At a time when dirty money pervades all levels of government and wall street is busy blowing up the next bubble with their bailout money, making Romney president would be like making your alcoholic uncle the bartender.

Imagine someone wanting to keep his or her money rather than have the government take it away. We are doomed more by government intervention than by an individual's desire to reduce his or her tax liability.

And this quote is ironically correct, though not in the way intended: "His personal finances are a poster child of what's wrong with the American tax system," said Jack Blum, a Washington lawyer who is an authority on tax enforcement and offshore banking.

George Romney was the first governor of Michigan that I can recall....

smayschmouthfootball said:

Imagine someone wanting to keep his or her money rather than have the government take it away. We are doomed more by government intervention than by an individual's desire to reduce his or her tax liability.

...

Click to expand...

aside from his inheritance, most of Romney's $$$ came from running Bain Capital's LBOs (Leveraged Buy-outs). there is an article out studying just how many of their acquisitions were made & assisted by government subsidies. E.g. Bain buys up XYZ Tools, Romney uses his connections to get them tax breaks, subsidies, grants, etc. from the state/local gov't to "create jobs" making them more profitable.

but instead of creating jobs... they "loan" Bain a huge chunk of money from XYZ Tools, or pay themselves 100% dividends from the profits, layoff a bunch of workers, and then either merge XYZ Tools with another company, or spin it off, having sucked all the wealth out of it.

AND THEN... they move those profits, despite being entirely earned in the US, and often with government assistance, offshore to avoid paying US income tax on them.

And this is okay... because that mean old government would be "unfairly" trying to take their hard-earned dollars...

here: http://www.salon.com/2011/12/21/romney%E2%80%99s_record_as_a_crony_capitalist/singleton/

smayschmouthfootball said:

Imagine someone wanting to keep his or her money rather than have the government take it away. We are doomed more by government intervention than by an individual's desire to reduce his or her tax liability.

And this quote is ironically correct, though not in the way intended: "His personal finances are a poster child of what's wrong with the American tax system," said Jack Blum, a Washington lawyer who is an authority on tax enforcement and offshore banking.

Click to expand...

Imagine someone wanting to keep his or her money while enjoying all the advantages, infrastructure, and services that lead to he or she getting his or her money in the first place. And then instead of using his or her money to repay their share they instead pay equally rich tax lawyers to skirt the law so that they may not.

There is no doubt massive government waste which overburden taxpayers but I disagree on the method of reducing that burden. Namely getting rich enough to pay lawyers instead of you tax bills and leaving the plebs to fit the bill.

MichChamp02 said:

smayschmouthfootball said:

Imagine someone wanting to keep his or her money rather than have the government take it away. We are doomed more by government intervention than by an individual's desire to reduce his or her tax liability.

...

Click to expand...

aside from his inheritance, most of Romney's $$$ came from running Bain Capital's LBOs (Leveraged Buy-outs). there is an article out studying just how many of their acquisitions were made & assisted by government subsidies. E.g. Bain buys up XYZ Tools, Romney uses his connections to get them tax breaks, subsidies, grants, etc. from the state/local gov't to "create jobs" making them more profitable.

but instead of creating jobs... they "loan" Bain a huge chunk of money from XYZ Tools, or pay themselves 100% dividends from the profits, layoff a bunch of workers, and then either merge XYZ Tools with another company, or spin it off, having sucked all the wealth out of it.

AND THEN... they move those profits, despite being entirely earned in the US, and often with government assistance, offshore to avoid paying US income tax on them.

And this is okay... because that mean old government would be "unfairly" trying to take their hard-earned dollars...

Click to expand...

Surprisingly, the only really wrong thing based on ignorance that you posted was the statement. ". . . either merge XYZ Tools with another company, or spin it off, having sucked all the wealth out of it." This is patently false. A huge majority of these venture holding companies (more than just Bain) actually sell them off, or spin them off, but leave them in great financial shape. That is why they are so damn successful.

On a slightly different topic:
Did you see the 60 minutes on the number of companies that have their headquarters moved to places like Ireland and Switzerland to escape paying taxes? It was explained by at least one of them, that it would be negligence of the highest order against their stockholders if their company did not take advantage of the provided tax sheltering from locating headquarters in these countries with much much lower tax rates. This one crosses just about all political lines I am afraid. If the US would just lower the corporate tax rate to about 20% (still higher than many industrialized nations) and offer some kind of tax break for money brought back into the US, it would inject 100's of billions of dollars back in to the government coffers.

What are the chances of this? Next to nil. I do not care who controls Congress or the Whitehouse - this one isn't going away any time soon unless this gets solved.

MichChamp02 said:

smayschmouthfootball said:

Imagine someone wanting to keep his or her money rather than have the government take it away. We are doomed more by government intervention than by an individual's desire to reduce his or her tax liability.

...

Click to expand...

aside from his inheritance, most of Romney's $$$ came from running Bain Capital's LBOs (Leveraged Buy-outs). there is an article out studying just how many of their acquisitions were made & assisted by government subsidies. E.g. Bain buys up XYZ Tools, Romney uses his connections to get them tax breaks, subsidies, grants, etc. from the state/local gov't to "create jobs" making them more profitable.

but instead of creating jobs... they "loan" Bain a huge chunk of money from XYZ Tools, or pay themselves 100% dividends from the profits, layoff a bunch of workers, and then either merge XYZ Tools with another company, or spin it off, having sucked all the wealth out of it.

