DaveinElma Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 The thing this election proved is that we are further down the path to a European style demise than most of us had thought. The recipient class now clearly outnumbers those who actually make their own wealth. I fear that no conservative could ever get elected president again without selling out with promises of government goodies. I loved the way Rush put it yesterday-You can't expect the recipient class to vote against Santa Clause, especially when Mitt is running on people being their own Santa Claus.
outsidethebox Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Does the"recipient" class include Romney and his 14 percent tax rate?
KD in CA Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Does the"recipient" class include Romney and his 14 percent tax rate? Just out of curiosity, do you even know your effective tax rate?
Kevbeau Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Just out of curiosity, do you even know your effective tax rate? I think he's find that most people with a mortgage or a couple of kids have an effective federal tax rate in the mid-teens, even without claiming nay capital gains....but don't want to let that get in the way of a good story.
fjl2nd Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Stop listening to talk radio. They are part of the reason the Republican party sucks so bad...
PromoTheRobot Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Actually we don't really know what Mitt typically pays since he refused to show more than a summary of his last two years of returns. PTT
Jauronimo Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Actually we don't really know what Mitt typically pays since he refused to show more than a summary of his last two years of returns. PTT How many years did your messiah show?
Chef Jim Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Actually we don't really know what Mitt typically pays since he refused to show more than a summary of his last two years of returns. PTT What would be missing from the summary that would show what he really pays?
Doc Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 I think he's find that most people with a mortgage or a couple of kids have an effective federal tax rate in the mid-teens, even without claiming nay capital gains....but don't want to let that get in the way of a good story. Not to mention that Barry could have raised it within that 4-1/2 month period during his first year where he had complete control of Congress. But he didn't. I wonder why...?
meazza Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Actually we don't really know what Mitt typically pays since he refused to show more than a summary of his last two years of returns. PTT Why do you go out of your way to be consistently wrong?
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Does the"recipient" class include Romney and his 14 percent tax rate? No, you see the 14% tax rate on investment income is a contribution, not a receipt. Words are hard.
B-Man Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Back to the point. Yes the country has passed the tipping point. .
49er Fan Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Why is anyone surprised that a large percentage of Americans receive some form of government aid? The initial baby-boomers (b. 1943) are approaching 70 years old. Should the government be depriving them of Social Security and Medicare? I don't think so.
Chef Jim Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Why is anyone surprised that a large percentage of Americans receive some form of government aid? The initial baby-boomers (b. 1943) are approaching 70 years old. Should the government be depriving them of Social Security and Medicare? I don't think so. The initial baby boomers were born in 1946 and have turned 66 and the younger baby boomers were born in 1964 and are only 48 but don't let the facts get in your way.
49er Fan Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 (edited) "Baby boom" birth dates are not "facts" - they are quite open to debate by generational scholars - not just using the U.S. Census Bureau dates. Edited November 8, 2012 by 49er Fan
Chef Jim Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 "Baby boom" birth dates are not "facts" - they are quite open to debate by generational scholars - not just using the U.S. Census Bureau dates. Baby boomers are considered to be all Americans born between 1946-1964. If you want to change those dates to make your argument go ahead.
Cugalabanza Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Anyway, a larger proportion of our population is leaving the work force. And that is a very uderstated obstacle to economic growth, in this country and many others around the world.
Chef Jim Posted November 8, 2012 Posted November 8, 2012 Anyway, a larger proportion of our population is leaving the work force. And that is a very uderstated obstacle to economic growth, in this country and many others around the world. Yet we still have high unemployment. Hmmmm, interesting.
Recommended Posts