cap gains rate-- so what.

All of the deflection from Dems regarding Romney's net worth.

Breaking news:

Obama's net worth has grown from $400K to $10.5 million in the 7 years he has been in DC.

Yeah but... - The Left

Poor bastard, self-described as "unemployed" and at one time forced to live in his son's basement. And economically raped at a 15% rate to boot.

If he's going to be the 'Job Creating President' his personal income taxes will have to go down.

"Mr. Romney is one of the 200,000 millionaires in America who pays a rate less than that of a taxpayer making $100,000. And if his rate turns out to be lower than 15 percent (a feat usually achieved through various tax avoidance schemes), he will be one of the 22,000 millionaire households paying less than half the rate of a middle-class family. (Based on the vague information Mr. Romney has already disclosed about his 2010 income, Citizens for Tax Justice estimated last year that his rate would be 14 percent.)

Sounds like a perfect representation of the master-class that runs the GOP.

Yeah but... - The Left

#2 | Posted by YouHateMe at 2012-01-17 01:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

We know that Romney's wealth comes from buying companies and selling them off piece by piece, making huge profits while putting families out of work.

Where did Obama get his money from? Link?

Working for a living is for chumps.

"But that might not be the end of the issue for Romney. Its likely he also benefited from related tax privileges during his time at Bain. While the lower rate on capital gains and dividend income is supposed to benefit investors, private-equity executives and hedge-fund managers who get paid by taking a share of their firms profits rather than a normal salary are also able to classify their income as a capital gain rather than a wage, and so they, too, pay a 15 percent tax rate â€" even when that money is, effectively, their salary.

Ultimately, the private-equity tax loophole could become far more controversial than whether private-equity deals destroy or create jobs. Today, even the Wall Street Journal came out against the loophole, arguing that capital gains should benefit those actually receiving a return on an investment rather than labor. "It is difficult to defend the fact that private-equity and hedge-fund executives pay no more than 15% on their share of their partnerships profits because it is considered a capital gain," writes Francesco Guerrera, editor of the Journals Money & Investing section. “If it looks like income and smells like income, it should be taxed like income at much higher rates."

Interestingly, all this may explain why Romney has moved away from his position in 2007, when he advocated for eliminating the capital gains tax entirely during a Florida GOP dinner. Romney says that he wants to eliminate the tax just for families earning less than $200,000 a year--presumably preserving the 15 percent tax on wealthy earners like himself. This places him to the left of every other major GOP candidate, whos either campaigned on eliminating the tax or lowering the rate across the board.

By contrast, President Obama has long campaigned for closing the carried-interest loophole entirely. It was a part of his 2011 platform and House Democrats passed a bill closing it in 2010, which would raise about $25 billion over the next 10 years. Obama also wants to raise the capital gains tax itself."

#10 this is why I laugh when people are licking Steve Jobs' balls over his $1 salary

"Mitt Romney estimated Tuesday that he pays about a 15 percent effective tax rate on his earnings, a much lower rate than many middle-class Americans pay."

I call bull. This article is comparing Romney's effective tax rate with "middle class Americans" marginal rate. With zero deductions and tax credits, the average American making $100k will pay an EFFECTIVE federal tax rate of 17.25% (MFJ), even though they're officially in the 25% marginal tax bracket. With deductions and credits, the average American making $100k (again, MFJ) will pay an EFFECTIVE federal tax rate of around 12%. MSNBC Fail.

And before Axe et al call me a "corporate Romney shill" or whatever, please provide proof that my numbers/reasoning is incorrect.

"With zero deductions and tax credits, the average American making $100k will pay an EFFECTIVE federal tax rate of 17.25% (MFJ), even though they're officially in the 25% marginal tax bracket."

IOW, even though Romney is officially in the 35% marginal rate, this couple pays a 15% higher rate than Romney.

"this couple pays a 15% higher rate than Romney."

Since Bart was talking about marginal rates vs effective rates, let me clarify:
this couple pays a 15% higher effective rate than Romney.

