Without a job, Romney made $57,000.00 a DAY for last two years.

Keep in mind, every nickel that a guy like Romney doesn't pay, because his rate is around 14% instead of higher,

is either a nickel someone else has to pay, or a nickel that gets added to the debt, or a nickel that has to come out of the budget.

If you want Romney's rate lower, which is what he wants, according to his own plan...

...who do you want to pay the difference?

1. Do you want to pay it?

2. Do want to just add it to the debt?

3. Do you want to cut your grandma's Medicare to pay for it?

4. Cut some poor family's food stamps to pay for it?

5. Cut some student's tuition assistance to pay for it?

Who do you want to pay for the tax cut Mitt Romney thinks HE deserves???

1) I expect everyone to pay for it the same
2) No... I want a balanced budget amendment with provisions for paying OFF the debt
3) Medicare is the only place?? I expect massive government spending cuts across the board
4) Yes... I cut out food stamps, other entitlements too, both private and corporate
5) YES INDEED.. you want to go to school as an adult, PAY FOR IT YOUR FUCKING SELF

Simple
 
Romney should pay AT LEAST the same tax rate as the rest of us.

Why should Romney pay less for sitting on his ass?

The Buffett Rule rocks!

Because at the rate Romney does pay, he probably pays more in taxes in one year than you will in a life time.
 
I'm for the janitor. More honest. Harder working. More worthy. Stick your big successful businessmen.

Hey dillweed, have you noticed that no one is responding to your posts? Do you know why? Because they appear random instead of a reply to someone's post. Learn to use the quote feature instead of the quick reply. When you want to comment on someone's post, click that little "quote" button at the bottom right of their post and then respond.

Constantly retraining liberals is tiring. :eusa_whistle:
 
Keep in mind, every nickel that a guy like Romney doesn't pay, because his rate is around 14% instead of higher,

is either a nickel someone else has to pay, or a nickel that gets added to the debt, or a nickel that has to come out of the budget.

If you want Romney's rate lower, which is what he wants, according to his own plan...

...who do you want to pay the difference?

1. Do you want to pay it?

2. Do want to just add it to the debt?

3. Do you want to cut your grandma's Medicare to pay for it?

4. Cut some poor family's food stamps to pay for it?

5. Cut some student's tuition assistance to pay for it?

Who do you want to pay for the tax cut Mitt Romney thinks HE deserves???

Welcome to the world of difficult choices. This isn't politics. If the money isn't there, the money isn't there. You have to cut something. My opinion, for what it's worth, is to consider whether or not government has gone beyond it's obligations in terms of what it spends. I know it sounds nice for government to do all these things for people. But right now we are experiencing the ramifications of spending on what sounds nice with little forethought as to whether there are some real drawbacks. The authors of the constitution knew this. Have a look at Jefferson's quote in Gallant's sig. Again it sounds like the nice moral thing to do, but it is not the role of the fed to spend money creating equality or making people's lives better. That isn't an idea of selfishness or greed. It comes from knowing that what inititally sounds compassionate and moral is really immoral and leads to tyranny in the long run.
 
Last edited:
So, what have we learned from this thread?

I learned that I hold values that were inculcated by trusted moral leaders like parents, teachers and clergy. Those values are study hard, work hard, obey the laws, respect others.


Well, if I grew into a Conservative in 2012, seems those values are dated and obsolete. I should have been much much more self centered. I should not have worked hard as hard work does not serve one well to earn a living.

What I should have done, according to the modern Conservatives posting here was get my foot somehow into the executive suite, skimmed as much profit from the company for my personal gain as possible and invest that gain in companies who outsource their production to countries not so concerned about creating a vibrant middle class. Countries where slave wages for workers is just fine. Countries where care for the environment isn't even on the national read. In other words: countries that aren't America.

Then I would be regarded as smarter than the hordes who did pursue hard work and an honest living. I would be lauded as a true American who assuages teamwork and champions self interest over all other virtues.

I guess as I was born twenty years before the first Reagan regime, it was far too late to be taught the new virtues of selfishness and greed. I was born in a gentler time. And mores the pity now.

boy oh boy have you bought a load of malarkey. Alinsky would love you. In the land of the blind etc etc etc ....
I was told on this very thread that hard work does not do anything to bring real wealth. I was told just yesterday by Limbaugh that 'teamwork' is not an American virtue but something to be dismissed as Socialism. I've been told on this very thread that smart counts for more than fair.

