Romney on Obama Supporters

[Hozzie]

I am not a huge Romney fan even though I will vote for him. This made me like him a little better. I am sure he wishes it didn't get out, but it's the truth.

[Links2k]

Does that 48% include the elderly and the people with crappy jobs that pay less than $20k per year?

I'm certain that it does. It doesn't matter right? They should have worked harder to ensure that they earned the middle class income of $250,000.

[Hozzie]

Sorry. but because I make decent money and can "afford it" (as those that don't pay anything typically say) doesn't mean almost half of the wage earners should pay zero. I am not saying they have to pay 30%, but yes, they should pay something. Life's not fair. You reap what you sow. I may have had it easier than most, but I also work my butt off and I am tired of being the bad guy when I pay what I consider to be more than my fair share. They can pay "A" share. Zero is not contributing, it is taking. We should all contribute, even if we only make $100.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Hozzie

[Links2k]

Sorry. but because I make decent money and can "afford it" (as those that don't pay anything typically say) doesn't mean almost half of the wage earners should pay zero. I am not saying they have to pay 30%, but yes, they should pay something. Life's not fair. You reap what you sow. I may have had it easier than most, but I also work my butt off and I am tired of being the bad guy when I pay what I consider to be more than my fair share. They can pay "A" share. Zero is not contributing, it is taking. We should all contribute, even if we only make $100.

Wow, are you guilt tripping our something? I was not talking specifically about you. I simply wanted to point out that I understand why the elderly and working poor pay little or no taxes and that they are included in those numbers.

I do quite well also, but I'm not going to break my arm patting myself on the back.

[Hozzie]

Wow, are you guilt tripping our something? I was not talking specifically about you. I simply wanted to point out that I understand why the elderly and working poor pay little or no taxes and that they are included in those numbers.

I do quite well also, but I'm not going to break my arm patting myself on the back.

Take it as what you want, I wasn't trying to pat myself on the back. All I am saying is I believe everyone, including the elderly and poor should pay something.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Hozzie

[Links2k]

Take it was what you want, I wasn't trying to pat myself on the back. All I am saying is I believe everyone, including the elderly and poor should pay something.

Even if they have worked their entire lives and already paid "something"?

[Guest Razz]

Does anybody else see the irony in conservatives bickering about how little someone else is paying in taxes?

Politics have taken a nasty, NASTY turn in this country and I know you guys don't want to hear it but you feed the beast every chance you get. When the crap hits the fan, know that you played a part.

[Hozzie]

Even if they have worked their entire lives and already paid "something"?

Yes. Life is not a free ride although too many try that route and get away with it. As long as you are using services (which everyone does) then you should pay something up until the time you die. It's not the feel good answer, but it's the fiscally responsible answer.

Oh yeah, and if you have been lucky enough to do well in life, the government thinks you should have to give 50% of your hard earned money to them, even if that means you have to sell your families property to pay it. So when should someone who has paid in their whole life and paid more than something "paid enough". Surely just because you have money doesn't mean that we should treat all old people differently. They all have paid "something", so what number is "enough" just to be fair. If you have reached that number, then yes, I will agree that no one who has paid in up to that number should have to pay more.

My family doesn't have that problem to worry about, but I know those that do.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Hozzie

[Links2k]

Does anybody else see the irony in conservatives bickering about how little someone else is paying in taxes?

Politics have taken a nasty, NASTY turn in this country and I know you guys don't want to hear it but you feed the beast every chance you get. When the crap hits the fan, know that you played a part.

I agree, but people around here have a tendency to post something and get bent out of shape when everyone does not agree with what they are saying.

I am simply stating a opposing view. If they only want to hear from people who agree with them they should only send pm's.

[Hozzie]

I didn't intend this to turn into a rich vs poor argument. In the end, we desperately need tax reform. What that reform looks like is for another thread.

[Links2k]

Yes. Life is not a free ride although too many try that route and get away with it. As long as you are using services (which everyone does) then you should pay something up until the time you die. It's not the feel good answer, but it's the fiscally responsible answer.

