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.

(Talking Points Memo)   Congress wants to know how Mitt Romney accrued a 100 million dollar IRA when the limit for them is $6000 a year. May subpoena his tax returns for the last 16,666 years   (tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 413
    More: Interesting, IRAs, Mitt Romney, Sander Levin, restrictions, Chris Van Hollen, subpoenas, Ways and Means Committee  
•       •       •

9289 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Aug 2012 at 7:31 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-05 07:48:22 AM  

shotglasss: intelligent comment below: shotglasss:
If you can disprove any of this, let me know.


Ann Coulter is not a source

That didn't disprove anything. If you can disprove what she wrote, let me know.


Harry Reid said and wrote that Mitt did not pay taxes for ten years. When you can disprove that, then you can you can let us all know.
 
2012-08-05 07:50:52 AM  

randomjsa: This just in... Romney continues to be guilty of the crime of being rich while Republican.

Any second now Obama will get around to actually running on his record. I'd particularly like to hear him brag about ObamaCare... A lot.


A program which does not become operational till 2014?
 
2012-08-05 07:52:44 AM  
None of this matters. Anyone who is still voting for Romney now won't be swayed by anything that comes out about him.
 
2012-08-05 07:56:12 AM  

jrw8778: cman: GAT_00: cman: This is just my personal opinion. I am not an economist.

This statement right here is what is wrong with America. What you're actually saying is "I have no idea what I talking about, but I have a right to my opinion, and it's just as valid as anyone else's"

Which is stupid and wrong.


So, you're saying you don't like teabaggers?
 
2012-08-05 07:59:44 AM  

Mugato: None of this matters. Anyone who is still voting for Romney now won't be swayed by anything that comes out about him.


It matters if he goes to jail.. oh yeah, that almost NEVER happens to the wealthy, no matter what they do.
 
2012-08-05 08:01:42 AM  

Mugato: None of this matters. Anyone who is still voting for Romney now won't be swayed by anything that comes out about him.


ayup, they'll vote for a moldy sponge if they're told to because Ni@@ger/socialist/demorat whatever. It really is a sad thing to watch. I just don't want to have to explain to my kids(which I don't plan on having... ever) why this era was called the Age of Stupid, because it really is. You guys made your mark on history now, you happy? You've managed to make a complete mockery of the human race. Are you pleased with yourselves? Good job, you farkin idiots.
 
2012-08-05 08:18:12 AM  

namatad: Tickle Mittens: StoneColdAtheist: torquestripe: All legal, no laws broken here!
Try again liberals.

Okay genius, try this: Nate Silver (who called 50/51 states (+ DC) in '08) says the President is going to give Romney the worst drubbing since Ronald Reagan did Jimmy Carter in '76.

The silver lining in the cloud for you is that you'll have four more years to biatch about Obama.

That was 80, and Reagan crushing Mondale in 84 was way worse.

1984 results will probably never be beat. If rmoney eat a dozen fetuses, aborted from his children and grandchildren, live on tv the day before the election, he would still win major red states. MAYBE if it was the week before, enough red voters would stay home. MAYBE.

Most of the current red vote are anti-President Obama. No matter what rmoney does, rmoney still will get those votes.


which is sad because they don't hate Obama for what he's actually done. They hate him for the things they've been told he's done. All of it lies. I'll guarantee that if you took a poll that 99 out of 100 complaints would be based on lies and misinformation.
 
2012-08-05 08:34:16 AM  

Hobodeluxe: which is sad because they don't hate Obama for what he's actually done. They hate him for the things they've been told he's done


Don't forget about the things he will do after re-election. On November 8 he's coming door to door for our guns.
 
2012-08-05 08:39:55 AM  

StoneColdAtheist: Okay genius, try this: Nate Silver (who called 50/51 states (+ DC) in '08) says the President is going to give Romney the worst drubbing since Ronald Reagan did Jimmy Carter in '76.


Actually, Silver just published a post about how he expects it to be closer this time than 2008.

Heck, we're not even at the conventions yet, and we have no idea who will be Romney's VP pick. My suspicion is that it will be a very close race, though probably (and hopefully) not like Florida in 2000.

I still think Obama's going to win it, though.
 
