how did romney get away with paying no income tax?

it must be amateur hour at the white house too.

they stonewalled documents requests from courts not just the press or the opposition.
 
Quote from Free Thinker:

its kind of funny watching the righties here and in the media making all kinds of excuses why no more information need be released after four years of rightwing mouthpieces scouring every possible avenue looking for something that would make obamas birth certificate false even after every expert has testified that it is real.
i guess the right wing mind is just different.

There is no excuse making. He simply doesn't have to show anymore than he has.
What the radical left is trying to do is say a guy is guilty of distributing child porn just because a guy has a computer. Someone is guilty of hit and run because they drive a car. Guilty of murder just cause you own a weapon. It's absurd!
The reality is you people just want to hit the rich guy for being rich. That's weak as hell, especially considering there are so many other relevant issues to hit him with.
 
Quote from CaptainObvious:

There is no excuse making. He simply doesn't have to show anymore than he has.
What the radical left is trying to do is say a guy is guilty of distributing child porn just because a guy has a computer. Someone is guilty of hit and run because they drive a car. Guilty of muder just cause you own a weapon. It's absurd!
The reality is you people just want to hit the rich guy for being rich. That's weak as hell, especially considering there are so many other relevant issues to hit him with.
We're not hitting him merely because he's rich, all of our presidents are comparatively rich. We're hitting him because he's unethically rich (legality does not change that), and because he does not represent the common man, and his policies appear intentionally designed to hurt the common man.
 
Quote from CaptainObvious:

There is no excuse making. He simply doesn't have to show anymore than he has.

you are right he doesnt but its the right of thinking people to continue to ask him what he is hiding. you have to be pretty slow upstairs not to understand why he is doing this after being backed into a corner.
 
Quote from Ricter:

We're not hitting him merely because he's rich, all of our presidents are comparatively rich. We're hitting him because he's unethically rich (legality does not change that), and because he does not represent the common man, and his policies appear intentionally designed to hurt the common man.

unethically rich?
wtf does that mean in this context.

is Buffet unethical, GE, geithner?

tax payers have every ethical right to use to claim deductions or exclusions - they are not supposed to lie or cheat... like perhaps some in the administration... but it is ethical to minimize taxes.

its why I argue we should drop personal income tax and go to some other method to raise revenues such as tarrifs.
 
Quote from jem:

...its why I argue we should drop personal income tax and go to some other method to raise revenues such as tarrifs.
(Clearly you don't understand international trade), but the main thing is that you acknowledge that that which is legal may nevertheless be unethical--in your example, taxation.
 
Quote from Ricter:

(Clearly you don't understand international trade), but the main thing is that you acknowledge that that which is legal may nevertheless be unethical, in your example, taxation.

I thoroughly understand trade.

When you are a net exporter you may wish to drop barriers to get your people working as much as you can.
When you are a net importer you may wish to put them up to protect jobs and industries.

The idea that we all gain by free trade is an antiquated utopian idea... it does not work when other countries have their own trade barriers and manipulate currency.

Its also funny idea to think otherwise because america became america by protecting its north eastern industries...
 
Quote from Ricter:

We're not hitting him merely because he's rich, all of our presidents are comparatively rich. We're hitting him because he's unethically rich (legality does not change that), and because he does not represent the common man, and his policies appear intentionally designed to hurt the common man.

Com'on man, unethically rich? Did he make his money running guns and dope?
No, he is not a common man. So what! Common men don't run for president and they never have.
Will his policies hurt the common man? Probably! So hit him on those policies. Not that Obama's policies are any better, but at least it's an argument with some substance.
 
Quote from Ricter:

Actually, those would be "illegally".

so what is unethical?
and who is more unethical.

Romney or buffet
Romney or Geithner
Romney or Obama 36 staffers who owe taxes
 
Back
Top