What a Co-inky-dink!

January 24, 2012 10:19 am

I was terribly surprised to find out that one of the world’s richest guys whom offered lip service to Obama’s “tax the rich” class warfare nonsense back when his insurance companies stood to make huge financial gains if the Feds jacked up taxes, and especially estate taxes, on the rich, ended up having another one of his companies making out like a damn bandit after the WH killed the Keystone XL pipeline. One of Warren Buffets companies, Burlington Northern, a railroad company in true Monopoly – the game for you illiterates – fashion, which makes oodles of money hailing oil from Canada stands tomake even more money after Obama’s cancelation of the XL pipeline.

Bleh, nothing to see here. It’s not like this WH has a history of such crony capitalism writ large. I mean the billions we sank into so many dubious green companies & technologies, only to see massive failures and no serious positive return of any value to speak of, for example, was actually just another series of “accidental misinvestements”. Yeah, sure. The US administration that has done the most during its tenure to abrogate itself the ability to use the law as a cudgel and allow it to pick which companies and ideas are winners and losers, and which despite all the facts to the contrary has decided they will spurn fossil fuels in favor of unicorn farts – green technology – even if it causes massive pain to the average American they so pretend to care about, just happens to make another decision that hurts the average citizen, but benefits the very people they pretend to so hate for being wealthy.

I see why Buffet loves this guy and feels it is a great idea to back his class warfare shenanigans. There is some huge money to be made here, and all it takes is the kissing of these champions of the little people’s asses. Of course, I remind you all that the only evil entities are these rich oil companies. And then only the “rich oil companies” that don’t end up being the largest contributors to the political campaigns of democrats like BP was for Obama. There is a pattern here, isn’t there? I am sure all the three letter DNC propaganda outlets will be stumbling over each other to report this tidbit or anything like it too. In the mean time, the leftists will tell us that when a rich guy like Buffet tells us we should be happy to get taxed harder, by collectivists that will then piss that money away buying votes with all kinds of stupid schemes, that we should take his advice. That he is actually making even more money because of these schemes, and is also likely to get himself an exclusion from these class warriors for a nice donation to their campaign funds, should not dissuade us people trying to keep government from fleecing us from bending over and liking what follows.

1 Like!

Tags: Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation, class warfare, Failure of Keynesian economics, green technology, Keynesian stupidity, Obama administration, oil, Warren Buffett, XL pipeline

90 comments

No ping yet

hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 10:39 am at 10:39 am (UTC -4)

I just read that Romney made $42mio last year

http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/24/news/economy/Romney_tax_return/index.htm?hpt=hp_t1

Which still isn’t enough. The ego needs to be fed too

Romney and his wife, Ann, gave away more than $7 million over the past two years — or about 16% of their income. Of that, $4.1 million went to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, to which they belong.

0 3
AlexInCT says:

January 24, 2012 10:44 am at 10:44 am (UTC -4)

Why bring Romeny up? Do you have any information that he made his money or stands to make oodles of more money from deals with connected democrats that hurt the average citizen, like Buffet is doing with this horrible XL pipeline decision by the WH? That would be a huge story. Otherwise Romeny’s income is irrelvant. Who the fuck are you to decide how much anyone gets to make as long as they do it legally? Class warfare is nothing but envy & greed pretending to be about caring.

4 0
sahrab says:

January 24, 2012 11:02 am at 11:02 am (UTC -4)

Which still isn’t enough. The ego needs to be fed too

how much do you make a year?

Should we decide that whatever you make is to much, will you return the extra back to your employer?

0 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 11:04 am at 11:04 am (UTC -4)

Theres working hard and theres working smart, and Romneys a smartie, too

The reason Romney’s rate is so low — despite having one of the highest incomes in the country — is because his income was derived almost entirely from capital gains and dividends from his extensive portfolio of investments. And that form of investment income is typically taxed at just 15%, well below the 35% top tax rate for high earners.

Another reason: He had extensive itemized deductions, which lowered his overall tax liability.

So he sits back and lets the masses toil for profit which he takes his share of, and he has time and leisure to run for president. Same legal thievery

http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/24/news/economy/Romney_tax_return/index.htm?hpt=hp_t1

0 3
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 11:13 am at 11:13 am (UTC -4)

Should we decide that whatever you make is to much, will you return the extra back to your employer

?
Sure, after I decide that you are qualified to do so.

0 3
sahrab says:

January 24, 2012 11:43 am at 11:43 am (UTC -4)

I have the same qualifications you use, when you state Romney (or anyone else) makes to much.

2 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 12:03 pm at 12:03 pm (UTC -4)

I didn’t say he earns too much, I say hes not taxed enough. Theres talk about the poor being poor cuz they’re lazy and feel a sense of entitlement, thanks to the left. So heres the right, feeling entitled to a lower tax because they sit around making money of the working masses. Same kind of difference.

I made nigh zero dollars last year so I feel qualified to say that Romney could pay higher taxes and still not starve.

0 3
sahrab says:

January 24, 2012 12:19 pm at 12:19 pm (UTC -4)

Are you sure about that?

Consistency doesnt seem to be your strong suite. what a surprisse. What was it you were saying here.

2 0
Seattle Outcast says:

January 24, 2012 12:39 pm at 12:39 pm (UTC -4)

So he sits back and lets the masses toil for profit which he takes his share of, and he has time and leisure to run for president. Same legal thievery

When you get done spouting off Marxist theory and proving yourself a complete idiot, you might want to consider that your professors at whatever college your parents are putting you through don’t know what the hell they are talking about.

Perhaps in a few years when you’re still working at Starbucks and have a postgraduate degree it will sink in.

2 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 1:15 pm at 1:15 pm (UTC -4)

I’ve played the game too. I had a Scottrade account with some spare $10k invested for long-term gains, as it earned me more than yer average interest in a typical savings account. I had no altruistic motives; the effers at Cisco had better keeping moving their lazy asses and make “our” stock rise. I bought a little Nortel stock; it tanked, the job too, and execs walked off with bonuses, as mentioned.
So, yeah, I have experience doing as Romney does, and did it for the same reason – to earn easy money off the working masses.
On topic, I’d say Buffett, Romney, Obama, etc. we’re all the same kind of people, after all, so whats with the endless ass-kissery?

0 2
sahrab says:

January 24, 2012 1:20 pm at 1:20 pm (UTC -4)

So, yeah, I have experience doing as Romney does, and did it for the same reason

And your motivation becomes clear. Unlike Romney, you sucked at it, and feel its not fair that he was succcessfull.

As such, like a petulant child, you want to punish those that succeed where you failed.

0 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 1:31 pm at 1:31 pm (UTC -4)

I didn’t suck at it, I didn’t have enough money to influence my stocks’ value as Romney and his friends do, to know whats gonna happen to them well before the opening bell, and trade accordingly. This appears to be ethical and legal, at least to those who adore him, so they tolerate it.

It so happens that my portfolio was holding up well until some folks managed to access my account while I was sick and screw it up badly, for shits and giggles, cuz they could, etc. which left me with $4800 in tax debt. which i don’t feel like paying to the masses anymore. Pah, penny ante shit, me whiner, get a job

0 2
Hal_10000 says:

January 24, 2012 1:48 pm at 1:48 pm (UTC -4)

I’m cooking up a post on Romney’s tax return. How much money he makes is really not the issue — more power to him. it does bring up some big issues with our tax system, however.

0 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 2:24 pm at 2:24 pm (UTC -4)

Aye, I’m just opining that “they” are all the same, no matter what flag they gather under

0 1
Seattle Outcast says:

January 24, 2012 2:26 pm at 2:26 pm (UTC -4)

It so happens that my portfolio was holding up well until some folks managed to access my account while I was sick and screw it up badly, for shits and giggles, cuz they could, etc. which left me with $4800 in tax debt. which i don’t feel like paying to the masses anymore. Pah, penny ante shit, me whiner, get a job

And you failed to press criminal charges why?

