Quote from: hfishjr81 on August 10, 2012, 07:59:34 AM

More like, playing by the loopholes.

"Did Romney pay 10 percent in taxes? Five percent? Zero? We don't know," says a narrator. "But we do know that Romney personally approved over $70 million in fictional losses to the IRS as part of the notorious 'Son of Boss' tax scandal — one of the largest tax avoidance schemes in history."


Romney, and Obama,  are the same. They're both corporate owned.

It's sad how people look over so much bad just so their party can succeed. Wish this would end so America could have an actual chance at a better future.

Was the tax avoidance scheme illegal?

It's the assholes in Washington that write tax law. It's written specifically, by both republicans and democrats, to take care of their corporate pals............................nobody else can understand it.

Romney was smart enough to hire someone to figure it out. To demonize the guy, because he found ways to pay less money to the corrupt government, (legally), is bullshit. Seems like smart business practice to me.

Stop listening to Obama's, "blame the rich", BS. It's a lie. The most prominent figure in our current financial disaster, is right in Obama's mirror.

I was going to post a link, but it contains enough information to merit it's own thread.

Why are we broke?

It's the GOVERNMENT stupid! Wake up.

Quote from: kramarat on August 10, 2012, 08:24:55 AM
It's the GOVERNMENT stupid! Wake up.

"Wake up"? Im saying exactly what you're saying-

Quote from: kramarat on August 10, 2012, 08:24:55 AM
It's written specifically, by both republicans and democrats, to take care of their corporate pals

Romney is willing to use those loopholes and so is Obama...  That's the point, They're both bought.  Granted, there's less evidence that Obama is willing to use those loopholes, though he sure has allowed for many placed in his healthcare bill , as well as that "credit card reform", so you do the math.



They're playing you guys just like they're playing those "liberals" you dislike.  Being that you're supposedly "awake" you should realize this by now.

Quote from: hfishjr81 on August 10, 2012, 09:13:45 AM
"Wake up"? Im saying exactly what you're saying-

Romney is willing to use those loopholes and so is Obama...  That's the point, They're both bought.  Granted, there's less evidence that Obama is willing to use those loopholes, though he sure has allowed for many placed in his healthcare bill , as well as that "credit card reform", so you do the math.



They're playing you guys just like they're playing those "liberals" you dislike.  Being that you're supposedly "awake" you should realize this by now.

Obama is bought and paid for, and helps to create the loopholes. One example, would be the waivers to Obamacare that he has issued to corporate buddies, massive tax breaks to companies like GE................the list goes on. Obama enjoys an incestuous relationship with corporate entities, across the entire spectrum. He is a man that is incapable of making his own money, and will always depend on his ability to skim money from others.

Romney is a self made millionaire. He made his money in the private sector, and took advantage of the loopholes that were intentionally created by politicians like Obama, as well as others, in both parties. While Romney is happy to take money from corporate donors to run his campaign, I seriously doubt that he feels a personal responsibility to run games from within government to help them out.................other than cleaning up the mess in Washington.

Romney can return to the private sector anytime he wants to, and continue making millions. Obama can't. He has no marketable skills.

Who do you trust?

QuoteRomney is willing to use those loopholes and so is Obama...  That's the point, They're both bought.  Granted, there's less evidence that Obama is willing to use those loopholes, though he sure has allowed for many placed in his healthcare bill , as well as that "credit card reform", so you do the math.

ALL of us use those "loopholes" because they are in the tax law. Some of those "loopholes were placed in the tax law, before we were born, for some entirely different purpose; but they are still there, so anyone who can uses them. Only a Lib would think there is something "bad" about paying as little as you can. If Obozo can dig something useful out of the tax law more power to him. That is completely different from Geithner lying on his tax returns. That's evading taxes, not avoiding them. What do you mean less evidence? How do you know - everything about Obama's prior life is a freaking state secret. You Libtards are attacking Romneys prior life to cover up the fact that you don't know zilch point zero about Obama's prior life. Jesus the other day they were making a big deal about Romney's report card from his freshman year in high school.

Not to mention the fact, that Obama has used his career in politics to enhance his personal fortune, since day one.

