... Warren Buffett's secretary.
10 years ago, congress and the president looked at the fact that US corporations pay up to 35% of their earnings in taxes (currently, that rate is the world's highest corporate tax rate)...
... then, when what was left after the corporate tax was paid to a guy like Romney, his tax rate on the dividend was as high as 35% as well.
This is called "double taxation".
By lowering the dividend tax to 15% for Romney (and drawing the anger of liberals like Obama), the total take on those earnings were lowered from a max of 70% down to a max of 50%.
Warren Buffett's secretary receives her income as "payroll", which is DEDUCTED by the corporation that pays her. Thus, her 20% tax is the total that is paid by she and her employer... 40% as much as Romney and HIS corporation pay.
If Mr. Obama succeeds with his "buffett rule" tax increase, then Romney and HIS corporation will see their combined tax raised from a max of 50% to a max of 65%... more that 3 TIMES what Buffett's secretary and HER corporation are paying.
Bottom Line: the "rate" isn't the issue... the issue is "double taxation".
Finally, I would also add that Mr. Romney, at one point in his life, had to "make" the money he now invests. In those days, the top rate on "earned income" was about 39%...
... and I can assure you that a man that successful was paying that rate.
Here's the problem: Barely 5% of American voters are ever AWARE of what I'm telling you in this post today. If you are concerned about that, I URGE YOU TO REPLICATE THIS POST AND POST IT ON AS MANY BOARDS AS YOU CAN.
If you don't, I can assure you that more voters will respond to Obama's "are you in" sound bite on Yahoo Message Boards than they will respond to the reality of double taxation and Obama's desire to hammer away at those who provide capital to jobs-producing, american businesses.
The only salvation for American capitalism is grass roots efforts among those who understand that socialism doesn't work.
Muddled thinking? I guess you forgot that we have had at least 3 classes, maybe more if you count degrees. So two classes is a come down from what we have enjoyed in this country for years. I want multiple at least 3, not 2 or 1. You want two, upper and lower.
My thought processes are fine, your's are bumping into republican orthodoxy. You really do not know why we have a deficit? One of the main reasons is and it should be expected, that employment is down, business is down. Now sir, I think you can understand that tax collections are down because of the Hoover, excuse me Bush depression. Government expenditures always go up in a recession because of fixed costs and transfer payments that increase. Also, the government does do programs to help stimulate the economy. I see nothing abnormal with that scenario, and in fact that is what happens in every recession. What does NOT happen is that the government cuts expenditures into the teeth of a recession/depression. That is the ultimate stupidity. Take a look at Europe if you want to see that in action.
I see that you could not defend the Republican (Bush/Cheney) policies. That sir includes all the so called fiscal conservatives now masquerading as republicans. It is a real laugh to watch these guys that caused the problem piously give the great unwashed the solution. Hey lets throw the majority of the country under the bus while the upper class gets tax cuts. Wow that sounds like a good idea. Problem is there are more VOTERS on the outs than in the money. Hmm how will that work out?
The only thing muddled is your view of the political world. I never said I liked Obama, in fact I said I did not vote for him the first time around! I also said that this time will be different, because the talking points and republican narrative do NOT make one bit of sense. Unfortunately I studied economics and the republican math does not balance. Now, we will never be Greece or Europe for that matter. As long as we maintain sovereignty and control our destiny, we will be fine. What I am saying is a direct quote from Lord Keynes (if you know who that is) IN THE LONG RUN WE ARE ALL DEAD! All this mealy mouthed talk of debt means little. you notice that Japan has high debt, we have debt no where near most countries. What we need is employment and since the dollar is lower, and transportation costs are higher we are getting manufacturing back. I am getting tired of speaking with you.
Some pretty nice generalities. How about some bullet points to help with specifics:
• Doubling of gasoline prices
• No drilling for gas or oil on public lands
• Keystone pipeline
• Free contraceptives irrespective one’s financial worth or religious beliefs
• Out of control spending
• Eric Holder
• Suing states that are trying to impede illegal immigration
• Cost of Michelle’s and Obama’s vacations
Finish discussing that list and I’ll post some more talking bullets.
A brief history:
Reagan's "it morning in america"
cost this country plenty
and was the beginning of
our present problems.
Clinton brought us close to
a balanced budget,but the
Rep. got in the way.
Bush Oh god! Did he really
screwed things up big time. Wars without putting it on
Obama Trying his best to clean
up the mess the Rep. have
made of this country.
If people have any brains at
all that other guy won't have
a chance against OBama.
Your post: <<I suppose even the blind cannot see. If you want a country with two classes, that is what the policies of Republicans will give you>>
My Post: <<Give us a history lessen. List some countries where there are (or were) only one class of people. The former Soviet Union?>>
Your post: <<You really can not read. No one wants one class.>>
Mike, your thinking is so muddled. First you’re being critical of the Republicans because they will give us two classes. Then you post that no one wants just one class. OK. You don’t want one class. You don’t want two classes. How many classes do you wish to have?
Your post: << I just cannot comprehend why anyone advocates doing the same thing over. That is the ultimate definition of stupidity, or insanity as Einstein said. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome!>>
Bush’s policies were leading the country to bankruptcy, i.e. fighting two wars and spending far more money then we had. So what does Obama, the purveyor of change, do? He makes Bush look like a piker. He spends even more money that we don’t have and establishes the largest debt in the whole history of the country. It doubtful that the country will ever be able to pay it down. Social Security and Medicare are projected to go broke. And you want to re-elect Obama so that we continue the same policies that got us into this mess?????
