Is Jon Stewart running for president, claiming to understand what's on the minds of the 99%?

Wonder how much he paid in taxes. By my estimation, since BruceBanner has now declared (on another thread) that Jon Stewart's income doesn't do the economy any good, Stewart should pay $13,800,000 in taxes.
After all, what the fuck is his problem?
Can't he live on $200,000 per year?
Doesn't he realize how many starving obese people could be fed on $13,800,000 ?
Doesn't he have any fucking compassion for the oppressed in America?
Why should he make 500x what a teacher makes?
Why should he be in the 1% when the rest of us are all struggling?
Who the fuck does he think he is?

And by the way, does he drive an electric car?
Does he recycle his own shit for fertilizer?
Does he turn his own urine into drinking water for green purposes?
Has he planted any trees lately?

It's becoming more and more clear that Jon Stewart is nothing more than a rich, white, environmental destroying male who doesn't pay his fair share and leeches off of the poor oppressed working man.

Is Jon Stewart running for president, claiming to understand what's on the minds of the 99%?

No, but Colbert is?
How much did that SOB make?
How much did he pay in taxes?
How much of his own shit was recycled for green energy?

etc. etc. etc.

"I like Jon Stewart, he makes some good points. But he should watch out for glass houses."

I don't ever remember Stewart defending his tax rate so it's not really a hypocrite thing unless you have evidence of his privately advocating for it while speaking against it on his show.

I don't ever remember Stewart defending his tax rate so it's not really a hypocrite thing unless you have evidence of his privately advocating for it while speaking against it on his show.

So how about Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid or even Barack Obama? Do they pay their fair share? Barry said that people that make over a million shouldn't pay less than 30%. Guess what? He paid 26% on $5 Million!

And how about you?
Do you pay your fair share?
How much do you make and how much did you pay?
And don't give me this private citizen bullshit!
I want to know if you're exploiting the oppressed, poor, downtrodden and hungry.
What's your problem with that?
If you have nothing to hide, then what are you afraid of?

"Jon Stewart is nothing more than a rich, white, environmental destroying male who doesn't pay his fair share and leeches off of the poor oppressed working man."

But enough about his parallels with Romney.

When Stewart runs for the Presidency on a platform of lowering his taxes even more, you'll have a point.

Stewart is unfairly using the 13.9% number, and disregarding the millions in charitable donations. He's operating on the assumption that if you don't give all your money to government alone, your income is unjustified. It should be how much you keep for yourself, in which case him and Romney are on the same footing.

"Barry said that people that make over a million shouldn't pay less than 30%. Guess what? He paid 26% on $5 Million!"

So he's advocating raising his own taxes, whereas Romney is advocating lowering his own taxes.

Got it.

Stewart is unfairly using the 13.9% number, and disregarding the millions in charitable donations.

They have nothing to do with each other. If you believe, as I do, that it's unfair for the super-rich to have an effective tax rate so much lower than many other Americans, Romney's tax rate is worth scrutiny regardless of what he does with the money he kept out of Uncle Sam's hands.

"He's operating on the assumption that if you don't give all your money to government alone, your income is unjustified."

No he's not: he's pointing out the last dollar of your income is subject to about twice the federal taxes as the last dollar Romney made.

"It's becoming more and more clear that Jon Stewart blah, blah, blah..."

Yeah, whatever...but what's really becoming clear is how much of a retarded douche-bag "Dr. Dude2" is.

.

Strange nothing is found suspect about Bill Clinton, George Soros or the Kennedy clan's incomes, ain't it?

You guys are focusing on the final tax rate, not baseline. That shoe scanner could have kids, buy a house with solar panels, and give to charity and he'd be able to pay a lower rate too. You're using Romeny's final rate, and comparing it to the initial rate among lower income earners.

Rcade, that's unfair though. If someone making 50,000 gives to charity they can deduct it too (or they used to be able to- didn't Obama reduce or eliminate the deduction?). Romney paid 42% of total income to charity and taxes (www.washingtonpost.com)
Stewart is way off on this criticism.

#12 | POSTED BY ADAMMM

But in doing so, he chose which causes he wanted to give his money to, thereby depriving the US Government of that privilege and undermining their ability to buy votes from the poor.

That said, capital gains should be taxed as income...period. Fair is fair.