2 0
AlexInCT says:

January 24, 2012 2:27 pm at 2:27 pm (UTC -4)

How much money does John Kerry make? The Kennedy’s? What about the Clintons? Shit, the democrats braying the loudest seem the ones raking in or sitting on the most cash.

And why are so many liberals so angry at people that actually pay the taxes they owe now, when they felt no such anger towards people that did not pay taxes, like several key members of the Obama administration, back when?

DO we see a pattern yet?

I’m cooking up a post on Romney’s tax return. How much money he makes is really not the issue — more power to him. it does bring up some big issues with our tax system, however.

A system that happens to be that way because of the people that tell us we need higher taxes on the rich, like Romney, to make it “fair” and address the injustice that he is better off than them, but then if allowed would proceed to jack taxes and create loopholes to exempt themselves from those higher taxes, only to become pissed when people like Romany then use the same loopholes the next time around? Look ata Obamacare. All their friends that donated big got exemptions…..

Fair would be a flat tax, but the left sees very little opportunity to manipulate the system and the people, and grow government from any of that. Instead we are wasting time getting advice from assholes like Buffet and Soros. The injustice is that these crooks have so many greedy and jealous people that pretend like them to be screwing over those better off than them out of some altruistic reason.

0 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 3:01 pm at 3:01 pm (UTC -4)

And you failed to press criminal charges why?

Theres nobody to charge. I was living in hospitals and motel rooms in ’09 which is where my password was borrowed, best guess. No money was withdrawn, but small handfuls of stocks were sporadically sold/repurchased scores of times – a day, sometimes – at $7, per. I received no e-mail notifications as the address had been changed. Since the stocks were all solid I was basically ignoring the portfolio; I had other things to worry about than my retirement money until the IRS came calling. They don’t care who did it, or if the transactions made any sense, financially – selling stocks is taxable, pal.
Handlers took care of my US mail for a while, so fuck if I know whats up. Likely just some kids having fun – not as bad as the gummint putting a GPS on my car, so lighten up.

0 4
sahrab says:

January 24, 2012 3:11 pm at 3:11 pm (UTC -4)

At what point do you realize the reason your life is fucked is because you spent to much time bitching about the joneses, whining about someone who has more than you, and blaming others instead of taking responsibility for your own actions?

2 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 3:21 pm at 3:21 pm (UTC -4)

You need to read the facts, not spin them into yer generic rah-rah- sis-boom-bah – I had plenty enough for everyone until I got sick, which cost me everything, friends didn’t help, and neither will the US because it can’t stand a whiny butt. Gotta wave the old flag, no matter how little anyone actually cares about anything but themselves. But I’m not “mad” or “jealous”, I’m just saying people are the same everywhere, after all. Thats making you really mad.

0 2
sahrab says:

January 24, 2012 4:01 pm at 4:01 pm (UTC -4)

But I’m not “mad” or “jealous”

If true, might want to start acting like it, your posts belie the above sparky

1 0
Seattle Outcast says:

January 24, 2012 4:24 pm at 4:24 pm (UTC -4)

So, whose email address was it changed to?

Not really buying your story.

3 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 4:44 pm at 4:44 pm (UTC -4)

Cmon, divorces don’t have to invariably end in fits of “he said, she said” with a grab for the cash, You can have it.
Taxes should be the same for everyone, lest they look skewed toward a certain demographic which makes can folks angry and leftfully so.

Its curious how some idols can blow with the wind while their fans adore them no matter what, offering their votes for free. So what can I say on this matter but “More power to Warren Buffett”

0 1
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 5:06 pm at 5:06 pm (UTC -4)

So, whose email address was it changed to?

Not really buying your story.

Good for you.
I put an average $2k per year aside from 2000 on, bought researched stocks and let them sit. I didn’t check the e-mail address for accuracy every time I logged in. I checked in maybe every 2-3 months to see the chart. When the market finally went to shit under Bush I figured I would by a few goodies at discount and let them sit. And that was it.
I never noticed the altered email address and I don’t know if the email address was legit. It looked like always by the time the IRS called. Taxes are gonna take whats left, the brokerage account requires $100 minimum, the minimum for trade is $500 so I’m going to close it all.

Liberty and justice cost a whole lotta money in the US, so I’m calling it a bust. Not the worst story around, not by far.

0 3
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 5:42 pm at 5:42 pm (UTC -4)

Symb Qty Price Action TradeDate Settled Interest Amnt Comm

HEB -10 3.0701 Sell 6/8/2009 6/11/2009 0 30.69 -7.01
HEB -200 3.0701 Sell 6/8/2009 6/11/2009 0 607 -7.02
HEB -200 3.0701 Sell 6/8/2009 6/11/2009 0 614 -7.02
HEB -90 3.0701 Sell 6/8/2009 6/11/2009 0 276.3 -7.01
HEB -100 3.0701 Sell 6/8/2009 6/11/2009 0 307 -7.01
HEB -100 3.0701 Sell 6/8/2009 6/11/2009 0 307 -7.01
HEB -100 3.0701 Sell 6/8/2009 6/11/2009 0 300 -7.01
HEB -100 3.0701 Sell 6/8/2009 6/11/2009 0 307 -7.01
HEB -300 2.92 Sell 6/8/2009 6/11/2009 0 868.97 -7.03
HEB -600 2.7101 Sell 6/5/2009 6/10/2009 0 1619.01 -7.05
HEB -680 3.0001 Sell 6/5/2009 6/10/2009 0 2033.01 -7.06

This is a snippet of “sales” made 6/5 and 6/8/09, “buys” look the same. HEB was sold, then bought and sold again in smaller chunks.

0 1
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 5:53 pm at 5:53 pm (UTC -4)

Don’t mean to spam so much, CM will be back soon, but I just had to laugh out loud reading this

TERRELL OWENS FRIENDLESS, NEARLY BROKE
http://www.thepostgame.com/features/201201/terrell-owens-gq-jeremiah-trotter-told-me-not-apologize-donovan-mcnabb

Now, at 38 and out of football, he’s lonelier than ever, and running out of money. In a GQ profile, Owens comes across as wounded, broke and desperate. When people text him to ask where he is, he replies back: “I’m in hell.”

But is it his own fault? That’s the perennial debate on T.O., who had a heartbreaking childhood but continually pointed fingers at everyone but himself once he became an adult.

Haha. Never trust yer friends, mate

0 1
Seattle Outcast says:

January 24, 2012 6:18 pm at 6:18 pm (UTC -4)

Let is sit for a few months? Seriously? I check mine every freaking day. Yeah, I got a lot more than $10K sitting there, but I’ve put a lot of years into it.

0 0
CM says:

January 24, 2012 7:35 pm at 7:35 pm (UTC -4)

Don’t mean to spam so much, CM will be back soon

I’m back. But don’t be concerned y’all – I don’t see anything worth responding to.

1 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 7:39 pm at 7:39 pm (UTC -4)

lolol I thought you’d be back so I had include you somehow

0 1
CM says:

January 24, 2012 7:50 pm at 7:50 pm (UTC -4)

I see Romney paid a tax rate of 13.9% in 2010.

“The most affluent Americans in recent years have pulled away from the rest of us, and the reason is at least in part that they are able to compound their wealth at very, very low tax rates,” said Edward Kleinbard, a law professor at the University of Southern California. “Romney’s tax return, with its heavy reliance on income taxed at low capital gains rates, demonstrates that.”