Do think that anyone would have purchased fake autobiographies from a leftist street agitator? How about a leftist college professor?

Nope..................wouldn't have happened if he didn't become a senator, and then on to become president.


Romney donated his salary to charity while he was in government. Hmmm.

Quote from: kramarat on August 10, 2012, 10:13:53 AM
Who do you trust?

I dont trust either. Roms approval of the loopholes proves that He's just as bad as those who install them. I dont see him not allowing for loopholes for his rich cohorts either, that is if Romney does try for any real reform if elected.  Dont see that happning though, Obamas not losing to the corporate Mormon.

Either way, Obama and Romney are both bought and not worthy of trust.

Quote from: mdgiles on August 10, 2012, 08:24:06 AM
AVOIDING TAXES IS NOT AGAINST THE LAW YOU DUMB FUCK! There is no rule that says you have to pay more than the absolute minimum that's due. LEARN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TAX AVOIDANCE AND TAX EVASION. Those type of attack ads are aimed at people exactly like you - ignorant. Your exactly like those clowns who were screaming at how bad outsourcing was, when what they really meant was offshoring.

LOL, chill Giles.

Look, it's simple. If insurance companies use loopholes that inevitably screw the  little guy then it's bad, if big business uses loopholes to short the system its bad. Not only having the loopholes is corrupt, but using them, especially in such bulk, certainly is. It's screws the little guy. 

"Son of Boss and its related shelters represented perhaps the largest tax avoidance scheme in history, costing the U.S. many billions in lost corporate tax revenues."

http://www.politicususa.com/brutal-obama-ad-references-romneys-ties-son-boss-tax-scandal.html




"He had an insider's perspective on the motivation and lack of substance in the transaction, as well as the financial sophistication to understand the tax avoidance involved. Romney failed in his duties to Marriott and its shareholders and acted to undermine the fairness of the tax system."


In business some would say it's "agresssive", I say Rom's corrupt and willing to allow more corruption by leaning on the side of corporate interest just like Obama.

Quote from: hfishjr81 on August 10, 2012, 11:35:52 PM

LOL, chill Giles.

Look, it's simple. If insurance companies use loopholes that inevitably screw the  little guy then it's bad, if big business uses loopholes to short the system its bad. Not only having the loopholes is corrupt, but using them, especially in such bulk, certainly is. It's screws the little guy. 

"Son of Boss and its related shelters represented perhaps the largest tax avoidance scheme in history, costing the U.S. many billions in lost corporate tax revenues."

http://www.politicususa.com/brutal-obama-ad-references-romneys-ties-son-boss-tax-scandal.html




"He had an insider's perspective on the motivation and lack of substance in the transaction, as well as the financial sophistication to understand the tax avoidance involved. Romney failed in his duties to Marriott and its shareholders and acted to undermine the fairness of the tax system."


In business some would say it's "agresssive", I say Rom's corrupt and willing to allow more corruption by leaning on the side of corporate interest just like Obama.

What did he do that was not legal?  Did the IRS drop the ball?  Was he ever audited?  I bet he has been.  Often.  I get a kick out of people who cry about this tax stuff.  It's not like he has ever been charged with anything other than using the existing tax code in his favor.  Just one more reason to get rid of the mess in DC.  You should be complaining about those in Congress and the Ways and Means Committee.  The same one who's chairman didn't pay up complaining that he didn't know the rules.

Quote from: hfishjr81 on August 10, 2012, 11:35:52 PM

LOL, chill Giles.

Look, it's simple. If insurance companies use loopholes that inevitably screw the  little guy then it's bad, if big business uses loopholes to short the system its bad. Not only having the loopholes is corrupt, but using them, especially in such bulk, certainly is. It's screws the little guy. 

"Son of Boss and its related shelters represented perhaps the largest tax avoidance scheme in history, costing the U.S. many billions in lost corporate tax revenues."

http://www.politicususa.com/brutal-obama-ad-references-romneys-ties-son-boss-tax-scandal.html




"He had an insider's perspective on the motivation and lack of substance in the transaction, as well as the financial sophistication to understand the tax avoidance involved. Romney failed in his duties to Marriott and its shareholders and acted to undermine the fairness of the tax system."


