Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 72

Thread: Fact Check: Is Romney's tax rate really lower than yours?

  1. #41
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Farmingdale, NY
    Posts
    2,521
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by CraigFL View Post
    Typical liberal cr@p. The guy pays MORE in taxes the he should have had to, due to his HUGE charitable donations, and the liberals try to twist it into a bad thing. No issue with Obama taking all his deductions, after his paltry donations. What is wrong with people?! And who cares where he gave it as long as it's listed as not for profit. He could've given it to the United Way where $.98 on a dollar go to administrative fees. (yes a hypothetical number but it is very high)
    Mitt Romney

    "You don't want a President that paid more than he owed in taxes, that's foolish"

    Mitt Romney, later

    "I paid 1.5 million more than I had to."

    The 13 or 14% rate is an artificial number - as in it would be lower if he wasn't running for President and releasing tax returns to the general public.

    And again, most of his money goes to the Church of Latter Day Saints - great! Jesus came to the New World and the garden of Eden is in Missouri, am-I-rite?

  2. #42
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Farmingdale, NY
    Posts
    2,521
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Indeed.
    Awesome. Love the way you read my posts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    So is every Black "Church" run out of a strip-mal and bussed to the polls on election day to vote (D), and every Islamic Center that right now could be plotting to murder you.

    Personally, I'm for ending all tax-exemptions for all "charitable" and "special interest" groups, universally. Part of my "everyone pays" Flat Tax preferences.
    The donations by the individual are tax deductible on their own returns and the religious institutions themselves are tax exempt.

    Freedom of religion, not subsidized choice of myth.

  3. #43
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,738
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    Awesome. Love the way you read my posts.
    I'm pleased you're pleased.

    Freedom of religion, not subsidized choice of myth.
    We agree.

    Do you also agree that "issue" or "special interest" groups should also NOT be tax-exempt?

  4. #44
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Cape Coral, FL
    Posts
    1,067
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    Mitt Romney

    "You don't want a President that paid more than he owed in taxes, that's foolish"

    link?


    Mitt Romney, later

    "I paid 1.5 million more than I had to."

    The 13 or 14% rate is an artificial number - as in it would be lower if he wasn't running for President and releasing tax returns to the general public.

    And again, most of his money goes to the Church of Latter Day Saints - great! Jesus came to the New World and the garden of Eden is in Missouri, am-I-rite?
    Do you know what they do with the donations they receive? Why is it that you seem to have a problem with this particular not for profit? A lot of people donate money to their church, and it is tax deductable under current tax laws, so what's the problem?

    Since 1985, LDS Charities (aka Humanitarian Services) of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has provided aid regardless of cultural or religious boundaries. Emergency assistance is provided through the Humanitarian Aid Fund, and long-term aid is provided through major initiatives such as clean water, wheelchairs, neonatal resuscitation training, vision care, immunization, food production, and a variety of local area initiatives.

    Two tenets of humanitarian aid define LDS Charities: 1) One hundred percent of every dollar donated is used to help those in need without regard to race, religion, or ethnic origin, and 2) LDS Charities helps people attain self-sufficiency so they can be self-reliant long after LDS Charities departs.

    In 2011, help was provided to more than 2 million people in 132 countries.

    Seems to me an effective use of donated monies, as opposed to some other not for profit organizations

  5. #45
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by CraigFL View Post
    Do you know what they do with the donations they receive? Why is it that you seem to have a problem with this particular not for profit? A lot of people donate money to their church, and it is tax deductable under current tax laws, so what's the problem?

    Since 1985, LDS Charities (aka Humanitarian Services) of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has provided aid regardless of cultural or religious boundaries. Emergency assistance is provided through the Humanitarian Aid Fund, and long-term aid is provided through major initiatives such as clean water, wheelchairs, neonatal resuscitation training, vision care, immunization, food production, and a variety of local area initiatives.

    Two tenets of humanitarian aid define LDS Charities: 1) One hundred percent of every dollar donated is used to help those in need without regard to race, religion, or ethnic origin, and 2) LDS Charities helps people attain self-sufficiency so they can be self-reliant long after LDS Charities departs.

    In 2011, help was provided to more than 2 million people in 132 countries.

    Seems to me an effective use of donated monies, as opposed to some other not for profit organizations

    You're wasting your time. SB is a bigot with an emphasis on anti Mormon. Just like FF2 is a bigot with an anti Catholic bias.
    I've known a few Mormons. Decent hard working people who are more moral than most.
    I think we should all not bash religions here- except Islam, of course. They want to KILL us.

  6. #46
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,738
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    SB is a bigot with an emphasis on anti Mormon. Just like FF2 is a bigot with an anti Catholic bias.
    I don;t agree with either of these claims. I think like many, they play politics. If that means raising doubts based on faith (faith being an issue liberals are not politically fond of to start with) then they'll do so.