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-24/romney-s-13-9-tax-rate-shows-power-of-investment-tax-preference.html

0 0
CM says:

January 24, 2012 7:54 pm at 7:54 pm (UTC -4)

BTW what happened to the Bloomberg story in the opening post? It doesn’t seem to exist anymore. No doubt Obama had it erased and everyone involved killed and cremated in a centre owned partly by Buffett’s relation. Thus proving everything.

1 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 7:56 pm at 7:56 pm (UTC -4)

Let is sit for a few months? Seriously? I check mine every freaking day. Yeah, I got a lot more than $10K sitting there, but I’ve put a lot of years into it.

Good on you. Its a neat setup
Aye, I started way back in 98 and swore to adhere to the “get rich slowly” school of investing and it worked nicely, a little Microsoft and the like, so nary a sale was made. AOL dialup was all I could get where I lived and it cost a fortune to logon countless times per session, up to $200 per month. The dotcom bubble allowed me to spare those $10k, and I was chugging along at some 8% yield, but then it went south. all together, even the best companies.

0 1
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 7:59 pm at 7:59 pm (UTC -4)

they are able to compound their wealth at very, very low tax rates

And this flies in the face of “just work hard and you’ll become someone, trust us”

0 1
CM says:

January 24, 2012 8:04 pm at 8:04 pm (UTC -4)

Sorry, I missed the fact that you linked to this in your first post.
Anyway, it’s healthy apparently. People who don’t stand and applaud are big fat losers who should stop being whiney cunts.

0 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 8:15 pm at 8:15 pm (UTC -4)

Heck, this is in todays news too
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2012/01/bill-gates-on-using-his-money-to-save-lives-and-fix-u-s-schools-and-steve-jobs/

With a pledge to give away 95 percent of Gates’ personal wealth, the Gates Foundation claims to have granted more than $26 billion since 1994. While some of that money is devoted to improving U.S. education, roughly 75 percent goes to the poorest countries in the world, and Gates scoffs at the idea that the money would be better spent at home.

“Well, the question is, are human lives of equal value?” Gates said. “For the mother whose child dies in Africa, is that somehow less important, less painful? If we can save that life — for very little [money], is that appropriate to do? And, in fact, we know that if we do save those lives, it can reduce the population growth. It can let them be on a path to graduate from receiving aid.”

After the Gates Foundation’s vaccination efforts in India, that nation reported only one case of polio last year. And while the foundation promises to fight on against preventable diseases, the top focus of this year’s letter is agriculture and Gates’ belief that without technology, farmers could never feed the world’s exploding population.

“I recommend you vote for the winners and invest generously, exactly as we winners recommend!”

0 1
CM says:

January 24, 2012 8:22 pm at 8:22 pm (UTC -4)

The State Department denied TransCanada a permit on Jan. 18, saying there was not enough time to study the proposal by Feb. 21, a deadline Congress imposed on President Barack Obama. Calgary-based TransCanada has said it intends to re-apply with a route that avoids an environmentally sensitive region of Nebraska, something the Obama administration encouraged.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2012/01/23/bloomberg_articlesLY20WE6K50Z001-LY9YF.DTL

Why did the Obama administration encourage another route if it doesn’t help Buffett?
I’m sure there’s an answer. All dots are connectable it seems.

0 0
CM says:

January 24, 2012 8:27 pm at 8:27 pm (UTC -4)

Alex:

….despite all the facts to the contrary has decided they will spurn fossil fuels…

Meanwhile, on Planet Earth:

Federal forecasters are expected to confirm on Monday what the energy industry already knows: Oil production is surging in the U.S.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration is likely to raise by a substantial amount its existing estimate that U.S. oil production will grow by 550,000 barrels per day by 2020, to just over six million barrels daily.

The forecast will include new production data from developing oil fields, including the Bakken shale area in North Dakota, which could hold as much of 4.3 billion barrels of recoverable oil. North Dakota’s output of oil and related liquids …

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204624204577177092687939480.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

All illegal too, as Obama has banned oil. Everyone aside from the LSM and the LSM sheeple know that.

1 0
Miguelito says:

January 24, 2012 8:31 pm at 8:31 pm (UTC -4)

I’m with SO on this one… someone getting into your account like that (“borrowed” your password? WTF?) then it is a crime and you should’ve reported it. You likely would’ve been covered on some of the losses at least.

Also, yeah, not checking periodically, stupid.

I’m betting you used the same lame password on every site or actually gave it to someone, which essentially means it’s ultimately your fault anyway.

0 0
CM says:

January 24, 2012 8:33 pm at 8:33 pm (UTC -4)

“Oil and Gas Jobs Increase by 75,000 Under Obama — 69,000 More Than Would Be Created By Keystone XL”

Obama Brings Back Oil After Bush Slump

All lies. Obviously. And I can prove it by telling you that’s it’s all obviously lies.

0 0
Miguelito says:

January 24, 2012 8:51 pm at 8:51 pm (UTC -4)

Why did the Obama administration encourage another route if it doesn’t help Buffett?
I’m sure there’s an answer. All dots are connectable it seems.

Since I’m on my neighborhood’s Planning Group board, I’ve seen a lot of internal bits about the development process that most don’t. There are insane amounts of studies and stuff that have to be done anymore just to even begin breaking ground on a project. It’s entirely possible they suggested an alternate route, knowing that this would essentially put those studies (like the Environmental Impact Report) back to square one, essentially being just another way to block the construction.

For example, recently over at advice goddess she blogged about some of this huge cost added by gov’t. Ironically the same gov’t types that whine about “affordable housing,” push for it onsite (or in-lieu fees) and such. Note the $240k cost added to building new homes in San Diego due to our massive gov’t involvement. We had an EIR from a project in our area that was over 3000 pages long, and the city is going to require it to be redone because they’re pushing for an amendment to our community plan to push through a road connection they really want, yet most of the people here don’t. I’m actually cool with it going in myself though.

Follow her link to the original blog which links the pdf study with the numbers cited.

Edit: oops, forgot to mention… I was saying this might be an end run to a stall tactic on the pipeline because I’ve seen groups do exactly this. Push for changes that trigger studies that can delay a project, which increases the costs enough to drive a developer (or owner) to give up or go a completely different route.

Edit 2: err.. Report not Results fixed up there.

2 0
balthazar says:

January 24, 2012 9:07 pm at 9:07 pm (UTC -4)

How many fucking times do we have to point out that most Americans pay an 11% income tax rate OR LESS its only been linked to at a minimum of 4 times by me, and its from the IRS it fucking self. But plod right on with your fucking stupidity CM. Dont let facts get in your way.

1 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 9:07 pm at 9:07 pm (UTC -4)

I’m with SO on this one… someone getting into your account like that (“borrowed” your password? WTF?) then it is a crime and you should’ve reported it. You likely would’ve been covered on some of the losses at least.

As I said, it takes money to buy justice in the US. And since some people call a GPS attached to car a “search” surely I can call someones misusing my account without stealing anything by its legal definition “borrowing”?

I’m betting you used the same lame password on every site or actually gave it to someone, which essentially means it’s ultimately your fault anyway.

I’m betting you could hack it in 5 minutes using only one finger.

0 1
CM says:

January 24, 2012 9:22 pm at 9:22 pm (UTC -4)

Since I’m on my neighborhood’s Planning Group board, I’ve seen a lot of internal bits about the development process that most don’t. There are insane amounts of studies and stuff that have to be done anymore just to even begin breaking ground on a project. It’s entirely possible they suggested an alternate route, knowing that this would essentially put those studies (like the Environmental Impact Report) back to square one, essentially being just another way to block the construction.

Possible yeah. That doesn’t mean it’s what happened. Unless you’re another one of those people who see proof in allegation and insinuation.
Of course there are studies required. It’s a massive oil pipeline through some sensitive areas.