"capital gains should be taxed as income...period. "

Not necessarily: you're ignoring the effects of inflation. Something held for ten years with a gain of 10% is actually a loss, due to inflation.

I could see CGs getting indexed to the CPI. Regarding dividends, I agree with you.

This decides it for me, I'm not voting for Jon Stewart for President (unless he actually runs).

We still don't know how much he paid in taxes, I doubt his income is all capital gains which would mean he is paying a much higher percantage than Mitt Romney and the problem for Romney is the low percentage of tax he pays, not his income.

"Romney paid 42% of total income to charity and taxes (www.washingtonpost.com)"

And why should I care how much money Romney gives to his Mormon church to use fighting political battles against gay rights????

Rcade, that's unfair though. If someone making 50,000 gives to charity they can deduct it too (or they used to be able to- didn't Obama reduce or eliminate the deduction?). Romney paid 42% of total income to charity and taxes ...

There's no way charity donations are getting him down to 13.9 percent. The biggest factor in Romney's tax rate being so low is the tax break on capital gains.

OMFG.

THIS canard again?

People with money can't attack Romney cos that makes them hypocrites?

See also: People of regular means can't attack him cos they are just jelly.

Here's the deal, rtards.

Romney's income is being attacked not because he is worth a quarter billion and makes more in a day than most people make in a year but because he's advocating a tax structure that would increase the wealth of himself and others like him at the expense of everyone else.

Already the wealthiest people in America who sit on investments and do little real work are paying less in taxes annually than the average Joe and Jane.

If that doesn't seem unfair to you then maybe it's time to put down the fucking koolaid walk outside and take a deep breath of fresh air.

Seriously, how long are you morons gonna try this brainless shit?

I'ts beyond pathetic.

Be Well.

So if Romney pays 14% in taxes, and gives 99.9% of the rest of his income to charity, and lived on $30,000 a year, while Stewart pays a 35% rate but no donations, he's still justified in criticizing Romney? Cause that's what I'm getting from you guys. Unless you give it to the Feds, it doesn't count how much you give to others.

"Romney paid 42% of total income to charity and taxes."

Define charity. Is it charity if it is compulsory? His good standing in the church is dependent on it.

#21, that seems irrelevant overall- the government counts it as charity, so why differentiate? But that said, it was 16% to the church and affiliates, and then 14% to other, non church charities.

or 12%, rather. It's all in the article.

Nobody debates issues any more. They just scream "hypocrisy!" and think they've made an argument.

No, but Colbert is?
How much did that SOB make?
How much did he pay in taxes?
How much of his own shit was recycled for green energy?
etc. etc. etc.

#3 | POSTED BY DR_DUDE2 AT 2012-01-25 10:58 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

Go find out what it is and get back to us Dr. Douche.

My guess is that if it is salary the rate he pays is about 2.5 times what Willard pays.

#24, or just criticize people, I guess.

I'd say there's a lot of issues here- charitable deductions, progressive tax rates, capital gains rates, etc. But obviously, you can't be bothered to read.

This entire criticism shows a startling lack of understanding as to what Stewart said.

Stewart was criticizing Romney's tax rate given his huge income. If Stewart isn't paying a similarly low tax rate (which he isn't because he is paid a salary for working, not collecting money because he already has money), then he's not being a hypocrite for criticizing Romney's tax rate.

Sheesh. The density here is unbearable at times.

So if Romney pays 14% in taxes, and gives 99.9% of the rest of his income to charity, and lived on $30,000 a year, while Stewart pays a 35% rate but no donations, he's still justified in criticizing Romney?

In a discussion of fairness and tax rates, yes. The super-rich prosper enormously in this society. They should pay their fair share of taxes like everybody else. What they do with their untaxed money is a separate issue entirely. If I rob a bank and give all the money to the Little Sisters of the Poor, I still robbed a bank.

I'm looking at it as how much income someone keeps, not how much they pay in taxes. God forbid people give money directly to help people, without it paying middle-men paper-pushing bureaucrats first.

If Romney paid 14% and kept the rest, that's one thing. But he's following the law, and giving millions away voluntarily. That's more than the president can say.

When are Democrats going to introduce a bill to raise the capital gains tax? Seems like all they do is bitch about tax rates without ever making an effort to raise them.

He paid his legal obligation, Rcade. If he was like Buffett, arguing for a higher rate while jumping through loopholes, then sure it's unfair. But he's advocating for what he's paying- seems fair to me.