In business some would say it's "agresssive", I say Rom's corrupt and willing to allow more corruption by leaning on the side of corporate interest just like Obama.

That's a funny site. They are talking about Romney not paying taxes on $70 million......................which amounts to 30% of $70 million, which is peanuts. Plus, no laws were broken. If you don't like loopholes, blame the people that write the tax code, not the people that use them.

They should be talking about the $500 million real dollars that Obama gave away to Solyndra, as well as the trillions that he has squandered. Trust me, cracking down on a loophole here and there, is not going to save the country. We have got to get rid of politicians like Obama, that have no concept of the value of money.

Quote from: republicans2 on August 11, 2012, 05:07:54 AM
What did he do that was not legal?  Did the IRS drop the ball?  Was he ever audited?  I bet he has been.  Often.  I get a kick out of people who cry about this tax stuff.  It's not like he has ever been charged with anything other than using the existing tax code in his favor.  Just one more reason to get rid of the mess in DC.  You should be complaining about those in Congress and the Ways and Means Committee.  The same one who's chairman didn't pay up complaining that he didn't know the rules.

Exactly, Obama has the IRS at his disposal, if Romney did anything close to tax evasion that they could document, Mitt's bid would be over, target neutralized.  One mans "loophole" is another mans tax break, and I would bet their isn't anyone here, poster or lurker, who does not readily take every tax break they can.

Quote from: hfishjr81 on August 10, 2012, 11:35:52 PM

LOL, chill Giles.

Look, it's simple. If insurance companies use loopholes that inevitably screw the  little guy then it's bad, if big business uses loopholes to short the system its bad. Not only having the loopholes is corrupt, but using them, especially in such bulk, certainly is. It's screws the little guy. 

"Son of Boss and its related shelters represented perhaps the largest tax avoidance scheme in history, costing the U.S. many billions in lost corporate tax revenues."

http://www.politicususa.com/brutal-obama-ad-references-romneys-ties-son-boss-tax-scandal.html




"He had an insider's perspective on the motivation and lack of substance in the transaction, as well as the financial sophistication to understand the tax avoidance involved. Romney failed in his duties to Marriott and its shareholders and acted to undermine the fairness of the tax system."


In business some would say it's "agresssive", I say Rom's corrupt and willing to allow more corruption by leaning on the side of corporate interest just like Obama.

Do you even know what you're talking about?
If you own a business, you're over taxed, if you expand your business and take on new employees, your taxes go up, that is anti growth, but if you own a business and buy new equipment, you are taxed for growing, but if you spend money to repair the old equipment you are taxed at the lower rate.
So in stead of buying new equipment, a business might use that "loophole" to void higher taxes.

Now you tell me, who is being corrupt, the business owner for repairing old equipment to avoid higher taxs, or the Govt?
Also which one is punishing the new equipment industry, the business owner for not buying new equipment, or the Govt?

Now do you understand what a loophole is?
The tax laws are extremely convoluted, even contradicting itself from time to time, but if it's in the tax code, then taking advantage of it is smart.
To do otherwise would be a very stupid business owner.

Quote from: Solar on August 11, 2012, 06:37:46 AM
Do you even know what you're talking about?
If you own a business, you're over taxed, if you expand your business and take on new employees, your taxes go up, that is anti growth, but if you own a business and buy new equipment, you are taxed for growing, but if you spend money to repair the old equipment you are taxed at the lower rate.
So in stead of buying new equipment, a business might use that "loophole" to void higher taxes.

Now you tell me, who is being corrupt, the business owner for repairing old equipment to avoid higher taxs, or the Govt?
Also which one is punishing the new equipment industry, the business owner for not buying new equipment, or the Govt?

Now do you understand what a loophole is?
The tax laws are extremely convoluted, even contradicting itself from time to time, but if it's in the tax code, then taking advantage of it is smart.
To do otherwise would be a very stupid business owner.

There's loopholes..............................and then there's just plain old cheating.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/18/AR2009011802070.html

Why was this not a problem?