2012-08-05 08:57:21 AM  

andrewagill: StoneColdAtheist: Okay genius, try this: Nate Silver (who called 50/51 states (+ DC) in '08) says the President is going to give Romney the worst drubbing since Ronald Reagan did Jimmy Carter in '76.

Actually, Silver just published a post about how he expects it to be closer this time than 2008.

Heck, we're not even at the conventions yet, and we have no idea who will be Romney's VP pick. My suspicion is that it will be a very close race, though probably (and hopefully) not like Florida in 2000.

I still think Obama's going to win it, though.


I largely agree, with one pointed exception.

It willlook like a close race, because the media will dress it up, but it will not be as close a race. Some 40% of the country will vote R, but I think Obama will have much most of the rest.
 
2012-08-05 08:58:34 AM  

andrewagill: StoneColdAtheist: Okay genius, try this: Nate Silver (who called 50/51 states (+ DC) in '08) says the President is going to give Romney the worst drubbing since Ronald Reagan did Jimmy Carter in '76.

Actually, Silver just published a post about how he expects it to be closer this time than 2008.

Heck, we're not even at the conventions yet, and we have no idea who will be Romney's VP pick. My suspicion is that it will be a very close race, though probably (and hopefully) not like Florida in 2000.

I still think Obama's going to win it, though.


My money is still on Barbour as his VP. If you're gonna fail, fail hard.
 
2012-08-05 09:02:57 AM  

Dwight_Yeast: Here's a fun question to think about: everyone claims that Mitt Romney is worth around $250 million (based on what he's told the press). But he has $100 million in his IRA account.

Does that mean that a very large portion of his net worth is in his IRA, or does it mean that he's lying about how much money he has?


Good question. Let's see his long forms.
 
2012-08-05 09:09:56 AM  

Brick-House: So when someone comes along that can outsmart the IRS LEGALLY, then he must have a pretty good understanding of the system and how best to fix it.


So, the Republicans are going to nominate Romney's tax preparer/attorney? You can guarantee Romney's involvement was limited to signing his signature on the tax return. Which is probably the real reason Romney won't release his forms: he actually didn't have a clue what's in them, either and only know has had someone explain the more creative portions to him. He told his tax preparer to minimize his taxes and didn't know or care if it was done perfectly legally, somewhat legally or completely illegally. The nice thing with tax preparers of the type Romney uses is that he is insulated in case their more creative means of minimizing taxes are later disallowed by the IRS. All Romney has to do is pay the recalculated rate and maybe a fine. Even audits are taken care of 100% by the tax preparers if they occur. Now, his lack of interest is biting him in the ass. Tough.
 
2012-08-05 09:27:42 AM  

sdd2000: shotglasss: intelligent comment below: shotglasss:
If you can disprove any of this, let me know.


Ann Coulter is not a source

That didn't disprove anything. If you can disprove what she wrote, let me know.

Harry Reid said and wrote that Mitt did not pay taxes for ten years. When you can disprove that, then you can you can let us all know.


Someone finally made the connection! Congrats!
 
2012-08-05 09:44:30 AM  
Mentat

It's called a "bust-out", and it's an old mob trick to defraud insurance companies. Start a business( toy stores were a favorite ), buy inventory on credit, insure the business and the inventory, take the inventory out after hours, burn the place, collect on the insurance and sell the inventory. Lather, rinse, repeat........Now what Romney did was to take this to the corporate level.
 
2012-08-05 09:45:01 AM  

Harry_Seldon: I am pretty convinced the Obama campaign knows something extremely politically damaging about Mitt Romney's finances. They either a) can't use the information due to it's source b) are waiting for the right time or c) giving Romney enough rope to hang himself

If you think back twenty years, a billionaire, Ross Perot, made a serious run at the presidency. No one was clamoring over his finances, which were likely quite complex.


Ross Perot hadn't proven himself time and time again to be a liar. Mittens can't seem to open his mouth without a lie popping out, especially when it comes to his own personal failings.
 
Xai
2012-08-05 09:47:49 AM  

Saturn5: [patriotdepot.com image 600x664]


isn't it funny how you consider taxes he avoided paying as 'his money'?
 