THANK YOU, Joe.

"So if Romney pays 14% in taxes, and gives 99.9% of the rest of his income to charity, and lived on $30,000 a year, while Stewart pays a 35% rate but no donations, he's still justified in criticizing Romney?" Yep, why should anyone who isn't a Mormon want to reward anyone for giving money to the Mormon church? They unlawfully use that money to participate in politics and should lose their tax exempt status over it.

" But he's following the law, and giving millions away voluntarily." That's why the law needs changing.

"I'm looking at it as how much income someone keeps, not how much they pay in taxes."

Which is why your comments are nothing more than a lame attempt at changing the subject.

"When are Democrats going to introduce a bill to raise the capital gains tax? Seems like all they do is bitch about tax rates without ever making an effort to raise them."

This is true. That people like Romney pay so little in taxes has more to do with Obama than Romney.

When are Democrats going to introduce a bill to raise the capital gains tax? Seems like all they do is bitch about tax rates without ever making an effort to raise them.

#30 | Posted by JOE at 2012-01-25 11:59 AM

It was called the "American Jobs And Closing Tax Loopholes Act", it passed the House in the spring of 2010.

The House passed a bill on Friday that would end a tax break for executives of investment funds, leaving hedge funds, private equity firms and venture capitalists scrambling to ease the effects of the bill before it is taken up by the Senate next month.
The measure was part of a broader tax bill, passed by a vote of 215 to 204, that would extend benefits for unemployed people. It seeks to change the tax treatment of carried interest, which is the portion of a fund's investment gains taken by fund managers as compensation.

"When are Democrats going to introduce a bill to raise the capital gains tax? Seems like all they do is bitch about tax rates without ever making an effort to raise them." That's a fair point but Democrats did propose the Millionaire Sur Tax recently, it was shot down of course by Republicans.

This is true. That people like Romney pay so little in taxes has more to do with Obama than Romney.
#36 | Posted by Sully

Agreed. Romney is only an object lesson.

God forbid people give money directly to help people, without it paying middle-men paper-pushing bureaucrats first.

The millions Romney tithes his church are hardly going directly to people in need. They're funding a massive church which undoubtedly has plenty of middle men.

In my book, charity is often a poor substitute for the government social safety net. Republicans like charity because they want to pick and choose who they help. Democrats believe government is an effective vehicle for helping everyone who truly needs it.

"The loophole closing aspect of the bill was eliminated in the Senate after republicans threatened to filibuster the bill, eliminating the unemployment extension also in the bill. Republicans held millions of unemployed Americans hostage to protect Romney's tax rate."

Why did the drafters of the bill merge unemployment with tax reform to begin with? We going to pretend the outcome wasn't entirely predictable? They knew they would be dropping tax reform with the excuse of "we had to help the unemployed". It was all a dog and pony show.

Why did the drafters of the bill merge unemployment with tax reform to begin with? We going to pretend the outcome wasn't entirely predictable? They knew they would be dropping tax reform with the excuse of "we had to help the unemployed". It was all a dog and pony show.

#41 | Posted by Sully at 2012-01-25 12:24 PM

Not really. If they separated them the unemployment bill would not have passed because there were no provisions for 'paying for it'. The closing the tax loopholes part of the bill was there to show that the other part of the bill could be paid for.

I think Stewart's income is actually higher than Romeny's. Mitt Romney gave 41% of his income to charity. How much did Stewart give? Regardless of who's running for President, who's a more decent human being?

The millions Romney tithes his church are hardly going directly to people in need. They're funding a massive church which undoubtedly has plenty of middle men.

They are also buying land and building Malls.

Not to mention funding anti-civil rights movements like the stop prop * thing in CA.

A quick google reveals they also own an insurance company with 3 billino in assets.

The church's holdings include:
AgReserves Inc. - the largest producer of nuts in America (circa. 1997)[1]
Hawaii Reserves, Inc. - Miscellaneous church holdings in Hawaii. Along with the Polynesian Cultural Center (the leading paid visitor attraction in Hawaii[25]) and Brigham Young University-Hawaii, Hawaii Reserves generated revenue of $260 million for the Hawaii economy in 2005.[26]
Farmland Reserve Inc. - 228,000 acres in Nebraska,[27]; 51,600 acres in Osage County, Oklahoma[28]; and over 312,000 acres (1,260 km²) in Florida (dba Deseret Cattle and Citrus).[29]
Bonneville International Corporation - the 14th largest radio chain in the U.S.[1]
Deseret Morning News - a daily Utah newspaper, second-largest in the state of Utah.[30]
Beneficial Financial Group - An insurance and financial services company with assets of $3.1 billion.[31]

Some charity.