"I call bull. This article is comparing Romney's effective tax rate with "middle class Americans" marginal rate. With zero deductions and tax credits, the average American making $100k will pay an EFFECTIVE federal tax rate of 17.25% (MFJ)"

I realize this is a discussion of income taxes only, but keep in mind you're ignoring payroll taxes. That middle class family, if, say, they run a restaurant, will also be liable for about $15,000 in payroll taxes, something hedge-fund managers don't have to pay.

And before Axe et al call me a "corporate Romney shill" or whatever, please provide proof that my numbers/reasoning is incorrect.

#12 | POSTED BY BARTIMUS AT 2012-01-17 06:32 PM

Funny how the libs here do not understand taxes. Wait, maybe because they don't pay taxes?

IOW, even though Romney is officially in the 35% marginal rate, this couple pays a 15% higher rate than Romney.

#13 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2012-01-17 06:37 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

But since the middle class does often benefit from deductions and credits (which you ignored in both your posts), their effective rate is usually around the 10% range. This year, after all is said and done, I'm paying about a 6% effective rate (and I'm about as "middle class" as can be). Anyone making less than $100k (MFJ) and itemizing their deductions shouldn't be paying anywhere close to the 15% effective rate. This of course changes for the self-employed, but I'm focusing on the majority of Americans who have a boss.

You're right on about payroll taxes and other tax loopholes though. I think it's crap that someone can pay themselves with company stock and only have to pay the 15%, without having any additional payroll taxes kick in. Borrowing from Corky's link: "If it looks like income and smells like income, it should be taxed like income at much higher rates."

In other works, true investment should be taxed at capital gains rates, income should be taxed like, well, income, regardless of how the income is delivered (IMHO).

"But since the middle class does often benefit from deductions and credits (which you ignored in both your posts), their effective rate is usually around the 10% range. "

Whoa. I was using your figures on the 100K couple, and their effective rate of 17.25%.

"Anyone making less than $100k (MFJ) and itemizing their deductions shouldn't be paying anywhere close to the 15% effective rate."

If they're close to $100K, It depends how far above the standard deduction they are.

#18 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2012-01-17 11:55 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

I gave two examples; the 17.25% was with zero deductions/zero credits taken.

"With zero deductions and tax credits, the average American making $100k will pay an EFFECTIVE federal tax rate of 17.25%"

I then gave a lower effective rate when calculating deductions and credits. :^)

Regardless, the article's claim that Romney's 15% rate is much lower than middle class America is absurd, unless they're willfully trying to compare an effective rate with a marginal rate.

" the article's claim that Romney's 15% rate is much lower than middle class America is absurd, unless they're willfully trying to compare an effective rate with a marginal rate."

My point is that couple in the 100K example is paying an effective rate 15% higher than Romney's (17.25% vs 15%), yet Romney is (presumably) in a marginal bracket 40% higher than the couple.

The Dems will razor-cut Romney about this taxes in the fall.

It's not that he's made and has access to lots and lots and lots of money, although in the current economy that will cause some discomfort for some voters. Or that he took full advantage of the one-percenter induced structure of our absurd tax laws, which will only serve to further place him in a very small, upscale corral.

No, here's the message that's going to be rolled out, bigtime:

Romney: Working Hard to Keep His Taxes - Not Yours - Low.

Too big for a bumper sticker, but there's a smart guy or gal out there on the Obama campaign who'll come up with a phrase encapsulating that message - simple, straightforward, and easily understandable (plus, what a rara avis, true).

Posted by truthhurts

FLORENCE, S.C. -- Mitt Romney estimated Tuesday that he pays about a 15 percent effective tax rate on his earnings, a much lower rate than many middle-class Americans pay.
--------------------
So they no every middle class Americans effective tax rate? I don't think so.

Everyone has a different effective tax rate.

cap gains rate-- so what.

Means he's making more than most Americans.

And it means he's paying a lesser rate than many Americans.

And he wants to make the playing field even more unlevel?

Capitol Gains is also money you make on paper not with the sweat of your own brow kinda thing.