2012-08-05 09:50:43 AM  

bootman: Step 1: Place thousands of stock certificates into duffel bags.
Step 2: Attach blank price tags the the duffel bags.
Step 3: Write 1¢ on the price tags.
Step 4: Have your self directed IRA buy these duffel bags for your retirement savings.
Step 5: Profit!


Step 5: Jailed for tax fraud

/IANAA
 
2012-08-05 09:53:10 AM  

Brick-House: So when someone comes along that can outsmart the IRS LEGALLY, then he must have a pretty good understanding of the system and how best to fix it.


LOL!

Wait, that was a joke, right?
 
2012-08-05 10:07:18 AM  

Chimperror2: NFA: I'll tell you how he did it. He used his business to deposit funds into a company managed retirement fund, then he rolled it over into a Roth IRA. BOOM, no taxes on $100,000,000.00 of retirement income.

Business owners and executives do this all the time.

BOOM, big tax hit on conversion. That will be the reverenge day when he rolls out a 40 milion check made out to the U.S. Treasury.


A douchebag like RMoney would just file for an extension, and then an extension of the extension. He is never paying money to the government. He has no skin in the game now and will have no skin in the game in the future.
 
2012-08-05 10:08:49 AM  

shotglasss: sdd2000: shotglasss: intelligent comment below: shotglasss:
If you can disprove any of this, let me know.


Ann Coulter is not a source

That didn't disprove anything. If you can disprove what she wrote, let me know.

Harry Reid said and wrote that Mitt did not pay taxes for ten years. When you can disprove that, then you can you can let us all know.

Someone finally made the connection! Congrats!


Except, Romney can easily prove he paid more than zero taxes by releasing his tax returns. There is literally nothing that Obama has in his possession that he can release to prove that he did not do any of the things Coulter accuses him of doing.
 
2012-08-05 10:11:31 AM  

themindiswatching: GAT_00: cman: I still think there is a good chance of hyper-inflation in the near future.

Why? The yen isn't the most powerful currency in the world. Neither is the Euro. Neither is the yuan. Currencies don't suffer hyperinflation just because they aren't super powerful.

Everything that isn't based on gold is going to hyperinflate, dontcha know.

/RON PAUL


Not that I'm a Ron Paul/extremist/goldbug, but you should go look into who is purchasing gold/gold mines/gold exchanges right now, I have to be honest, it's a bit alarming.
 
2012-08-05 10:55:44 AM  

shotglasss: sdd2000: shotglasss: intelligent comment below: shotglasss:
If you can disprove any of this, let me know.


Ann Coulter is not a source

That didn't disprove anything. If you can disprove what she wrote, let me know.

Harry Reid said and wrote that Mitt did not pay taxes for ten years. When you can disprove that, then you can you can let us all know.

Someone finally made the connection! Congrats!


Except Obama is not saying that Ann Coulter should put up or shut up. Rmoney should be the one putting up or better yet please just shut up.
 
2012-08-05 11:54:50 AM  

Chimperror2:
Why would anyone think this is bad? If he took Bain Capital from nothing to billions and he put shares of stock that were worth nothing and put them into his retirement and it's worth millions, he should be in charge. That's the guy I want figuring out social security, fixing the economy, and running the country.


Because if this country were a business, we would be the customers, the government would be the executives, and the campaign donors would be the shareholders. A business's main purpose is to make money for itself and its shareholders by means of taking as much money from its customers as possible in return for giving them as little as they can get away with. A business doesn't exist for the sake of its customers or employees, those people are merely the necessary means by which the business makes money for itself. And once the business gets wealthy enough, it doesn't even need its customers and employees at all, it'll just trade money back and forth with itself and reap its own capital gains.

Romney has millions and millions of dollars to his name, but he's not doing anything with it. He has a $100,000,000 IRA that's just sitting there collecting interest. How exactly would implementing that kind of financial strategy help our economy? A person who saves up $50 and goes out and buys a TV is much better suited to helping the economy than a person who saves up $500 and sticks it in his mattress.

A government is not a business; it is the organizational structure by which a country collects and distributes resources amongst itself to keep itself functioning. It is not about making as much money as possible, it is allocating the resources it has to where they are most needed and ensuring both that all parts of the country get what they need to survive while taking in a suitable amount of funding to sustain its activities. A government's success is not based on its profits, but by the well-being of its people. So instead of looking at a candidate's financial record as a metric to judge their competency for office, we should be looking at how well the people who worked under them fared.
 
