Tax returns are a deal breaker

[Red Arrow]

If you consider turning -4% yearly real GDP "growth" into +2.5% yearly real GDP growth in the face of an instransigent House that refuses to do anything that might improve the economy pathetic, I don't know what to tell you. And for someone who doesn't care about Obama's speech, you sure do seem to fight really hard to pretend most of it didn't happen.

(Many years ago now) one of my uncles was hired to turn around a money losing manufacturing facility.  In a couple (2 or 3) of years it was making profit. Corporate told him he needed to make 15% profit the next year.  My uncle said he could give them 12% profit.  He was fired, 12% wasn't good enough.  We should do the same for President Obama.

[Red Arrow]

"Obama 2012: It could always be worse!"
I think the GOP is already doing that.

More like:

"Obama 2012: It will be worse (with Obama)"

[Red Arrow]

Romney should release more tax returns the day after Obama releases his college records.
Right after Bush releases his military records...

Bush is history and not running for President in 2012.  I won't ask for Obama's college records in 2016.

[Red Arrow]

It doesn't matter if it was $46 or $76,000, most of us don't get to deduct our hobby expenses.

Because we are too lazy to set it up as a business. You can have losses for a couple of years but eventually occasionally have to have a profit or it reverts to an actual hobby.

As far as the gift tax thing goes, don't you think it's important for us all to know how that happened so that it can be discussed openly and fixed or not as the body politic sees fit?

You have to do a bit more convincing for me to believe that is your actual goal.

[Hoss]

Love the deflection going on here.  Don't like people asking a relevant question as it pertains to a candidate, who by running on a platform of his business acumen, to release 10 more years of his tax return, then just deflect it by asking for the college transcript of the sitting President.

That's like asking for the divorce papers from a previous marriage of a fiancee you have now, but in angry response, she asks for your vaccination records to make sure you won't give her the chicken pox.

[Red Arrow]

Love the deflection going on here.  Don't like people asking a relevant question as it pertains to a candidate, who by running on a platform of his business acumen, to release 10 more years of his tax return, then just deflect it by asking for the college transcript of the sitting President.

That's like asking for the divorce papers from a previous marriage of a fiancee you have now, but in angry response, she asks for your vaccination records to make sure you won't give her the chicken pox.

You are deflecting that Obama claims his academic credentials as part of his qualifications.

[nathanm]

Because we are too lazy to set it up as a business. You can have losses for a couple of years but eventually occasionally have to have a profit or it reverts to an actual hobby.

Incorporation is irrelevant to whether or not you can deduct business expenses. Sole proprietorship is still a legally recognized way to operate a business. Ill advised, perhaps, but still not only legal, but very common.

You have to do a bit more convincing for me to believe that is your actual goal.

I don't really care what you believe. However, I'll still say that as far as I'm concerned, they're both smile heels. I simply think Obama is the less radical candidate. Romney wants to reshape the income tax to distribute income upward. Obama does not. Romney proposes to drastically increase the military budget over its already bloated levels. Obama does not. He proposes to let some temporary tax cuts expire. Neither candidate is going to do what is necessary to get us out of this economic funk because they're both too blinded by partisan politics and the legalized bribery that is campaign finance to do anything to actually fix the fundamental problems holding us back.

Although Romney is the conservative in the language of politics, in the English language he is nothing of the sort.

As long as we focus on the horse race, the real issues remain obscured, just as the men behind the curtain would like them to be. If against openness as to what current and recent past tax policy actually is and how it actually affects the wealthy, by all means keep saying Romney's tax returns aren't important. If he is actually a serious tax cheat, do you really want him in office? You seem not to care one way or the other. That's OK, I don't either, but for a very different reason.

[Hoss]

You are deflecting that Obama claims his academic credentials as part of his qualifications.

I'm not saying one way or the other.  Did he?  Do his academic credentials make as much difference as a man who says a businessman is good for the country and won't release his tax forms?  Especially if his fellow Republicans asked him to do so as well?

Do I care if he releases them?  No.  But if he doesn't when our sitting President has released 12 years, then what is one to think?  Oh, unless one is a registered (R).

We saw what happened last time we picked a businessman, right?  The same businessman who refused to release his military record.

Once again, my point proven.

[nathanm]

We saw what happened last time we picked a businessman, right?

To be fair, the only business success he ever had involved soaking north Texas taxpayers for hundreds of millions of dollars, some of which found its way into his pocket, and then successfully evading half the tax that was due on the income. So no business success at all, really, just a major success at the graft racket.

[Hoss]

To be fair, the only business success he ever had involved soaking north Texas taxpayers for hundreds of millions of dollars, some of which found its way into his pocket, and then successfully evading half the tax that was due on the income. So no business success at all, really, just a major success at the graft racket.

Never said he was a 'successful' businessman Nate, just saying he was one.   

[Red Arrow]

I don't really care what you believe.

Well, we have something in common as I don't really care what you believe either.  We just both derive some entertainment from each other's posts.

I simply think Obama is the less radical candidate.

Oops, back to disagreeing.

Although Romney is the conservative in the language of politics, in the English language he is nothing of the sort.

More conservative than Obama will have to do.

If against openness as to what current and recent past tax policy actually is and how it actually affects the wealthy, by all means keep saying Romney's tax returns aren't important.

This sounds more like an obsession than a question of qualifications.

If he is actually a serious tax cheat, do you really want him in office? You seem not to care one way or the other.

I believe the probability of Romney being a tax cheat is so close to zero as to not be a concern.  Please do not assume that I don't care if someone is a tax cheat, it's insulting.

[nathanm]

This sounds more like an obsession than a question of qualifications.

It speaks to a legitimate and ongoing national discussion. Political campaigns are about qualifications, record, and issues.

I believe the probability of Romney being a tax cheat is so close to zero as to not be a concern.  Please do not assume that I don't care if someone is a tax cheat, it's insulting.

Sorry if you got that from my post, but if he's not a tax cheat, it shouldn't matter to you one way or the other whether Romney releases his returns. I'm sure you wouldn't mind not hearing about them again, though. I'm sure the harping gets tiresome.

[Red Arrow]

It speaks to a legitimate and ongoing national discussion. Political campaigns are about qualifications, record, and issues.

The legitimacy of the national discussion is questioned by many.

Sorry if you got that from my post, but if he's not a tax cheat, it shouldn't matter to you one way or the other whether Romney releases his returns.

You finally got it.  I don't care if he does or he doesn't release MORE returns.

[nathanm]

The legitimacy of the national discussion is questioned by many.

Tax policy is not a legitimate national discussion?

[Red Arrow]

Tax policy is not a legitimate national discussion?

You are spinning almost as fast as a Pitts Special rolls.
Releasing tax returns to the public is not the law, it has been customary.  Trying to make it sound as if it were the law to release 10 years of tax returns to the public is not legitimate.  Would it satisfy a curiosity?  Of course it would.

Tax policy is a matter of discussing existing laws and whether or not they should be changed.  One man's returns are not a discussion of tax policy, it is a witch hunt.