• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Obama's Share

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

xBiffx

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2011
8,232
2
0
You are just over stating the % of income you paid in Federal Income taxes.
No I am not. You showed how someone would be paying that much. Not sure why you are so sure I don't. The numbers you used are correct. Keep telling yourself there is no way I pay a higher percentage that the Obama's did. Still doesn't take away from the fact that I did and the amount they payed is still laughable given all his rhetoric on the topic.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,182
7,997
136
This thread is so stupid!

First off Obama nor anyone can over pay the IRS, if they did they would receive a refund. Sure Obama can donate to the government but that goes to a general fund which is pretty much controlled by republicans. So only an idiot would give extra money to the government when republicans hold the bulk of the purse strings.

But go ahead keep raging!!
 

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
So true, and had it been Romnesia we would never know at what rate he'd have paid, I would wager.
He just gave up 5% of his pay, I call that leading by example.
What govt benefits are you going to voluntarily refuse?
I am quoting both of you but giving one reply, first Romney nor I ever bitched about people at the top not paying their fair share, so I view this as a bit of a non issue for Romney or myself, and also Romney lost so why bring him up Moonie unless you're just trying to deflect...

Obama has been going on with his class warfare for a good while now, and like so many others in the 1% he always has the option to voluntarily make more and then turn it into a spectacle.

Instead, yet another "Progressive" will complain about people like him not paying their fair share, and then instead pay what amounts to nothing or less than others from a percentage standpoint...

Again, this is a guy with a net worth of 11mil (approx), that stands to make a lot more money once he is out of office, that is only contributing 20K/year....I lump this in the whoop de doo pile...he could have done more and made a stink about it, but instead he didn't.
 

UberNeuman

Lifer
Nov 4, 1999
16,939
3,078
126
I am quoting both of you but giving one reply, first Romney nor I ever bitched about people at the top not paying their fair share, so I view this as a bit of a non issue for Romney or myself, and also Romney lost so why bring him up Moonie unless you're just trying to deflect...

Obama has been going on with his class warfare for a good while now, and like so many others in the 1% he always has the option to voluntarily make more and then turn it into a spectacle.

Instead, yet another "Progressive" will complain about people like him not paying their fair share, and then instead pay what amounts to nothing or less than others from a percentage standpoint...

Again, this is a guy with a net worth of 11mil (approx), that stands to make a lot more money once he is out of office, that is only contributing 20K/year....I lump this in the whoop de doo pile...he could have done more and made a stink about it, but instead he didn't.
Why didn't Mr. Romney release his tax returns? It's been common place for Presidential front runners for some time....
 

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
Why didn't Mr. Romney release his tax returns? It's been common place for Presidential front runners for some time....
Uber, again I say who really gives a shit at this point?

Couldn't you at least have used another Bush reference instead....

Keep deflecting libs....the fact is the guy is worth millions and will be worth millions more and is contributing virtually nothing/year when compared to plenty of others who make far far less....yet he is also one of the biggest proponents for people to pay their "fair share"...why does the line "I'm starting with the man in the mirror" come to mind??

Fact is he could have done more and had no negative financial impact, yet he chose to do arguably as little as possible.
 

UberNeuman

Lifer
Nov 4, 1999
16,939
3,078
126
Uber, again I say who really gives a shit at this point?

Couldn't you at least have used another Bush reference instead....

Keep deflecting libs....the fact is the guy is worth millions and will be worth millions more and is contributing virtually nothing/year when compared to plenty of others who make far far less....yet he is also one of the biggest proponents for people to pay their "fair share"...why does the line "I'm starting with the man in the mirror" come to mind??

Fact is he could have done more and had no negative financial impact, yet he chose to do arguably as little as possible.
Oh, come on, man.... that's a cheap argument and you know it..

\shall I hear yet again how Billy Bob Clinton didn't take on the bad guys hard enough before 911?
\\you may try, but you can't run away from history...
 