0 0
hohokiss says:

January 24, 2012 9:22 pm at 9:22 pm (UTC -4)

most Americans pay an 11% income tax rate OR LESS

Thats not the subject here, the subject is that if I earn a decent $400k I’m taxed at 35% whilst Romney earning $21mio only pays 13.9%, which is 2.9% than the lowest bracket, which I’m in.

Single / Married / Filing Jointly, Qualified Widow(er) / Married Filing Separately / Head of Household

10% $0 – $8,700 / $0 – $17,400 / $0 – $8,700 / $0 – $12,400

Romney here at $21,000,000 / 13.9%

15% $8,701 – $35,350 / $17,401 – $70,700 / $8,701 – $35,350 / $12,401 – $47,350
25% $35,351 – $85,650 / $70,701 – $142,700 / $35,351 – $71,350 / $47,351 – $122,300
28% $85,651 – $178,650 / $142,701 – $217,450 / $71,351 – $108,725 / $122,301 – $198,050
33% $178,651 – $388,350 / $217,451 – $388,350 / $108,726 – $194,175 / $198,051 – $388,350
35% $388,351+ / $388,351+ / $194,176+ / $388,351+

0 1
CM says:

January 24, 2012 9:37 pm at 9:37 pm (UTC -4)

In comparison, in 2010 Obama was taxed at 26.3 percent and Gingrich at 31.7 percent.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/24/us/politics/the-candidates-tax-returns.html?ref=politics

Those rates are far below the top income tax rate on wages, which is 35 percent, because the U.S. tax code in recent years has favored investment income over wage income.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/24/us-usa-campaign-romney-taxes-idUSTRE80N06U20120124

As I said (FOUR FUCKING TIMES FUCKING FUCK), this all makes a complete nonsense of those graphs which show standard federal tax rates.

For 2011, about 46 percent of Americans will pay no federal individual income taxes, most of them because they are poor, according to the Tax Policy Center, a think tank.

Poor = no tax
Rich = 26-31% tax
Super Rich = 13.9% tax

0 2
Section8 says:

January 24, 2012 10:54 pm at 10:54 pm (UTC -4)

Holy shit, has the cognitive abilities of our leftist ideologue friends become so diminished that simple concepts such as hypocrisy are beyond the scope of understanding?

I can see bitching about how much a person is taxed if they are part of the ideology that we need more taxes. such as hypocrite and yacht tax dodger John Kerry, who was paying less percentage in taxes than Romney when running for office, or faux tax warrior and grave robber Warren Buffett, but if you aren’t advocating a bunch of new taxes then you aren’t held to the same standard. I would think that’s just common sense.

To put it simply in an example for the dullards who have difficulty understanding: If a person has a stance that says the government shouldn’t care about who you sleep with as long as they are a consenting adult, then there is no real need to get into a tizzy if you find out they are sleeping around with consenting adults. Now, if a person says you’ll burn in hell for sleeping around, and the government should enforce some rule to prevent you from sleeping around, if that person is caught sleeping around, then it’s a fucking topic.

Same thing with taxes, if you advocate more, then we find out you don’t pay, or dodge them, then it’s a problem.

Also, it’s about 15% living in poverty, not 46%. In fact, anyone living in the US, would know there’s no fucking way 46% is even close. Even if it is broken down to those capable of working, it’s not even close.

Link

46%? That’s just a silly ass number left wing talking point from an ideologue.

Of course the numbers have continued to go up under the leadership of the great Messiah. Can’t blame Bush forever.

0 0
hohokiss says:

January 25, 2012 9:32 am at 9:32 am (UTC -4)

Its up to definition again. Being poor and living in poverty are two different things and altogether relative terms, depending on where you live.
Whats virtually identical are the crooks we get to vote for, the fools who adore their favorite brand.

0 2
Xetrov says:

January 25, 2012 9:38 am at 9:38 am (UTC -4)

Poor = no tax
Rich = 26-31% tax
Super Rich = 13.9% tax

Come on, CM. How exactly do you equate capital gains/investment taxes with income taxes? If he earned money under a salary, he would have been taxed at a higher rate. If you think capital gains/investment taxes should be higher, fine, say so. But to try to argue he’s somehow cheating the system on income taxes is disingenuous.

And lest we forget – anyone who buys a stock with money they’ve made from a salary, the money has ALREADY BEEN TAXED. It’s a double tax. So hypothetically, if Romney made 20mil in salary in 2009 and was taxed at 35% on it, invested a big chunk of it, and sold those stocks in 2010 dead even, he’s now paid 50% on that income, but would show an effective tax rate of 15%. Fucking politicians/media and their doublespeak bullshit.

0 0
hohokiss says:

January 25, 2012 10:34 am at 10:34 am (UTC -4)

And lest we forget – anyone who buys a stock with money they’ve made from a salary, the money has ALREADY BEEN TAXED

Normally, every single time any goods are bought or sold, they are taxed – food, clothing and shelter included. Even gifts and inheritance can be taxed. Some people argue that stocks are goods, so its only fair that they are taxed too. And since they can appreciate in value its only fair that their value is taxed accordingly, as income. Someone sold my stocks, so I have to pay that tax. If my stocks earn me $20mil (on top of my other income), I personally wouldn’t complain about being taxed 35%. but then I’m not the yuppie winner type A personality who buys expensive friends.

The list goes on – transfer taxes, expatriation tax.Get this – if I do decide to renounce my US citizenship, I can be taxed

One example is the United States under the American Jobs Creation Act, where any individual who has a net worth of $2 million or an average income-tax liability of $127,000 who renounces his or her citizenship and leaves the country is automatically assumed to have done so for tax avoidance reasons and is subject to a higher tax rate

Americans assume its all for the money.

0 2
Xetrov says:

January 25, 2012 11:34 am at 11:34 am (UTC -4)

And since they can appreciate in value its only fair that their value is taxed accordingly, as income.

That’s asinine. If I have a savings account, I earn interest. You want me to pay income taxes on that too? If I buy a Ferrari, and it appreciates over the course of 20 years, and I sell it privately for three times what I bought it for, you want me to pay income taxes on the difference?

Americans assume its all for the money.

Fixed -

American politicians that passed the stupid law in the first place assume its all for the money.

0 0
hohokiss says:

January 25, 2012 11:56 am at 11:56 am (UTC -4)

And you failed to press criminal charges why?

Me: “Your Honor, my online brokerage account was accessed without my permission or knowledge by someone who made random, sporadic stock trades in 2009, resulting in what the IRS now asserts amounts to an additional $4800 in tax liabilities. Payable now”

His Honor: “You should’ve reported it. But you didn’t check periodically, stupid.. And I’m betting you used a lame password or actually gave it to someone, which essentially means it’s ultimately your fault anyway. CASE DISMISSED.”

Me: “The hacker is innocent by law?”

His Honor: “I’m the law, fag. Hackers only make the Innernet safer by testing its security. CASE DISMISSED”

Me: “Whats a ‘lame’ password? Scottrade requires 8 characters minimum – letters and numbers, at least one capital letter. I used 12 characters, total”

His Honor; “Did you use any of the numbers 1 through 5?”

Me: “Matter of act I did.”

His Honor: “See how lame that is?! I knew that right away!! Have fun with homelessness, you loser. Serves you right Hahahahahahahah CASE DISMISSED”

0 1
Xetrov says:

January 25, 2012 12:02 pm at 12:02 pm (UTC -4)

Since the left seems to be using this tax issue as some sort of memorandum on Romney being a greedy capitalist, perhaps we should not only center the discussion on legally required and paid taxes, but consider charitable contributions.