I'm a living anachronism. I have been playing by rules that seemingly have served this society well for generations. But those rules are arcane and trite. The new rules are strip a corporation down to its lowest possible vitality, increase the stock price, trade on the price before it increases, take the profits from that sale and invest in another company and do the same.

My values include pay workers a fair wage for their efforts. Retain those workers with benefit packages so they no longer have to fear medical calamities will devastate their meager savings. Treat retirees with the respect they earned after years of service to the company. Treat my community with respect by not making an environmental wasteland of the neighborhood. Treat my stockholders with respect, but don't hurt the workers just to keep them happy.

I could not get any respect from today's Conservative with such values. Today's Conservative regards those values as something subversive and dangerous.

I guess then that today's Conservatives are all successful businessmen and women. Today's Conservatives dismiss hard work as foolish. They regard collective bargaining as evil and suspect.

I'm glad I have my values. I don't know what would pump blood through my body otherwise.
 
Funny how they can't define "fair". I have 10 acres and you have 4. Is that fair or unfair? Should I have to give up 3 of my acres so we are equal? Is that fair? Fair and fair share are class warfare buzzwords that have yet to be defined. I guess its like pornography. You can't define it, but you know it when you see it.
Managment begs labor to concede wages and benefits. The resulting profit is then applied to the bottom line and the stock price shoots up. A few investors make as staggering amount of money, the labor force has to scrape by on less. Is that fair?

If you want to argue by anecdote, use one that applies.
NosmoKing, with all due respect to an amazing man that you are, management indeed begs. Do you know how many businesses fail in a year? 24% Two years? half. 10 years? 90%, more and less.

Yes, management begs to stay in business. I'm sorry the labor force has it hard as well. Research on small Businesses. America has always been about helping each other out. Don't forget that the stats you are reading do not include the also-rans. It ONLY includes those who made it through the gauntlet. That's not many. "Fairness"--there's little of that in determining who "should" gain from others when success is so hard to come by.

Life may not be a fair place, but when we base it on tricky information we are fed by people with vested interests to share all it-takes-a-village wise, we are on a slippery slope all the way down to the bottom of human despair, and that type of government requires murdering the society's upper crust. Communism fails every time. In the 20th century, Russia lost 50 million to it, and China twice that. Both are morphing into enterprise-run governments as we speak. We seem headed for their old fate, and it troubles me.

Please peruse the "Research on Small Businesses" link I placed above. That tells the side of business statistics generally conceal in a push to prove something by one group to another. It's not easy to get a business going that excites people into supporting it. You have a better chance of getting a 4.0 GPA at Harvard than you have of making a million dollars, considering you first have to get in the door at Harvard, and then you have to work your butt off for people who do not take any attitude in the stead of grueling work.

I hope that you know I do take your well-being most seriously.
Becki,

Companies like Jones and Laughlin Steel, Maytag, General Motors all begged concessions from their workers and turned those concessions into profit.

A start up is one situation. Established companies with retirees and working class families is something else all together.
 
My monthly pension check comes to me minus a certain amount of withheld Income Tax. When I take some of that taxed money to the gas station and fill up my car that taxed money is taxed again. So how is this essentially different from your lament about Romney's situation?

Is it something like this: Let's say I invest some of my taxed pension money in bonds. When I redeem those bonds the interest (on my already taxed money) is taxed, than I go to the gas station with the taxed interest from my taxed pension money and it's taxed again. And so on. Is that what you mean?

No. We're talking about only the money that is considered your income. A companies profits, if you own stock, is part of your income which is taxed at the corp. lvl. When you actually realize that income it is taxed once again. If you spend that money somewhere else we're now talking about someone elses income.

No, YOU'RE talking about that, because lefties love to cherrypick only those items that support their worldview. The rest of us are talking about the whole, complete, BIG picture.

Please point to me anywhere that I or any other conservative said, "Okay, YOU can set the parameters of the debate and tell us what facts are and aren't allowable", because I don't remember ever having been that drunk.
 
Last edited:
So, what have we learned from this thread?

