Reid Suggests Romney Paid No Taxes for 10 Years

#427
#427
lawgator1 said:
I don't disagree with any of that. I do think that the spending cuts should be real, i.e. in the trillions and incorporating entitlements and defense, and accompanied by increased revenues.

I'd like to see the capital gains tax either increased or reformed in its application to capture more revenue.
Click to expand...

We agree in part then.

Im for a more simple tax code that shrinks the need/size of the IRS.

Im not for giving more $ to an entity that has yet to prove they want to do the right thing with it. A politicians nature is to win the next election. That doesn't = whats best for the country. That is no different on left as it is on the right.
 
#428
#428
Hell, I'd settle for a slowdown in the growth of government spending!

Even the Ryan plan provides for growing government spending - just at a considerably lower rate.
 
#429
#429
BeecherVol said:
We agree in part then.

Im for a more simple tax code that shrinks the need/size of the IRS.

Im not for giving more $ to an entity that has yet to prove they want to do the right thing with it. A politicians nature is to win the next election. That doesn't = whats best for the country. That is no different on left as it is on the right.
Click to expand...

not even possible with this admin. 16,000+ new hires being brought on at the IRS and no way they risk "job growth" and get rid of them
 
#430
#430
lawgator1 said:
Obama isn't claiming that you should vote for him because of the grades he got in college 30 years ago whereas Romney is touting his personal financial success in the last 10-15 years as THE reason you should vote for him. That would be one rather enormous difference.
Click to expand...

what? Obama's lone claim on anything is that he attended two of the best universities in America. How on earth is that removed from the vetting process, given that it's his lone accomplishment?

Romney is touting time as a governor / chief executive. Why didn't you ask questions like that of the current pretender in the White House? Your sudden urge to vet a candidate is pure hypocritical media driven politics.
 
#431
#431
volinbham said:
How is that any different than Obama withholding his transcripts or him doing an executive order version of the Dream Act or any action he takes?
Click to expand...

the main difference is in major media support. Obama's hiding his past helped the viewpoint of the vast majority of those vetting him, so he was handed a pass on a silver platter.

Romney has been enormously successful in the private enterprise world and that doesn't help the viewpoint of the vetters either, so they've found a way to try and undermine a strength over a pointless issue. Given that it has lasted so long, it either works or hands Romney the job.
 
#432
#432
politicsvol said:
Those are facts? He bought a bunch of strugling companies that were going bankrupt without him. He didn't exactly buy apple and decide to fire everyone and move operations to dubai.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter how hands on he was in the day to day operations. Bought struggling companies on the cheap with the intention of shedding unprofitable parts of the company and turn a profit. To do that, most business models involved shedding jobs and outsourcing jobs. Again, nothing wrong with that in and of itself.

However, politically, that is very unpopular nowadays. Therein lies the problem.
 
#433
#433
BigPapaVol said:
neither is factual. The guy was at the helm of a company buying portfolio companies for any number of reasons. Those portfolio companies are operated independently of the equity holders. Bain typically has seats on the board and can grow those to control positions via provisions in the purchase agreement(s). Pretending that Romney had some hand in the decision making for most of these companies is silly.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he was completely unaware of the business models to turn around the struggling companies he was buying. Common.
 
#434
#434
PKT_VOL said:
Doesn't matter how hands on he was in the day to day operations. Bought struggling companies on the cheap with the intention of shedding unprofitable parts of the company and turn a profit. To do that, most business models involved shedding jobs and outsourcing jobs. Again, nothing wrong with that in and of itself.

However, politically, that is very unpopular nowadays. Therein lies the problem.
Click to expand...

You act as though this was romney's entire operation. The fact that the obama administration has only come up with 2 or 3 total companies that this happened to speaks volumes.
 
#435
#435
Romney has tends of millions stashed away in Swiss Bank accounts, and the Cayman Islands. He turned $450,000 into $102 million, tax free. He paid a tax rate of less than 14 %. And he wants to be in charge of tax and budget reform, but won't release his own taxes, as everyone else has done for decades.

And your constant retort is where are Obama's college transcripts from the 30 years ago?

That's just awesome.
 