Has the fact that Rmoney pays much of his tithe through Bain stock rather than money from his bank account come to light yet?

Be Well.

"Mitt Romney gave 41% of his income to charity. How much did Stewart give? Regardless of who's running for President, who's a more decent human being?"

He can give all of his money to the Mormon Church but that won't make him any better of a person than Joh Stewart.

I think Stewart's income is actually higher than Romeny's. Mitt Romney gave 41% of his income to charity. How much did Stewart give? Regardless of who's running for President, who's a more decent human being?

#43 | POSTED BY SOHEIFOX AT 2012-01-25 12:29 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

No he didn't, you're taking Adamantbrain's OpEd at face value and using the same distorted talking point. It states that he paid 42% in taxes and charity.

I think Stewart's income is actually higher than Romeny's.

Are you insane?

Mitt Romney gave 41% of his income to charity.

No, he didn't.

How much did Stewart give?

What does that have to do with Stewart's point at all?

Be Well.

No he didn't, you're taking Adamantbrain's OpEd at face value and using the same distorted talking point. It states that he paid 42% in taxes and charity.

#46 | POSTED BY REAGAN58 AT 2012-01-25 12:36 PM | REPLY | FLAG

And how much do you believe Jon Stewart gave to charity? Everyone thinks Stewart's being so clever but he's not. He's making himself look like a pedantic ass and it is, in fact, hypocritical no matter how much the slavering mindless followers here wish to claim otherwise. If Stewart hates the income tax loopholes so much HE IS FREE TO NOT USE THEM.

It was called the "American Jobs And Closing Tax Loopholes Act", it passed the House in the spring of 2010.

That would not have raised the capital gains rate, which is what everyone is attacking Romney for.

"Everyone thinks Stewart's being so clever but he's not."

Admitting Jon Stewart's jokes go right over his head. Hint...get someone to explain them to you.

It really wouldn't be hard for Stewart to pay what is it, the 55% income tax the top earners are supposed to, but do you think he does? That is hypocritical by the classic logical definition. The fact that Romney is runnign for President and Stewart is not is utterly irrelevant; Stewart tries to paint himself as the friend of the 99%, but he's just another rich fuck getting richer off the backs of the poor.

And his fans cheer for it, swooning happily that someone is finally "assing the questions they want answers to". He's an entertainer, and he takes the same tax deductions everyone else does. He's part of the 1%, and he doesn't want his taxes to go up any more than Mitt does. He doesn't give a shit about you sheep and probably goes home to laugh about it while he does the Scrooge McDuck thing with his riches.

Admitting Jon Stewart's jokes go right over his head. Hint...get someone to explain them to you.

#50 | POSTED BY DANNI AT 2012-01-25 12:43 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Are you so stupid that you seriously think Stewart was telling a joke here? Stewart is often very funny, he doesn't have a one dimensional shtick like Colbert, but this is not being clever.

"And how much do you believe Jon Stewart gave to charity? Everyone thinks Stewart's being so clever but he's not. He's making himself look like a pedantic ass and it is, in fact, hypocritical no matter how much the slavering mindless followers here wish to claim otherwise."

The fact that you keep bringing up charity proves that you don't understand the issue and are therefore unqualified to say if Stewart is being hypocritical or not.

I think Stewart's income is actually higher than Romeny's.

Romney's net worth is from $190 to $250 million. He's one of the 3,000 richest people in the United States. Jon Stewart makes around $14 million a year.

"The fact that Romney is runnign for President and Stewart is not is utterly irrelevant; "

The fact that Romney is campaigning on continuing these types of tax favors and Stewart is against that kind of unfair playing field makes it relevant.

"Stewart tries to paint himself as the friend of the 99%, but he's just another rich fuck getting richer off the backs of the poor."

Bwahahahaha! Folks are choosing to pay for that tier of cable, and choosing to watch. He's hardly shuttering businesses or schlepping jobs overseas. If he can sell out a comedy arena, how is that "on the backs of the poor"...?