    I do not believe either SB or FF would, in their real lives, descriminate against Mormons, Catholics or any other faith. I just don't see it.

    E-Rhetoric =/= Bigotry.

    I think we should all not bash religions here- except Islam, of course. They want to KILL us.
    Your own bias is obvious, and understandable. But your defense of faith is not different than their criticisms of faith. Neither marks the other as a bigot.

  7. #47
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,656
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    You tell us which loopholes he could close.
    How about he comes out and tells us which loopholes he WILL close.
    Romney has been pretty clear on his position. The tax reform plan centers on simplification. He told an audience in Ohio the other day "don't expect to pay less in taxes then you currently pay". They would charge the congressional ways and means committee of going through the code and identifing loopholes which can be eliminated in favor of rate reductions. The total collections would remain steady. If they can't come up with enough to reduce rates by 20% then they will lower the rate reduction to compensate.

    The one and only area where he has promised to actually cut taxes is on Cap Gains and Dividends for folks with middle class incomes. Today middle class families trying to save need to use things like 529K accounts and traditional IRA's. This would eliminate the need for those programs and simplify the code while encouraging savings.

  8. #48
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    I don;t agree with either of these claims. I think like many, they play politics. If that means raising doubts based on faith (faith being an issue liberals are not politically fond of to start with) then they'll do so.

    I do not believe either SB or FF would, in their real lives, descriminate against Mormons, Catholics or any other faith. I just don't see it.

    E-Rhetoric =/= Bigotry.



    Your own bias is obvious, and understandable. But your defense of faith is not different than their criticisms of faith. Neither marks the other as a bigot.

    Warfish, you are a fairly reasonable person. C'mon. FF2 has a few to many anti Catholic rants to be anything but. SB is headed the same way about Mormons.
    If someone wants to call me a bigot about Islam. Fine, THAT'S TRUE. I admit it, but warranted. Defense of faith, though, is hardly the same as bigotry. My approach is live and let live. Let a person worship as he sees fit without criticism.
    PK hates EVERYTHING. That's his schtick. Laughable but hey, it's PK.

  9. #49
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,738
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    Warfish, you are a fairly reasonable person.
    Thank you, I like to think so, on most issues.

    Defense of faith, though, is hardly the same as bigotry.
    You are arguing my point.

    Defense of an Organized Religion is the same as Criticism of that Organized Religion.

    It's no different that a liberals Defense of Organized Labor and the alternative Criticism of Organized Labor.

    In neither case does criticism = bigotry.

    My approach is live and let live. Let a person worship as he sees fit without criticism.
    You're free to take that view. Others are free to take other views, especially if the actions of the organized religions in question have effects on them or their lives, or their viewpoints re: society as a whole.

    I'm not supporting their specific criticism per se, only their inalienable right to express criticism without being labeled as a hateful -ism simply for expressing criticism

    After all, isn't just that what many Conservatives argue Liberals do to them, call valid criticism racism, sexism or homophobia?

    PK hates EVERYTHING. That's his schtick. Laughable but hey, it's PK.
    He is very much a robust critic of human, organized, religion, especially Chrisitianity and (now) Mormonism, aye.

  10. #50
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Thank you, I like to think so, on most issues.



    You are arguing my point.

    Defense of an Organized Religion is the same as Criticism of that Organized Religion.

    It's no different that a liberals Defense of Organized Labor and the alternative Criticism of Organized Labor.

    In neither case does criticism = bigotry.



    You're free to take that view. Others are free to take other views, especially if the actions of the organized religions in question have effects on them or their lives, or their viewpoints re: society as a whole.

    I'm not supporting their specific criticism per se, only their inalienable right to express criticism without being labeled as a hateful -ism simply for expressing criticism

    After all, isn't just that what many Conservatives argue Liberals do to them, call valid criticism racism, sexism or homophobia?



    He is very much a robust critic of human, organized, religion, especially Chrisitianity and (now) Mormonism, aye.
    I believe in Jesus Christ. Doggin does not. Neither he nor I are a bigot. If I call Judaism a gutter religion (ala some black folks) I AM a bigot. If doggin says Catholics are a filthy pervert religion (FF2 has) he is a bigot.
    I merely say belieive what you will. We should have that opportunity without criticism. Religion is a little different than leg breaking union thugs from the teamsters or CWA.
    Now, we all have the right to say whatever about another person's religion or race. However, doing so in a negative way DOES cast one as a bigot, racist or biased.
    Calling a liberal un American is not the same. Hey, calling someone a faggot is now a criminal offense in many areas. I do not believe that is an appropriate comment either. Nor a crime.

  11. #51
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,353
    Post Thanks / Like
    For $hits and giggles I grabbed a tax return from my files and looked.