2012-08-05 12:14:44 PM  

Fast Moon: Chimperror2:
Romney has millions and millions of dollars to his name, but he's not doing anything with it. He has a $100,000,000 IRA that's just sitting there collecting interest. How exactly would implementing that kind of financial strategy help our economy? A person who saves up $50 and goes out and buys a TV is much better suited to helping the economy than a person who saves up $500 and sticks it in his mattress.


So if Romney invested that money in companies that learned how to make TV's cheaper and every person was able to buy two TV's instead of one, you'd be okay with that and vote Romney?

You do realize that making products cheaper and more affordable is one of the things that investing in the stock market does, don't you? Go try and find a cathode ray tube TV. Capital is what made LCD/Plasmas bigger and cheaper than CRT's. If a company didn't adapt to that changing reality, they are out of business.

The economics are simple, price, supply and demand. During a bad economy, a person wants to save $50 because they are worried about the economy and the utility of having a weeks worth of food in the bank is more important than the new TV. That remains true until that TV hits a price point that compels the person to buy it (shifts the demand curve).
 
2012-08-05 12:30:22 PM  

Chimperror2: The economics are simple, price, supply and demand. During a bad economy, a person wants to save $50 because they are worried about the economy and the utility of having a weeks worth of food in the bank is more important than the new TV. That remains true until that TV hits a price point that compels the person to buy it (shifts the demand curve).


And right now, the job situation is so tenuous that the TV has to essentially be free to be enticing to the consumer, leaving no incentive for the manufacturer to employ people to create that TV. Lower tax rates really don't have anything to do with it, regardless of what we're being told by Republicans. I'm old enough to remember when the type of yarns that they spin all started with the words "Once upon a time".
 
2012-08-05 01:27:40 PM  

More_Like_A_Stain: Chimperror2: The economics are simple, price, supply and demand. During a bad economy, a person wants to save $50 because they are worried about the economy and the utility of having a weeks worth of food in the bank is more important than the new TV. That remains true until that TV hits a price point that compels the person to buy it (shifts the demand curve).

And right now, the job situation is so tenuous that the TV has to essentially be free to be enticing to the consumer, leaving no incentive for the manufacturer to employ people to create that TV. Lower tax rates really don't have anything to do with it, regardless of what we're being told by Republicans. I'm old enough to remember when the type of yarns that they spin all started with the words "Once upon a time".


It's a demand curve. There is always a lowed price point to drive up demand. Eventually they have to compete with new models so there is always market pressure to increase volume by lowering price (and internally to lower cost). Lower capital gain taxes keep the money in the capital markets that actually do create jobs. There are always new products either disrupting the existing product market or as a follow-on. Keeping that money in the capital markets keeps the demand curve shifting so that new products are continuously being developed. No manufacturer wants to delay production due to lack of capital.

There is a similar risk/reward curve that is affected by tax rates (reward is lowered when taxes are higher). Raising/lowering taxes will always shift that just as price shifts the supply.demand curve.
 
2012-08-05 01:50:02 PM  
When the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, did they consider the tax rate? No!
 
2012-08-05 02:22:22 PM  

mjjt: nobody really cares how about how he did it or whether it was legal


I do.
 
2012-08-05 02:56:57 PM  

Chimperror2: So if Romney invested that money in companies that learned how to make TV's cheaper and every person was able to buy two TV's instead of one, you'd be okay with that and vote Romney?



If that person's job was just outsourced to China to make the product cheaper, then no, they couldn't buy 2 tv's


Chimperror2: You do realize that making products cheaper and more affordable is one of the things that investing in the stock market does, don't you? Go try and find a cathode ray tube TV. Capital is what made LCD/Plasmas bigger and cheaper than CRT's. If a company didn't adapt to that changing reality, they are out of business.



The stock market only makes rich people more rich by doing nothing. Sorry to burst your bubble.

The cheaper products has only been because of tax breaks by America and super cheap labor in 3rd world countries


Chimperror2: The economics are simple, price, supply and demand. During a bad economy, a person wants to save $50 because they are worried about the economy and the utility of having a weeks worth of food in the bank is more important than the new TV. That remains true until that TV hits a price point that compels the person to buy it (shifts the demand curve).



