It is ironic that a President that refuses to share his personal records would make an issue of Romney's personal tax records. And how can it be relavent to the election? I mean the IRS has determined them to be accurate and lawful, otherwise they would be pursuing legal remedies. Where as if Obama has fibbed on his resume, that would be pretty important. (ie qualifications, character, etc)
On the other hand, why do these gentlemen continue to refuse transparency? Should anything be PRIVATE when applying for the office of President? Thoughts?
CNN Romney Tax Disclosure
Obama Release Your Records
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
37 comments:
What records do you think Obama should release? I don't believe it's customary to release college transcripts. Has any other presidential candidate done this in the past?
btw, that Obama link was pretty riduculous. I thought G2A had better standards than that.
Oh come now, I have posted enough Liberal conspiracy theories. (or you may say "truths") You should know that my standards are variable depending on the topic. Especially when it makes a point or displays another point of view.
The reality is that many people think that Obama is a fraud. Just as many people seem to see Romney as a ruthless businessman and tax evader. They may or not be correct, however they get to voice their concerns since this is America.
The strange part is that these Politician's seem to strive to block this request for transparency. So are they shady characters or just trying to keep some private things private.
It seems more relevant that Obama share proof of his credentials (ie birth certificate, proof of degrees, etc) than for Romney to share his tax returns. We already have the IRS vouching that Romney's taxes are legally compliant. (ie no charges pending)
So why do you think that Romney should share his tax information? If we know he is abiding by the law, why is it relevant?
Although Presidential candidates have long history of releasing tax returns I really can't think of a good reason for Romney to release his returns, unless he can show he paid a similar or higher tax rate as the commoners (unlikely)
I must have missed your posts about liberal conspiracy theories, just as you seem to have missed Obama releases original long-form birth certificate But it is not just you, Lots Of Republicans Still Think (Obama's) Not Even An American
Also, if you can find a liberal equivalent of the birther link I'd like to see it.
Lastly, I am curious if you are part of the high volume chain of hateful emails about Obama, I used to get a look at those received by my mother (She is an Obama supporter and accepted these emails for a few years out of curiousity. She finally said stop as they have become more frequent and more nasty/racist.
Here are some similar Liberal sites. Little meat and a lot of opinion / accusations. They seem similar to the Conservative one I linked to.
Daily Beast
MN Publius
As for a Liberal equivalent of the Birther, I must agree that it is an interesting challenge. I'll need to give it some thought and maybe do some research. Maybe a Conservative reader can help me out.
As for emails, I don't forward any. If they are interesting enough they end up on G2A.
ycbs (you cannot be serious)
your link is anonymous blog devoted to birtherism while the Daily Beast is an online journal with accomplished people writing on a variety of topics (olympics, art, entertainment.) I perused the politics section and found this essay related to your current topic: Mitt Romney’s Tax Returns Are Irrelevant to the Presidential Race
MN Publius is a poor example, as well, as it is most comparable to Powerline (both MN political blog whose authors have a partisan viewpoint)
You have a poor case that the left is as extreme as the right, but keep trying to make if you want. It is interesting to observe your idealogical blinders.
Since I do like reading the extremist talk from both sides, I'll keep checking them all out. Please keep straightening me out when my blinders seem to be showing.
Now are you certain that you are not just getting more sensitive as the election draws nearer. That "the Conservative's are more extremist" is something I could hear the Conservative's saying about the Liberal press. Maybe a sound bite from Rush.
The point of this post is that the Politician's are hiding personal data and their opponents are demanding it. The suspect link was randomly grabbed off a google search regarding what is Obama hiding? No deep seated point nor belief in the site's voracity, just an example of someone's frustration regarding Obama's non-disclosure history.
Even your link said he didn't provide a birth certificate until he was long in office. Which of course makes no sense...
It seems to me that both sides could be doing a better job of telling us what their plan is, rather than beating these trivial and annoying negative campaign techniques to death.