For an American public looking at a declining standard of living and fearing an increase these things should all be red flags.

Between his Gordon Gekko-esque time spent at Bain, his wooden manner whenever trying to appear remotely human, and the visceral reaction against Mormons found within the evangelical base that are legion within the ranks of the GOP the enthusiasm gap for this candidate should be immense.

It will make Kerry's time as Nom look like the Beatles appearing for the first time of the Ed Sullivan Show.

Should be lulzy.

Be Well.

#22 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

How about this bumper slogan? "Romney: It's Really Not Much Money".

Me like.

Or this: "Romney: The Dog Liked It"

What we're seeing now are some filleting knives at work; wait'll Romney's November opposition hauls out the hammer and tongs on this guy.

And the beauty, from a political point of view, is it won't even be coming from Obama - it'll come from the megafunded "independent" organizations our bitched-up election financing laws helped create.

The dog...Irish setter "Seamus" - lol!

And, of course, the coup de grace:

I call bull. This article is comparing Romney's effective tax rate with "middle class Americans" marginal rate. With zero deductions and tax credits, the average American making $100k will pay an EFFECTIVE federal tax rate of 17.25% (MFJ), even though they're officially in the 25% marginal tax bracket. With deductions and credits, the average American making $100k (again, MFJ) will pay an EFFECTIVE federal tax rate of around 12%. MSNBC Fail.

And before Axe et al call me a "corporate Romney shill" or whatever, please provide proof that my numbers/reasoning is incorrect.

#12 | Posted by bartimus

until one gets reamed in the ass by the AMT

So they no every middle class Americans effective tax rate? I don't think so.

Everyone has a different effective tax rate.

#23 | Posted by 90c2cab

ummm the irs sure does

Or how bout

Romney: "I'll Bet You $10,000 I Pay Less Taxes Than You"

So he's basically enjoying welfare in the form of a reduced tax rate for people with money. There is no reason why cap gains should be taxed at a special, lower rate. Its a giveaway to people who don't need it.

Why don't we all pay 15% tax rate instead of charging the masses up to 35% plus FICA rate of 7.65% up to 106K. The investment class pays just 15% with no FICA, and yet the revenue from that FICA tax is borrowed to run the country.

Why isn't all income treated similarly for tax purposes?

Why do the super rich pay only 15% and someone who labors for a living more? Why?...because the rich own Congress and until we eliminate campaign finance bribery it will only get worse.

"There is no reason why cap gains should be taxed at a special, lower rate."

Sure there is: inflation. Something held ten years and sold for 10% above purchase price has lost money.

15% of millions is still more than 30% of jack shit.

From the WSJ article on the same subject:

President Barack Obama and his wife paid 25.3% of their 2010 income of $1.8 million in income taxes after taking deductions of about $245,000 for charitable contributions, and $78,000 for local taxes, among others.

Roughly half of householdsâ€"mostly lower-incomeâ€"pay no income tax, although many still pay payroll taxes. The average income-tax rate for the middle slice of householdsâ€"those making between $34,300 and $50,000â€"was 3.3% for 2007, according to Congressional Budget Office data based in part on actual returns. That estimate includes the effects of various breaks, such as the per-child credit and the mortgage-interest deduction. Average income-tax rates rose to 14.4% for the top fifth, and to 19% for the top 1%, before dropping slightly for the very highest earners, who tend to have a larger percentage of their income from investments.

"15% of millions is still more than 30% of jack shit."

There you go, a bumper sticker appropriate to our times and perfect for The Base who'll be holding their noses to vote for M'Lud Romney in November.

"Sure there is: inflation. Something held ten years and sold for 10% above purchase price has lost money."

Regular interest isn't adjusted for inflation when its taxed. Why would cap gains be?

His stumbling answer about tax returns in the debate Monday was pretty embarrassing. Makes it look like he has something to hide. It's not that big a deal to me how much money a candidate makes or what rate they pay, unless I suppose they are doing something criminal. I think Romney would be a bad president for policy reasons, not because he's rich.