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and his wife Michelle gave $10,772 of the $1.2 million they earned from 2000 through 2004 to charities, or less than 1 percent, according to tax returns for those years released today by his campaign.

The Obamas increased the amount they gave to charity when their income rose in 2005 and 2006 after the Illinois senator published a bestselling book. The $137,622 they gave over those two years amounted to more than 5 percent of their $2.6 million income.

Romney charitable contributions

Tax year Taxable income Charitable donations Donations as % of income
2010 $21.7 million $2.98 million 13.73%
2011 (est) $20.9 million $4 million 19.14%

Also

In fact, in those two years, he (Romney) paid 16 percent of his income to charity, compared to, er, 2.6 percent by Newt Gingrich.

And what about President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden in the run-up to their 2008 campaign?

In 2007, the Obamas gave more than $240,000 to charity, about 5.7 percent of their income. The Bidens gave an average of $369 to charity a year for the decade before he moved to the Naval Observatory – about 0.3 percent of their income. Back in 1997, then veep Al Gore and his then wife Tipper gave $353.

Since becoming veep, Biden hasn’t become much more generous. In 2010, he gave $5,350, about 1.4 percent of income. That same year, Romney gave some $3 million. The national average is about three percent.

0 0
hohokiss says:

January 25, 2012 12:23 pm at 12:23 pm (UTC -4)

That’s asinine. If I have a savings account, I earn interest. You want me to pay income taxes on that too? If I buy a Ferrari, and it appreciates over the course of 20 years, and I sell it privately for three times what I bought it for, you want me to pay income taxes on the difference?

Hello?

When you file your income tax return, you must report all of your income regardless of its source. The interest on a savings account is taxable just like most interest income. The tax rate depends on how much other income you have for the year.

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc403.html

So, sure, your Ferrari money put into an interest-bearing savings account appears to be taxable. Also:

I’m assuming this is your personal car, not something you used for business and depreciated. You’d owe taxes only if you made a profit on it. If you bought it for $10,000 and sold it for $15,000, you’d owe taxes. But unless it’s some kind of collector car, you probably paid more for it than you sold it for, so there’s no tax on the sale and you don’t report it anywhere on your tax return.

Regardless of whether or not the car was used for business, you would have to pay income tax on the proceeds IF you had a gain on the sale. If you sold it for less than you paid for it then you would not be able to claim the loss.
Gains on personal property is taxable, losses are not deductible.
The payment of sales tax on the purchase has no bearing on the taxability on the sale.
Source(s):16 years experience as a tax professional and Enrolled Agent

So hows the buyer taxed?
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_you_have_to_pay_sales_tax_when_purchasing_a_used_car_from_a_private_party_seller_in_California

Do you have to pay sales tax when purchasing a used car from a private party seller in Ohio?
No you don’t pay taxes to an individual, only a dealer. You will pay the sales tax at the dmv when you go to register the vehicle.

Do you have to pay dmv tax when purchasing a used car from a private party seller in California?
Yes, as a buyer in a private party vehicle sale, you will need to pay the use tax. Use tax is calculated based on the sales tax rate in your residence county. You can find more information on CA…

Sales tax when purchasing a used car from a private party seller in Maryland?
Yes. Maryland MVA collects an excise tax (a tax that it return to the State government) in the amount of 6% of the book value of the vehicle. If you buy through a dealer, you pay the tax through the…

Do you have to pay sales tax when purchasing a used car from a private party in atlanta?
NO. But you will pay sales tax when you tag and transfer title. Based on the value of car… not the actual sales price

Do you have to pay sales tax when purchasing a used car from a private party seller in Texas?
Absolutely, although the process is slightly different than in a normal transaction in it is collected when you register or title the vehicle.If the amount you claim the purchase was for is different..

So, I stand corrected, no taxes anywhere.

0 1
JimK says:

January 25, 2012 12:38 pm at 12:38 pm (UTC -4)

I’m'a come straight out an say it. Like so much of hoho’s blathering, this stock story is an utter fabrication. Total bullshit. It’s just some more of his delusional nonsense that he thinks shores up his ridiculous arguments, but either does the opposite or has no bearing on the discussion.

Interestingly, even though it’s a lie, it *is* psychologically telling. Once again, his problems are the fault of someone else. It’s never him. No matter what the issue, no matter what the circumstance, someone else is always to blame.

Sound like anyone we all know? Someone in a position of extreme power?
JimK recently posted..Re-discovering an old musical friend

5 0
Xetrov says:

January 25, 2012 12:38 pm at 12:38 pm (UTC -4)

The Securities Exchange Act has specific anti-fraud sections that makes your court hypothetical impossible. You think you’re the first person to have their securities account hacked? Or did you just make stupid trading decisions, try to lie about it, get smacked, and now bitterly bitch about it online? There would be IP Address records if someone had hacked your account. Relatively easy to prove.

0 0
AlexInCT says:

January 25, 2012 1:09 pm at 1:09 pm (UTC -4)

I’m’a come straight out an say it. Like so much of hoho’s blathering, this stock story is an utter fabrication. Total bullshit. It’s just some more of his delusional nonsense that he thinks shores up his ridiculous arguments, but either does the opposite or has no bearing on the discussion.

I wish I could thumbs up your post twice Jim. This is utter nonsense. Even more unbelievable is how he nonchalantly let it go because it was someone he knew. Fuck, I would have my any friend up on charges if they pulled a stunt like that. Maybe Hoho is a millionaire and can afford to lose thousands of dollars just like that, but I would be pissed even if it was a $100.

It is one thing to subscribe a friend to a ghey porn magazine and have it sent to him at his mom’s house when he was forced to live there after college like I did to my best buddy. It might even be funny to log into someone’s computer game and strip his character naked and delevel him back to a newb like a spurned girlfriend did to a friend of mine playing Evercrack. But it is a different thing to break into someone’s investment portfolio and cause him/her to lose thousands of dollars. Even the damn Nigerians are smart enough to just steal it.

Interestingly, even though it’s a lie, it *is* psychologically telling. Once again, his problems are the fault of someone else. It’s never him. No matter what the issue, no matter what the circumstance, someone else is always to blame.

How many guesses do we get? And do the first 2 count? Barry? Is that you?

0 0
Seattle Outcast says:

January 25, 2012 2:16 pm at 2:16 pm (UTC -4)

Interestingly, even though it’s a lie, it *is* psychologically telling. Once again, his problems are the fault of someone else. It’s never him. No matter what the issue, no matter what the circumstance, someone else is always to blame.

Sound like anyone we all know?

Every woman in the world?

0 0
JimK says:

January 25, 2012 2:35 pm at 2:35 pm (UTC -4)

Every woman in the world?

Heh. Although I feel compelled to defend mah woman, who owns up to her shit with the quickness. And hell yes, I already know I’m one lucky sonofabitch. :)
JimK recently posted..Re-discovering an old musical friend

0 0
CM says:

January 25, 2012 3:01 pm at 3:01 pm (UTC -4)

Come on, CM. How exactly do you equate capital gains/investment taxes with income taxes? If he earned money under a salary, he would have been taxed at a higher rate. If you think capital gains/investment taxes should be higher, fine, say so. But to try to argue he’s somehow cheating the system on income taxes is disingenuous.

Where did you get that I said anyone was ‘cheating’?

Also, it’s about 15% living in poverty, not 46%. In fact, anyone living in the US, would know there’s no fucking way 46% is even close. Even if it is broken down to those capable of working, it’s not even close.

Link

46%? That’s just a silly ass number left wing talking point from an ideologue.

Who said 46% were living in poverty? Obviously in the quote “poor” equals “don’t earn enough”. But then this was discussed in detail in the other thread. You clearly missed the entire thing, or didn’t understand it.