"He's part of the 1%, and he doesn't want his taxes to go up any more than Mitt does."

Strange...he seems to support folks who, if they had their way, would raise his taxes.

When are Democrats going to introduce a bill to raise the capital gains tax? Seems like all they do is bitch about tax rates without ever making an effort to raise them.

#30 | Posted by JOE at 2012-01-25 11:59 AM

Mitt Romney gave 41% of his income to charity.
#43 | Posted by soheifox

Absofuckinlootly not.

He gave $4.1 million to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and another $2.9 million to other recipients.

What he gave was not 41%, but 16.4%.

That's what you get for letting Vermin sell you a calculator.

SHOEIFOX -

Take it easy on ShitHeadFox folks, it's hard going through life drunk and stupid.

Good point. Why haven't we seen any election year bills? If everyone's so upset at how much Romney is making and paying in taxes, why isn't the party of the 99% (lol) doing anything about it?
#56 | POSTED BY LIVE_OR_DIE AT 2012-01-25 12:54 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Are'ya trying to reach the heights of stupidity routinely on display from the likes of Special Eddie and ShitHeadFox? Sort of like asking why the sun shines when it rises.

Go find out what it is and get back to us Dr. Douche.

Sarcasm. The point is, dumbshit, that I don't care what Colbert or Stewart makes or whether or they're running for orafice. I don't even give a shit what Danfuck or 726 makes. It's none of my damned business as long as it's legal.

You liberal twits that argue about the rate of taxation on income vs. capital gains are simply rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. We've had leftards and righttards running the country and the only thing that ever changes is how much more they spend and how the average guy gets fucked. So here's a new idea (you know, like Hope and Change...)

Income shouldn't be taxed.
Capital gains shouldn't be taxed.
Tax consumption and leave out people below the poverty line.
You don't want to pay taxes, live off the land. Don't consume.
You want to consume a lot - yachts, private jets, etc. - then pay more taxes.
Then require a balanced budget except in times of declared war or national emergency.

But 726 and Danfuck would never allow for such a thing because John Kerry couldn't move his yacht out of state to avoid taxes, 726 can't give my money to Solyndra, Danfuck can't provide kick backs on my nickle to his union pals and BruceBanner couldn't force fund the Chevy Volt.

"Tax consumption and leave out people below the poverty line."

Yeah, that'll be a real job creator, punish folks for buying things....brilliant.

When are Democrats going to introduce a bill to raise the capital gains tax?

They don't have to this year, they just need to let the Bush-Obama tax cuts sunset. It isn't a tax increase as it's just a reversion to the rates in place when the statute was enacted.

Bwahahahaha! Folks are choosing to pay for that tier of cable, and choosing to watch.

Kinda like Foxnews right Danfuck? You know, the 1%ers who you can't stand.
Or kinda like those big wigs over at Morgan Stanley, where people choose to put their money. Or British Petroleum, where people choose to buy gasoline.

Oops forgot.
Those 1%ers are assholes.
John Stewart and his 1%er crowd are ok.

"You want to consume a lot - yachts, private jets, etc. - then pay more taxes."

Lots of people have jobs building yachts, private jets, etc. We don't want to discourage the purchase of luxuries, we want to tax income so that the wealthy look for tax breaks to avoid paying the government, then we deisgn the tax breaks to be investments into DOMESTIC industry which creates jobs.

Romney's net worth is from $190 to $250 million. He's one of the 3,000 richest people in the United States. Jon Stewart makes around $14 million a year.

So Romney is really a .01%er.
Stewart is only a .1%er.

Thanks for clarifying. I didn't realize we were now splitting the 1%ers down into decimals. Did anyone notify OWS of this change? There's no mention of it on their website.

Admitting Jon Stewart's jokes go right over his head. Hint...get someone to explain them to you.

John Stewart makes jokes?
You mean like Al Franken? Or Rosie O'Donnell? Or Janine Garafalo?
Or Bill Maher? Or Barack Obama?

When are Democrats going to introduce a bill to raise the capital gains tax?

They don't have to this year, they just need to let the Bush-Obama tax cuts sunset. It isn't a tax increase as it's just a reversion to the rates in place when the statute was enacted.
Posted by taxman at 2012-01-25 01:27 PM

So the prop using Buffet's secretary does not mean the whiner in chief wants to raise capital gains to her tax rate? Let me guess, he wants to bring her rate down to that of the capital gains rate?

