Why examine Romney’s taxes?

[dc.]

See there have always been the super rich. Twenty years ago no one cared because the general quality of life for the average American was high. Someone like Bill Gates was considered an American hero is now demonized for being rich. Now that the economy is considered poor, the first thing people look to is the super rich as the problem. So going back to your original statement: I work hard and pay the taxes I am supposed to, but what gets me mad is to see huge inefficiencies government. Hospitals are charging $500 for a two mile ambulance ride because they have to cover the cost of those who use an ambulance as a taxi but don't pay. Many hospitals are barely able to operate across the country. The Post Office posting an annual loss in the billions. Government congressmen and senators getting a $100K pension for the rest of their life after only two years of "public service" to their country. You have hundreds of "government agencies" where you have four employees doing the work that any for-profit business would only need one person.

 

I will disagree with the first few statements here to an extent - though I think we're still on the same page.

 

Point one is that over the last 20 years, even when "times were good" between 1990 and 2008, the ratio of wealth/income/etc of the top 1% to even just the middle class was rising at an absurd rate. I remember reading a NY Times article that pretty much said the difference in median income is now as large as it was in the late 19th century with the Robber Barons and Captains of Industry. In the 1950s and 60s, there was a gap, but it was far smaller.

 

Point two is that the super rich and the corporations they run have convinced us that "regulation" is a dirty word. It's not. Rules are valuable and worthwhile. In fact, despite the popular notions otherwise, even the likes of Adam Smith believed in measures that would maintain a "perfectly competitive market" - it didn't mean a free market, it meant a market with infinite buyers and sellers and choice. As Spen alluded to earlier, it's largely been deregulation that has hurt our economy and our quality of life in recent years - the end of Glass-Steagall in the 1990s, the convergence and growth of the financial industry (Romney's industry).

 

I also disagree slightly about the inefficiencies in government. I mean, I think they are there for sure. I just disagree about what and where the inefficiencies are. I also think they are a minimal issue in compared to so many other issues we face. Sure, I would love to cut spending and clean up all the agencies - but how about we stop spending BILLIONS on 'defense.' How's that for a fast, efficient cut. Personally, I believe government support of items like the arts, technology, schools - which many oppose as 'frivolous' - are in fact critical and incredibly necessary.

 

Meanwhile - what bothers me most is not the positions people take on the issues. As Spen said, I doubt much difference comes from either side. But I hate the conversation as it takes place now. It used to be that everyone wanted smaller government, it was just a matter of what we wanted to make smaller. Now it's just labels. Conservative. Liberal. Everyone has an "agenda" that we need to be wary of. No, there's no "gay agenda." There are gay people who want rights. That's their agenda... like everyone else. Socialist. Seriously, how did "socialist" ever get into the conversation? I swear most people who use that word don't know what it means.

 

Here's an example: the more I look at the heathcare issues in this country, the more I believe that the likes of Obama's plan didn't go far enough. Is healthcare a right? I don't know. But I know that I don't believe someone should die in this country because they can't afford their medication or surgery. Meanwhile, half our population has been scared into believing that a tax penalty is a form of socialism. Oddly enough, from a rational standpoint, a tax penalty and a tax credit (which Obama's opponents frequently say is a better option) are the same thing. Think about it this way... under Obama's plan, those who get healthcare pay X, those who don't pay X+1000. Under a tax credit program, those who get healthcare pay X-1000, those who don't pay X. What's the difference? Nothing. In both cases, the person with healthcare pays less in taxes and the person who doesn't, pays more. But apparently, the first version is socialism and the second if free market capitalism! In reality, that's true only in the most semantic interpretations of our laws and constitution.

[thundercleetz]

I think we are on the same page as well, dc. I am not saying anything is right or wrong, I am just being realistic and pointing out a lot of the problems we have today are made more difficult by globalization and we do not currently have the leadership capable to fix them. For myself as the average American, my philosophy is to accept that the condition of the economy now as what it is going to be for the forseeable future. I don't think things are going to get better anytime soon.

 

[/font][/color]

 

I will disagree with the first few statements here to an extent - though I think we're still on the same page.

 

Point one is that over the last 20 years, even when "times were good" between 1990 and 2008, the ratio of wealth/income/etc of the top 1% to even just the middle class was rising at an absurd rate. I remember reading a NY Times article that pretty much said the difference in median income is now as large as it was in the late 19th century with the Robber Barons and Captains of Industry. In the 1950s and 60s, there was a gap, but it was far smaller.

 

You're spot on about the numbers. My reference was in regard to public opinion. The population can blame whoever they want for why things the way they are, blame does not solve problems. The blame game has been a very popular topic for both parties since the 2008 and no one is getting anything done.

