47% Don`t Pay Taxes: True Or False? [Pic+]

Submitted by: kitteh9lives 4 years ago

Mitt Romney claims that 47 percent of Americans don"t pay taxes in a video previously posted. Is he right?
There are 52 comments:
Male 7,378
5Cats, You`re Canadian dumb. I don`t know if there`s a difference between that and American dumb it`s just that Canadian dumb sounds funnier.
0
Reply
Male 36,462
So let us "recap" the facts:
The Republicans are at fault fo not protecting an Embassy that didn`t exist when they passed the bill, AND wasn`t covered by it anyways.

The Obama administration is NOT to blame for being utterly CLUELESS about Al Queda.

Got it!

Obama has NO CONTROL over the situation! Glad you`ve finally admitted that @madest.
0
Reply
Male 36,462
[quote]See in America 5Cats, congress controls the purse.[/quote]
@madest: How ODD that you forget that every time you mention the BUSH BAILOUT eh? Which came froma *gasp!* Democrat Congress!
But no, your memory seems to "skip over" that...
And Obama? You blame the Repubs but *gasp!* it was a Democrat Congress for TWO WHOLE YEARS, but you (and others at IAB) still blame Repubs (and Bush!) for that too!
How odd...

[quote]the consulate in Benghazi, where Stevens and other Americans died, was considered a “temporary facility.” It was not on the administration’s request list for structural improvements for fiscal 2012 or 2013,[/quote]
Just ignore the facts @madest, they make you look SO STUPID! LOLZ!

Oh yeah, WHO could have imagines that 9/11 would have anti-American events in an Al Queda stronghold? WHO?
0
Reply
Male 17,512
madest: You didn`t even read your link did you?

It says those were PROPOSED cuts not just to security but construction and maintenance. Btw, most of the proposed cuts were to construction.

"...the Appropriations Committee gave Obama all of the $689 million he requested for security upgrades under the embassy security, construction and maintenance portion of the State, Foreign Operations and Related Agencies bill."

Ooops, didn`t read that part did ya?

Once again you put your foot firmly in your mouth.
Bon Appetit.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
0
Reply
Male 7,378
I didn`t blame Bush. I`m blaming the republican congress. See in America 5Cats, congress controls the purse. Just a little bit of info about the country you pretend to be an expert on.
0
Reply
Male 36,462
[quote]@5cats: I`m not exactly sure, but maybe their payroll tax is similar to our CPP and EI deductions?[/quote]
Yeah, seems that way @patchy! So we Canadians pay Provincial Payroll tax ON TOP of that, eh?

[quote]GOP cuts to embassy security is to blame.[/quote]
That`s so obviously right @madest!

3+ YEARS later...
At an embassy that didn`t exist under Bush...
In a city that was a Al Queda hotbed...

OBVIOSLY BUSH IS TO BLAME!!! OBAMA WAS HELPLESS TO STOP THEM!!! REPUBLICANS ARE THE REAL TERRORISTS!!!!ELEVNTY!!!!
0
Reply
Male 7,378
GOP cuts to embassy security is to blame. Look in the mirror CJ, your party is the problem.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
AJ: According to the Libyan official the threat warning was specific to Benghazi, where the attack happened, and the date Sept. 11th. That`s the `then` and `where` right there.
0
Reply
Male 2,368
[quote]@HA: I have to ask - why is everyone so opposed to the old way of collecting taxes? [/quote]

Well if you really want to get down to the old way of collecting taxes how about everybody who owes send a check to DC twice a month instead of the automatic deduction done now.? It wouldn`t work because people would spend it but it would mostly cause even more outrage because it would be a twice monthly reminder of just how much Uncle Sam is taking instead of a once yearly reminder.
0
Reply
Male 1,059
You can stop reading once you get to:
"Technically speaking, it`s true."

Not sure what`s "technical" about truth, but there you have it -- it`s true, end of story.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@HA: [quote]I have to ask - why is everyone so opposed to the old way of collecting taxes? [/quote]
Well off the top of my head I`d say it`s partly because what if a state can`t pay up? Some can barely balance their own budgets. Also, the feds pay for things that the states don`t, unless you`re looking to split up things like the FDA, SEC etc. into 50 slices and have each state pay 1/50 of those bills. But most likely it`s just because the government:

a) Doesn`t want to lose any tax revenue
b) Doesn`t want the hassle and cost of a complete revision to the tax code.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@5cats: I`m not exactly sure, but maybe their payroll tax is similar to our CPP and EI deductions? Both employer and employee pay those though, but it`s the closest thing I can think of to compare to their payroll tax.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
"All I see in those articles is that Libyan officials warned American officials of a dangerous security situation."