Wooohooo, here we go again with the lazy cowardly allegations. What positions do I hold that make me an ideologue?
I won’t hold my breath waiting for a response. Nobody else has been able to even begin to justify their nonsense.

0 0
Section8 says:

January 25, 2012 5:20 pm at 5:20 pm (UTC -4)

Who me? What? How did? Where what? Jesus.

Same old lying CM. Take a look at what you wrote and what you chose to present. The 46% figure is from the Tax Policy Center. The “too poor” came from a reporter who decided to inject their commentary unless you want show me where that’s not true.

Then you went on to extend your hyperbole by breaking down the tax brackets into “poor”, 46% apparently, and the rich, in typical left wing rich and poor polarization. I don’t have an issue with that necessarily, as that’s typical of left wing ideologues, it’s just the ones that are too dishonest to own up to their own viewpoints and ideologies that are a joke.

Anyhow, your amazing redefinition of that it means to be poor leaves out factors such as tax credits, those who wouldn’t pay anyhow such as senior citizens who don’t get their income via work, etc. I suppose we could have less “poor” people by removing deductions for dependents and such.

Link

Anyhow, keep bullshitting yourself my ideologue friend, you’re the only one who buys into it anyhow.

2 0
CM says:

January 25, 2012 5:42 pm at 5:42 pm (UTC -4)

As discussed, I went into this (people with middle class jobs paying almost no federal income tax because they’re deemed too poor) at length in other thread. But no, you charge right into your usual misrepresentations. And as usual, you’ve missed the point because you’re too busy frothing at the mouth seeing commies everywhere you look.

AGAIN, please provide examples which demonstrate that I’m an ideologue. If it’s so obviously true, that should be very easy.
Put up, or shut the fuck u (i.e. stop being a whiney cunt). Or are you just as full of shit as the others?

0 2
Section8 says:

January 25, 2012 6:33 pm at 6:33 pm (UTC -4)

LOL, you’re too damn stupid to even recognize the example I just gave you, or (and more likely) deliberately lying yet again. Your response to balthazar in his comment about taxation was it was due to people being “too poor”, so then what’s the disagreement then given your broad interpretation of the word? Why even respond to him with that statement? He’s right, you’re right, but you gave a supposed reason. If the word “poor” is just a synonym for tax write offs, deductions, and other non taxable income then why not be honest enough to just state that from the beginning, and state you’re redefining the word to include those above mentioned scenarios along with those that would fall into the classical use of the word “poor” which the rest of the fucking planet uses, i.e. broke, out of money, barley hanging on, etc. Why? Because “poor” is a buzz word, and used deliberately to misrepresent the reality of the argument you silly ideologue you.

1 0
CM says:

January 25, 2012 6:44 pm at 6:44 pm (UTC -4)

LOL, you’re too damn stupid to even recognize the example I just gave you, or (and more likely) deliberately lying yet again.

I can’t be held responsible for your ongoing inability to correctly interpret the discussion.

Your response to balthazar in his comment about taxation was it was due to people being “too poor”,

The “too poor” comment was part of a quote, it wasn’t from me. The key part was the fact that many people don’t earn enough to pay federal income tax. In the other thread I pointed out that there is something wrong with a system when people with decent jobs are earning so little that they’re considered too poor to pay income tax.

Because “poor” is a buzz word, and used deliberately to misrepresent the reality of the argument you silly ideologue you.

I bet you see dirty commies everywhere you look.
Call them what you like, I don’t give a shit, and it doesn’t alter anything. If I called them non-rich would that stop me from being an ideologue? How about “yet to be rich”? Surely that’s even better!
It also doesn’t change the fact that you’re going off on another misdirected rant in a desperate attempt to abuse and demean and dismiss someone you don’t agree with. Lame.

0 2
CM says:

January 25, 2012 6:46 pm at 6:46 pm (UTC -4)

I’m still yet to hear how I said anyone was cheating. Or is that just going down the memory hole with all the other bullshit?

0 2
CM says:

January 25, 2012 6:51 pm at 6:51 pm (UTC -4)

My comment about the different rates paid in tax (poor, wealthy, super-wealthy) was also directly in relation to the tax table that gets thrown around like it means anything in reality. But if you actually read my comments in context, that’s blatantly obvious. Both you (Section8) and Balthazar obviously don’t give a shit about context in your mission to show how good you are at spotting goddamn commies and stopping them in their tracks by calling them stupid.

0 2
hohokiss says:

January 25, 2012 9:04 pm at 9:04 pm (UTC -4)

I’m’a come straight out an say it. Like so much of hoho’s blathering, this stock story is an utter fabrication. Total bullshit. It’s just some more of his delusional nonsense that he thinks shores up his ridiculous arguments, but either does the opposite or has no bearing on the discussion.

Interestingly, even though it’s a lie, it *is* psychologically telling. Once again, his problems are the fault of someone else. It’s never him. No matter what the issue, no matter what the circumstance, someone else is always to blame.

Good to know that the IRS letter I’m looking at is utter fabrication. Lemme take a screen shot of your above post right now and send it to the IRS. Case closed haha.

I could scan this 15 page “Notice of Deficiency”, form 5564, in its entirety, and send it to you. It has every one of the stock sales I listed above on it, plus many more. I could let you access my account and check each entry against the entires in Account History/Transactions tab, letter for letter. And still you would conclude that it has to be all my fault, not any hackers, which is also pychologically telling.

0 2
hohokiss says:

January 25, 2012 9:27 pm at 9:27 pm (UTC -4)

The Securities Exchange Act has specific anti-fraud sections that makes your court hypothetical impossible. You think you’re the first person to have their securities account hacked? Or did you just make stupid trading decisions, try to lie about it, get smacked, and now bitterly bitch about it online? There would be IP Address records if someone had hacked your account. Relatively easy to prove.

“made stupid trading decisions” thats pretty funny. You’re a star pschologist on top of tax expert, what would compel someoneto sell $1200 worth of stock in increments of $100-$200 minutes apart @ $7 per trade, instead of all at once for one (1) $7 commission? “Fag’s just jealous of the rich syndrome, too stupid to make a decent password lol What a retard. Serves him right”
You’re also a star attorney, I’ll bet you can get Scottrade to release those IPs it claims not to have from 2009. And what if the IP came from a motel’s courtesy wifi connection you’d personally stayed at for a month, shared by X amount of residents? Hm?
You’re so smart so tell me aleady how you’d go about financing this fight for justice? Speak up. Sue Scottrade, the motel and the Web, and then file bankruptcy, or vice versa, what now?

0 1
AlexInCT says:

January 26, 2012 11:03 am at 11:03 am (UTC -4)

I’m still yet to hear how I said anyone was cheating. Or is that just going down the memory hole with all the other bullshit?

HEH!

As if anything anyone ever showed you, no matter how blatant and obvious to everyone else, would get you to admit you are full of it. When called on the mat you ignore what you don’t like, pretend it is invalid or dismiss it as inconsequential or not pertinent to the conversation, accuse the people pointing your bull or any of the usual bull coming from the left, of lying, then act as if the burden of an impossible, and obviously to be dismissed anyway when presented proof, still remains to be met. Must be nice to live in Fantasy Land.

I could scan this 15 page “Notice of Deficiency”, form 5564, in its entirety, and send it to you. It has every one of the stock sales I listed above on it, plus many more. I could let you access my account and check each entry against the entires in Account History/Transactions tab, letter for letter. And still you would conclude that it has to be all my fault, not any hackers, which is also pychologically telling.

Uhm, yeah, sure….