 

Point two is that the super rich and the corporations they run have convinced us that "regulation" is a dirty word. It's not. Rules are valuable and worthwhile. In fact, despite the popular notions otherwise, even the likes of Adam Smith believed in measures that would maintain a "perfectly competitive market" - it didn't mean a free market, it meant a market with infinite buyers and sellers and choice. As Spen alluded to earlier, it's largely been deregulation that has hurt our economy and our quality of life in recent years - the end of Glass-Steagall in the 1990s, the convergence and growth of the financial industry (Romney's industry).

 

I agree here as well. No consumer wants Monopolies. I already mentioned in my example about the breakup of the Soviet Union how this became a problem. I was simply mentioning that in our global economy today with essentially transparent boarders it is a lot easier for corporations to avoid regulation and domestic taxes. In other words, a lot easier said than done.

 

I also disagree slightly about the inefficiencies in government. I mean, I think they are there for sure. I just disagree about what and where the inefficiencies are. I also think they are a minimal issue in compared to so many other issues we face. Sure, I would love to cut spending and clean up all the agencies - but how about we stop spending BILLIONS on 'defense.' How's that for a fast, efficient cut. Personally, I believe government support of items like the arts, technology, schools - which many oppose as 'frivolous' - are in fact critical and incredibly necessary.

 

I agree with you 100% here. Technology, arts, and schools are absolutely where money should be going. Going back to my first post, one reason there is high unemployment is not because jobs are not available, it is America does not have an abundance of skilled laborers in fields of science, math, and technology to fill these highly demanded positions. Once again, completely agree here. America needs to maintain a competitive edge in all fields and we need a resurgence in math and science.

 

Defense spending... I did not mention this for a reason and I do not intend to. I have no idea the type of foreign intelligence we get which causes us to spend the way we do. At this point we are getting beyond comprehendible economic concepts. I am just claiming ignorance on this one. Ron Paul had an isolationist strategy for cutting defense spending. Ron Paul is one of the smartest men on the planet in my opinion, so I trusted his plan. Safety of this country is top priority, I am not smart enough to give an opinion on what we should and should not do here. I will say though, we do give out a lot of foreign aid to other countries...

 

As far as inefficiencies in the government budget, we'll just agree to disagree. Even if they seem minimal, with the range of our government minimal adds up quick. You do not agree that an audit of the fed would not help us in constructing a new, efficient budget plan? How can you construct a budget if you do not know what is efficient and what is not?

 

Health care... I am not opening that topic. It gets too blue and red at that point. I am at the point where we just need to pick something and go with it. Making a half-assed Health Care plan will only make matter worse. All I know is health care premiums are getting out of control and are only going up.

[Spen]

 

No no, I wasn't referring to you at all. I was just speaking about general public opinion in the US. I am sorry if I came off as accusative.

 

You did not in the least. No worries. I was just wondering if I came off as demonizing the rich. I do not mean to.

[RavenMad]

It sounds like everything needs a reset and then we begin building from the ground up.

 

Maybe that is what the Mayans were on about with the end of the cycle in December 2012. Maybe the global economy is going to come crashing down and a new age will rise from the ashes.

[cravnravn]

It sounds like everything needs a reset and then we begin building from the ground up.

 

Maybe that is what the Mayans were on about with the end of the cycle in December 2012. Maybe the global economy is going to come crashing down and a new age will rise from the ashes.

 

 

That would be nice, but if the rich can continue to avoid taxes with hiding their money in off shore accounts, it wont solve anything.

[thundercleetz]

 

 

That would be nice, but if the rich can continue to avoid taxes with hiding their money in off shore accounts, it wont solve anything.

 

Crav, that is hardly the root of the problem. With the type of budget deficit we have, even if we so-called taxed the rich, it wouldn't even put a dent in the deficit. Even if all income over $1 million taxed at 45% rightfully, it would only put a 10% dent in our deficit (which would be less and less with the projectory our government is spending). You start taxing higher than that and rich people will either stop working or pack up and leave the country, and we will be left with less revenue overall.

 

The real problem is how the fed is printing money like Monopoly paper and spending is out of control. I am not taking sides here, it is something both parties are guilty of. Figuring out our budget is the most important task in Washington right now without a doubt. Pick a reasonable budget and work off of that. More intermediate term goals like making a more efficient tax system and us stop buying up all of China's crappy exports at a manipulated currency rate will free up more discretionary revenue later. The budget needs to be set first.

[papasmurfbell]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/27/gop-anti-porn-plank-platform_n_1833840.html

Here is some regulation that the GOP is for.

