Romney, man of the people

#76
#76
WA_Vol said:
So they would deserve to pay a lower tax rate because there are fewer of them?
Click to expand...

Not what I meant. I'll put it this way. I plan to work hard, save money, and someday retire where I can live on investment income. Just because I won't be as wealthy as buffett and Romney doesn't mean I don't want the same situation just on a lower scale.

Finally, taxing it at higher rates is barely going to move the needle when 50% don't pay taxes. If you are talking about taxes because you think the government needs more revenue, sadly the middle class is the group that needs to be addressed. If the starting point is Buffett and Romney, it is just a jealousy argument IMO
 
Last edited:
#77
#77
When I go to work each day, I am not risking losing money. I know that when I put in my 40 hour week, I will get paid for those 40 hours.

When I invest in a company, I am risking my money. That money may be lost completely.

If I think my income taxes on my wages are too high, I may be willing to scale back my work some, but I must continue to work regardless because I need that money to live on. The economy suffers slightly, but because I need to work, the economy continues to chug along.

If I think that the taxes on my investments are too high that they make the profit margins for me to be too small to be acceptable for the inherent risk involved, then I may be willing to cut back or even stop investing at all. Since our economy relies on such investment, then any curtailing of it can have extremely bad consequences.

Can you see the difference?
 
#78
#78
vols4sure said:
Long explanation short - it has already been taxed once, taxing it penalizes savers as opposed to incentivizing more people to not depend on the government for retirement, and more money being invested is good for the economy.

I would rather it not be taxed at all, but I am ok with the current rates.
Click to expand...

Income taxes should be abolished anyways. I guess that is my main contention. I understand your argument about it already being taxed once (a point I knew but just overlooked in my previous ran). My main frustration is with the income tax. When I was working two jobs and making $30K about 15 years ago and working 70+ hours/week, I was getting taxed the same as a person with one job working 40 hours. That is the origin of my frustration. I worked nearly twice as much some weeks to get taxed at the same rate. That is the kind of nonsense that discourages people from working more instead of getting on the govt teet.
 
#79
#79
vols4sure said:
There is a federal sales tax? News to me. I would much rather pay lower federal taxes in exchange for higher state taxes.
Click to expand...

Have you ever heard of import tax?

Have you ever heard of road tax on gas and diesel?

Have you ever heard of federal excise tax?
 
#81
#81
If the goal is really to boot Obama, then people should probably start thinking of polling in these terms:

Obama has a 6 point lead over Romney in national polling
Obama has a 8 point lead over Santorum in national polling
 
#83
#83
milohimself said:
If the goal is really to boot Obama, then people should probably start thinking of polling in these terms:

Obama has a 6 point lead over Romney in national polling
Obama has a 8 point lead over Santorum in national polling
Click to expand...

Would not make a decision over that statistically insignificant spread.
 
#84
#84
WesternKyVol said:
Would not make a decision over that statistically insignificant spread.
Click to expand...

I realize, but it being an aggregate provides a little clearer of a difference. My point was more thinking in terms of who can beat Obama. Romney's support seems to be taking a bit of a tumble for the first time in a while and Santorum is surging; yet Romney is still doing better compared to Obama (even if only by a little).
 
#85
#85
milohimself said:
I realize, but it being an aggregate provides a little clearer of a difference. My point was more thinking in terms of who can beat Obama. Romney's support seems to be taking a bit of a tumble for the first time in a while and Santorum is surging; yet Romney is still doing better compared to Obama (even if only by a little).
Click to expand...

First, Obama will be tough to beat, period. Second, it is so difficult to extrapolate numbers all the way to November when countless campaign choices would sway them one way or another. As weak as Santorum can be, he has proven, in my view that he is a better campaigner and "political athlete" than Romney. This will translate at least somewhat to the general election. On the other side are the strong statements on the social issues which will likely hurt him--a little-- among women. Many who will vote in the general have not even started paying attention yet. So again, it's almost impossible to extrapolate these polls over 8 mos.
 
#86
#86
Wasn't trying to extrapolate; just saying this might be Santorum's biggest lead in the polls, but even with his surge and Romney's fall, that at this moment people may like Santorum over Romney, but they also like Romney a little bit better compared to Obama. :hi:
 
#87
#87
milohimself said:
Wasn't trying to extrapolate; just saying this might be Santorum's biggest lead in the polls, but even with his surge and Romney's fall, that at this moment people may like Santorum over Romney, but they also like Romney a little bit better compared to Obama. :hi:
Click to expand...

Gottcha.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top