This fucking guy can do no wrong...

they just need to let the Bush-Obama tax cuts sunset

That wouldn't affect all capital gains, would it?

"
When are Democrats going to introduce a bill to raise the capital gains tax?

They don't have to this year, they just need to let the Bush-Obama tax cuts sunset."

But that won't raise capital gains to the same rate as regular income will it? I know you know taxes.

That wouldn't affect all capital gains, would it?

Yes, everything, including dividends, would go back to Clinton rates.

But that won't raise capital gains to the same rate as regular income will it?

No and it shouldn't. A corporation is taxed at the corporate level, and I, as well as many others, believe a shareholder should pay a lower rate for capital gains and dividends. What I have a problem with is hedge fund managers using carried interest to achieve lower tax rates when in reality the income they receive should be taxed at ordinary rates.

Are'ya trying to reach the heights of stupidity routinely on display from the likes of Special Eddie and ShitHeadFox? Sort of like asking why the sun shines when it rises.

#60 | Posted by Reagan58 at 2012-01-25 01:18 PM

They don't have to this year, they just need to let the Bush-Obama tax cuts sunset. It isn't a tax increase as it's just a reversion to the rates in place when the statute was enacted.

Posted by taxman at 2012-01-25 01:27 PM

I wonder what will be tied to them this time...

They don't have to this year, they just need to let the Bush-Obama tax cuts sunset. It isn't a tax increase as it's just a reversion to the rates in place when the statute was enacted.

#63 | Posted by taxman at 2012-01-25 01:27 PM |

It IS a tax increase.

By that logic since we at one time didn't have an income tax in this country if we were to make the tax rates zero we wouldn't be cutting taxes, we'd just be letting them sunset to their pre 16th Ammendment levels.

Gotta love the 3rd grade argument.

well he does it too......

Throw out the tax code and do what Simpson-Bowles suggested:

Eliminate all deductions save for a couple of generous ones targetted at the bottom and lower the rates to:

1-100k = 10%
100k+ = 23%

To that I would add a provision that no tax filer can deduct their tax liability to be less than $10.

With all of this talk about "paying their fair share" (which is a nice vague platititude) - it is truly unfair that 47% pay ZERO (or less) in federal income taxes.

"Oops forgot. Those 1%ers are assholes."

Your words.

it is truly unfair that 47% pay ZERO (or less) in federal income taxes.

Yeah, but without them paying zero, who'd vote for the Democrats?
They start with a base of 47% of their voters who pay zilch.
That way they only have to convince another 3.1% that white men are racist and they win every election.

"it is truly unfair that 47% pay ZERO (or less) in federal income taxes."

Well, why did that number spike and who authored the main reason?

And why concentrate on income taxes and not, say payroll taxes, which are a larger chunk of government revenue? Oh, right.....because the conclusions are exactly the opposite.

Your words.

"Sure. This is my website too - "

Then quote them. Don't barf a lie and then attack it; that's a classic strawman.

What's amazing is that Stewart earned his income--don't know about his corporation or S corp--but he paid aobut 35% in taxes on his income.

Of that he is investing--not sure on what--but he's earning capital gains on that investment money--paying another 15%.

Just like Romney.

BTW--how much does Stewart give to charity?

And another thing--

Would you good folks listen to yourselves?

Read what you are posting??

Obama is a grand success in class warfare.

It's all over this website.

Then quote them. Don't barf a lie and then attack it; that's a classic strawman.

I didn't quote them. I just used their 'word'.
Can't you fucking read?

BTW--how much does Stewart give to charity?
He does Comic Relief. Which he uses to bash Sarah Palin.
I am sure it's tax deductable though.

And besides, it is more than Biden's $376.12 annual contribution to all of the charities he supports.

Who cares what john stewart makes he's not running.
Mitt is a sociopath.

Who cares what john stewart makes

Steven Colbert. He thinks he's getting fucked by the network.