What do you think happened right before 9/11 happened?

"Oh. There might be an attack. We aren`t sure when, or how big. Might wanna batten down the hatches."

They didn`t.
0
Reply
Male 4,431
Ollie, you`re not using all of Romney`s speech! I`m happy to use all of it. Listen, he said, "There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it -- that that`s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. ... These are people who pay no income tax. ... [M]y job is not to worry about those people. I`ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives." So, now, sure, 47% pay no income tax. You`re right. Are they the people he described, though? Are they dependent on government, not taking responsibility? Look at ALL of the facts.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
[quote]All I see in those articles is that Libyan officials warned American officials of a dangerous security situation. They don`t say anything about specific threats.[/quote]
What I do know is Valerie Jarrett had armed security for her vacation to Martha`s Vinyard, but the US Ambassador to Lybia, Chris Stevens, did not. That should tell you something about Obama`s priorities.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
What Romney said is absolutely true. The title of this post, though, is a goddamned stinking liberal lie. Romney specifically said INCOME taxes, while the title of the post (and the bull$#!+ liberal article) conveniently take the word "taxes" completely out of context, i.e., separating it from the immediately preceding adjective describing exactly WHAT taxes he`s talking about, i.e., INCOME taxes, so they can LIE and say he`s talking about something completely different, i.e. ALL taxes.

When conservatives post Obama`s "You didnt` build that" speech, the liberals squeal like stuck pigs and say an entire paragraph was taken out of context. But liberals can chop a single sentence to shreds and take out words that completely change the clear and unambiguous meaning to make it say something completely different, and that`s just fine.

Why do liberals have to lie like this? Because when they`re honest about their policies, they lose.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
All I see in those articles is that Libyan officials warned American officials of a dangerous security situation. They don`t say anything about specific threats.

I`m not trying to defend the administration or anything. I think it`s silly that they claim it wasn`t a planned attack, when it clearly seems to be the opposite.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Also one of the libyan security guards wounded in the attack, says there was no protest before the attack. Antiwar.com

So the whole Obama narrative is now suspect.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Davy: CNN has the story.
As does The Daily Mail.

0
Reply
Male 4,014
He said income taxes. Yes, he`s correct.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]Libyan officials gave them warnings 3 days prior and this president, Obama, ignored them.[/quote]
Crakrjak, can you please provide supporting evidence of this 3-day warning that was ignored? Primary evidence, mind. I`d be very interested in reading it.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
The troops don`t pay federal income taxes when deployed in combat. Bunch of freeloaders.
0
Reply
Male 307
It is this sort of disinformation that is being feed to the poor sheep known as the Republicans of this country who don`t know better that just really burns my panties in this filthy election.

47% did not pay taxes in 2011? According to the partisan Tax Policy Center who did a report on this in July of 2011 (and the basis of Romney/Satan`s remarks), half of the 47% had no tax due to standard deductions and tax credits, and the other half took advantage of tax credits and loopholes to effectively zero their taxes out.

Gee - this is the same tax strategy Romney/Satan uses so that he pays so little in tax - yet he has the balls to criticize everyone else.

Here is the report. Lots of simply graphs so Republicans understand too.
0
Reply
Male 2,357
I have to ask - why is everyone so opposed to the old way of collecting taxes?

Essentially, the federal government tells each state what they owe (for military protection, post office, etc.). Then, it is up to the states to determine how they will collect the revenue.

In this way, the states will continue to find better methods for tax collection and we eliminate the need for individual federal filing.

If you agree with this notion, that`s because it makes sense. Why we went away from it I`ll never know.
0
Reply
Male 2,357
@5Cats: When someone here refers to "Payroll taxes" they are refer to withholding and FICA (social security + medicare) taxes.

Basically, with FICA, you owe half and your company owes half. This is one of the reasons it is difficult to be self-employed, as you must pay both halves.

