what trash.
"Start with the fact that, like Warren Buffett, Mr. Romney said he makes most of his money from investments, not wages or salary. Thus his income is really taxed twice: once at the corporate tax rate of 35%, then again at a 15% tax rate when it is passed through to him as dividends or via capital gains from the sale of stock."
do you think the autyhor is completely stupid or is deliberately working to con the gullible?
google pays 4% taxes, max. bain doesn't pay 35%, either. none of teh players do. fact. fact which this author could easily verify but doesnt bother to. so why is the author pretending it does? why? so he can decieve
few companies pay significant dividends anymore and most public companies provide most of their officer and insider compensation in stock options which they are accounted for as expense even thoguh they are not an expense. when those stock options are exercised it costs the company nothing as all the money comes from stock buyers. this nice trick was protested by the accounting standards boards but they were blackmailed by a bribed congress to shut up or be shut down. this is better for the company and beter for the insiders and bad for everyone else.
romney is gettign income at capital gains rates which you would have to claim as ordiuary income - he pays 15% (actually 14%...do to other tax games) while you would pay 35%, minimum). he helped bribe the govt to treat hedgies who manage other peoples money as if they were risking their own capital - even when they arent so they shoulding qualify for cap gains rates. buffett plays different but similar tricks. he mainly uses tax loopholes created with bribes from insurance companies and he gets tarp money and govt garnatees on his schemes.
lets clear teh muddy puddle in which this clown has got most people intellectually drowning. instead of talking about romney who can be confused with the legal fiction known as bain, lets talk about soros.
why does't the author talk of soros instead of romney and buffett? when soros pays 15% (or probably even less usign other games) on gains from insider info or an engineered currency disaster, why should he pay 15%? in the soros case there is no nonsense about being an 'owner of a company' where 'all excess profits get paid out as dividends' to muddy the water.
why doesnt the authro talk of soros? because that makes the shell game transparent and the con falls apart. and also, of course, because the author is personally invested in the continuation of the coruption
use your heads, people this isnt rocket science. if something is printed in teh msm which supports teh status quo is is more likely than not that it is a deception adn a lie. dont be an idiot.
the folks at ows know whats going down.
"Our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil" -Ephesians (Paul)
| 