There are two separate issues here. First, by not providing his tax records, Mitt gives the appearance that he is hiding something, as he surely is. He has more or less acknowledged that the records will be picked over for information the Democrats will use to his disadvantage. Mitt, in effect, has made a decision that keeping his records secret involves less of a political cost than revealing them. Second, the records would show the distortions of tax policies that benefit the wealth at the expense of the rest of us. That is, because the government lets Mitt keep more of his money, we keep less of ours. More information from Mitt would certainly provide more evidence of that. But, quite frankly, we have enough evidence of that in the forms Mitt has already provided us. If Democrats can't make adequate use of that, I don't see how piling on more information would really help.
--Hiram
Republicans want Obama's school transcripts. I am sure Democrats would in turn demand Mitt's disciplinary records from high school particularly with reference to any bullying incidents. And Dan Rather still wants to know if George Bush ducked out of the last couple of years of his military service. This is what Republicans want to talk about because they surely don't want to talk about Mitt's tax proposals which would lower taxes on the unearned income of Mitt and his billionaire backers, tax cuts which would be funded by higher taxes on the money middle class people actually work for and earn. This is understandable. If that were my tax plan, I would be eager to shift the discussion to whether the president ever had detention in high school too.
--Hiram
As for a Liberal equivalent of the Birther,
Presumably the liberal equivalent of a birth would be someone who claims that Mitt Romney isn't a citizen, wasn't born in the United States. Do you hear liberals make that claim a lot? Is there a liberal Orly Taitz out there, going uncovered by our biased media.
I will say here bluntly, what I don't say a lot of other places out of fear of being accused of playing the race card, and I am told I mustn't do that. The reason why Obama's citizenship is question and Mitt's is not is pure racism. Even here in the second decade of the 20th century, a lot of Americans have difficulty in accepting that a man with a slightly different color of skin is an American. Social mores have taught them they cannot say that directly, so they say it indirectly, by lying about the facts of Barack Obama's birth. They do that for no other reason then they are racists.
--
I see that I did not sign that last posting. It was from me, Hiram.
--Hiram
I have no doubt that race is an issue for some percentage of the Birther conspiracy folks. Like the authors of the contentious link possibly. However I find it hard to believe that it is Trump's issue. Maybe he just likes stirring the pot.
As for Romney's place of birth (Detroit Michigan), it seems to be harder to dispute since there was no foreign travel alleged to be involved. Unless maybe Mom took a day trip to Canada while in labor?
Obama's latest TV ads seem like good politics, hopefully both the parties can get back to positive campaigning, instead of these distractions. Obama The Choice Ad
For fairness and equal time...
Romney TV Ad
As for Romney's place of birth (Detroit Michigan), it seems to be harder to dispute since there was no foreign travel alleged to be involved.
There is literally no substantive reason to think that Barack Obama was born anywhere but in the United States, yet curiously many Republicans have disputed what should be an undisputed fact.
Has anyone thought to ask whether Romneys was traveling at the time of Mitt's birth. Bear in mind also, that George Romney was born in Mexico yet no one thought to question his citizenship when he ran for president. Had Mitt been born outside of the United States as his father was, and as John McCain, was, he would have still been a US citizen. As Barack Obama would have been had he been born outside the United States. Yet for some reason, many Republicans question Barack Obama's citizenship. Why, exactly, is that?
--Hiram
Why?
The same reason the DFL is pounding the tax return drum...
They can and it may sway some of the uninformed and fearful.
The same reason the DFL is pounding the tax return drum.
The reason Democrats are demanding Mitt's tax returns is that by failing to provide them, Mitt appears to be hiding something. I don't actually think that if Mitt released his forms, much would change. They would simply tell us more of what we already know, and to understand how the way we tax folks like Mitt distorts the system and the economy generally we have enough information. The problem with Mitt's tax issues is that they are too complicated to explain now, and that's a problem adding more information doesn't really help solve.