Oh yeah, and if you have been lucky enough to do well in life, the government thinks you should have to give 50% of your hard earned money to them, even if that means you have to sell your families property to pay it. So when should someone who has paid in their whole life and paid more than something "paid enough". Surely just because you have money doesn't mean that we should treat all old people differently. They all have paid "something", so what number is "enough" just to be fair. If you have reached that number, then yes, I will agree that no one who has paid in up to that number should have to pay more.

My family doesn't have that problem to worry about, but I know those that do.

You're entitled to that opinion. I'll ask my mother in law how much is enough when I visit her at the nursing home tomorrow.

[Hozzie]

I agree, but people around here have a tendency to post something and get bent out of shape when everyone does not agree with what they are saying.

I am simply stating a opposing view. If they only want to hear from people who agree with them they should only send pm's.

I am all for debate. I don't have to agree with everyone or anyone for that matter. I state my beliefs and if you convince me I am wrong, then I am more than willing to consider anyone's point of view. I tend to put things in context based on my personal experiences, but the intention is not to make it appear as if I am only wanting to see posts from people that agree with me. If we all agreed on everything it would be boring.

[Hozzie]

You're entitled to that opinion. I'll ask my mother in law how much is enough when I visit her at the nursing home tomorrow.

Are you implying that those in nursing homes shouldn't have to pay anything either? I don't want to infer too much on this, but I don't see the relationship to paying taxes and being in a nursing home. There are people of all wealth ranges in nursing homes. I may have totally misunderstood the intention of that statement as well.

[Links2k]

Are you implying that those in nursing homes shouldn't have to pay anything either? I don't want to infer too much on this, but I don't see the relationship to paying taxes and being in a nursing home. There are people of all wealth ranges in nursing homes. I may have totally misunderstood the intention of that statement as well.

She has worked her entire life, paid taxes, saved a little money, paid into the system and is now in a home. I have no problem if she never pays another penny in taxes.

[Hozzie]

I don't want to get into a personal debate as that wasn't the intention. I understand where you are coming from, I just have a different opinion.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Hozzie

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Yet, they always end up being a rich or poor argument. Robin Hood still prevails.

Just so you know, even under the Fair Tax, poor folks would be effectively paying zero in taxes It just goes about it differently.

Yes. Life is not a free ride although too many try that route and get away with it. As long as you are using services (which everyone does) then you should pay something up until the time you die. It's not the feel good answer, but it's the fiscally responsible answer.

Oh yeah, and if you have been lucky enough to do well in life, the government thinks you should have to give 50% of your hard earned money to them, even if that means you have to sell your families property to pay it. So when should someone who has paid in their whole life and paid more than something "paid enough". Surely just because you have money doesn't mean that we should treat all old people differently. They all have paid "something", so what number is "enough" just to be fair. If you have reached that number, then yes, I will agree that no one who has paid in up to that number should have to pay more.

My family doesn't have that problem to worry about, but I know those that do.

Lucky enough? You took the whole argument away from the argument. If it's luck that brought me my income

all these years, I guess hard work had nothing to do with it.

"I am simply stating a opposing view. If they only want to hear from people who agree with them they should only send pm's."

Damned, I'm proud of you!

[Hozzie]

Lucky enough? You took the whole argument away from the argument. If it's luck that brought me my income

all these years, I guess hard work had nothing to do with it.

Taking my words a little too literal. Maybe fortunate is a better word. It doesn't imply luck but doesn't preclude hard work..

Anyway, I am for a flat tax, not a so called "fair" tax. No loopholes, credits, deductions, etc. It can be tiered at 3 or 4 levels based on income, but everyone should pay something.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Hozzie

[Dolomite_supafly]

How about this. If you don't want to pay your taxes that is fine. But when you do not pay taxes you lose the right to vote, US citizen or not. After all why should those who don't pay have a say in how the money of those that do gets spent.