While the fact you are claiming to be willing to share access to your account does show you are not operating with a full deck, all this other stuff you present as evidence is not pertinent to the fact that you claim your losses were caused by someone else that got access to your account and did it as a joke of all things, which is what we all called bullshit on. Now if you had a police report saying this I might feel compelled to say you have a case. Without it, I can only conclude you are full of it or insane. granted, I sometimes wonder if you are not insane, but even the insane do not take kindly to gettting shafted for thousands of dollars.

1 0
hohokiss says:

January 26, 2012 12:16 pm at 12:16 pm (UTC -4)

You got it all figured out, as usual. Funny though, how Scottrade says to notify them immediately if I notice any suspicious activity, not “call the cops”. This seems to have some pertinent reasons. The account is blocked so nobody, not even its owner, can access it, who then need to get in touch with a local Scottrade office to work around it. I would assume they do actively monitor it to see who tries to access the account from then on. But as I’ve already mentioned, its been two years since the last “hack”and my e-mail address is back to its old self, and while someone may have looked into it since, there was no more trading done.
I put this machine in motion after I got the IRS letter on December 18, 2011, and I may send them an “explanation of deficiency” by March 1, 2012 but I’m still going to have to pay up. Still no cops in sight. And I need to empty the account to pay one more months rent – February 2012.
Whos yer attorney who is gonna fix this, and them, for free? Whom do I go on an armed righteous rampage against? Americans here are siding with the hacker, saying its my fault for clearly having a sucky password, and that I’m retarded anyway

Of course theres Installment Agreement form 9465, which might allow me up to 60 months to pay it back. Used to be I always paid my taxes, but now I’m inclined to – ready? – let you, the truly hard-working Americans in the tough 13.9% tax bracket absorb this instead, along with all those doctor bills, because you can, and are proud to do so.
I’m looking forward to getting my own thread there, ya’ll grumbling about this lazy retarded fag who got unemployed and sick and Obamas welfare state bailed out for free with your hard-earned tax dollars. Need health care, eh, how about some euthanasia.

I still want to think that some smart ass kid got lucky, couldn’t resist poking around a bit and didn’t think that selling and repurchasing stocks at the ca. same price would cause much of a problem, showed his badass computer savvy to peers, and moved on. I’ll admit I’ve hacked a few times myself, after watching War Games. I also believe that a lot of good people would scoff at my getting all wet over a paltry $4800, which they spend on entertainment alone after a hards weeks work

0 1
Section8 says:

January 26, 2012 12:23 pm at 12:23 pm (UTC -4)

all this other stuff you present as evidence is not pertinent to the fact that you claim your losses were caused by someone else that got access to your account and did it as a joke of all things, which is what we all called bullshit on.

If you look at the chart for HEB, and when it was sold, it was at the last major peak of the ongoing downward long term trend, and is now trading for about 30 cents. Depending on where he bought it, he either made a killing, which prior to the 3 or so bucks that he sold at was at around 50 cents just a few months before. If it was long term and bought at a higher amount a few years before, it’s a loss anyhow and not taxable, but would have been an even a further loss if it wan’t sold. If he held the stock is pretty much worthless now which would be no taxes but no profit (depending on when bought), either of which would be even more in the hole. Not sure what he’s bitching about on that one. I only wish someone would hack into my account and sell at the top of each peak in a tread.

0 0
hohokiss says:

January 26, 2012 1:24 pm at 1:24 pm (UTC -4)

Thats deep. But the fact remains that HEB stock was sold and repurchased numerous times at ca. the same price over the course of a few days in 2009, which is taxable. Same thing with other stocks – bought/sold at the same price, same time. Sale = tax.

0 0
CM says:

January 26, 2012 3:04 pm at 3:04 pm (UTC -4)

HEH!

As if anything anyone ever showed you, no matter how blatant and obvious to everyone else, would get you to admit you are full of it. When called on the mat you ignore what you don’t like, pretend it is invalid or dismiss it as inconsequential or not pertinent to the conversation, accuse the people pointing your bull or any of the usual bull coming from the left, of lying, then act as if the burden of an impossible, and obviously to be dismissed anyway when presented proof, still remains to be met. Must be nice to live in Fantasy Land.

More civil discourse from the king himself.
All those words and still not a single piece of evidence to show how I suggested anyone was cheating. You’ve added even more accusations to the list. Many of which you’ve made before, none of which you’ve been able to substantiate. You’d do well as a despot. I can see exactly how your dissident trials would go.

0 1
CM says:

January 26, 2012 3:43 pm at 3:43 pm (UTC -4)

And lest we forget – anyone who buys a stock with money they’ve made from a salary, the money has ALREADY BEEN TAXED. It’s a double tax. So hypothetically, if Romney made 20mil in salary in 2009 and was taxed at 35% on it, invested a big chunk of it, and sold those stocks in 2010 dead even, he’s now paid 50% on that income, but would show an effective tax rate of 15%. Fucking politicians/media and their doublespeak bullshit.

But this is almost certainly not the case with income from private equity firms like Bain Capital, because they are invariably set up as “pass throughs,” meaning that profits face only the individual rates of the owners, not the corporate rate.

What about the corporations in which the PE funds invest? Don’t they pay the corporate rate and wouldn’t that be capitalized into their profits (which would be lower due to the corp tax)? But that’s not how the PE guys roll. They profit from buying and selling undervalued stock in the company, or for that matter, selling the undervalued company itself. The corp rate doesn’t come into play in either scenario (Dan Shaviro makes these points here).

And to the extent that these companies are themselves pass-throughs, the corporate rate again doesn’t apply. Based on Romney’s tax returns, it’s impossible to tell whether the capital gains he realized through these companies reflect corporate taxes at all (interestingly, Romney’s trustee actually made this point to the WSJ, which chose to ignore it).

Finally, remember this: PEs are masters of debt financing, and debt financing carries an effective tax rate of -6% because business interest can be deducted from your tax bill. For the highly leveraged PE crowd, debt financing is a tax shelter for other liabilities they face, including any corporate income that might slip through the cracks…if I were the WSJ here, I’d crow that Romney’s tax rate is actually 9% (15-6)!

http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/tax-distortions/

0 0
Poosh says:

January 26, 2012 4:57 pm at 4:57 pm (UTC -4)

CM why are you posting links from Soros-funded Think Progress…. the silly claim, as far as I can tell, that Obama is somehow… creating Oil and gas jobs…… …. ..claims that “he” created 60 thousand or whatever. After a quick read up, it turns out this was inevitable and would have happened whoever was in power. New technologies and discoveries… and nothing to do with Obama. Yet somehow this is “jobs created under Obama” which is deliberately misleading as it suggests the lie that Obama had anything to do with this. In fact I see evil Halliburton as one of the prime causes of these jobs being created.

6000 contract jobs goes along way. And if it brings money from Canada into the USA then that’s even better.

Why is it that when private citizens create jobs people are eager to attribute it to “government”?

1 0
CM says:

January 26, 2012 5:15 pm at 5:15 pm (UTC -4)

CM why are you posting links from Soros-funded Think Progress

Shouldn’t matter where it’s from. It’s either right or it’s not.

…. the silly claim, as far as I can tell, that Obama is somehow… creating Oil and gas jobs…… …. ..claims that “he” created 60 thousand or whatever. After a quick read up, it turns out this was inevitable and would have happened whoever was in power. New technologies and discoveries… and nothing to do with Obama. Yet somehow this is “jobs created under Obama” which is deliberately misleading as it suggests the lie that Obama had anything to do with this. In fact I see evil Halliburton as one of the prime causes of these jobs being created.

“Jobs created under Obama” seems accurate enough to me. How is it misleading? The point is – claims that Obama is anti-oil or is actively trying to kill the industry are contradicted by the facts. Jobs in the industry have increased 13% since he became President. Since Obama took office, oil production has increased substantially – with more drilling rigs being deployed in America today than at any time since the mid 1980′s. That’s the opposite of what some people would lead you to believe (and is another example of ODS). That was my point.