Or this?

http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2009/03/obama-appointees-and-democrat-congressman-all-american-tax-cheats/

Or this?

http://www.punditreview.com/2009/02/democrat-tax-cheat-champion-charlie-rangel-tops-tom-daschle-and-timothy-geithner-28-2/


No wonder we're having problems communicating...........................democrats are too stupid to know the difference between a loophole, and outright cheating. Well, I have to take that back. They're either stupid or dishonest..............take your pick.

Quote from: kramarat on August 11, 2012, 06:45:58 AM
There's loopholes..............................and then there's just plain old cheating.

"In addition, the Son of Boss transaction was listed by the Internal Revenue Service as an abusive transaction"


"Like other prepackaged corporate tax shelters of that era, Marriott's Son of Boss transaction was an entirely artificial transaction, bearing no relationship to its business. Its sole purpose was to create a gigantic tax loss out of thin air without any economic risk, cost or loss -- other than the fee Marriott paid the promoter."


I think it's a problem when big business is allowed to cheat the system/the people, I dont disagree that we should be upset at those that allow for these type of loopholes, but when people who've "aggressively" used them are trying to run our country it's not a stretch to say they're for big business, rather than the people.


Obama and Romney will allow for corporate rule, there is no difference between them there. It's sad that, even based on that knowledge, most will still vote for either candidate just so the other party doesn't win.  It's what many would call "the definition of insanity."

Quote from: hfishjr81 on August 11, 2012, 08:21:21 AM

"In addition, the Son of Boss transaction was listed by the Internal Revenue Service as an abusive transaction"


"Like other prepackaged corporate tax shelters of that era, Marriott's Son of Boss transaction was an entirely artificial transaction, bearing no relationship to its business. Its sole purpose was to create a gigantic tax loss out of thin air without any economic risk, cost or loss -- other than the fee Marriott paid the promoter."


I think it's a problem when big business is allowed to cheat the system/the people, I dont disagree that we should be upset at those that allow for these type of loopholes, but when people who've "aggressively" used them are trying to run our country it's not a stretch to say they're for big business, rather than the people.


Obama and Romney will allow for corporate rule, there is no difference between them there. It's sad that, even based on that knowledge, most will still vote for either candidate just so the other party doesn't win.  It's what many would call "the definition of insanity."

If I can find a legal way to beat the corrupt government out of my tax dollars, I'm going for it. They can call me anything they want.

The good news is, that Paul Ryan, (our new VP in January), has some great ideas on tax reform.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/30/the-truth-about-paul-ryans-tax-plan/

Quote from: hfishjr81 on August 10, 2012, 11:35:52 PM

LOL, chill Giles.

I'm sorry, stupidity bothers me. Especially when it's directed at me, which means the person spouting it is has a low opinion of my intelligence. IOW stupidity directed at me is an insult. 

QuoteLook, it's simple. If insurance companies use loopholes that inevitably screw the  little guy then it's bad, if big business uses loopholes to short the system its bad. Not only having the loopholes is corrupt, but using them, especially in such bulk, certainly is. It's screws the little guy.

Every insurance policy states exactly what they cover and what they don't cover. It isn't "screwing the little guy" when you buy a "Yugo" policy and then whine because you not getting "Rolls Royce" coverage.

Quote"Son of Boss and its related shelters represented perhaps the largest tax avoidance scheme in history, costing the U.S. many billions in lost corporate tax revenues."
http://www.politicususa.com/brutal-obama-ad-references-romneys-ties-son-boss-tax-scandal.html

Which part of "tax AVOIDANCE" are you having trouble understanding? IOW, they looked at the law and found a way to pay less. Only Libtards think that it "costs" the government something when they don't take YOUR money.   

Quote"He had an insider's perspective on the motivation and lack of substance in the transaction, as well as the financial sophistication to understand the tax avoidance involved. Romney failed in his duties to Marriott and its shareholders and acted to undermine the fairness of the tax system."

And he should pay more taxes than he has to because?

QuoteIn business some would say it's "agresssive", I say Rom's corrupt and willing to allow more corruption by leaning on the side of corporate interest just like Obama.

IOW, you have the typical Leftoid perspective that ALL our money belongs to the government, and it's somehow unfair when you manage to keep some of it. What bothers me is that you clowns never see the problem with that.