[papasmurfbell]

 

http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/boehner-lies-about-bush-tax-cuts-and-deficits

 

The Bush tax cuts are the largest part of the defecit. Tax cuts need to be paid for by spending cuts. The cuts were never made.

[cravnravn]

Cleet, just looking at Pops 1st post, last paragraph..The US lost BILLIONS in taxes, due to Tax shelters, from one Company..Marriott,

 

Maybe an investigation, I dont know Swiss bank accts, off shore accts, should be done. I bet the figures would be ridiculous..theres enough shelters in North America..How many pro atheletes do you think reside in Florida because there is no state tax on income..Or Canadian addresses because the dollar is stronger in Canada than the US.

 

I wouldnt see an acrossed the board Tax of 27-35% for ALL people, reguardless of income..But for Romney to disclose that he made millions, and only paid 15,000 in taxes, well thats just robbing the Govt blind, and he wants to lead this country???

 

Monkey see, Monkey do and if Americans hid their income like our want to be leader does, it would devestate this country, 10x worse than what Owebama or Bush has done to this place..

[thundercleetz]

Cleet, just looking at Pops 1st post, last paragraph..The US lost BILLIONS in taxes, due to Tax shelters, from one Company..Marriott,

 

Maybe an investigation, I dont know Swiss bank accts, off shore accts, should be done. I bet the figures would be ridiculous..theres enough shelters in North America..How many pro atheletes do you think reside in Florida because there is no state tax on income..Or Canadian addresses because the dollar is stronger in Canada than the US.

 

I wouldnt see an acrossed the board Tax of 27-35% for ALL people, reguardless of income..But for Romney to disclose that he made millions, and only paid 15,000 in taxes, well thats just robbing the Govt blind, and he wants to lead this country???

 

Monkey see, Monkey do and if Americans hid their income like our want to be leader does, it would devestate this country, 10x worse than what Owebama or Bush has done to this place..

 

I think we are on the same page crav. I agree with you, corporations hiding their money in the Cayman Islands is without a doubt a problem. All I am saying is fixing this problem is an ambitious undertaking that would take a global initiative, and I do not believe we have the capable leadership to accomplish this. This is a huge source of potential revenue. You have to think if this was an easy fix, politicians from either party would have accomplished this to have a hundred billion at their disposure to spend.

 

http://crooksandliar...ts-and-deficits

 

The Bush tax cuts are the largest part of the defecit. Tax cuts need to be paid for by spending cuts. The cuts were never made.

 

Good article, thanks for sharing. This actually directly ties in to Crav's post. With the way the system is, Bush tax cuts or not, the corporations and 1% will continue to find ways to avoid taxes. What I am scared of is if the tax cuts expire, it is the average American and small businesses who will be hurt the most, not the rich who are considered the targets of such a move.

[papasmurfbell]

Actually the Bush cuts go to the wealthy much more. They are the ones who made out like bandits with them in effect. Also Corprate taxes I think in the 50's made up something like 30% of the revenues of the govt. It is not down to I think I saw 13%.

[papasmurfbell]

Oh also Obama has said he wants to do a middle class tax cut but the Bush cuts are being pushed on him to do it. The Bush cuts should have ended in 2010 but the GOP said they would not do I think it was an extension to unemployment without extending it to now.

[thundercleetz]

Actually the Bush cuts go to the wealthy much more. They are the ones who made out like bandits with them in effect. Also Corprate taxes I think in the 50's made up something like 30% of the revenues of the govt. It is not down to I think I saw 13%.

 

Oh I am not doubting the proportions at all. Here's what I am scared of: You have a middle class American making $65,000 in a 25% tax bracket (2012). Bush tax cuts expire, that 25% tax bracket is now 31% (1999) or maybe even higher. So person A goes from paying $16,250 in federal taxes to $20,150. That is $3,900 less in his pocket, which is a lot of money is an economy where the cost of living is very high. Sure getting rid of the Bush tax cuts will yield more revenue from having that top bracket jump from 35% to 45/50/whatever percent, there are two problems with this:

 

1. The system is still the same, individuals can still put their money into trusts, capital gains taxes are still 15% (I believe so? I think there was talk of raising this as well?), etc. Rich people who have earned their money are smart people, they will continue to utilize all legal aspects of the system for their benefit (as they rightfully should).

2. It might seem like a no brainer for the government to increase the top tax bracket 10/15/20% while the lower brackets increase only 3-5%, but that 3-5% to those individuals will be hit very hard.

 

Now I am not advocating extending the Bush tax cuts, I am just saying if they expire Washington better have something else lined up to keep taxes the same, at the least, for the middle class and the small businesses.

