thing is the “I’ll show you!” for the birth certificate thing. Do any of you see this becoming a endless cycle that doesn’t help? I do. TimeWeaver- good comment

What Romney has done more of is reboot. Massachusetts law requires you to be a resident for 7 years prior to running for governor. Mitt had filed residency in Utah through 2002. When that was pointed out, he “retroactively” re-filed for Massachusetts. Trust much?

Another catastrophically clueless political gaffe from Romney, but come on … who would ever want to pay MORE taxes than they owe? The issue here is what taxes he DID owe and why he’s so desperately trying to keep them a secret.

Why does investment income need to be treated differently than salary/hourly income? That’s the first lie.

If these 1%ers were to pay their full. fair share, it would still be cheaper than trying to buy politicians and elections.

“The top 10 percent of income earners paid 71 percent of all federal income taxes in 09……………What is their Fair Share?”

First question: Did the top 10% receive more or less than 71% of all income generated for that year? I’m not certain, but I’d suspect it’s rather more.

Second question: Do you object to the whole concept of progressive taxation? When shortfalls occur, is it unfair to ask that sacrifices be made by those best able to absorb them? If four people have two apples each, five people have no apples, and one person has 20 apples, which apples should first be targeted to make sure nobody goes hungry?

So let’s define “Fair”…

Worked so well for Wesley Snipes, didn’t it?

Simple fact: Since Reagan came in, Republicans (and Democrats) have NOT taken in enough in taxes to meet the bare minimum of the expenses they ran up. The spending didn’t go UP that much, but the taxes DID go DOWN too much. Then add in "W"s wars, and previous spending for wars, on junk that doesn’t work, and taxes didn’t meet the minimum needs.

Simple fact, Robme’s plan to go back to Reaganomics with a vengeance is “E.D.” for the economy.

If all you whiny poor people cared about money, shouldn’t you have been born to rich parents like Romney and his ilk? Why should the rich suffer just because you chose to be born poor?

Thought ya was soundin’ like wonna them there tax protesters.

SCOTUS has no problem with progressive taxation,

“Maybe you should be asking where are all the jobs that BHO promised”According to the current right-wing ideology, government cannot create jobs. Only private-sector ‘job-creators’ can create jobs.Unfortunately, the ‘job-creators’ are sitting on $2 trillion in assets and not hiring.

“why did he promise to create jobs”Because Obama can create jobs. And in fact, he HAS created more private sector jobs than Bush. Obama has managed to create more private sector jobs than Bush, despite the worst recession in 70 years.As for public sector jobs, Obama assumed the Republicans would agree that country comes first and cooperate. Obama has introduced a number of bills to provide aid to states to hire more teachers, police, fire, etc. He has introduced a number of bills for infrastructure, which this country desperately needs, and which would put a million construction workers to work within a month.However, Republicans have blocked ALL these efforts. Record numbers of filibusters in the Senate. Endless empty symbolic amendments in the House. They have only one goal – Obama out and more tax breaks for the top income bracket.

It sounds like you don’t care to know about Romney’s taxes. Are YOU getting that kind of deal? As an owner of a corporation and entitlee to various commercial real estate tax breaks, I can tell you that I personally get some pretty sweet deals that I’m sure Romney is also getting. But I’m not running for President and, quite frankly, am astounded at the fact that I pay less a percentage of my income in taxes than my sister, who is a home-care nurse..As far as Obama’s promises about jobs (which are just some nyah nyah thing you pulled out of your posterior) I can easily see read and interpret those numbers for myself because they’re publicly available..Unlike Romney’s tax returns.

‘The top 10 percent of income earners paid 71 percent of all federal income taxes in 09……………What is their Fair Share?’

This does not include SSI, Medicare, and other payroll taxes.

If I run for office, I promise I’ll share all the details of my astounding capitalistic success story.