"Regular interest isn't adjusted for inflation when its taxed. Why would cap gains be?"

Because regular interest is paid regularly. You don't wait 10 or 20 years to collect.

Sounds like a perfect representation of the master-class that runs the GOP.

#7 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Eat it dok!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What is the tax rate of ALL the rich dem politicians?

It's the way ALL of the rich pay taxes, not just the republicans. You livs are soooooooooooooooooooooooooooo smart.

The problem that this issue poses for Romney is that it truly reinforces that he is Wall Street. For many people, that is perfectly fine. Private Equity, Investment Banking & Hedge Fund management is capitalism, and both parties have been closely aligned with wall street over the years. However, I think that most Americans admire capitalism more when it comes from a desire to create a better widget, improve on an existing service or develop a completely new way of doing things. It is reflected in entrepreneurship...with a passion to create, build and provide. These folks want to make more money, and provide better for their families also, but money is not their primary motivation. The money eventually comes as a result of effort over a long period of time.

Bain Capital is/was simply about making money. Romney should never have to apologize for that. That was his job. But, I think Americans are going to be skittish about moving in a direction that is much more Wall Street friendly, in lieu of their heist this past decade. Romney has done a good job in defending his record, and the Dems run the issue of overplaying it too early. He would be wise to release his records now instead of waiting. Why wait until April? It just gives the Dems more ammo in a few months.

#45

Snippy must have missed the part where the Dems want to change the tax rate for the wealthiest, while the Rs are against it.

There you go, a bumper sticker appropriate to our times and perfect for The Base who'll be holding their noses to vote for M'Lud Romney in November.

#41 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

If my choice is between Obama and Romney I'm writing in Dole Caned Pineapple.

Having said that I think our tax structure is retarded and punitive against anyone truing to get ahead, rich or broke.

Bain Capital is/was simply about making money. Romney should never have to apologize for that

#46 | Posted by CaseyJones

Or pretend that it was a pro-social enterprize from his point of view. A theme he has attempted to develop.

"Because regular interest is paid regularly. You don't wait 10 or 20 years to collect."

Mathematically, there's no difference. Regular interest is paid regularly but also taxed regularly. Cap gains are not paid regularly but also not taxed regularly.

"15% of millions is still more than 30% of jack shit."

Not only will Republicans be able to slap that message on their bumpers, but I understand Gucci, Armani, Louis Vuitton, Turnbull & Asser, and Versace are teaming up with Dolce and Gabbana, Prada, Barney's, Levi Strauss, and Oshkosh (b'gosh) to put out a new line of T-shirts for the Romney campaign and RNC with that memorable message stitched -- well, stenciled, in the case of Oshkosh (b'gosh) -- discreetly but distinctively above the pocket.

"Mathematically, there's no difference."

Sure there is: you have the use of the current money to invest or spend as you wish every time they pay out. Reinvesting becomes a pro-active choice, and if you're not matching inflation, you know it immediately. Not so with long-term investments, where one bad year could wipe out all prior gains.

"Why wait until April?"

Because it's tax time?

I can see the upside (not much of one) from the Romneybots perspecetive: he's bound to pay a whale of a lot more money in taxes than all but about 0.01% of the population.

But the downside - the rate - is a killer and, worse from a political point of view, understood by all but the dimmest of dimmest bulbs in the electorate. All anyone has to do to ram that point home is explain how you pay, say, twenty-cents of every dollar you earn in federal tax but M'Lud pays fifteen-cents. Why?

Not so with long-term investments, where one bad year could wipe out all prior gains.

#52 | Posted by Danforth

Ain't that the truth!!!!

"Sure there is: you have the use of the current money to invest or spend as you wish every time they pay out. Reinvesting becomes a pro-active choice, and if you're not matching inflation, you know it immediately. Not so with long-term investments, where one bad year could wipe out all prior gains."

Yes, investments that pay interest are generally safer than investments in capital. That has nothing to do with how inflation affects any earnings.

"That has nothing to do with how inflation affects any earnings."