#88 | POSTED BY DR_DUDE2 AT 2012-01-25 04:19 PM | REPLY | FLAG:
Colbert's funny Stewert's funny. what the heck is funny worth. lol
Comedy central needs to add another infonewstainment show.

the %s are misleading. generally, the 15% comes into play based on unearned income. however, in order to have the assets to generate unearned income, you have to have made income (or your parents did) that has already been taxed at income rates once already. to the extent there are loopholes that exist to convert earned into non-earned income and escaping that first round, that should be looked at.

What if there was no social security cutoff? What if someone retires with a certain amount of money they don't receive ssi? The rich are just greedy.

#91 they take the money with a promise of future benefit. don't take the money in the first instance then and just raise taxes.

I didn't realize Jon Stewart was running for President. What a stupid premise for a thread.

"How in the world do you, Mitt Romney, justify making more in one day than the median American family makes in a year -- while paying the same tax rate as the guy who scans shoes at the airport?"

that was his quote. passive income generally come from assets you bought with after tax dollars. so, he's probably paying 15% on income derived on assets he's acquired with money he paid 30% on already. 2nd bite at the apple at this point. if you raise cap gains rate, then it may be that people will hord the money they've already paid tax on rather than reinvest in a capital asset (like factories, buildings, new business, etc) careful what you wish for.

I don't get the whole "Jon Stewart isn't running for president so it doesn't matter" line. He's commenting daily, to a huge audience, on the election. That falls under politics. If he's going to play the game, then he is just as fair a shot as Willard.

#95 - No. look at fox "news" etc... Comedians have long been agents delivering uncomfortable truths. If you want to start a class war, include everyone included in "He's commenting daily, to a huge audience, on the election." Either way, it would be pointless.

Are we aware that there are wealthy people in the country? Yes. Now let's talk about one specifically - Big Willie Rmoney. He's the one we may be voting for.

I just don't see how delving into the nitty gritty on Stewart is relevant unless it's an attempt to threaten Stewart.

"passive income generally come from assets you bought with after tax dollars."

Really? Link, please, specific to Mr. Romney.

rcade wrote,

"Democrats believe government is an effective vehicle for helping everyone who truly needs it."

Actually democrats don't really help anyone. They steal 90% of what the government gets in tax revenue and give it to their union thugs and cronies. If any is left then a few crumbs fall from the table to the dogs!

NAW AHH

NO WAY.

liberals would NEVER bitch about someone making money when they are rich bastards..

NO WAY....

well unless your name is kerry or any athelete who is an obama supporter or ANY ACTOR working at all..

nnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooo

DRAT!!

meant to say
any actor who gets paid MILLIONS for about six weeks to three months work....

Stewart ..........He's operating on the assumption that if you don't give all your money to government alone, your income is unjustified.

#7 | Posted by adammm at 2012-01-25 11:06 AM | Reply | Flag:

Yup, that's exactly what he is saying. Sure.

Thank you for voluntarily moving yourself to the irrelevant category on here.

Actually democrats don't really help anyone. They steal 90% of what the government gets in tax revenue and give it to their union thugs and cronies. If any is left then a few crumbs fall from the table to the dogs!

#98 | Posted by dnmxt at 2012-01-26 04:01 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag:

It must really sting to know that that red states are welfare states that steal from the blue states.

Romeny's 15% is all he CAN pay because, after all, it's the law, according to Willard.

This is the same man who says the poor should have to pay taxes, LAWS be damned!

Yeah, that'll be a real job creator, punish folks for buying things....brilliant.

Breaking news my chocolate flower, virtually every state (if not every one) does this today. Even your beloved Florida.

unfortunately, this will be lost on most as it isn't subject to any good sound bites.

I wonder if Stewart forgot he had $3 million in a Swiss bank account, like Rmoney did?

That forgotten foreign money,Somoco, should be a great Newtbite tonight.

Actually Obama himself railed against those millionaires and billionaires (those earning 200K single or 250K married) who need to pay their 'fair share'.

He said it a few times NO?

Sooooo I demand we see the tax return of Buffets secretary. She is a fat cat who needs to pay MORE taxes....as DEMANDED by Obama!!!

#108. a point that he'll no doubt exploit. don't get me wrong, I'm not a Romney supporter. but i think it's disingenuous to state that capital gains and income rates should be the same. capital assets usually have already been taxed once, and you'd really need a much more detailed analysis to see how much a person has been taxed on the deal.

the more the repubs whine at each other about their successes, the more fucked we will be. Obama is gonna kick ass in the upcoming election.