AND THEN... they move those profits, despite being entirely earned in the US, and often with government assistance, offshore to avoid paying US income tax on them.

And this is okay... because that mean old government would be "unfairly" trying to take their hard-earned dollars...

Click to expand...

Without the intervention of companies like Bain, XYZ would have gone bankrupt and everyone would have been out of work. And Bain was one of hundreds of like companies in the 80s that was rebooting corporate america. It was all part of a market adjustment likely saved America from the fate that Europe is suffering right now. But the revisionists out there are comparing Romney to Gekko and the public is lapping it up.

Imagine someone wanting to keep his or her money while enjoying all the advantages, infrastructure, and services that lead to he or she getting his or her money in the first place. And then instead of using his or her money to repay their share they instead pay equally rich tax lawyers to skirt the law so that they may not.

There is no doubt massive government waste which overburden taxpayers but I disagree on the method of reducing that burden. Namely getting rich enough to pay lawyers instead of you tax bills and leaving the plebs to fit the bill.

Click to expand...

Since I consider my "share" (and yours as well) of the Federal Tax liability as "zero," this diatribe of yours is irrelevant. Its the tax laws that drive people to look for ways to skirt them in the first place, and ... guess what ... it's legal! So what's your beef?

Since your Federal Tax liability is zero you have no need for national defense, roads, police and firefighters, public schools...etc.

personally, I'm not comparing Romney to Gekko, although I am aware some have made the comparison. As far as my opinions of Romney go, I think he'd probably be better than GW Bush as President, although that's not saying much.

the sometimes bumbling way he's handled his GOP rivals in this primary is concerning. He should've been able to mop the floor consistently from Day 1 with goofs like Perry, Gingrich, and Santorum, instead of struggling with them up until now.

I don't think Europe is in as bad shape as you say, unless you're lumping all of it together.

and you're wrong about LBO shops leaving the companies they buy in better shape. maybe in some cases, but in the vast majority of them, they're taking a lot more out of them than they leave them with. that's why they (Romney) went into the business...

cheeno said:

Since your Federal Tax liability is zero you have no need for national defense, roads, police and firefighters, public schools...etc.

Click to expand...

Please. That old argument? *knee-jerk* There was no Federal Income Tax from 1789 to 1913 and...what a stagnant time that was in America.

MichChamp02 said:

I'm not comparing Romney to Gekko.

I don't think Europe is in as bad shape as you say, unless you're lumping all of it together.

and you're wrong about LBO shops leaving the companies they buy in better shape. maybe in some cases, but in the vast majority of them, they're taking a lot more out of them than they leave them with. that's why they (Romney) went into the business...

Click to expand...

You're just sniffing the same hairspray in a bag that Gingrich is. Imagine that. But, hey, he's out there making Alfred Kinsey blush pink, so what's the difference?

smayschmouthfootball said:

cheeno said:

Since your Federal Tax liability is zero you have no need for national defense, roads, police and firefighters, public schools...etc.

Click to expand...

Please. That old argument? *knee-jerk* There was no Federal Income Tax from 1789 to 1913 and...what a stagnant time that was in America.

Click to expand...

I guess you must be Amish. Good luck with your cart and buggy and your zero tax liability.

Speaking of tired and old 1789 to 1913? Thanks for the history lesson old timer, in case you haven't noticed things have changed a little since then.

cheeno said:

smayschmouthfootball said:

Please. That old argument? *knee-jerk* There was no Federal Income Tax from 1789 to 1913 and...what a stagnant time that was in America.

Click to expand...

I guess you must be Amish. Good luck with your cart and buggy and your zero tax liability.

Speaking of tired and old 1789 to 1913? Thanks for the history lesson old timer, in case you haven't noticed things have changed a little since then.

Click to expand...

You got that right. We are now the collective willing bitch of the Federal Government. Change. Embrace it.

I don't know anyone who is a fan of the federal government or taxes but zero tax liability? I mean did they forget to mix in the meds along with your gruel at your medicaid sponsored assisted living facility?

cheeno said:

I don't know anyone who is a fan of the federal government or taxes but zero tax liability? I mean did they forget to mix in the meds along with your gruel at your medicaid sponsored assisted living facility?

Click to expand...

Son, I can run 5 miles in under 40 minutes. And I don't take any prescription drugs. They kill people. More than 500,000 a year. So why does the Federal Government not pass laws to criminalize them?

Yes: Repeal the 16th. It never should have been passed to begin with.

I am just rattling your chain. I tend to lean toward your POV for the most part.

I guess I'm the only one who is bothered by the fact that some of my fellow citizens can use their wealth to buy tax shelters, hide their wealth from U.S. tax authorities (or their reach), and put a greater tax burden on the rest of us.

Others have no problem with this, in some sort of twisted, reverse-Robin-Hood way of thinking...

"YEAH, YOU GO MITT!!! STICK IT TO THE MAN!!!! DON'T PAY YOUR SHARE OF TAXES! DON'T WORRY, I'LL PAY MINE."