I question whether you are 49 years old. Your thought process is more like a school kid’s.
You really can not read. No one wants one class. I want a vibrant middle class, featuring upwardly mobile citizens. And LESSEN.... lessen is what you get with Republicans, but a lesson is what Republicans will get at election time.
I understand why you do not want to defend the depression Bush's policies caused. There is no defense for them. Which is the reason we do NOT want to go back to that mindset. Even you might understand that, when you get through changing what I say to meet your stilted view of our country. I just cannot comprehend why anyone advocates doing the same thing over. That is the ultimate definition of stupidity, or insanity as Einstein said. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome!
Oy Vey! You’re thinking is so warped that even I can’t help you. Just a couple of points:
<< If you want a country with two classes, that is what the policies of Republicans will give you.>>
Give us a history lessen. List some countries where there are (or were) only one class of people. The former Soviet Union? Maybe you can evaluate the USA beginning in 1787 and then moving forward. Take us to an era that we should emulate. Thank God for different classes. It gives us (well, at least some of us) inventive to work a little harder so that we can advance to a higher level
<< I say that is a direct consequence of W's policies. Defend them defend his and the republican policies that caused problem if your dare!>>
Obama ran on change. He had complete control in both houses for two years. With that control, did he repeal and change those dastardly Bush policies? I think that he used his time running around the country saying “Bush did” or used his time trying to bankrupt the country with Obamacare and the stimulus.
Your recollection is the typical Republican drivel. W was a spender and borrower and set the stage for the problems. I suppose Obama is responsible for all the numb nut policies and wars on a credit card. Come on guy, your recollection is selective.
I suppose even the blind cannot see. If you want a country with two classes, that is what the policies of Republicans will give you. I am sure that is what you advocate as your talking points are being disseminated at FOX. As far a doubling down , cutting top rates, corporate rates, cutting social programs, loose regulation. Does that sound familiar?
Income disparity, are your really arguing against statistics for the last 10 years? Of course someone makes more than someone else. I am not arguing for everyone to make the same you idiot. What I am saying is the middle class wages have NOT increased and earnings at the top have significantly. While arguments for lower overall rates will only benefit the top.
Sure sure, illogical uh huh. Here is some logic for you. When the budget plans are exposed and the populace sees what is in store, the Republican candidate will be defeated. That is a political reality. The only hope Republicans have is to hope that the hatred of Obama is enough to make people vote against their interest.
I am not a democrat. I am not a republican. I consider myself an independent. I just do not want the political system turned over to banks and CEO's. I am not interested in legislated fairness, just a level playing field. I have watched as bankers have cheated their customers, and companies business plans are to bait and switch and then the bankruptcy code has changed slanted to creditors. I say the lender has as much liability for making bad loans as the borrower. I say the downturn was caused by unbridled greed and fraud. I say that is a direct consequence of W's policies. Defend them defend his and the republican policies that caused problem if your dare!
<<Hey, bankrupt the country? What a line of BS. You know or should know that the economy was in free fall when he got in office!>>
My recollection on this matter is that Obama created the largest debt in the entire history of this country via his stimulus package. You have no concerns about the size of the debt that has been created on Obama’s watch???? (Oh I see. He had to bankrupt this country in order to avoided bankrupting this country.)
<<Well a depression started before on REPUBLICANS watch, with republican policies, which by the way Romney wants to double down on!>>
Educate us all. From Romney’s web site or his speeches or any other reliable source, gives us a link were Romney wants to “double down”. In the alternative, just tell us that you really didn’t know what you were talking about.
<<Last point. Income disparity! Does it exist? Statistics show it does, and it at the feet of the politicians.>>
What is income disparity? Is it “Sure, I’m making a fair wage, but someone is making more.” Never mind that in the entire history of this country someone always makes more. They set a bar or goal that many of us attempt to achieve. Why would that bother you?
<<No tax policy is slanted toward the rich, look at the data, it does not lie.>>
The top 5% of the wage earners pay about 60% of the federal income tax. The bottom 50% pay about 2% of the federal income tax, and you want to soak the wealthy even more??? The Democrats, the party of fairness, think that it is fair that 47% of Americans pay no federal income tax. You guys are illogical.
Hey, bankrupt the country? What a line of BS. You know or should know that the economy was in free fall when he got in office! I know republicans have a short memory, but think back! Now, I seem to remember the excuse for the recession in Bush's first term was it started before. Well a depression started before on REPUBLICANS watch, with republican policies, which by the way Romney wants to double down on!
The policies by Barney Frank, seems like everyone of the politicians were at the alter of housing. Yes Democrats were too. But if you are not too blinded, look at what the ruling party advocated!
Last point. Income disparity! Does it exist? Statistics show it does, and it at the feet of the politicians. They have been bought and paid for, BOTH parties. We already have class warfare, did you know that? Yes the middle class has already lost that war, now it is whether the majority of the population is in servitude and competing directly with labor from china and india or vietnam or you name it. No tax policy is slanted toward the rich, look at the data, it does not lie. So get off that line of inquiry. It holds no water. And stripping away? Really, it is not jealousy from me. I just know our society works better when everyone has a shot at the ring, and if we want to look at counties with two classes, you will see turmoil. My view is that everyone benefits when our citizens make good wages, as compared to driving wages down to where we are equal to developing countries. Obviously, government policies have speeded the loss of jobs and the ruling heads wonder why as the sip cocktails at the country club. Hey it is not near, but continued inequity will cause serious problems.