I learned that I hold values that were inculcated by trusted moral leaders like parents, teachers and clergy. Those values are study hard, work hard, obey the laws, respect others.


Well, if I grew into a Conservative in 2012, seems those values are dated and obsolete. I should have been much much more self centered. I should not have worked hard as hard work does not serve one well to earn a living.

What I should have done, according to the modern Conservatives posting here was get my foot somehow into the executive suite, skimmed as much profit from the company for my personal gain as possible and invest that gain in companies who outsource their production to countries not so concerned about creating a vibrant middle class. Countries where slave wages for workers is just fine. Countries where care for the environment isn't even on the national read. In other words: countries that aren't America.

Then I would be regarded as smarter than the hordes who did pursue hard work and an honest living. I would be lauded as a true American who assuages teamwork and champions self interest over all other virtues.

I guess as I was born twenty years before the first Reagan regime, it was far too late to be taught the new virtues of selfishness and greed. I was born in a gentler time. And mores the pity now.

Basically, what I've learned is that you're incapable of hearing anything but the echo chamber inside your head, saying, "You are better and more moral than everyone else. You're SUCH a good person", and it is therefore pointless to talk to you like a sane, intelligent person.

They have meds for that, loser. Investigate.

People like Mikey believe two things. One there is nobility in poverty.
Two, unless one works in a low end unskilled job ,they are not working at all.
Look, the Left's entire premise of "working hard" is based one one factor, Unions.
The worker focused left is not concerned with jobs in general. They want union jobs.
For example. During the 2008 crisis in which it became clear that GM was in serious financial trouble a few things came to the forefront. The Left whined and bitched about the potential loss of UNION jobs. They railed against those "Jap car companies" that kept the unions out. They whined about "those Jap car companies" taking away business from GM and Chrylser. They wanted protectionist legislation to protect, you guessed it, UNION jobs.
At the end of the day, those evil "Jap car companies" pay wages in the same neighborhood as the UAW plants. In fact some pay more. The fact is none of the foreign manufacturers here are saddled with the high cost of wages and benefits the Big Three have to endure.
GM at pone time was paying over $70 per hour for each line employee. Toyota's truck plant in San Antonio, TX has a per hour labor cost of around $40 per hour.
If GM was not answerable to the UAW and the AFL-CIO, nobody would have raised such an intensive stink.
 
Managment begs labor to concede wages and benefits. The resulting profit is then applied to the bottom line and the stock price shoots up. A few investors make as staggering amount of money, the labor force has to scrape by on less. Is that fair?

If you want to argue by anecdote, use one that applies.
NosmoKing, with all due respect to an amazing man that you are, management indeed begs. Do you know how many businesses fail in a year? 24% Two years? half. 10 years? 90%, more and less.

Yes, management begs to stay in business. I'm sorry the labor force has it hard as well. Research on small Businesses. America has always been about helping each other out. Don't forget that the stats you are reading do not include the also-rans. It ONLY includes those who made it through the gauntlet. That's not many. "Fairness"--there's little of that in determining who "should" gain from others when success is so hard to come by.

Life may not be a fair place, but when we base it on tricky information we are fed by people with vested interests to share all it-takes-a-village wise, we are on a slippery slope all the way down to the bottom of human despair, and that type of government requires murdering the society's upper crust. Communism fails every time. In the 20th century, Russia lost 50 million to it, and China twice that. Both are morphing into enterprise-run governments as we speak. We seem headed for their old fate, and it troubles me.

Please peruse the "Research on Small Businesses" link I placed above. That tells the side of business statistics generally conceal in a push to prove something by one group to another. It's not easy to get a business going that excites people into supporting it. You have a better chance of getting a 4.0 GPA at Harvard than you have of making a million dollars, considering you first have to get in the door at Harvard, and then you have to work your butt off for people who do not take any attitude in the stead of grueling work.

I hope that you know I do take your well-being most seriously.
Becki,

Companies like Jones and Laughlin Steel, Maytag, General Motors all begged concessions from their workers and turned those concessions into profit.

A start up is one situation. Established companies with retirees and working class families is something else all together.
Ahh yes...That evil concept known as "PROFIT"...Heaven forbid a business should make an attempt to turn a profit. A personal affront to us all.
Would it be palatable to you if business had to turn all profit over to the employees?
 