#437
#437
lawgator1 said:
Romney has tends of millions stashed away in Swiss Bank accounts, and the Cayman Islands. He turned $450,000 into $102 million, tax free. He paid a tax rate of less than 14 %. And he wants to be in charge of tax and budget reform, but won't release his own taxes, as everyone else has done for decades.

And your constant retort is where are Obama's college transcripts from the 30 years ago?

That's just awesome.
Click to expand...

a) You have no idea how much money Romney has in Swiss Bank accounts.

b) He put the bain investment in his IRA. That's the worst possible account from a tax point of view. It's all going to come out as ordinary income rather than be taxed whenever he sold it as capital gains. If Romney knew that investment was going to turn into hundreds of millions than he should fire his accountant immediately for costing him tens of millions of future taxes he never would have paid.
 
#442
#442
politicsvol said:
And now they are showing restraint? come on.
Click to expand...

Well, when you stretch laying off someone to causing a woman to die of cancer, even though she had health insurance well after that AND lie about your campaign having knowledge of the story...then yes, it is politically smart to show some restraint for a few news cycles.
 
#443
#443
PKT_VOL said:
Yeah, he was completely unaware of the business models to turn around the struggling companies he was buying. Common.
Click to expand...

Ever spent any time around an equity shop? Ever seen one force a company to make the move overseas? Were you around the business world when the vogue move was outsourcing to some cheap labor craphole in the world? Seen a company become uncompetitive due to American labor pricing?

It wasn't Romney driving the decision train for these moves. Deal teams are small and tend to handle verticals. The vertical groups only have the leverage to pull the trigger once a deal goes sideways enough to give them control. At that point, the decisions are relatively obvious. Nobody at Bain walks into a deal thinking a move overseas is the path to profitability so they'll shove it down someone's throat. The board and management of the portfolio companies still drive the decision making at the company. The last thing Bain wants is to have to wade into the middle of a company and start making strategic decisions.
 
#444
#444
BigPapaVol said:
Ever spent any time around an equity shop? Ever seen one force a company to make the move overseas? Were you around the business world when the vogue move was outsourcing to some cheap labor craphole in the world? Seen a company become uncompetitive due to American labor pricing?

It wasn't Romney driving the decision train for these moves. Deal teams are small and tend to handle verticals. The vertical groups only have the leverage to pull the trigger once a deal goes sideways enough to give them control. At that point, the decisions are relatively obvious. Nobody at Bain walks into a deal thinking a move overseas is the path to profitability so they'll shove it down someone's throat. The board and management of the portfolio companies still drive the decision making at the company. The last thing Bain wants is to have to wade into the middle of a company and start making strategic decisions.
Click to expand...

Your barking up the wrong tree. I have no problem with laying off people or shipping jobs overseas. That is volprof.

I am talking from a purely political standpoint in an election year. He was fully aware of the diverse practices his company was engaged in. He obviously did not have a problem with it and nor should he given the business he was in. He saved many jobs by doing what he did in spite of the fact that he laid off workers and outsourced jobs. All of that is irreverent.

We are in a time of unprecedented outrage and anger by the American public for CEO's and outsourcing/laying off people to make an extra buck. Given how widely unpopular that image is, the GOP thought it was a good idea to nominate him as their Presidential candidate. It is dumbfounding to try to understand the logic behind that. It is obviously hurting him like the tax return situation. Both of which the GOP (CEO/outsourcing/laying off) and Romney (tax returns) should have seen coming ahead of time.

If you truly despise Obama and want him out of office, you ought to be really ticked off that the GOP and the Romney campaign are trying their damnest to give away the election instead of trying to defend their actions.
 
#445
#445
PKT_VOL said:
Your barking up the wrong tree. I have no problem with laying off people or shipping jobs overseas. That is volprof.

I am talking from a purely political standpoint in an election year. He was fully aware of the diverse practices his company was engaged in. He obviously did not have a problem with it and nor should he given the business he was in. He saved many jobs by doing what he did in spite of the fact that he laid off workers and outsourced jobs. All of that is irreverent.