Mitt's returns are meaningful to folks like me who understand a bit more about this stuff than most folks, but he already doesn't have my vote. What I think people can and need to understand is that Mitt, and his friends, already pay a lower tax rate than you do, and that he wants to lower his rate even more, and in order to fund the tax cuts which would save him millions of dollars, he must raise your taxes.
To let Mitt keep more of his money, you have to keep less of yours.
--Hiram
about lack of transparency and Obama's non-disclosure history:
Romney staff spent nearly $100,000 to hide records (from his term as governor)
Romney’s Olympic records to be released before election, WITH CUTS
Why won't Romney release more tax returns? (I read on another blog that it could be that his accountants found a way to avoid taxes by funding his $100 million IRA)
Now for Obama:
FactCheck.org Obama's records
Factcheck.org Born in the USA (Aug 2008)
That's three examples of Romney secrecy vs. none for Obama (in case you lost count :)
about conspiracy theories - since you have provided any liberal ones I have a few to share - The first is one that I thought was on the liberal fringe, 911 truthers, but wikipedia says it is a diverse movement (liberals, conservatives, and libertarians) and that most members are involved in right wing politics.
I also learned of a new conspiracy theory just today, but it is once again from the conservative side of the political spectrum.
"The administration’s recent move to allow states to apply for waivers from certain parts of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program is “outrageous,” Gingrich said, and part of a conspiracy by Obama and liberals to increase government dependence."
Welfare Fight Heats Up, Gingrich Joins Fray
Finally, I have one more (liberal this time) from four years ago that I sort of believed for a day or two. Sarah Palin Probably Staged A Gigantic Hoax About Being Trig's Mother
So if they bought all the hard drives... What would cancelling the leases have to do with hiding data? I am missing something here.
Apparently Romney is a smart businessman, records retention and deletion is a critical activity within our corporation. If it is no longer relevant or necessary, delete it. (and to be certain, destroy the hard drive) Why would anyone or any company leave useless info around for someone to try and misinterpret? Especially if you are a politician/
As for Obama, I agree that he has not "sealed" his records. However he certainly has been reluctant to share them. I would say equal to Romney.
And maybe their opponents are just asking for too much.
I would sure dislike a bunch of political opponents trying to audit my personal tax records. I don't think I have done anything wrong, but I am sure they would find some ammunition or questions. And my taxes are relatively simple...
You never did mention even one record Obama is hiding that you think he should release.
I agree Romney has the right to keep his tax records private. The consensus view in my family is he paid a very low effective tax rate using a variety of of accounting strategies that are totally incomprehensible to people who file a three page tax form. I wouldn't think any more highly of him even if he did he pay 15% (unlikely) so he might as well keep the records private.
What do you think is a fair tax rate to rate to pay on $20 million income?
There is a lot we know already about Romney's taxes, much of it damaging. My favorite is the magical IRA. But if we knew more, it would be more of the same.
What we do know is that Mitt pays a lower tax on income he doesn't earn than most of us pay on income we work very hard for. We know that he thinks he should pay even less. And we know he thinks you should fund his tax cut out of your earnings. What we don't know is why you should keep less of your money, which you work very hard for, just so he can keep more of his money for which he doesn't work at all.
It's a mystery.
--Hiram
I think we are back to the discussion regarding whether Payroll taxes are actually taxes or forced insurance/savings plans. Fact Check Romney Rate For all practical purposes, Romney is retired from his previous career and living on his savings and investments. The link explains that you are comparing apples and oranges.
I guess my point is that if the IRS is satisfied. Why all the ruckus?
As for future tax rates etc. I am not sure where I stand. I guess I am a fan of encouraging saving and investing. So lower rates on unearned income make sense. Of course this benefits the savers and investors, isn't this what we want? Now how do we get more people saving and investing?
As for $20 million, it depends if it is a wage or a return on investment. Or if it is in a 401K or IRA... Thoughts?