It does when you have access to your money every year, and can choose other investments with ease and without tax consequences. If inflation is rising, you can move from a lower-bearing CD to a higher one, at regular intervals. Regardless, dividends and interest are paid out in the year, and can be taken out of the investment itself, meaning those monies are assumed to rise with inflation following that point.

Why do the super rich pay only 15% and someone who labors for a living more? Why?...because the rich own Congress and until we eliminate campaign finance bribery it will only get worse.

#37 | Posted by Robson

By God, I think you've got it. But............... on top of that many in congress (dems and reps) are the rich you talk about. They write tax law that is best for them.

That's why they want control of the process. Pretty basic self-interest politics.

"It does when you have access to your money every year, and can choose other investments with ease and without tax consequences. If inflation is rising, you can move from a lower-bearing CD to a higher one, at regular intervals.'

That's just more to do with risk.

"Regardless, dividends and interest are paid out in the year, and can be taken out of the investment itself, meaning those monies are assumed to rise with inflation following that point."

You don't get interest if you take the money out of the investment.

"You don't get interest if you take the money out of the investment."

I'm talking about the earnings, which are paid out each year, meaning the nominal and the real amounts are very close, at most off by one year's worth of inflation.

My central point is I can see a case to index cap gains to inflation. Not so with interest and dividends, since they're within the same year.

He makes his money off capital gains ... what's the story here? There will be a time when many of us will be in this boat, like when we retire and live off our savings.

But regardless, if his income was 1 million -- that means he paid 150K in taxes. Why is that not enough for one person to pay to live in the USA? May the class warfare/green with envy intellectuals enlighten me.

"But regardless, if his income was 1 million -- that means he paid 150K in taxes. Why is that not enough for one person to pay to live in the USA? May the class warfare/green with envy intellectuals enlighten me."

He should pay the same rate as someone who made a million by working and producing stuff. Why should someone who sits on his ass for a living get a huge tax break?

You couldn't figure out that position on your own?

Sheesh.

Why is that not enough for one person to pay to live in the USA?

It is enough. Unless you are a bottom feeding leftard who wants to take from the rich and give to Solyndra.

"I'm talking about the earnings, which are paid out each year, meaning the nominal and the real amounts are very close, at most off by one year's worth of inflation."

Yeah but the taxes are paid every year too. Capital gains are tax deferred until one decides to "realize" the gain.

"My central point is I can see a case to index cap gains to inflation. Not so with interest and dividends, since they're within the same year."

I know what you're daying but disagree. I'm also doing a crap job of explaining myrself but I don't see how inflation affects these investments any more than other earnings.

"Where did Obama get his money from? Link?"

#8 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob

Part of it came from a "job" his wife had on a hospital board when she was not barred in IL to practice law and has no medical expertise. Her job on the board was apparently to be the wife of a senator because when she moved to DC the position of eliminated.

Romney's returns also might not spell out how much he benefits from a tax break used by private equity executives called the carried interest loophole.

This rule allows private equity and hedge fund managers to pay the 15 percent capital gains tax rate, rather than the top income tax rate, on a large portion of their earnings.

That's what Spud wants to see, specifically.

Be Well.

/Any word on when Trump is gonna release his financials?
//LOLOLOL!

Sully - If you owned stocks which paid dividends you would understand that this is not a rate just for the rich. My and my wife are just middle class but have a portfolio of mostly dividend paying stocks and those dividends are taxed at the same rate as Romney' dividends are taxed.

"those dividends are taxed at the same rate as Romney' dividends are taxed."

But he gets the bigger break as compared to ordinary income. He effectively gets a 42% better deal than you do.

Why should someone who sits on his ass for a living get a huge tax break?

You couldn't figure out that position on your own?

Sheesh.

#61 | Posted by Sully at 2012-01-18 12:38 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

why do you care, what business is it of yours where his income comes from , other than your insanely jealous of anyone doing better than you- typical democrat

4% higher than Warren Buffet paid. And one of those two claims he didn't pay nearly enough. Weird.

