Quote:

---

Under Paul Ryan's plan, Mitt Romney wouldn't pay any taxes for the next ten years -- or any of the years after that. Now, do I know that that's true. Yes, I'm certain.

Well, maybe not quite nothing. In 2010 -- the only year we have seen a full return from him -- Romney would have paid an effective tax rate of around 0.82 percent under the Ryan plan, rather than the 13.9 percent he actually did. How would someone with more than $21 million in taxable income pay so little? Well, the vast majority of Romney's income came from capital gains, interest, and dividends. And Ryan wants to eliminate all taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends.

Romney, of course, criticized this idea when Newt Gingrich proposed it back in January by pointing out that zeroing out taxes on savings and investment would mean zeroing out his own taxes.

Almost. Romney did earn $593,996 in author and speaking fees in 2010 that would still be taxed under the Ryan plan. Just not much. Ryan would cut the top marginal tax rate from 35 to 25 percent and get rid of the Alternative Minimum Tax -- saving Romney another $292,389 or so on his 2010 tax bill. Now, Romney would still owe self-employment taxes on his author and speaking fees, but that only amounts to $29,151. Add it all up, and Romney would have paid $177,650 out of a taxable income of $21,661,344, for a cool effective rate of 0.82 percent.

But what about corporate taxes? Aren't they a double tax on savings and investment, so Romney's "real" rate is higher than his headline rate? No. As Jared Bernstein of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has pointed out, Romney has structured his investments as "pass-throughs" that avoid corporate tax. In other words, the 0.82 percent tax rate is really a 0.82 percent tax rate.

It might seem impossible to fund the government when the super-rich pay no taxes. That is accurate. Ryan would actually raise taxes on the bottom 30 percent of earners, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, but that hardly fills the revenue hole he would create. The solution? All but eliminate all government outside of Social Security and defense -- a point my colleague Derek Thompson has made in incredible chart form.

Maybe Harry Reid's mysterious source that Romney didn't pay taxes for a decade was really a time-traveler from the future. If Romney wins, it could very well be true.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
But what about the ppl whose taxes would increase???

Oh, that's right- you don't care about those other ppl. You only care about the rich.

See what I mean Chris? Burning to death .... maybe not good enough.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
See what I mean Chris? Burning to death .... maybe not good enough.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Think how much worse global warming would be if every callous, ignorant dope like Rappy suddenly burned to death...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Today of all days you post a demented death wish for someone?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
C'mon, Chris, you wouldn't really wish someone's death, makes me feel bad for YOU. We're buddhists, dammit, even joking about such a thing... Is he really getting to you that much?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
The shell game being played, of course, isn't about paying taxes. The rich already pay FAR more than their fair share. It's about how much the govt is SPENDING. No one, save for Romney and Ryan, seem to want to address THAT issue. And for that, they're being vilified , by the Left ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Niki2:
C'mon, Chris, you wouldn't really wish someone's death, makes me feel bad for YOU. We're buddhists, dammit, even joking about such a thing... Is he really getting to you that much?

---

I WAS SAYING WE SHOULD PITY RAPPY, NOT WISH HIM TO DIE!!!

I'm a scapegoat here! Call my attorney!!! Here comes a slander suit!

(wait, if it's in print, it's liable, so is this considered print, or electronic speech....????)

Chrisisall, wearing a frilly Mal thing on his head, and ready to shoot unarmed, full-body armoured lawyers

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
The shell game being played, of course, isn't about paying taxes. The rich already pay FAR more than their fair share. It's about how much the govt is SPENDING. No one, save for Romney and Ryan, seem to want to address THAT issue. And for that, they're being vilified , by the Left ?

---

Sending has continued to decrease each year under Obama.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Posting a 4 1/2 hour video on Creationist is relevant..how ?

---

Quote:

---

You want to call it an analogy, but you couldn't be more wrong if you tried. IMO, calling someone ( or comparing them ) to a Creationist is pretty much on par w/ calling them a Marxist,in terms the level of the insult.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
See what I mean Chris? Burning to death .... maybe not good enough.

---

Quote:

---

Biden's 'chains' comment unleashes controversy
(AFP) – 3 hours ago

WASHINGTON — US Vice President Joe Biden set off a campaign firestorm Tuesday by saying in the once slave-owning state of Virginia that Mitt Romney's banking policies would "put y'all back in chains."

The Romney campaign accused President Barack Obama's camp of stooping to new lows and of using the tactics of "demonization" as the president's camp snapped back, accusing Republicans of "hypocritical" outrage.
"Look at their budget and what they're proposing," Biden told the crowd in Danville, Virginia.

"In the first hundred days (Romney's) going to let the big banks once again write their own rules, unchain Wall Street," Biden said.

"They're going to put y'all back in chains."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
The shell game being played, of course, isn't about paying taxes. The rich already pay FAR more than their fair share. It's about how much the govt is SPENDING. No one, save for Romney and Ryan, seem to want to address THAT issue. And for that, they're being vilified , by the Left ?

---

Sending has continued to decrease each year under Obama.