The US government believes that they have a right to withhold a portion of our earnings. They will hang onto it until you file your tax returns, at which point you will receive back what is overpaid, or will have to pay further. These 47% get back all of their withholdings for federal income taxes (and in many cases more).

The sinister aspect of this is that we are essentially all forced to provide an interest free loan to the government each year. You have the option to adjust your withholdings, but those who do are few and far between.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
As I`ve said before, This whole `issue` is a 4 month old hit piece, held in reserve, to distract, divide and distort attention away from an Obama screw up.

That Obama screw up is the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens. The last time an ambassador died, on duty, was 1979 under Jimmy Carter`s watch. Libyan officials gave them warnings 3 days prior and this president, Obama, ignored them. It`s no co-incidence that this disaster happened on September 11th.
0
Reply
Male 36,462
[quote]I was very impressed with your response.[/quote]
Thanks @markust! My but you`ve been polite and kind-hearted lately! Not just with me I mean.

[quote]You did leave out Federal payroll taxes for the people in this 47% that work.[/quote]
I didn`t leave it out on purpose because I didn`t even know about it! Up here the "payroll tax" is Provinical, and slapped on the employer not the workers.
But I could be wrong! Not something I`ve looked into!
And the employees still bear it, since the employer has less money to pay them eh?

Poor @jamie76: he left in a hissy-fit without seeing this series of Romney-bashing posts!

0
Reply
Male 787
Oh and considering only 35% of all americans (who are able to work. NOT just the skewed figure romney gives which encapsulates people not even eligible to pay taxes) I think that it isn`t even a big deal.

PLEASE dratING READ THIS POST. Seriously half the inane arguments and foolish propaganda would just die under what I presented. But I expect many many non sequiturs like the users of this sight 30 and up are aught to resort to so I`m going to another page.
0
Reply
Male 787
Ah. Finally this link provides the rebuttal I had already posted because Old Ollie and his ilk were too ignorant to take me at face value when I said exactly what this article is saying.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
[quote">The idea of not paying taxes being lazy assed people mooching off society is a joke.[/quote">

When it comes to a generational gap it`s NOT a joke
0
Reply
Male 4,431
How is *this* even possible? Thousands of millionaire families in the country that pay NO income tax? At all?! They`re part of the 47%, too. Click here.
0
Reply
Male 4,431
Exactly. The idea of not paying taxes being lazy assed people mooching off society is a joke. And way out of touch. But, we all know that. If you are actually interested and want to see some of the numbers and who *actually* doesn`t pay, presented in a non-partisan, sanitary manner, go here
0
Reply
Male 440
I heard a guy call in to a radio show today and brag how he makes "high 5 figures" and has six kids, and his wife doesn`t work outside of the home. He said he "nets" 3000-4000 dollars off of the Federal income tax because of the child credit. We pay him to have kids. Lovely.
0
Reply
Male 4,431
It`s ONLY correct regarding Federal Income Tax, and, not even then. All but 5% pay the payroll tax, but, they get a refund equal to or in excess of that payment due to exemptions that are supported by both parties.

Romney`s clear implication was that 47% just don`t pay, are sitting on their asses mooching off of those of "us" who pay taxes. He`s very clear about it and I`m not going to repeat the quote. He lists all of "their" mooching. Whatever. Provided all agree on the numbers, and we do (they`re kind of indisputable), I`m not going to argue over the poobaggedness and obvious false implications of his statement.
0
Reply
Male 4,294
"I for one would love to see a lot of these programs cut, re done and tried again. Easy example- welfare. Cut a program and re do it"

I`m bitching about Republican lawmakers here not you: How come Republicans always want to cut the program first? Why not just fix the problems? Conservatives are screaming about how Obamacare is so horrible yet they haven`t done anything to fix any of the things they don`t like about it.
0
Reply
Female 2,764
How was what I said not compassionate?

There are far more people taking advantage and getting a free ride then there are those using it for the right reasons. I am simply saying it needs to be redone so that doesn`t happen.
0
Reply
Female 836
nation would help solve many problems.
0
Reply
Female 836
HalfPintRoo

I have no problem with making things better, more efficient as far as welfare, etc.

But that has to be done with COMPASSION (not the same thing as just always saying "yes", I mean real compassion)

And it has to be done with KNOWLEDGE of who and what you are dealing with. Not prejudices.