I run a fund that writes covered call options against dividend-paying stocks. For most of my clients, the income is taxed at two different rates: regular income tax rates for the call premiums; capital gains rates for the dividends. Then if I get positions called away, it's taxed at a short-term capital gains rate, usually. It's confusing, and this is the time of year I start to get the phone calls.

"There is no reason why cap gains should be taxed at a special, lower rate."

Sure there is: inflation. Something held ten years and sold for 10% above purchase price has lost money.

#37 | Posted by Danforth at 2012-01-18 09:30 AM | Reply | Flag:
---------------------------

Obviously you haven't been listening to the govt or the financial thieves and banksters.....There is no inflation and there hasn't been inflation for 20 years. Read the WSJ. You've been hoodwinked.

All income should be taxed the same even a casino bet held for 12 months. Every so called job is merely a casino bet for the job holder. No guarantees even if they do their best.

This seems to be a deflection piece so the media can avoid the FACT that we are drowning under $16 trillion in debt.

Regular interest isn't adjusted for inflation when its taxed. Why would cap gains be?

#41 | Posted by Sully at 2012-01-18 09:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

---------------------------

Excellent point. The crux of it all is that the USA has become the double standard in the world, and it serves the oligarchs, not the people, and not the standard of equal opportunity and of treatment that we once were known for.

More for the rich and less for average hard working workers who actually made the USA what it once was. That is the new mantra of the owned politicians, Club for Growth and US Chamber of Commerce. The ultra rich didn't make the USA rich, they instead took from the USA and used its infrastructure and education system, and populace and base and connived with politicians to make themselves rich.

If these so called self made rich were born in Yemen they'd be terrorists not entrepreneurs.

He pays 15% on his investments, dividends, capital gains.

It's not income.

So what...

#74 "He pays 15% on his investments, dividends, capital gains.

It's not income."
=====================
Oh? Allow me then to explain the basics of accounting 101. There are three financial statements. Income, balance sheet and cash flows.

Romney's investments give him income and positive cash flow, exactly the same as the check from Wallymart, etc that wage earners receive for their labor. His income is no more valuable than the risk that Wallymart wage earners take for exposing themselves to corporate bullshit or the health risks of certain jobs.

There is only reason Romney's income is taxed at only 15%, and it is because the richest in our corrupt society get most of their income from investments, and they bribe Congress well so they only pay 15% on this income, while average schmuck wage earners pay 42% on theirs (income tax + FICA).

"It's not income"

Ah, more made-up shit from Murph.

Here's a hint: all wealth acquisition is considered income. Now, whether it's taxable income or not, is another question. Aunt Petunia's birthday check isn't taxable, but it is, without a doubt, income.

There is only reason Romney's income is taxed at only 15%, and it is because the richest in our corrupt society get most of their income from investments, and they bribe Congress well so they only pay 15% on this income, while average schmuck wage earners pay 42% on theirs (income tax + FICA).

#75 | Posted by Robson

The scandal is the 42%. Titanic, monstrous government, and even at those usurious rates, Zero needs to borrow a trillion point four a year to shovel it out the door.

Nice try democrat losers. Many of you also don't pay the full tax rate on all earnings. Lets take a look at some ways you are getting over on other tax payers.

Do you have a IRA? If so you are not currently paying any taxes on the growth of that IRA. Yeah, we know you might pay some tax on the distributions in the future but right now you are not and the country is broke. Write a check fuckers and pay up your fair share assholes.

Do you own tax free municipal bonds? Ha, another way some of you liberals cheat the tax system.

Currently some of you aren't even paying into that pyramid scheme known as social security. Yep, granny sooner or later won't get her check cause you fucks aren't paying your fair share.

Try looking in the mirror next time you file a tax return and take you earned income tax credit, mortgage interest deduction, etc.

Good luck turning that into a bumper sticker.

You guys are really having a tough time with this one, aren't you?

Hey, not to worry: worse is yet to come.