Except as the past 12 years have shown, people keep losing their jobs, so demand is never going to be there. You can keep cutting prices all you want, but since it wont add jobs IN AMERICA, it will do nothing for anyone else except the top 1%.

But that's the point of your end game in the first place. Romney didn't do a damn thing but put up the money and have his advisers do all the business decisions. Stop trying to frame him like a financial Bill Gates.

Chimperror2: Lower capital gain taxes keep the money in the capital markets that actually do create jobs.



I'd sure love a citation for this. Especially considering the Clinton years had higher capital gains and higher job growth while the Bush years had the worst job growth in history after capital gains taxes were lowered.

Unless you mean jobs and wealth OVERSEAS then sure, that's what you accomplish. But again, back to that end game. That's the point of the Republican strategy. To screw everyone else so they can profit.

And you're a perfect broke poor shill to do it for them
 
2012-08-05 03:04:23 PM  

Chimperror2: Fast Moon: Chimperror2:
Romney has millions and millions of dollars to his name, but he's not doing anything with it. He has a $100,000,000 IRA that's just sitting there collecting interest. How exactly would implementing that kind of financial strategy help our economy? A person who saves up $50 and goes out and buys a TV is much better suited to helping the economy than a person who saves up $500 and sticks it in his mattress.


So if Romney invested that money in companies that learned how to make TV's cheaper and every person was able to buy two TV's instead of one, you'd be okay with that and vote Romney?

You do realize that making products cheaper and more affordable is one of the things that investing in the stock market does, don't you? Go try and find a cathode ray tube TV. Capital is what made LCD/Plasmas bigger and cheaper than CRT's. If a company didn't adapt to that changing reality, they are out of business.

The economics are simple, price, supply and demand. During a bad economy, a person wants to save $50 because they are worried about the economy and the utility of having a weeks worth of food in the bank is more important than the new TV. That remains true until that TV hits a price point that compels the person to buy it (shifts the demand curve).


You obviously have no clue on how business economics work. If the TV company can make the TV at half the price it currently pays for parts and manufacture, they will still charge the same market price and just keep a fatter profit. The market price is the highest price that the market will bear. If the price drops because a competitor sells it at a lower price, then they will drop the price. No business ever drops the price of a product because the cost to make it went down, and survive.

The "we pass the savings to you" is a marketing term, not an actual business practice.
 
2012-08-05 03:19:11 PM  

dericwater: You obviously have no clue on how business economics work. If the TV company can make the TV at half the price it currently pays for parts and manufacture, they will still charge the same market price and just keep a fatter profit.


That is exactly what happened when we started off-shoring jobs in the 1990s-early 2000s. Companies like Levi's, who made clothing in the US for decades moved their manufacturing overseas (claiming they needed to do so to stay competitive) then continued to charge exactly the same prices for their products, while vastly increasing profits.
 
2012-08-05 03:25:50 PM  

jst3p: mjjt: nobody really cares how about how he did it or whether it was legal

I do.


Me too. My guess is that Romney harvested most of the average employees' pension deposits from the companies that Bain Capital vultured.

How did he do that Kimosabe? Romney joined the company's pension plan and in lieu of salary he received humongous grants within the company pension plan. When the company failed, he then rolled that federally insured pension into his own IRA.
 
2012-08-05 03:43:46 PM  

gimmegimme: Chimperror2: Sliding Carp: Is this a good time to remember that Romney was the ONLY executive, the ONLY MEMBER of the Board of directors, and the ONLY shareholder of Bain Capital?

Whatever happened, there is exactly one person who did it.

Why would anyone think this is bad? If he took Bain Capital from nothing to billions and he put shares of stock that were worth nothing and put them into his retirement and it's worth millions, he should be in charge. That's the guy I want figuring out social security, fixing the economy, and running the country.

Cool, I hate America, too. Like you, I want the country run like Bain Capital. The weak and less profitable people must be liquidated so as to extract whatever meager value they hold.


I love America and companies like Bain capital that hold back the workers and let them become all they can become instead of ground down into poverty by incompetent management.
 