---

( False)
2013 United States federal budget - $3.8 trillion (submitted 2012 by President Obama)[104]
2012 United States federal budget - $3.7 trillion (submitted 2011 by President Obama)
2011 United States federal budget - $3.8 trillion (submitted 2010 by President Obama)
2010 United States federal budget - $3.6 trillion (submitted 2009 by President Obama)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget#Total_outlay
s_in_recent_budget_submissions

Quote:

---

Increasing taxes on those who can afford to pay more will help bring down the debt even more.

---

( False )

We could tax the " rich " at 100% and it wouldn't pay for 6 months of operating the Federal Govt.

Quote:

---

Ryan's plan cuts taxes for those who don't need a tax cut and cuts spending. Plus does not balance the budget for something like 40 years.

---

They don't NEED a tax cut ? Sorry, but I beg to differ. Who are YOU to say they need a tax cut or not ? The tax burden of the top 1%, the ACTUAL amount of revenue paid via income taxes has nearly DOUBLED, while almost 1/2 of all working Americans pay 0 in Federal income.

Yep, that's right. Even AFTER all these mythical, fairy tale loop holes and tax shelters the " RICH " allegedly stash all their money and hide from the Fed govt, they STILL are paying far more than their " fair share ".

From '09...

The top 10 percent of income earners paid 71 percent of all federal income taxes in 2009 though they earned 43 percent of all income. The bottom 50 percent paid 2 percent of income taxes but earned 13 percent of total income. About half of tax filers paid no federal income tax at all.

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/top10-percent-income-earners

And from the CBO ..

The top 20 percent of earners — the top quintile — bore 67.9 percent of the federal tax burden in 2009. The middle quintile paid 9.4 percent, while the lowest paid .03 percent of the federal tax burden.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/11/cbo-top-earners-pay-68-percent-of-ta
x-burden/#ixzz23YwoyL6O

The problem ISN'T too little taxing of " the rich ", it's too damn much spending by the Govt!

Thus, shell game. One which has you completely bamboozled.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
See what I mean Chris? Burning to death .... maybe not good enough.

---

The sheer hypocrisy of the Left. Here, Sig is proposing that, because of my views, burning me to death MAY not be good enough.

Remember the phony, astro turfed outrage over Sarah Palin's innocent, facebook page, where she identified campaign DISTRICTS ( no one's face, no names, just places on a map ) ?

" OMG! The wack-o TEA party is advocating SHOOTING of candidates!!! "

While that never happened, and the Left KNOWS it, we have THIS gem, coming from none other than Siggy, on this very board.

Fall in line, though. Because the Left will say absolutely ANYTHING they want, to demonize and attack those on the Right.


Joe Biden - They're going to put y'all back in chains

Quote:

---

Biden's 'chains' comment unleashes controversy
(AFP) – 3 hours ago

WASHINGTON — US Vice President Joe Biden set off a campaign firestorm Tuesday by saying in the once slave-owning state of Virginia that Mitt Romney's banking policies would "put y'all back in chains."

The Romney campaign accused President Barack Obama's camp of stooping to new lows and of using the tactics of "demonization" as the president's camp snapped back, accusing Republicans of "hypocritical" outrage.
"Look at their budget and what they're proposing," Biden told the crowd in Danville, Virginia.

"In the first hundred days (Romney's) going to let the big banks once again write their own rules, unchain Wall Street," Biden said.

"They're going to put y'all back in chains."

---

The crowd Biden was speaking to ? Was largely black.

He knew what he was saying, and the implication of suggesting that the GOP wants to put ANYONE back in chains, and how it would be received by those in the audience.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Huh. So you're saying that the GOP knows exactly what it's saying when it refers to black people wanting to stay "on the plantation"?

I always figured they knew what they were saying, but it's nice of you to admit it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Say what?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
( False)
2013 United States federal budget - $3.8 trillion (submitted 2012 by President Obama)[104]
2012 United States federal budget - $3.7 trillion (submitted 2011 by President Obama)
2011 United States federal budget - $3.8 trillion (submitted 2010 by President Obama)
2010 United States federal budget - $3.6 trillion (submitted 2009 by President Obama)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget#Total_outlay
s_in_recent_budget_submissions]

Holy crap, you can cite a source.

Your right, I was incorrect.

What I was thinking of was that since 2011 the deficit has gone down each year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_United_States_federal_budget
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_federal_budget
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_United_States_federal_budget

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
( False )

We could tax the " rich " at 100% and it wouldn't pay for 6 months of operating the Federal Govt.

---

Most likely true, if we drop all other taxes. Think is now is asking or thinking or rates even close to that.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:They don't NEED a tax cut ? Sorry, but I beg to differ. Who are YOU to say they need a tax cut or not ? The tax burden of the top 1%, the ACTUAL amount of revenue paid via income taxes has nearly DOUBLED, while almost 1/2 of all working Americans pay 0 in Federal income.

---

That's right, the rich DO NOT NEED TAX CUTS. Who I'm I to say it, a voter. Kinda how democracy works.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:Yep, that's right. Even AFTER all these mythical, fairy tale loop holes and tax shelters the " RICH " allegedly stash all their money and hide from the Fed govt, they STILL are paying far more than their " fair share ".