Keep in mind, every nickel that a guy like Romney doesn't pay, because his rate is around 14% instead of higher,

is either a nickel someone else has to pay, or a nickel that gets added to the debt, or a nickel that has to come out of the budget.
Seems simple to me:
Take it out of the budget.
:dunno:

Good. Then, since Romney has already said he won't cut defense, he needs to tell the truth.

Tell the People that he wants to pay for a tax cut for himself and his comparably wealthy fellow Americans by cutting

Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, education, environmental protection, health and safety, etc.

Run on that. Run on the Truth.
 
It's the absolute truth. Romney as president will cut taxes for upper income Americans, increase defense spending, and pretend that he's going to cut spending somewhere else to magically balance the budget.

And he will fail just like Reagan and Bush did.

yea, well I wish and I am sure I am not alone, that we lived in the failure that was the reagan years....:lol:.
The Reagan years weren't bad years because the Reagan government was running the Nation on credit. That, along with his tampering with regulations that protected the ordinary citizen against bankers, corporatists and Wall Street sharks, are the causes of most of our current miseries. We were simply oblivious to it at the time.

I'm not saying Reagan engineered any of it because he didn't have the intelligence to do that. He was in fact demented and probably had descended into the early stages of Alzheimer in the middle years of his Presidency. He was an obedient servant of a shadow government which is still running things.
:roll:
Better check the mirror - your tinfoil hat is crooked.
 
He made some good investments....

What's your point....

How much does Bill Gates make a day.
Warren Buffet....

Oh that's right it's only evil and wrong when republicans make money off investments

They should pay their fair share.

I bet you pay more than 13.9%.

Not unless he's making $500,000 a year or more, he doesn't. And neither do you.
2010, my household federal tax rate was 4.6%.
:dunno:
 
So, what have we learned from this thread?

I learned that I hold values that were inculcated by trusted moral leaders like parents, teachers and clergy. Those values are study hard, work hard, obey the laws, respect others.


Well, if I grew into a Conservative in 2012, seems those values are dated and obsolete. I should have been much much more self centered. I should not have worked hard as hard work does not serve one well to earn a living.

What I should have done, according to the modern Conservatives posting here was get my foot somehow into the executive suite, skimmed as much profit from the company for my personal gain as possible and invest that gain in companies who outsource their production to countries not so concerned about creating a vibrant middle class. Countries where slave wages for workers is just fine. Countries where care for the environment isn't even on the national read. In other words: countries that aren't America.

Then I would be regarded as smarter than the hordes who did pursue hard work and an honest living. I would be lauded as a true American who assuages teamwork and champions self interest over all other virtues.

I guess as I was born twenty years before the first Reagan regime, it was far too late to be taught the new virtues of selfishness and greed. I was born in a gentler time. And mores the pity now.

boy oh boy have you bought a load of malarkey. Alinsky would love you. In the land of the blind etc etc etc ....
I was told on this very thread that hard work does not do anything to bring real wealth. I was told just yesterday by Limbaugh that 'teamwork' is not an American virtue but something to be dismissed as Socialism. I've been told on this very thread that smart counts for more than fair.

I'm a living anachronism. I have been playing by rules that seemingly have served this society well for generations. But those rules are arcane and trite. The new rules are strip a corporation down to its lowest possible vitality, increase the stock price, trade on the price before it increases, take the profits from that sale and invest in another company and do the same.

My values include pay workers a fair wage for their efforts. Retain those workers with benefit packages so they no longer have to fear medical calamities will devastate their meager savings. Treat retirees with the respect they earned after years of service to the company. Treat my community with respect by not making an environmental wasteland of the neighborhood. Treat my stockholders with respect, but don't hurt the workers just to keep them happy.

I could not get any respect from today's Conservative with such values. Today's Conservative regards those values as something subversive and dangerous.

I guess then that today's Conservatives are all successful businessmen and women. Today's Conservatives dismiss hard work as foolish. They regard collective bargaining as evil and suspect.

I'm glad I have my values. I don't know what would pump blood through my body otherwise.

You're values? Don't make me laugh. What is trying to be put across to you is that your values aren't in fact good values.