We are in a time of unprecedented outrage and anger by the American public for CEO's and outsourcing/laying off people to make an extra buck. Given how widely unpopular that image is, the GOP thought it was a good idea to nominate him as their Presidential candidate. It is dumbfounding to try to understand the logic behind that. It is obviously hurting him like the tax return situation. Both of which the GOP (CEO/outsourcing/laying off) and Romney (tax returns) should have seen coming ahead of time.

If you truly despise Obama and want him out of office, you ought to be really ticked off that the GOP and the Romney campaign are trying their damnest to give away the election instead of trying to defend their actions.
Click to expand...

the outrage of Americans against CEOs is similar to the enmity that has always been drummed up by the left against the wealthy. It isn't new nor has it reached some crescendo that hasn't existed in the past. The media is making every effort to make it appear as a more significant issue than it has been in the past. That's utter crap.

The true effort is to make this more about anything but the greater economy and the politics of the media is allowing that to be the case. Romney's camp has a couple of months to shift back where the debate needs to go. It will happen. If not, the guy shouldn't be president.

Your last point makes no sense whatsoever.
 
#446
#446
lawgator1 said:
I understand his reasoning. It is thus:

A) Not releasing my tax returns is going to cost something in terms of allowing my opponents (and even some of my supporters) to raise questions about what is in them, and I calculate it will cost me "X" votes.

B) Releasing the returns will cost me "Y" votes because of what is in them.

C) Y > X.


Therefore, he doesn't release them. Source: George Will.
Click to expand...

The point I was making earlier (which flew completely over your head) was that it is completely idiotic that either A or B would cost him any votes.

Vote for whichever candidate you think has the best answers for the economy, foreign policy, etc. But that fact that someone would base their vote on a 8 year old tax return is stupid. Completely and utterly stupid. Just like the fact that you seem to think it should really matter.
 
#447
#447
BigPapaVol said:
the outrage of Americans against CEOs is similar to the enmity that has always been drummed up by the left against the wealthy. It isn't new nor has it reached some crescendo that hasn't existed in the past. The media is making every effort to make it appear as a more significant issue than it has been in the past. That's utter crap.
Click to expand...

Yep, it is at the same level it was back in the 90's. I don't think you even believe that. No doubt the Democrats are beating that drum this cycle, as well they should.

BigPapaVol said:
The true effort is to make this more about anything but the greater economy and the politics of the media is allowing that to be the case. Romney's camp has a couple of months to shift back where the debate needs to go. It will happen. If not, the guy shouldn't be president.
Click to expand...

You would think. The problem with that is Romney doesn't really have a decent plan to counter. The economy isn't a big secret. There is only so much Romney can say without innovative new ideas. He has not proposed any thus far.
 
#448
#448
PKT_VOL said:
Yep, it is at the same level it was back in the 90's. I don't think you even believe that. No doubt the Democrats are beating that drum this cycle, as well they should.



You would think. The problem with that is Romney doesn't really have a decent plan to counter. The economy isn't a big secret. There is only so much Romney can say without innovative new ideas. He has not proposed any thus far.
Click to expand...

Why "should" the dems beat that drum, except that theirs is the socialist platform that robs from Peter to pay Paul, thus grabbing Paul's vote? Otherwise, what the hell and why are you advocating it. It's why the country is a financial disaster.

Romney doesn't have to be particularly innovative. He gets to point at the problem, attribute the slide to any one of a number of Obama's issues and run on not being Obama. It's how Obama won and he had no history to fall back on.
 
#449
#449
rjd970 said:
The point I was making earlier (which flew completely over your head) was that it is completely idiotic that either A or B would cost him any votes.

Vote for whichever candidate you think has the best answers for the economy, foreign policy, etc. But that fact that someone would base their vote on a 8 year old tax return is stupid. Completely and utterly stupid. Just like the fact that you seem to think it should really matter.
Click to expand...


And my point is that Romney's decision has nothing to do with "should" and everything to do with weighing those factors.

The decision not to release more returns is 100 % political.
 
#450
#450
lawgator1 said:
And my point is that Romney's decision has nothing to do with "should" and everything to do with weighing those factors.

The decision not to release more returns is 100 % political.
Click to expand...

and the idiotic point of asking for them is political.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top