From '09...

The top 10 percent of income earners paid 71 percent of all federal income taxes in 2009 though they earned 43 percent of all income. The bottom 50 percent paid 2 percent of income taxes but earned 13 percent of total income. About half of tax filers paid no federal income tax at all.

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/top10-percent-income-earners

And from the CBO ..

The top 20 percent of earners — the top quintile — bore 67.9 percent of the federal tax burden in 2009. The middle quintile paid 9.4 percent, while the lowest paid .03 percent of the federal tax burden.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/11/cbo-top-earners-pay-68-percent-of-ta
x-burden/#ixzz23YwoyL6O

The problem ISN'T too little taxing of " the rich ", it's too damn much spending by the Govt!

Thus, shell game. One which has you completely bamboozled.

---

No they are not paying there fair share. How much of the wealth in this country does the 1% have, or make in one year? How much can they afford? If nothing else capital gains should be taxed as normal income if not more. People making money off of investments are not producing anything, nor are they working for their money. Right now the system is set up to make it easier for the rich to get richer. It should be the opposite.

Government spending right now is a huge % of GDP. If we cut it it will also mean we lower our GDP, which will slow the economy. That is fucking ECON 101.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Chrissy - I didn't make the movie " Runaway Slave ". You might want to look into that, son.

---

Race card Rappy.
And I even bothered defending you recently.
Here's a quote from Buffy that seems to fit,
"I hope you dance till you burn."


Chrisisall, wearing a frilly Mal thing on his head, and ready to shoot unarmed, full-body armoured little bits

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:

People making money off of investments are not producing anything, nor are they working for their money. Right now the system is set up to make it easier for the rich to get richer.

---

Quote:

---

The former director of the Office of Management and Budget for the Reagan administration, David Stockman, blasts Paul Ryan's budget plan in a New York Times op-ed.
Stockman calls the budget an "empty conservative sermon" and "fairy tale" and says it will "do nothing to reverse the nation's economic decline and arrest its fiscal collapse."
Stockman's main complaint about the Ryan budget, which reflects broader frustration with today's Republican party, is that it preserves massive and unnecessary spending on Defense and other programs while screwing people who actually need help by cutting food stamps, Medicaid, and other poverty-mitigation efforts.
Stockman also rails against the new "Wall Street-coddling" bailout Republicans like Ryan, who stand by and let the Federal Reserve fix interest rates, encourage speculators, crush savers, encourage overconsumption, and punish thrift.
Specifically, Stockman observes, Ryan's "phony" budget plan:
Maintains Defense spending that is nearly twice the $400 billion (adjusted for today's dollars) that General Eisenhower spent in the 1960s
Shreds the safety net provided by $100 billion in food stamps and $300 billion in Medicaid
Does not cut one dime from Medicare or Social Security for another decade
Includes no serious plan to create jobs
Radically cuts taxes on the richest Americans while eliminating tax breaks that mostly help the middle class
Fails to even consider a "value-added sales tax," which is the only way the country can begin to climb out of its budget hole
In short, Stockman says, Ryan's plan is "devoid of credible math or hard policy choices."
Harsh words coming from a fellow Republican.
But then, today's Republican party doesn't look much like it did in Stockman and Reagan's day.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Jong - follow along, if you can. It's quite clear in the thread.

---

Quote:

---

While Mitt Romney would reportedly pay less than one percent of his income in taxes under Paul Ryan's previous tax plan, most Americans making less than $200,000 would see a tax hike under the budget of Ryan proposed before his selection to be Romney's running mate.

Most of Romney's income is comprised of interest income, capital gains and dividends, which are not taxed under the plan Ryan first introduced in 2010.

Ryan proposed two tax rates, 10 and 25 percent, instead of the current six.

The House Republican budget for the 2013 fiscal year, passed by the House in June, would raise taxes by $1,358 for jointly-filing households earning between $50,000 and $100,000, assuming the additional income is taxed at a 10 percent rate, according to a report published earlier this summer by the Joint Economic Committee of Congress.

Households with incomes between $100,000 and $200,000 would see their taxes increase by $2,681, the Joint Economic Committee said.

Rep. Ryan's office did not return a request for comment.

The committee reported Ryan's budget plan would give the richest Americans -- those who make over $1 million -- a tax break of about $300,000.

According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, Ryan's budget plan would make the Bush tax breaks permanent, including the extra tax cuts on taxable household income above $250,000, and would cut the top tax rate paid by the wealthiest Americans and the corporate income tax rate by nearly 30 percent.

Americans for Tax Fairness Action, a left-leaning political group, criticized Ryan for giving tax breaks to millionaires and ending the Medicare guarantee.

"The bottom line is that our tax system is rigged in favor of the wealthy and big corporations who play by their own set of rules," said Sean Crowley, communications director for Americans for Tax Fairness Action. "The tax system is not working for most Americans. The richest already get the biggest tax breaks. It's not fair and we need to radically overhaul our tax system."

---