Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   POTUS and VP to release tax returns all the way back to 2000. What did they have to hide in 1999?   (nytimes.com) divider line 275
    More: Interesting, President Obama, vice presidents, Buffett Rule, Swiss bank accounts, adjusted gross income, Mitt Romney  
•       •       •

1261 clicks; posted to Politics » on 13 Apr 2012 at 10:56 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



275 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-13 05:45:28 PM  

lennavan: Whenever you're in an argument/discussion with someone and you make such a strong convincing point


hehe who told you what that feels like?
Enjoy your weekend. You lost again.
 
2012-04-13 05:48:05 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: BojanglesPaladin: tenpoundsofcheese: are you saying that the IRS isn't doing their job in processing the returns?

I am not saying that. Where did you get that?

maybe I got the wrong meaning, but i was reacting to your comment that they should release returns to show they were on the "up and up". Given his income level, his political desires and his accountants, and the IRS, I don't expect it to be anything but "up and up".


Nor do I. Which is why I look at it and think the Obama campaign demanding it has limited upside: At best it will demonstrate "Wow! this dude is lo-o-o-a-d-d-e-d" Which everyone alredy knows. Romney himslef has been clear that he pays more like 16% instead of the more common 33% or so, since his income is derived from investments, not salary. Again, this is not news to anyone keeping up either. Clearly, the Obama campaign hopes to use it to define the opposition as "Rich guy- not like us". They may be succesful in doing so, but they are dancing into the 'class warfare' line of fire doing it, and even Obama's own strategists seem to understand that that particular narrative is not resonating strongly with moderates and independants though it plays VERY well with the commited left - who they already have in the pocket.

I think that's why they are pushing for it NOW, rather than in the general election. If they can succesfully "re-brand" Romney now, they can move off of this for the general, but peope will retain the impression of Romney as "fat-cat richie".

To clarify my comment and your reaction:
I mean that for right or wrong, the candidates' right to privacy has been vonuntarily superceded by the candidates desire (and subsequent public expectation) that they reveal personal details about their finances in order to asssure the voters that they are "an honest politician".

Releasing tax records has become and expectation of custom, not a legal requirement. No serious candidate would even attempt a run with a tax evasion skeleton in the closet becasue of the certainty it would eventually come to light.

We agree that it is exceedingly unlikley that Romney's taxes are 'dirty', despite the best hopes of the speculative Obamazealots.
 
2012-04-13 05:49:39 PM  
My favorite threads are where lennavan and sk fight

Lennavan and sk fight in every thread

Therefore, every thread is my favorite thread.
 
2012-04-13 05:51:00 PM  

CPennypacker: My favorite threads are where lennavan and sk fight

Lennavan and sk fight in every thread

Therefore, every thread is my favorite thread.


I know sarcasm and that there... that's sarcasm
 
2012-04-13 05:52:09 PM  

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: My favorite threads are where lennavan and sk fight

Lennavan and sk fight in every thread

Therefore, every thread is my favorite thread.

I know sarcasm and that there... that's sarcasm


No, he was clearly being serious. I'm gonna search the sports tab archives for a thread to prove him wrong.
 
2012-04-13 05:54:21 PM  

lennavan: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: My favorite threads are where lennavan and sk fight

Lennavan and sk fight in every thread

Therefore, every thread is my favorite thread.

I know sarcasm and that there... that's sarcasm

No, he was clearly being serious. I'm gonna search the sports tab archives for a thread to prove him wrong.


You guys should fight about whether or not I was serious.

CONTEXT PEOPLE!
 
2012-04-13 05:55:27 PM  

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: My favorite threads are where lennavan and sk fight

Lennavan and sk fight in every thread

Therefore, every thread is my favorite thread.

I know sarcasm and that there... that's sarcasm


It's like holiday time at the qorkfiend house; when the fights start, it's time to go home. Unless you want to stick around to drink, of course.
 
2012-04-13 05:57:23 PM  

CPennypacker: lennavan: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: My favorite threads are where lennavan and sk fight

Lennavan and sk fight in every thread

Therefore, every thread is my favorite thread.

I know sarcasm and that there... that's sarcasm

No, he was clearly being serious. I'm gonna search the sports tab archives for a thread to prove him wrong.

You guys should fight about whether or not I was serious.

CONTEXT PEOPLE!


Imma gonna need your tax returns first
 
2012-04-13 05:57:35 PM  

lennavan: Whenever you're in an argument/discussion with someone and you make such a strong convincing point that the only reasonable reply is "you know what, you're right" you never get that moment.


You might want to re-evaluate your expectations from Fark :)
 
2012-04-13 05:58:14 PM  

qorkfiend: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: My favorite threads are where lennavan and sk fight

Lennavan and sk fight in every thread

Therefore, every thread is my favorite thread.

I know sarcasm and that there... that's sarcasm

It's like holiday time at the qorkfiend house; when the fights start, it's time to go home. Unless you want to stick around to drink, of course.


well, I can't drink here. Time to go where I can. Feliz fin de la semana, putos!
 
2012-04-13 05:58:51 PM  

qorkfiend: It's like holiday time at the qorkfiend house; when the fights start, it's time to go home. Unless you want to stick around to drink, of course.


Well, when my shiat finishes in two minutes, I was planning to do both.
 
2012-04-13 06:00:08 PM  
Looks like we are all agreed!

Thread's finished. Time to go home.

Everyone have a good weekend. Someone get the lights.
 
2012-04-13 06:02:16 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Looks like we are all agreed!