[papasmurfbell]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/28/republican-national-convention-the-one-graph-you-need-to-see-before-watching/

Here is another chart that is like it.

 

I would put out a middle class tax cut proposal right now. Say you want it passed by october. If it is not out of congress dump the blame on them and tell people to remember that when they enter the polls.

[thundercleetz]

http://www.washingto...efore-watching/

Here is another chart that is like it.

 

I would put out a middle class tax cut proposal right now. Say you want it passed by october. If it is not out of congress dump the blame on them and tell people to remember that when they enter the polls.

 

Interesting chart, I am not too much of a fan of the WP. All I read is how the Republicans pretty much are responsible for the destruction of the world. I already hear enough of the blame game from both parties as it is. I do not care who did what, you are elected and paid very well to fix the problem, so fix it. The last paragraph is what I got the most from the article:

 

Now, the response you sometimes get to this graph is yes, that’s true, but Obama should have done more about the debt. But Obama has proposed a multi-trillion dollar deficit reduction plan. Republicans just refused to pass it. And, to be fair, he refused to sign their plan, too. So the question then is less about what led to the debt and more about who has the right plan to get rid of it.

 

I really do not have much faith in our elected officials. To me, it is just a constant blame game back and forward.

[papasmurfbell]

The chart is info from the congressional budget office.

[thundercleetz]

The chart is info from the congressional budget office.

 

No problem with the chart, just not a fan of WP commentary LOL

[vmax]

You guys are impressing the shit out of me with your knowledge.

[papasmurfbell]

Watch a lot of non network news.

[dc.]

I think the chart pretty much says that Neo-Cons are responsible for the near-end of the world... WP doesn't have to say it.

 

I'll add, though, that what's worse than the inability to get anything done or deal with the real issues is that most politicians are happy to fight what I would largely consider "non-issues." Why are we wasting our time on abortion debates and voter ID laws (when there is virtually NO instance of voter fraud) in the midst of all the rest that is going on?!

[RavenMad]

I don't think the offshore accounts issue is an easy problem to solve. The only solution I can think of is to heavily tax any banking transactions that involve money leaving the country to these banks which could make it unattractive to move money to these tax havens. The only downside to this is it's a 1 off transaction cost and you can't account for lost taxes from any future interest or capital gain that this money will make.

 

As for setting up a company in a tax haven, you could write paragraphs on the subject which I won't do. If you have an office/factory in a country you should at least be paying a portion of your taxes in that country. If not, then you are an importer and you will have to pay import duties.

 

The problem with most tax systems, is they are so complicated that even the professionals don't know everything and new loopholes are being discovered all the time and it takes the IRS/HMRC or whatever each country's tax collection agency is called, ages to find and close these loopholes. If you make everything simpler it will be harder to cheat.

[thundercleetz]

I don't think the offshore accounts issue is an easy problem to solve. The only solution I can think of is to heavily tax any banking transactions that involve money leaving the country to these banks which could make it unattractive to move money to these tax havens. The only downside to this is it's a 1 off transaction cost and you can't account for lost taxes from any future interest or capital gain that this money will make.

 

As for setting up a company in a tax haven, you could write paragraphs on the subject which I won't do. If you have an office/factory in a country you should at least be paying a portion of your taxes in that country. If not, then you are an importer and you will have to pay import duties.

 

The problem with most tax systems, is they are so complicated that even the professionals don't know everything and new loopholes are being discovered all the time and it takes the IRS/HMRC or whatever each country's tax collection agency is called, ages to find and close these loopholes. If you make everything simpler it will be harder to cheat.

 

Good post!

[thundercleetz]

Here is an article from the WSJ on companies moving abroad for tax savings:

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-firms-move-abroad-024200566.html

[papasmurfbell]

I got an idea to fix companies from hiding their taxes over seas. Do you like access to the American market. If you do pay your taxes. These companies that move their HQ's for tax reasons can enjoy tariffs.

[Spen]

I think the chart pretty much says that Neo-Cons are responsible for the near-end of the world... WP doesn't have to say it.

 

I'll add, though, that what's worse than the inability to get anything done or deal with the real issues is that most politicians are happy to fight what I would largely consider "non-issues." Why are we wasting our time on abortion debates and voter ID laws (when there is virtually NO instance of voter fraud) in the midst of all the rest that is going on?!

 

Its an election year, I am amazed we havent had a big 'flag burning' debate yet. Thats usually a big election year 'non issue'.

 

I got an idea to fix companies from hiding their taxes over seas. Do you like access to the American market. If you do pay your taxes. These companies that move their HQ's for tax reasons can enjoy tariffs.

 

I agree, Its a simple and fair solution.