Right now, I know lots of intelligent, hard working people who are just b.a.r.e.l.y. squeaking by. Yes, some are on food stamps. But NONE of them is a "welfare queen" or anything like that.

I have seen, in my life, a shift in how much money people have to spend and how cautious they need to be. It`s not the same as it was, under 29 year old HalfPintRoo...

I DO believe the rich are not paying their fair share and squawk about it when asked to do so. And yes, that WOULD help, in many ways.

The morale of this country is even worse than the economy. Knowing that we were actually trying to pull together as a natio
0
Reply
Male 4,294
"It`s correct, for US Federal taxes, why is it even a question?"

I was very impressed with your response. You did leave out Federal payroll taxes for the people in this 47% that work. But I don`t think you did it on purpose.
0
Reply
Female 2,228
And then you have this guy,


whom I will never accuse of being an intelligent, empathic human being saying much the same thing.

"It`s worth recalling that a good chunk of the 47% who don`t pay income taxes are Romney supporters, especially of course seniors (who might well believe they`re entitled to healthcare) and lower income Americans (including servicemen and women) who think conservative policies are better for the country even if they`re not getting a tax cut. So Romney seems to have contempt not just for Dems who oppose him, but for tens of millions who intend to vote for him."

We (liberals) have said it many times before, but I guess we need to say it again. Why do you people vote for plutocrats who think you`re shiftless, lazy, immoral, losers who *deserve* any of the poverty and hard luck they rain down on your heads
0
Reply
Female 2,228
Steve Benen writes-

"Romney sees this 47% as lazy moochers who refuse to "take personal responsibility," the truth is we`re talking about millions of seniors who`ve left the workforce, Americans with disabilities who can`t work, students not yet in the workforce, low income families and middle class families that take advantage of tax credits Reps have traditionally supported.

In other words, he is not only expressing contempt for nearly half of the population, he doesn`t even seem to understand those he`s condemning. On the contrary, the Rep candidate seems to believe these Americans are indolent schemers trying to get away with something, which is demonstrably ridiculous...Half the country in Romney`s eyes is made up of slothful and pathetic losers.

Keep in mind Romney himself has been accused of not paying Income taxes for yrs, a charge that if true would put him in this lazy 47%.
0
Reply
Male 36,462
It`s correct, for US Federal taxes, why is it even a question?

Of course people pay LOTS of other taxes too.
Gasoline.
"Sin" taxes of smokes, booze & tanning salons
Sales tax

THOSE taxes hurt the poor a LOT more than the wealthy, percentage-wise.
0
Reply
Female 2,764
I for one would love to see a lot of these programs cut, re done and tried again. Easy example- welfare. Cut a program and re do it (stricter requirements such as 6 months time limit, repayment later, only supplemental income from any job, etc. etc. etc.)

This would also work for food stamps, heap, child support, section 8.....
0
Reply
Male 645
another argument for the fair tax?
0
Reply
Male 886
Politicians.

Eff `em all.
0
Reply
Male 187
"on the middle class!" * (autocorrect, sorry) It`s factually accurate, even with the party spin. What`s the big deal?
0
Reply
Male 187
Yeah, it`s true. It`s a number released by our own government. It only applies to FEDERAL income taxes, though.

I agree with everyone else: what`s the big deal? He`s appealing to his base with a fatally accurate statement. Okay? It`s no different than when a democrat says "Republicans want to lower taxes on the wealthy and raise taxes on ever musket class
0
Reply
Male 7,915
I personally didn`t have a problem with what he said. It was just strategy. All politicians have strategies for what groups they need to get. We just usually don`t see behind the curtain.

However PLENTY of people in his "47%" are die hard republicans that will vote for him.
0
Reply
Male 2,552
Why are people freaking out about this?

It was an off-the-cuff statement at a fundraiser where he was stating that he`s not going to spend time trying to win over 47% of the country who is dependent on the government that they will automatically vote so as to NOT lose said funding.

*shrugs*

Not that big of a deal. Makes sense not to waste time and energy on a lost cause if you`d ask me.
0
Reply
Female 167
47% of Americans are probably students or elderly people with no taxable income!
0
Reply
Female 8,044
Link: 47% Don`t Pay Taxes: True Or False? [Pic+] [Rate Link] - Mitt Romney claims that 47 percent of Americans don`t pay taxes in a video previously posted. Is he right?
0
Reply