If you are not a US citizen yet work and pay to support our nation you should have a say.

There are too many people who are voting themselves more money, nothing more. Problem is that money is earned on the backs of others.

I also believe you should never get a refund on your taxes because of credits. If your credits outweigh your liability then you should receive ZERO, not a windfall. If you overpaid, without the credits, then that is what you are entitled to at the most. Not the $5K+ some of these welfare recipients receive every year.

Dolomite

[Guest HvyMtl]

Um. And yet, Mitt wants to extend the same tax breaks he is complaining about in the recording... The same which makes a lot of those 47% not pay taxes.

This guy seems to be his own worst enemy when it comes to getting elected. Sure, you may think that almost 50% of the population won't vote for you, but assigning reasons like this, in a place you can get recorded, for the world to hear, can only ruin your chances of winning the election.

And where were his handlers? Obviously forgot to prevent recording at this event.

Does Mitt understand he has to be a likable candidate to win? Serious foot in mouth disease. I expected more of this from Biden, not Mitt.

Edited September 18, 2012 by HvyMtl

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I am all for debate. I don't have to agree with everyone or anyone for that matter. I state my beliefs and if you convince me I am wrong, then I am more than willing to consider anyone's point of view. I tend to put things in context based on my personal experiences, but the intention is not to make it appear as if I am only wanting to see posts from people that agree with me. If we all agreed on everything it would be boring.

No, you will convince yourself whether you are right or wrong. I might throw out an argument, but it is up to you how

you reconcile it. If you put things in context for you, why not everyone else? Sometimes it helps to use a level playing field for

discussion.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Um. And yet, Mitt wants to extend the same tax breaks he is complaining about in the recording... The same which makes a lot of those 47% not pay taxes.

This guy seems to be his own worst enemy when it comes to getting elected. Sure, you may think that almost 50% of the population won't vote for you, but assigning reasons like this, in a place you can get recorded, for the world to hear, can only ruin your chances of winning the election.

And where were his handlers? Obviously forgot to prevent recording at this event.

He needs new handlers, anyway.

[BryanP]

How about this. If you don't want to pay your taxes that is fine. But when you do not pay taxes you lose the right to vote, US citizen or not. After all why should those who don't pay have a say in how the money of those that do gets spent.

Which taxes? Just income taxes? We pay an awful lot of taxes in different categories.

[Jonnin]

Does that 48% include the elderly and the people with crappy jobs that pay less than $20k per year?

I'm certain that it does. It doesn't matter right? They should have worked harder to ensure that they earned the middle class income of $250,000.

Yes. About 1/2 of the 47%, or 23% of americans, are the ones that pay nothing due to staying home and making babies instead of going out and working. The combined low income + child credits = 0 tax liability. There are a couple of breakdowns on this in the news today, that is the executive summary. The other half includes the elderly for sure, and a few others.

The generation of elderly that were against handouts are gone, mostly -- the WWII vets and beyond. Now the elderly are the boomers and they love their handouts. The AARP site is loaded with entitlement propaganda now.... I am ok with the programs but they DO need some reform. My gripe is the forced participation. I could put that money in my own accounts and do better long term, but I have to pay it to the govt so they can fail at earning interest on it for my future. It should be possible to opt out.

Romney is not low tax anyway. At the best, he will not raise them. I predict, if he wins, he will raise them one way or the other, possibly by closing loopholes or allowing the W cuts to expire or whatever indirect methods.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Jonnin

[Guest HvyMtl]

Dolomite, everyone, even those on welfare, and those who are poor, and those who are weathy, and those in between, must be allowed to vote. Or we will become a cast society, where only those with wealth rule. No offense, but I would not want our nation to look like India.

This nation is founded on the principal "all men are created equal." Deny the vote to some due to their economic status, goes against this principal.

[mav]

Personally, I think this is more groupism. Both parties create these groups and pit them against each other. That is how they stay in power. Even though it will never happen, I think the answer lies in repealing the 16th so nobody pays federal income tax.