Slew Foot

Lifer
Sep 22, 2005
12,387
94
86
No, he's paying what is required by law. And arguing for higher taxes for the rich, including himself. Hypocrisy not found.
If the resident righties object to Social Security, unemployment, disability insurance, etc.., then they should refuse to accept these govt services.
Id happily give those up if I can not pay those taxes. But if the government is going to force me to spend it, Im going to take full advantage
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
3,960
33
91
No I am not. You showed how someone would be paying that much. Not sure why you are so sure I don't. The numbers you used are correct. Keep telling yourself there is no way I pay a higher percentage that the Obama's did. Still doesn't take away from the fact that I did and the amount they payed is still laughable given all his rhetoric on the topic.
You can keep on claiming you did all you want but the facts based on Federal Income Tax tables tell a different story than what you are claiming.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
Wow, I get back from the weekend and it's still Lefties trying to come up with any excuse why a rich family who will just become more rich over the coming years is failing to adhere to their own ideology voluntairily, which they absolutely can - and should, if they actually believed their own ideology - do.

I especially liked the references to people collecting SS when they don't agree with it...like people shouldn't want the money back taken from them over decades is the same as a rich someone not paying their fair share when they advocate for rich to pay their fair share.

Or, people wanting the US to attack Iran going to personally attack Iran when it's not people who attack countries (those would be called terrorists) but rather countries that attack countries...basically, a F'ing retarded analogy to make.

I don't know why people try to defend the indefensible, and yet, here this thread is...

Chuck
 

Sho'Nuff

Diamond Member
Jul 12, 2007
6,211
114
106
I didn't read through the thread so I'm sure this view point has been stated already, but isn't it deliciously ironic that Obama bashed Romney for engaging in the very activity (evil charitable donations) that he himself engaged in, with the result being a reduction in his (Obama's) marginal tax rate?

And for those of you saying that the "wealthy" should "pay their fair share," stick a sock in it. The term "fair" implies "equity," and there is nothing equitable about one class exclusively paying for services that another class consumes. Morality =/ equity or fairness.

Just wait, we're going to see laws passed in the next 20 years that incrementally cap what one can receive in social security based on 1) a person's income; 2) a person's retiremenet savings; or 3) a combination of both. When that happens, social security taxes (which certain individuals have paid throughout their lives) will retroactively become a tax on the rich, all to support large swaths of individuals who lacked the foresight and balls to fend for themselves.
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,068
18,808
136
I didn't read through the thread so I'm sure this view point has been stated already, but isn't it deliciously ironic that Obama bashed Romney for engaging in the very activity (evil charitable donations) that he himself engaged in, with the result being a reduction in his (Obama's) marginal tax rate?
I'm unaware of Obama bashing Romney for making charitable donations. Can you provide a link to this?

What Obama did say was that the rich should pay a higher marginal tax rate, something he explicitly has attempted to introduce on several occasions, including what would have been substantial increases in his own income tax rates. This was thwarted by Republicans.

And for those of you saying that the "wealthy" should "pay their fair share," stick a sock in it. The term "fair" implies "equity," and there is nothing equitable about one class exclusively paying for services that another class consumes. Morality =/ equity or fairness.
The word 'equity' is not commonly associated with the word 'fair', actually.

Regardless, there is absolutely no requirement for levels of taxation to be exactly equal in order to be fair. The well off clearly gain far more from our system of laws than do the poor, therefore it is absolutely equitable that they pay more to maintain that system.

Just wait, we're going to see laws passed in the next 20 years that incrementally cap what one can receive in social security based on 1) a person's income; 2) a person's retiremenet savings; or 3) a combination of both. When that happens, social security taxes (which certain individuals have paid throughout their lives) will retroactively become a tax on the rich, all to support large swaths of individuals who lacked the foresight and balls to fend for themselves.
Save it. The overall tax rate paid by the richest segments of society has declined precipitously over the last 40 years even as their share of national income has skyrocketed.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY