The "Cubans"

[Xavier_Onassis]

Romney can arrange his income to make it appear that he is receiving dividends. 
Rich people have all sorts of tax dodges, and I am sure Romney used them all.

You are hardly qualified to decide what is fair and what is not.

[sirs]

What part of HE'S NO LONGER WORKING, are you not grasping??  No work, no income tax

And I'm perfectly qualified to proclaim fairness vs overt unfairness (as in punitive)

[Xavier_Onassis]

It is called the INCOME tax, not  the WORK tax. Romney had millions in income. And he was able to get away with a low, low 14% tax rate because of the way the tax laws were written.  I do not blame him for taking advantage of the tax laws which favor the mega rich, but these tax laws favor the wealthy.

A guy who does heavy physical labor might pay up to 34%, which a guy like Romney entrusts his investments to advisers pays less than half that rate. TAT NOT WHAT I call equitable.

[sirs]

Playing semantic games again.  It's called an income tax, that taxes a person's WORKING income.  NOT investements, NOT sales, but working INCOME, in the form of wages, or salary, or tips, or commissions.  If you are not WORKING, you generate no taxable INCOME.  You are taxed on other things however.  Romney already did his work, already payed his required income taxes, when he was generating a working income.  He no longer works, thus he no longer pays income taxes.  That's the literal definition of FAIR

[Xavier_Onassis]

The income tax taxes investments, sure as hell it does. I have investments and I have paid taxes on profits from investing.
INCOME is not the same as what the IRA calls EARNED INCOME.

There is also a MINIMUM TAX.

[sirs]

The income tax taxes investments, sure as hell it does. I have investments and I have paid taxes on profits from investing.

And that's taxed as well, but that's investment.  That's not you or Romney working for anything.  Income tax is generated from one's work...be it salary, commission, punch clock, etc. 

Investements, and any profits they generate are NOT the same as work income, that's why they are NOT taxed the same.  That's why you have taxes on investements, and taxes on income...BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT THE SAME   

[Xavier_Onassis]

The  tax on investments is 15%.
Romney somehow managed to get away with only paying 14%.

The income tax is NOT exclusively a tax on money earned by working.

[sirs]

INCOME tax is PRIMARILY a tax on money earned by working.  Profits made on investments are a whole other animal, ergo, they are taxed seperately, at a lesser rate.  We lesser folks are taxed on both, if we're still working.  It's by no means fair, to punish us lesser folks for having to pay an equally higher tax on our investments, while still working and paying income taxes, or to punish success with higher taxes, if someone manages to reach a point where they no longer have to work for a living.  That's called a GOAL

[Plane]

The income tax taxes investments, sure as hell it does. I have investments and I have paid taxes on profits from investing.
INCOME is not the same as what the IRA calls EARNED INCOME.

There is also a MINIMUM TAX.

And you want your tax load increased?

That is remarkably generous.

But could you not do as well as the government at directing charitable giving?

Probably better?

[Xavier_Onassis]

I  can give to charities if I wish, and deduct it from my income, just as Romney does.

[Plane]

You may , but it only gives you a percentage off .

The main part of the tax is still due and the main part of that is still someone else's idea of good spending.

[Xavier_Onassis]

There never will be a government that spends only on what any given individual considers essential, no matter what party is in power.
We can vote for the party that is most in keeping with what we expect from the government, and that is all we will ever be able to do.

[sirs]

There never will be a government that spends only on what any given individual considers essential, no matter what party is in power.
We can vote for the party that is most in keeping with what we expect from the government, and that is all we will ever be able to do.

This is one of those rare instances, that xo is correct.  With an emphasis on what we "expect from the Government".  If only the GOP actually practiced what they campaign on, we conservatives could then start expecting them to run the Government as it was intented to be run

[Xavier_Onassis]

Reagan said he wanted to  abolish the Secretary of Education.  He did not need Congress to approve this, but he failed to do it.  He said he would make the government smaller, It grew in size and in cost. He said he wanted to balance the budget. He also did not do that.

Not one of the Republicans has managed to do most of the supposedly "conservative" stuff they promised.

I bet the next Republican candidate will also say that he wants to move the US Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv (where it is much safer and more convenient to Israelis) to Jerusalem (where there is no room and it would be much less safe). This is another promise that they always make and even never try to fulfill.
It is a really dumb idea, by the way. They promise this because some rich Jewish donor hands then a bag of much money, which of course, they do not return.

Conservatives are essentially suckers. It is like Charlie Brown and the football. Charlie always trusts Lucy and she always jerks it away.

[sirs]

Actually, you do need congressional support.  Too bad he didn't, as its not a function of the Federal Government to be meddling with a state's primary function.  But you're making my point, that the GOP frequently is elected to office, on what they pledge to do, then turn around and throw those who voted them in, under the bus.  Senator Cruz being one of the rare exceptions, and the reason he and Trump are the top 2 in the current polling, and why Sanders has been able to stay as close as he has to former Secretary of Scum, and her financial juggernaught