The secret in Mitt Romney’s tax returns

[Gaspar]

If he does release them, I hope they show all kinds of shelters, charities, and investment strategies designed to shield him from overpayment.  I would hope that a man as successful and resourceful as Romney could at least maintain an effective rate below 30%, if not, he'd be worthless.  I would also like to see most of his estate set up under trusts so that he would be partially shielded from death taxes and would be able to pass the fruits of his success to his boys.

As a requirement to be a candidate for president, Mr. Romney had to release them to the FEC for audit along with Government Ethics Form 278.  He has no obligation to release them to anyone else.  They are his personal records, and as long as they are deemed to be legal and ethical by the FEC, there is no need for Chris Matthews et. al. to whine about horses, Mormon missions, or investments in waterproof shoelace companies.

After looking at his 2010 return, what a bag of excitement that was, I would assume that he will probably release several more, but most likely wants to wait until the libs work themselves up into a good froth.  This is an excellent diversion for them.  Out of our 535 members of congress only 17 have agreed to release any tax returns.  It's simply not a requirement of office.  Public disclosure of financial records as a requirement of elected office is considered discriminatory, just as personal health records are. 

I am confused as to why Democrats seem so bent on discriminatory action against a political candidate. . .oh yeah, never mind. 

[RecycleMichael]

I would hope that a man as successful and resourceful as Romney could at least maintain an effective rate below 30%, if not, he'd be worthless. 

If that is your measure of a man's worth, I feel sorry for you.

[AquaMan]

No, Mike. I actually agree with part of what he says. I hope he does release them and they are full of what he describes. I remember what a former city councilor told me when I complained that the street in front of the mayor's home was smooth and well maintained while mine just a few blocks away was crumbling and rippled. He said, "My gosh Steve, if a mayor can't get the roads and sidewalks repaired in front of her own home, what kind of mayor is she?" It will be a wake up alarm for many people who have no idea that besides being able to buy justice, the wealthy also buy zero taxation. It will perhaps precipitate a change in tax law that reflects what the public considers fair and reasonable.

As far as his lib, media concerns and the rest of his funny little beliefs, well ...tell it to Fox baby! I would imagine that those 17 congressmen are either running for president, are planning to in the future or (gasp) understand that the public is justified in asking. What a red herring. They also aren't obligated to take English tests or loyalty oaths. So what.

No one in their right mind thinks a wealthy democrat running for president (especially one who sings God Bless America and bases his campaign on his business ability and integrity) could get away with not disclosing their taxes 'cause the press might criticize them" or because the public doesn't understand what the wealthy have to go through to not pay taxes. Talk about whiny.

[Gaspar]

No, Mike. I actually agree with part of what he says. I hope he does release them and they are full of what he describes. I remember what a former city councilor told me when I complained that the street in front of the mayor's home was smooth and well maintained while mine just a few blocks away was crumbling and rippled. He said, "My gosh Steve, if a mayor can't get the roads and sidewalks repaired in front of her own home, what kind of mayor is she?" It will be a wake up alarm for many people who have no idea that besides being able to buy justice, the wealthy also buy zero taxation. It will perhaps precipitate a change in tax law that reflects what the public considers FAIR and reasonable. Bingo!

As far as his lib, media concerns and the rest of his funny little beliefs, well ...tell it to Fox baby! I would imagine that those 17 congressmen are either running for president, are planning to in the future or (gasp) understand that the public is justified in asking. What a red herring. They also aren't obligated to take English tests or loyalty oaths. So what.

No one in their right mind thinks a wealthy democrat running for president (especially one who sings God Bless America and bases his campaign on his business ability and integrity) could get away with not disclosing their taxes 'cause the press might criticize them" or because the public doesn't understand what the wealthy have to go through to not pay taxes. Talk about whiny.

Except for Jimmy Carter.  He also only released one return and refused additional requests.

[Gaspar]

If that is your measure of a man's worth, I feel sorry for you.