Doc, I know loser demcrats like you will do anything to deflect from Obama's failures with the economy but trust me by election day Mitts finances will be a plus not a minus and Obama will have no where to hide from the lousy ass job he has done and people like me will make sure that it so.

Good luck next year crying about president Romney while Obama fades into Jimmy Carter like obscurity. I hear habit for crack dealers is hiring maybe Obama can get a job with them when we fire his sorry ass!

"...I know loser demcrats like you will do anything to deflect from Obama's failures..." blah, blah, blah.

I realize you're too dense to appreciate the irony of that statement, given that you're attempting to deflect from M'Lud Romney's tax debacle which is, after all, the topic of this thread.

But if you weren't too dense? Well, let's just say you'd be laughing your ass off.

"While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks...These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species."

the leftists I know work for cash and suppliment their so called income selling grass and cocaine. others make their drug purchases selling those nifty food cards for half on the dollar. the trade inpharmacuticals paid for by taxpayers is similarly lucrative.

those cards fed my sorry ass last winter. a ten cent oxyc gets you ten dollars on the street. ssdi is a frigging godsend. only thing standing between the little time we have left and burning inner cities.

many here appear to be too young to remember what the 70's were like.

they shall indeed be pleasantly surprised when the music stops again, and they go to bed with dozens of city centers alight.

these things are cyclical necessities for some reason here.

One more nincompoop checks in.

#72 | Posted by patriotwoman23

Another rightbot buffoon for whom staying on topic is an act as challenging as squaring a circle.

re 80.

I did a habitat build once. good gig, long as you do not mind bringing your own tools and watching retards destroy them. then wanting to kick your ass for exehibiting concern that one is going zip another with your saw.

never again. rather toss a grenade into a monkey cage and wait in the parking lot for the genius who figures out what that ring thing does.

my conscience does bother me over that day... but I still got ten fingers... just one scar.

someone shot me in the ass with my own nailgun. no one would pull it out, someone fainted. I almost got jacked for my tools by the neighborhood youths.

the monkey statement is in no way intended as racist... everyone there were quite white. union gig in revere Massachusetts @1990something.

I hope for your sake your posts are spoofs. If so, well and good. If not, check and see if you caught a couple of loads from that nail gun in your cerebral cortex.

"nail fun in your cerebral cortex" - classic.

Or this: "Romney: The Dog Liked It"

Nice! "Romney: The Dog Liked it - and so will you!"

"Romney: The Dog Liked it - and so will you!"

Most excellent!

I wish someone would ask M'Lud how a left-handed monkey wrench works.

"He pays 15% on his investments, dividends, capital gains.

It's not income."

If you don't even know that its income then you are not qualified to comment.

Mit pays less than the 15% he claims and that is what is going to hurt him. How is the money hidden in the Cayman islands taxed? As investment or labor?

What? Its not taxed?

Mits gonna have some explaining to do.

Do you own tax free municipal bonds? Ha, another way some of you liberals cheat the tax system.

Do tell how that is "cheating" when it is in the income tax code.

I suppose not one righturd owns a municipal bond too.

Good luck with that.

The more desperate the situation becomes for Willard Mittens Rmoney, the more desperation will come out on this blog.

the monkey statement is in no way intended as racist...

Nah, what would ever give that impression. Duh.

It isn't cheating if it is in the rules. It isn't a loophole if it is part of the law. We don't need to "go after cheaters" or "close loopholes" as that is clearly them passing the blame to us. We need to overhaul the entire system which is THEIR duty.

each and every one of you libs here would vote for any dem or liberal such as buffett who makes his money the exact same way....isnt that correct...wasnt that what we learend when all of went beserk thinking that his secretary paid higher percentage than he did??

well?????

AGAIN I SAY

RICH GUY RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT

OOOOOOO MMMMYYY GGOOOODDDDDDDDDDDD

AND one more thing on this subject....

GUARANTGODDAMNTEE you...if teddy were still alive and running or anyother kennedy BOOTLEGGER legacy...this shit wouldnt see the light of day in the democrat media complex.....