2012-08-05 04:05:51 PM  
Do we actually want to go down this road? What are the chances any of the Congressman would come up with a clean bill of health if the IRS looked into their earnings? There's zero chance the Republicans won't do this exact same thing now. Good job.

/Does not care of Mitt, Obama, or anyone on Fark pays 100% their taxes.
 
2012-08-05 04:35:38 PM  
LL316: /Does not care of Mitt, Obama, or anyone on Fark pays 100% their taxes.

Then you're an idiot who doesn't understand the social contract.
 
2012-08-05 04:46:33 PM  
Now that the Democrats have decided to weaponize their positions in government and turn them on the Republicans, the GOP is free to do the same. Internecine warfare can be so entertaining.

i50.tinypic.com
 
2012-08-05 04:46:49 PM  
LL316: Do we actually want to go down this road? What are the chances any of the Congressman would come up with a clean bill of health if the IRS looked into their earnings? There's zero chance the Republicans won't do this exact same thing now. Good job.

/Does not care of Mitt, Obama, or anyone on Fark pays 100% their taxes.


simple enough, ALL public employees, contractors and employees of contractors, including subcontractors must make their current and past tax records public and online. TADA. Dont worry, the IRS will provide this service.
TADA
problem solved

sigh
 
2012-08-05 05:03:10 PM  
namatad: LL316: Do we actually want to go down this road? What are the chances any of the Congressman would come up with a clean bill of health if the IRS looked into their earnings? There's zero chance the Republicans won't do this exact same thing now. Good job.

/Does not care of Mitt, Obama, or anyone on Fark pays 100% their taxes.

simple enough, ALL public employees, contractors and employees of contractors, including subcontractors must make their current and past tax records public and online. TADA. Dont worry, the IRS will provide this service.
TADA
problem solved

sigh


Sounds like a big government solution to a non-existent problem.
 
2012-08-05 05:21:08 PM  
namatad: LL316: Do we actually want to go down this road? What are the chances any of the Congressman would come up with a clean bill of health if the IRS looked into their earnings? There's zero chance the Republicans won't do this exact same thing now. Good job.

/Does not care of Mitt, Obama, or anyone on Fark pays 100% their taxes.

simple enough, ALL public employees, contractors and employees of contractors, including subcontractors must make their current and past tax records public and online. TADA. Dont worry, the IRS will provide this service.
TADA
problem solved

sigh


LOL. You guys will protect "your team" to the bitter end. Who cares if the guy who bleats on about jobs and taxes is responsible for thousands of lost American jobs and cheated on his taxes? He's on our team, Goddammit!
 
2012-08-05 06:10:53 PM  

my lip balm addiction: Harry_Seldon: I am pretty convinced the Obama campaign knows something extremely politically damaging about Mitt Romney's finances. They either a) can't use the information due to it's source b) are waiting for the right time or c) giving Romney enough rope to hang himself

If you think back twenty years, a billionaire, Ross Perot, made a serious run at the presidency. No one was clamoring over his finances, which were likely quite complex.

Ross Perot hadn't proven himself time and time again to be a liar. Mittens can't seem to open his mouth without a lie popping out, especially when it comes to his own personal failings.


He also put forth a resoundingly honest message, financed his own campaign, and was beholden to no one.

He was also completely insane.
 
2012-08-05 06:16:51 PM  
I am all for investigating this...just as soon as they investigate how congresspersons make X dollars for Y years, then leave office godzillionaires.
 
2012-08-05 06:19:08 PM  

Chimperror2: I love America and companies like Bain capital that hold back the workers and let them become all they can become instead of ground down into poverty by incompetent management.



So is that why wealth of everyone but the top 10% has been negative for 30 years?
 
2012-08-05 06:20:35 PM  

jjorsett: Now that the Democrats have decided to weaponize their positions in government and turn them on the Republicans, the GOP is free to do the same. Internecine warfare can be so entertaining.

[i50.tinypic.com image 415x336]



So Republicans can do this for decades, but the second Democrats fight back, how dare they! Prepare for war!

Like little children rooting for their favorite sports team, you Fark Independents are so pathetic
 
2012-08-05 06:34:28 PM  

More_Like_A_Stain: Sounds like a big government solution to a non-existent problem.


so you are ok that congress trades on insider information??
mkay ....
you dont think that there is something WRONG with that??
mkay ....
 