    Married couple, wife is stay at home, 2 kids. Hubby made $225,000 in 2011.

    amounts rounded

    Adjusted gross income of $231,000
    Taxable Income of $183,000

    Total Federal tax, incuding AMT tax $40,409

    Effective rate of 17 percent, marginal rate 28 percent.

    I looked at a few others and same scenario... hubby earns $150K and then the effective rate is only 13 percent.


    Conclusion..FACT not OPINION.

    Romney paid a higher tax rate than almost ALL married Americans earning $150,000 and less jointly.

  12. #52
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,738
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    I believe in Jesus Christ. Doggin does not. Neither he nor I are a bigot.
    Ok.

    If I call Judaism a gutter religion (ala some black folks) I AM a bigot. If doggin says Catholics are a filthy pervert religion (FF2 has) he is a bigot.
    Agree to disagree I guess.



    I merely say belieive what you will. We should have that opportunity without criticism.
    Agree to disagree, but I STRONGLY disagree with this one.

  13. #53
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,656
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by southparkcpa View Post
    For $hits and giggles I grabbed a tax return from my files and looked.

    Married couple, wife is stay at home, 2 kids. Hubby made $225,000 in 2011.

    amounts rounded

    Adjusted gross income of $231,000
    Taxable Income of $183,000

    Total Federal tax, incuding AMT tax $40,409

    Effective rate of 17 percent, marginal rate 28 percent.

    I looked at a few others and same scenario... hubby earns $150K and then the effective rate is only 13 percent.


    Conclusion..FACT not OPINION.

    Romney paid a higher tax rate than almost ALL married Americans earning $150,000 and less jointly.
    +1
    I'd venture a guess that those folks pay plenty of state and local taxes however. Tax rates are fine where they are. We just spend too much.

  14. #54
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,353
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    +1
    I'd venture a guess that those folks pay plenty of state and local taxes however. Tax rates are fine where they are. We just spend too much.
    Romneys state rate will be MUCH MUCH higher than almost ALL Americans as there is NO special dividend or cap gains rate at the state level.

  15. #55
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,999
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    If doggin says Catholics are a filthy pervert religion (FF2 has) he is a bigot.
    Listen, I can't ignore you when you say something like this.

    PLEASE show me where I said that or STFU.

    FTR: I am against priests raping boys.

    I am NOT against Catholocism.

  16. #56
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Ok.



    Agree to disagree I guess.





    Agree to disagree, but I STRONGLY disagree with this one.

    OUCH. Your disagreements with me on points 2 and 3 are very troubling.
    Somewhat uncivil? C'mon, it's bordenline serious anti-social. I can't believe that. Are you just being argumentative to be annoying? LOL

  17. #57
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    Listen, I can't ignore you when you say something like this.

    PLEASE show me where I said that or STFU.

    FTR: I am against priests raping boys.

    I am NOT against Catholocism.


    You have been spouting anti Catholic stuff for a long time. And on many occasions. And I call you on it when I see it. And will continue to call you on it until you cease.
    If you want to be uncivil and crude against religion expect to get whacked.
    I may be a hard a$$ but religion is a no no.
    I don't care who knocks religion. Take a shot at Jews, Quakers, or Baptists or whover (except Moslems) and I will call on it.

  18. #58
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,738
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    OUCH. Your disagreements with me on points 2 and 3 are very troubling.
    Somewhat uncivil? C'mon, it's bordenline serious anti-social. I can't believe that. Are you just being argumentative to be annoying? LOL
    I believe very deeply in the freedom of speech, opinion and expression.

    I believe very stringly in your right to support, and express support, for a particular religion.

    But I equally suport, equally strongly, the rights of others to be equally critical of those same religions if they feel it warranted.

    I do not feel that and that alone is equaivalent to bigotry, which is defined as:

    "a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance".
    To put it in alternative terms, I may be strongly critical of the New York Jets, but that deos not in and of itself mean treat fans or employees of the New York Jets (as a group) with hatred and intolerence.

    So no, I'm not Devil's Advocate'ing here. It is a core fo my beliefs that the freedom to express, positive and negative, is one of the most important we posess, and attempts to stifile it by denouncing, inaccurately, those who may be of an opposing viewpoint as "Bigots", "Racists" or the like is neither appropriate, nor constructive.

  19. #59
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,999
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    You have been spouting anti Catholic stuff for a long time. And on many occasions. And I call you on it when I see it. And will continue to call you on it until you cease.
    If you want to be uncivil and crude against religion expect to get whacked.
    I may be a hard a$$ but religion is a no no.
    I don't care who knocks religion. Take a shot at Jews, Quakers, or Baptists or whover (except Moslems) and I will call on it.
    I've spouted anti priest-rape stuff for a long time and condemned the church's poor response.

    You claim I said: "Catholics are a filthy pervert religion."

    Please tell me when I said that.

  20. #60
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,459
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    Please tell me when I said that.
    You didn't.

    Catholics are touchy people. They like to touch things and thingies.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us