As for Obama info, he apparently withheld posting his birth certificate all through the election and through 2+ years of his Presidency. This is why it seems similar to me. No rational reason for the delay, just some power play or desire for privacy.
As for Liberal conspiracies, I seem to remember a lot of discussion regarding Bush's military records, alcohol consumption, etc. They seem pretty similar to the birther and school record stuff.
The ruckus I am making is that Mitt pays a lower tax rate for income he doesn't earn than you do for income you do earn. I am not saying that's illegal, just not good policy.
Mitt wants you to keep less of the money you work for so he can keep more of the money he doesn't work for. What sense does that make?
Obviously, I have little use for birtherism. There is no reason at all to think Obama wasn't born in the United States. Why should he cater to racists who have made a conscious decision to lie?
--Hiram
So you believe that retirees should continue to pay ~15% in payroll taxes?
Mitt's not employed. He doesn't pay payroll taxes.
--Hiram
My point exactly. Therefore his tax rate is lower. And his income is almost exclusively from long term investments or in tax deferred instruments, therefore taxed at a lower rate.
$3 million seems like a pretty healthy tax bill to be paying on income from investments. Especially since he had to donate approx another $3 million to charity to get that low rate. FC Link What do you think he should be paying?
Should income from savings and investing be taxed at the same rate as earned income from your perspective?
A positive thought for you, Mitt will owe a lot of taxes when he starts cashing out those IRA's/401K's. They are tax deferred, not tax free.
His income comes various financial assets he owns. There is no reason at all to think they are long term investments. He certainly doesn't work for the income he receives. He is unemployed. And of course, we know virtually nothing at all about the income he receives from his tax deferred investments. If we included that in the calculations, the rate in taxes he paid would in all likelihood be significantly lower than the rate reported in the media.
So are you willing to pay more in taxes on the income you work hard to earn so Mitt can pay less?
==Hiram
Should income from savings and investing be taxed at the same rate as earned income from your perspective?
I don't see a reason why unearned income should be taxed at a lower rate than earned income. Mitt doesn't merely want to continue the preferred tax treatment for unearned income, he wants to increase it.
--Hiram
I want Americans to save more and use debt less. Keeping investment income taxes low is one way to encourage that.
I want people to give more to charity. Keeping the write off is one way to encourage it.
Will I support higher taxes for the spenders to help change our culture to be more interested in saving. Yes.
"I want Americans to save more and use debt less."
We will have left to save, if Mitt Romney has his way. And isn't there a contradiction here? How can you save money without creating debt? Banks don't keep that much cash on the premises. They loan the money you save, creating debt.
Mitt Romney made his fortune by use of debt, that is borrowing huge sum of money to buy out companies. The money he borrowed stayed on the balance sheet of those companies and it is stifling economic growth now.
--Hiram
Using temporary debt to leverage a gain on an investment is a good thing, to saddle yourself with a long term debt that you can not afford is another. Especially when it is for some discretionary item.
History of Debt
Though my only debt is a reasonable sized mortgage. (ie leverage for investments) I personally only watch my net worth. I am always astounded by how low the median net worth number is. Median Net Worth History
So I am guessing that you think investment income should also be taxed on a progressive scale, just like earned income?
By the way, if Bain bought a company, borrowed against it, and tried to sell the company. The purchasing entity would offer less for the company to account for the debt on the balance sheet.
If they still own the company, they are still carrying the debt. And the bank that financed the loan thought it was an acceptable risk.
Mitt was in the business of settling long term debt on others.
--Hiram
I agree that they aren't Saints, however I sure don't see them as the Devils that you do.
I think these quotes say it all.
"A Wall Street Journal analysis of 77 businesses Bain invested in while Romney led the firm found that 22 percent either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested (although in many cases, that was after Bain had parted with the companies).
Romney acknowledges that not every Bain deal was a hit, that some investments went bad and ended in bankruptcy, while others led to layoffs.