6000 contract jobs goes along way. And if it brings money from Canada into the USA then that’s even better.

If there were no other aspects to consider, nobody in their right mind would choose 0 jobs over 6000 jobs. But the point is – since Obama became President it appears that 75,000 oil and gas jobs have been created. That’s more important context. We’re not comparing 81,000 potential jobs with 0 actual jobs, we’re comparing 81,000 with 75,000.

Why is it that when private citizens create jobs people are eager to attribute it to “government”?

Again, I think you’ve missed the point of the argument.

0 0
Poosh says:

January 26, 2012 5:55 pm at 5:55 pm (UTC -4)

The point is – claims that Obama is anti-oil or is actively trying to kill the industry are contradicted by the facts… Jobs in the industry have increased 13% since he became President.

You’re conflating unrelated events. And the mere fact that someone desires to kill a certain industry or replace it with more environmentally-friendly industries, is not refuted by an increase in the sector that one desires to destroy, big fallacy you’ve made there. “Since Obama became president” and other BS like that is deliberately manipulative, the intent of the language you use is both deceptive and wrong. Your context in regard to the number of the jobs is absurd and pointless, why are you even saying it? If you’re a builder or technician etc, whose job is to take contract jobs, and you’re unemployed, you really don’t care if 60,000 or whatever contract jobs have been created, you’re still bereft of the contract job you’ve trained for, and need to live. You wouldn’t be posting such claptrap if you didn’t read Think Progress < that's why it matters.

In fact, you could say, and this would be FAR more truthful, 60,000 or whatever jobs have been created in the oil/gas industry IN SPITE of Obama. * though I wouldn't rule out some sort of cronyism between politicians and oil, that's a possibility.

1 0
CM says:

January 26, 2012 6:10 pm at 6:10 pm (UTC -4)

You’re conflating unrelated events. And the mere fact that someone desires to kill a certain industry or replace it with more environmentally-friendly industries, is not refuted by an increase in the sector that one desires to destroy, big fallacy you’ve made there.

If jobs have been created during a large recession in an industry that the President is supposed to be against to the point where he actively wants to kill it off, then the addition of jobs and a massive upswing in domestic production would certainly be inconsistent with that assertion. Those making those sorts of arguments (as Alex has, time and time again) can’t have it both ways – they can’t claim that Obama is killing the industry, and also say that he couldn’t stop this massive upswing in jobs and production. If he’s killing the industry, why is it seemingly thriving (relatively speaking) under such a President (who had the numbers for his first 2 years) and in such a recession? That’s the point.

“Since Obama became president” and other BS like that is deliberately manipulative, the intent of the language you use is both deceptive and wrong.

How? How else would you make the point without using that term?

Your context in regard to the number of the jobs is absurd and pointless, why are you even saying it?

To counter the absurdities put forward by others.

If you’re a builder or technician etc, whose job is to take contract jobs, and you’re unemployed, you really don’t care if 60,000 or whatever contract jobs have been created, you’re still bereft of the contract job you’ve trained for, and need to live.

If you take contract jobs and 60,000 have been created, then there’s a significantly better chance that you’ve been able to get a job than if there were 0 jobs created, or jobs lost in the industry. Or if you’re in another industry with 0 or negative jobs created.

You wouldn’t be posting such claptrap if you didn’t read Think Progress < that's why it matters.

I’ll stick to the discussion thanks.

0 0
Poosh says:

January 26, 2012 6:27 pm at 6:27 pm (UTC -4)

!!!!!

0 0
CM says:

January 26, 2012 7:32 pm at 7:32 pm (UTC -4)

How cool is this new HD Nasa image of the Earth though.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gsfc/6760135001/sizes/o/in/photostream/

0 0
AlexInCT says:

January 26, 2012 7:36 pm at 7:36 pm (UTC -4)

More civil discourse from the king himself.

You either think we are stupid and that we will buy your sudden “democrat-like” appeal for decorum, or you have a split personality. This is more of the same crap we had after Giffords was shot. The most obnoxious, annoying, and disgusting people all pretended they wanted moderated and decent discourse when what they really wanted was to use the tragedy to silence the people calling them out. You are doing it again. Man do you love playing the victim, huh?

Caling you out. Pointing out what you do, and do constantly, does not amount to uncivil discourse. It’s telling the truth. But keep at it. You have now been told by more than 3 others that you are full of it. And yet, like the petulant child that causes trouble and then puts on a good show to have his parents punish the siblings, you keep playing the victim and crying as loud as you can, in hopes others get blamed for you being a dick.

Grow up.

0 1
richtaylor365 says:

January 26, 2012 8:14 pm at 8:14 pm (UTC -4)

{sigh}

0 0
CM says:

January 26, 2012 9:07 pm at 9:07 pm (UTC -4)

Domestic crude oil production is expected to grow by more than 20 percent over the coming decade: Domestic crude oil production increased from 5.1 million barrels per day in 2007 to 5.5 million barrels per day in 2010. Over the next 10 years, continued development of tight oil combined with the development of offshore Gulf of Mexico resources are projected to push domestic crude oil production to 6.7 million barrels per day in 2020, a level not seen since 1994.

http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=4671

0 0
sahrab says:

January 27, 2012 8:22 am at 8:22 am (UTC -4)

Imagine what the increase would be, and the benefit to all who get goods that use the result of Oil Production (a’la everyone), as well as the addition of more jobs, if the Pipeline had gone through

0 0
JimK says:

January 27, 2012 10:13 am at 10:13 am (UTC -4)

Alex, my main page post applied to you as well. Stop with the constant namecalling. Argue your points without the constant namecalling. I know you can, so just do it.
JimK recently posted..Re-discovering an old musical friend

0 0
sahrab says:

January 27, 2012 10:35 am at 10:35 am (UTC -4)

Jim, your main page post hurt my feelings

0 0
JimK says:

January 27, 2012 11:10 am at 11:10 am (UTC -4)

Jim, your main page post hurt my feelings

Aww, I’m sorry. I’ll hold your hair back while you cry so hard that you puke. Then I’ll take you to the mall to get new panties. Cool? ;)
JimK recently posted..Re-discovering an old musical friend

0 0
sahrab says:

January 27, 2012 11:23 am at 11:23 am (UTC -4)

lacey ones?

0 0
JimK says:

January 27, 2012 12:47 pm at 12:47 pm (UTC -4)

lacey ones?

Are their any other kind between lovers?
JimK recently posted..Re-discovering an old musical friend

0 0
sahrab says:

January 27, 2012 1:10 pm at 1:10 pm (UTC -4)

lol i cant do it anymore its getting to weird

hah

0 0
AlexInCT says:

January 27, 2012 3:54 pm at 3:54 pm (UTC -4)

Alex, my main page post applied to you as well. Stop with the constant namecalling. Argue your points without the constant namecalling. I know you can, so just do it.

Fair enough. CM, I appologize for calling you a dick. I should not have done that. The rest of my post shoulkd have stood on it’s own.

BTW, this blog needs a few private rooms…. :)

0 0
Poosh says:

January 27, 2012 6:06 pm at 6:06 pm (UTC -4)

Just to reiterate the stupidity of this claim that Obama had anything to do with the increase in oil production and jobs in that industry, and the stupidity of believing this means that he isn’t against that industry or wishes to destroy it … to those it might concern.

Since Obama took office, according to the Institute for Energy Research, oil production has fallen precipitously on Federal onshore and offshore leases, while it has increased by an even larger amount on state and private lands largely outside of this Administration’s reach.

Some data some of you might want to arm yourself with in the coming months. Don’t let them get away with these lies.

0 0