Working hard? What is intrinsically valueable or noble about that? You simply have to unlearn some things. I get an awful lot of people took pride in hard work and it was viewed as noble or something the blue collar workers that worked hard. Take a few moments and rid yourself of your biases and look at that objectively. WHY is that something a person should take pride in? What is inherently noble about putting in any more effort than is necessary to generate income?

Paying people a fair wage? I agree with that too. The problem is you aren't honest with yourself. What constitutes a fair wage is not whatever the employee thinks is fair. The employer gets a say too and is normal human nature that the employee is gonna think their worth more than they are and the employer is gonna think their worth less than they are and you meat somewhere in the middle.

Helping people avoid the cost of medical calamities? Here's one thing that has never changed. Employers have NEVER compensated workers based on what they need to live on. You are compensated as a result of the skill you provide. Not as a result of what you need to live on.

Treat retirees with respect? Why is it an employers responsibility to plan for your life after you choose to stop working? Again you are paid for the skills you provide. An employer certainly doesn't oweing anything (even though most companies will still match 401k contributions) for NOT working. You have it entirely backwards. Employers have bent over backwards to retain good employees. They DO pay them to not work (vacation). They subsidize their healthcare and they give people money to live on even after they stop producing anything for them. You sniveling, selfish entitlement assholes still have the nerve to contend that it's the employers that aren't treating you fairly.
 
Keep in mind, every nickel that a guy like Romney doesn't pay, because his rate is around 14% instead of higher,

is either a nickel someone else has to pay, or a nickel that gets added to the debt, or a nickel that has to come out of the budget.
Seems simple to me:
Take it out of the budget.
:dunno:
Good. Then, since Romney has already said he won't cut defense, he needs to tell the truth.

Tell the People that he wants to pay for a tax cut for himself and his comparably wealthy fellow Americans by cutting

Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, education, environmental protection, health and safety, etc.

Run on that. Run on the Truth.
If he said he'd do all that, I might actually vote for him.
If he -actually- did all that, he'd save the country.
 
No. We're talking about only the money that is considered your income. A companies profits, if you own stock, is part of your income which is taxed at the corp. lvl. When you actually realize that income it is taxed once again. If you spend that money somewhere else we're now talking about someone elses income.

No, YOU'RE talking about that, because lefties love to cherrypick only those items that support their worldview. The rest of us are talking about the whole, complete, BIG picture.

Please point to me anywhere that I or any other conservative said, "Okay, YOU can set the parameters of the debate and tell us what facts are and aren't allowable", because I don't remember ever having been that drunk.

I think you mean MikeK the lefty. You've been around here long enough to know I'm no lefty.
 
No. We're talking about only the money that is considered your income. A companies profits, if you own stock, is part of your income which is taxed at the corp. lvl. When you actually realize that income it is taxed once again. If you spend that money somewhere else we're now talking about someone elses income.

No, YOU'RE talking about that, because lefties love to cherrypick only those items that support their worldview. The rest of us are talking about the whole, complete, BIG picture.

Please point to me anywhere that I or any other conservative said, "Okay, YOU can set the parameters of the debate and tell us what facts are and aren't allowable", because I don't remember ever having been that drunk.

I think you mean MikeK the lefty. You've been around here long enough to know I'm no lefty.

I was. Go back and look at my post. I have no idea how that extra quote attribution to you got in at the top, but I was addressing Mike.
 
Because its not yours?
Someone else decided that the money I earned was actually their money and took it!
Two wrongs make a right?

You're just bitter over people having things you don't.
Welcome to reality - and it sounds like you need a helmet.
You seem eager to embrace the wrong rather than seeking a solution.
Why is it again that you feel entitled to money that isn't yours?
What legitimate claim do you have on the money earned by others?
 
Keep in mind, every nickel that a guy like Romney doesn't pay, because his rate is around 14% instead of higher,

is either a nickel someone else has to pay, or a nickel that gets added to the debt, or a nickel that has to come out of the budget.
Seems simple to me:
Take it out of the budget.
:dunno:

Good. Then, since Romney has already said he won't cut defense, he needs to tell the truth.

Tell the People that he wants to pay for a tax cut for himself and his comparably wealthy fellow Americans by cutting

Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, education, environmental protection, health and safety, etc.

Run on that. Run on the Truth.

Do you know the difference between all of those. One is constitutionally mandated and the others are not. Follow the law.
 

Forum List

Back
Top