Oh goodness why? 
I spend a great deal of time every year figuring out how to pay as little income tax as possible.  I bet you do as well.

It would be fiscally irresponsible of any business person not to employ every measure legally possible to reduce the taxes paid on a corporate or individual level.

I have yet to meet anyone who seeks ways to pay additional taxes?  Even when Warren Buffett speaks out of one side of his mouth about not paying enough, the other side is cheering his attorneys who are battling to keep him from over a billion in unrealized tax benifits that the government is currently suing him for.

Only a very silly person would stand up and say "look at me, I payed the maximum amount of taxes and took no deductions!"  That would be like paying sticker price for a car or a house.  What kind of idiot does that?

[AquaMan]

Jimmy Carter? Well, there you go. Our man Romney is just like Jimmy!

[Gaspar]

Jimmy Carter? Well, there you go. Our man Romney is just like Jimmy!

Awesome non-sequeter.  Run with it.

I'll go ahead and submit it to Troof Team, and perhaps it will make it on-prompter sometime.

[RecycleMichael]

It would be fiscally irresponsible of any business person not to employ every measure legally possible to reduce the taxes paid on a corporate or individual level.

So obviously, you would thus feel that anybody who didn't take advantage of food stamps or welfare would be equally as silly.

Why would anyone not file for the maximum unemployment benefits they day they lose their job?

Who would hire any unemployed person who is not doing that? They would be worthless in your mind.

[Gaspar]

So obviously, you would thus feel that anybody who didn't take advantage of food stamps or welfare would be equally as silly.

Why would anyone not file for the maximum unemployment benefits they day they lose their job?

Who would hire any unemployed person who is not doing that? They would be worthless in your mind.

No, that would be the opposite of what I would feel.

[RecycleMichael]

The rich should take advantage of the system, but the poor shouldn't.

Got it.

[Gaspar]

The rich should take advantage of the system, but the poor shouldn't.

Got it.

Unrelated.  You purposefully misinterpret. Both the rich and the poor should have the same advantages when it comes to taxation.  No wealthy person should be able to pay a smaller percentage of his/her income to the government than a less successful person.  In fact, everyone should be taxed fairly and equally.  In an ideal society, the tax rate would be constant, and either usage based or flat.  There would be NO deductions, shelters, or exemptions.  No tools, or slings for politicians to grapple.

To address the other side of your unrelated analogy, entitlements should be made available to those that NEED them, with the goal of graduating people off of them rather than expanding them.  Dependence is the enemy, attractive as it may be to politicians to acquire votes, it harms people.  The purpose of these programs should be to promote sustenance and personal development, not comfort.

[AquaMan]

You're off your mark today Gas. First you relate how Romney is similar to Jimmy Carter in that they both refused to release more than a couple years of tax returns (you brought it up on re-direct so to speak), now your own logic is used against you on the cherished business principle of avoiding taxes. Some days it just don't pay to post!

FWIW, I find fault with that cherished principle. Many companies go to great lengths, expensive lengths, to eliminate taxes. It becomes a mantra that impedes or adversely affects their operations. Tax strategies have to be considered in terms of larger goals. There is a cost/benefit analysis for every business practice. Romney is finding that out.

The lower demos figure that out when they draw unemployment, workers comp or join a union then find employers consider them poisonous.

[Hoss]

You're off your mark today Gas. First you relate how Romney is similar to Jimmy Carter in that they both refused to release more than a couple years of tax returns (you brought it up on re-direct so to speak), now your own logic is used against you on the cherished business principle of avoiding taxes. Some days it just don't pay to post!

FWIW, I find fault with that cherished principle. Many companies go to great lengths, expensive lengths, to eliminate taxes. It becomes a mantra that impedes or adversely affects their operations. Tax strategies have to be considered in terms of larger goals. There is a cost/benefit analysis for every business practice. Romney is finding that out.

The lower demos figure that out when they draw unemployment, workers comp or join a union then find employers consider them poisonous.

you haven't seen his "the new acorn" post yet....