Thread's finished. Time to go home.

Everyone have a good weekend. Someone get the lights.


*click*
 
2012-04-13 10:28:31 PM  
I made 16,900 last year. I will pay $4500 in fed taxes. That's 26.62%.

/Living within my means sucks when I see people on welfare buying steaks and driving $40,000 cars
//white male in Illinois sucks
 
2012-04-13 10:29:08 PM  
///also being 1099'd sucks
 
2012-04-13 10:47:53 PM  
Distraction accomplished.

Well done, untrustworthy!
 
2012-04-13 11:14:37 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: after whining that the rich have all these loopholes to avoid paying taxes, the 0bama's give $48000 to their kids...tax free!


As opposed to the 100 million dollar trust fund the Romney just set up for their 5 kids?

The limit for a couple in 1995 was $20,000 and has since grown to $26,000. In addition, there's a "lifetime gift-tax exclusion" for all the boys that totaled $1.2 million back in 1995 and has since grown to $10 million.

Add it all up, and the Romneys could have gifted $1.3 million in 1995, and a total of $10.6 million through 2011. All tax free.


Link (new window)
 
2012-04-14 01:45:18 AM  
Space
 
2012-04-14 05:15:31 AM  
Charity starts at home. And apparently there are no free lunches in the Biden household. Ever. Not even if you're homeless and starving in the street.
 
2012-04-14 06:49:22 AM  
I.
Don't.
Care.
How.
Much.
They.
Make.
 
2012-04-14 09:23:20 AM  
Wow, even the cynics are hard pushing Obama.
Eloquence is obviously much more powerful than I had realized.
 
2012-04-14 10:22:00 AM  

quatchi: tenpoundsofcheese: after whining that the rich have all these loopholes to avoid paying taxes, the 0bama's give $48000 to their kids...tax free!

As opposed to the 100 million dollar trust fund the Romney just set up for their 5 kids?

The limit for a couple in 1995 was $20,000 and has since grown to $26,000. In addition, there's a "lifetime gift-tax exclusion" for all the boys that totaled $1.2 million back in 1995 and has since grown to $10 million.

Add it all up, and the Romneys could have gifted $1.3 million in 1995, and a total of $10.6 million through 2011. All tax free.



The difference is the hypocracy of 0bama's whining that people do this...then he does it.

Secondly, the article is clearly LYING as you are.
It is not a $100M trust fund.

The fund could be worth $100M only if it earns 26% annual compound return, when the average return at the time is 10%.

Why don't you call it a $1B trust fund? It is as long as it earns a 150% (or some number) annual return for the next 15 years (or some number).

To get to $100 million, the account would have needed a 26% average annual compound rate of return, said Jonathan Bergman, chief investment officer at Palisades Hudson Asset Management. Stocks over that same time have gained about 10%.
 
2012-04-14 10:25:05 AM  

quatchi:

Add it all up, and the Romneys could have gifted $1.3 million in 1995, and a total of $10.6 million through 2011. All tax free.

Link (new window)


By the way, this article uses the would "could" 8 times. It is not what Romney did it is what he COULD have done.

Seriously, is that the best you can do?
 
2012-04-14 10:31:14 PM  

tenpoundsofcheese: Secondly, the article is clearly LYING as you are.

It is not a $100M trust fund.

The fund could be worth $100M only if it earns 26% annual compound return, when the average return at the time is 10%.

Why don't you call it a $1B trust fund? It is as long as it earns a 150% (or some number) annual return for the next 15 years (or some number).

To get to $100 million, the account would have needed a 26% average annual compound rate of return, said Jonathan Bergman, chief investment officer at Palisades Hudson Asset Management. Stocks over that same time have gained about 10%.


Uh-huh.

(CNNMoney) - Mitt Romney's five sons - Matt, Tagg, Craig, Ben and Josh - are sitting pretty with a trust fund worth $100 million.

CNN Link (new window)

For extra Lulz...

As we all know, much of Mitt Romney's wealth is derived from "carried interest," a share of the profits from investments that Bain Capital made while he was CEO. This income is taxed at the same 15 percent rate as ordinary capital gains, which is why Romney's tax rate is so low.

But it turns out there's another interesting tidbit about carried interest that I've never heard of before: It's a great way of passing along a huge inheritance to your kids without paying any taxes. David Cay Johnston explains:


MoJo Link (new window)
 
2012-04-15 04:12:46 AM  
<b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7048294/76225483#c76225483" target="_blank">quatchi</a>:</b> <i>

But it turns out there's another interesting tidbit about carried interest that I've never heard of before: It's a great way of passing along a huge inheritance to your kids without paying any taxes. David Cay Johnston explains:

MoJo Link (new window)</i>
From your Mojo:
"They were able to take assets they have that are producing enormous income and,
under the law, give that money to their children and not pay any taxes on it."

followed by
"The Romney kids will have to pay taxes when they start taking income from the trust their father set up for them."

So is t producing income or not? and is it taxed or not?

And BTW, dividends are not income.

If you buy $100 worth of stock with your own after tax money, and the stock issues a $10 dividend, it's value decreases by $10. Withdrawing $10 worth of value may change the basis but it's not income.

Think of it this way, if you took the same $100 and put it in a savings account and use your ATM card to withdraw $10, the "dividends are income" arguments would have you believe that your $10 withdrawal from your after tax savings account is income? And then the declining value of your savings account is a capital loss? I think most people would see that an after-tax withdrawal from the ATM is not a taxable event.
 
Displayed 25 of 275 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report