2012-08-05 06:51:35 PM  

namatad: More_Like_A_Stain: Sounds like a big government solution to a non-existent problem.

so you are ok that congress trades on insider information??
mkay ....
you dont think that there is something WRONG with that??
mkay ....


No, I'm not okay with that. Yes, I do think that there's something wrong with that. But I don't see the connection between Congressional perks and this;

simple enough, ALL public employees, contractors and employees of contractors, including subcontractors must make their current and past tax records public and online.

Most members of Congress at both State and Federal levels already voluntarily release a fairly complete record of their financial history. The current shiatstorm is over a Presidential candidate that refuses to and has stated publicly that the reason for that refusal is that there is stuff in there that can be used against him. Like I said, a big government solution to a non-existent problem. If Romney chooses to allow the perception that he has something to hide to continue to cloud his record and damage his campaign, so be it. There's no reason for a clerk in the patent office or a Petty Officer in the Navy to be required to post their returns online.
 
2012-08-05 08:06:35 PM  

FlashHarry: clearly he's been retroactively contributing to his IRA for 16,666 years.

next question!


He just lost the religious right. Claiming more than 6,000 years of contributions is blasphemous.
 
2012-08-05 11:01:41 PM  

dericwater: Chimperror2: Fast Moon: Chimperror2:
Romney has millions and millions of dollars to his name, but he's not doing anything with it. He has a $100,000,000 IRA that's just sitting there collecting interest. How exactly would implementing that kind of financial strategy help our economy? A person who saves up $50 and goes out and buys a TV is much better suited to helping the economy than a person who saves up $500 and sticks it in his mattress.


So if Romney invested that money in companies that learned how to make TV's cheaper and every person was able to buy two TV's instead of one, you'd be okay with that and vote Romney?

You do realize that making products cheaper and more affordable is one of the things that investing in the stock market does, don't you? Go try and find a cathode ray tube TV. Capital is what made LCD/Plasmas bigger and cheaper than CRT's. If a company didn't adapt to that changing reality, they are out of business.

The economics are simple, price, supply and demand. During a bad economy, a person wants to save $50 because they are worried about the economy and the utility of having a weeks worth of food in the bank is more important than the new TV. That remains true until that TV hits a price point that compels the person to buy it (shifts the demand curve).

You obviously have no clue on how business economics work. If the TV company can make the TV at half the price it currently pays for parts and manufacture, they will still charge the same market price and just keep a fatter profit. The market price is the highest price that the market will bear. If the price drops because a competitor sells it at a lower price, then they will drop the price. No business ever drops the price of a product because the cost to make it went down, and survive.

The "we pass the savings to you" is a marketing term, not an actual business practice.


Where did I ever say "cost" except as an internal driver to maximize profit. It's price/supply/demand. Cost is what drove CRT's out of business but it was the price set by flat screens that did it.

And yes, business do drop prices when their cost decreases. It's called capturing/keeping market share and they do it all the time if they can recover profit per part with profit over volume. The same is true in the other direction. If you have any doubt, visit your corner gas station. What they paid for the gas in their tank is irrelevant. But next weeks price and their competitors price is very dependent on their cost or they stop selling gasoline.
 
2012-08-06 01:11:59 AM  

intelligent comment below: jjorsett: Now that the Democrats have decided to weaponize their positions in government and turn them on the Republicans, the GOP is free to do the same. Internecine warfare can be so entertaining.

[i50.tinypic.com image 415x336]


So Republicans can do this for decades, but the second Democrats fight back, how dare they! Prepare for war!

Like little children rooting for their favorite sports team, you Fark Independents are so pathetic


I don't recall Republicans taking to the Senate floor to actively trash a presidential candidate or try to gin up a House investigation of one in the middle of a campaign, but now that the precedent is set, I'm sure the GOP will be happy to operate under this new paradigm. No doubt you'll be whining just as loudly when that happens.
 
2012-08-06 02:07:18 AM  
Did any working stiff actually think that IRA's were created to help them? LOLOL

God, I stand amazed at the people who lost their asses in those things and will still take a hit when it gets time for retirement.

Go ahead and vote for this rich spoiled child. I weep for America.
 
Displayed 50 of 413 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report