”Sometimes the medicine is a little bitter but it is necessary to save the life of the patient,” Romney told the New York Times in 2007. ”My job was to try and make the enterprise successful, and in my view the best security a family can have is that the business they work for is strong.”
Bain was “never interested in driving companies out of business,” said Howard Anderson, a professor at MIT’s Sloan School of Management, “and certainly to portray that as their modus operandi is unfair and inaccurate.”
“The goal here was to create wealth,” Anderson said. “Jobs were the byproduct, not the product.”
Bain has lots of success stories, like Staples and Sports Authority, Anderson said. “But sometimes, it doesn’t work out as you plan and they go out of business,” he said. “On day one, they all look good, like the first day of baseball. … All in all, Bain is a remarkable company.”
“Their overall performance was terrific,” concurred Steven Neil Kaplan, a professor at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. “He’s got lots of deals that worked.”"
Fact Check Facts Strained
However I am sure you will maintain your position.
But you notice the success stories aren't very successful in terms of the economy. The successes Mitt cites, Sports Authority, Staples, and Domino's came early in his career and are not characteristic of it. And they are all in the low paying retail industry, of which there wasn't a shortage of jobs then, and there isn't a shortage of jobs now. In economic terms, Mitt was a pusher on a string.
Mitt Romney was part of the financialization of American business, the belief that wealth could be created by the shuffling of paper. He was a guy who made his vast fortune at a time when Americans believed they could make money by selling the same thing to each other over and over again, at ever higher prices. Mitt was a broker in those deals, but not a participant in them since he was smart enough to get his money up front. Those days are over now. They ended when the bubble that made Mitt Romney fabulously wealthy burst in the real estate crisis. We need to do now, what Mitt Romney has never in his career shown a glimmer of knowing how to do. get Americans back to work.
--Hiram
As I said, I didn't think we would come to consensus.
The amazing thing to me is that Mitt Romney is taken seriously. He was so much a part of the wrong direction America took in the 80's and 90's, the archetypal man of the bubble. And I think the fact that Mitt is taken seriously is the result of the fact that even today, Americans don't understand the origins of bubbles generally, and specifically how we got into the mess we are in today.
Mitt Romney's era of the bubble is over. All that's left is the fabulous wealth on his balance sheet, and the extraordinary debt Mitt and people like Mitt, inflicted on ours.
--Hiram
I find it hard to believe that the era of bubbles is over. I believe as long as humans want to get rich quick with little effort or research, there will alway be bubbles. It is part of American human nature and our culture.
Please explain your rational for no more bubbles. And how you believe bubbles are created.
I find it hard to believe that the era of bubbles is over.
You are right, it never is. But I think Mitt's form of bubble is over. We won't see leveraged buyouts again until the generation of decision makers who was burned by them fades from the scene. The kind of business that made Mitt himself wealthy has been dead for more than a decade now.
Bubbles have to reinvent change. In the '80s, it was commercial real estate and junk bonds, in the '90s, it was the internet. Mitt made money by buying assets he could persuade people were undervalued in a bull market, extracting as much wealth from them as he could personally, reshaping the income statement, and pawning them off on some fool who thought he could pawn them off on greater fools. Eventually we ran out of greater fools, or more likely the greater fools ran out of money, so all that's left from that era is the debt which somehow managed to end up on our balance sheets, not the balance sheet of the Mitt Romney's of the world who actually borrowed the money.
Funny how it works out that way.
--Hiram
The point of Keynesian economics as I see it is to minimize the creation of bubbles. The idea is to prevent the economy from getting too high or too low. Somebody like Mitt objects to that because just when things are going good, the credit markets which were the lifeblood of his business would be shut off from him. There is a moral hazard here, by the way. The central problem of Mitt's business is that it would take risks, huge risks sometimes, for which other people would bear the burden. The money he borrowed, would end up on someone else's balance sheet. And when those businesses went belly up, ultimately pretty much everyone in the economy is hurt except Mitt.
--Hiram
Post a Comment