(09-21-2012 04:25 PM)Max Power Wrote:  I'm not "intolerant."

That's just good comedy right there.

There are 14 million Mormons, and let's say just 2.5 million are good tithe-paying members, as they are required to be. And if those 2.5 million members make a salary of $40k/year (a very low assumption I would assume for Mormons), each paying a 10% tithe of $4k, the Mormon church collects $10 BILLION every year.

How much do they spend on charity? "From 1985 - 2009, $327.6 million in cash and $884.6 million in commodities of aid was given throughout 178 countries."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LDS_Humanitarian_Services

So they've spent a little over $48 million per year on what I would call charity. That sounds like a lot, but in comparison to their $10 billion annual income in tithes, it's peanuts. It's less than one-half of one percent, and I'm probably overstating it. NOT a charity.

(09-21-2012 02:32 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Romney gave away 30% of his income last year. What a scumbag he is. He doesn't care about regular people.

How much of it went to a political organization masquerading as a charity...

How much of it went to charitable trusts?

How much of it went to true charities?

(09-21-2012 03:25 PM)Max Power Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 03:00 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Lots of religions have big, nice places of worship, Max.

What's your point?

My point is that giving (and in Mormonism you are required to tithe) money to the Mormon church to build lavish temples and country clubs for their members is very different from giving to the United Way or a Childrens Hospital. It's selfish and tribalistic to a degree and it's probably something he feels compelled to do given how his Mormon connections throughout his life helped him get where he is today.

This is true. Giving to private, exclusionary clubs to which one is a member is not the same as giving to a true charity. Its not just religious groups...it includes gifts to country clubs, non-public art collections etc.

I think all charities for whom more than 10million is claimed as a charitable expense donation should have to release their full balance sheet and income statement including all payments over 50,000 in any calendar year.

I don't think any public charitable service is advanced by Harold Camping having the taxpayers subsidize his 'the world is ending' campaign for example. Or for a megapreachers mansion (known as a parsonage). Or for salaries over 200,000 per year. Or for private jet travel for board members of obscure charities to travel to fully paid for board of directors meetings at high end resorts.

We really don't know how much Mitt Romney's 'charity' is real 'charity' because we have no idea who he has been giving the 'charity' to.

(09-21-2012 04:56 PM)Max Power Wrote:  There are 14 million Mormons, and let's say just 2.5 million are good tithe-paying members, as they are required to be. And if those 2.5 million members make a salary of $40k/year (a very low assumption I would assume for Mormons), each paying a 10% tithe of $4k, the Mormon church collects $10 BILLION every year.

How much do they spend on charity? "From 1985 - 2009, $327.6 million in cash and $884.6 million in commodities of aid was given throughout 178 countries."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LDS_Humanitarian_Services

So they've spent a little over $48 million per year on what I would call charity. That sounds like a lot, but in comparison to their $10 billion annual income in tithes, it's peanuts. It's less than one-half of one percent, and I'm probably overstating it. NOT a charity.

Interesting move by our scum sucking ambulance chaser. Let's make an assumption I pull out my a$$, let's add another assumption from my a$$ and then let's make a definitive statement based on the assumptions that, as a reminder, came out my a$$.

So pathetic.

(09-21-2012 05:14 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 02:32 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Romney gave away 30% of his income last year. What a scumbag he is. He doesn't care about regular people.

How much of it went to a political organization masquerading as a charity...

How much of it went to charitable trusts?

How much of it went to true charities?

Why don't you dive in and tell us. The returns are online for your reading pleasure. Or are you just happy assuming that he gave to things you feel aren't "real" charities and ergo you can bash him for it. I'm guessing the latter.

(09-21-2012 03:28 PM)Max Power Wrote:  http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-habe...36321.html

Alex Castellanos, the former Mitt Romney strategist from 2008 who has alternately been critical and praising of the current campaign, left no doubt where he stands on the decision to release a summary of the candidate's tax rates over 20 years.

"At first I thought this was an April Fool's Joke," said Castellanos, who tweeted something to that effect at me earlier. "But it isn't April. I can't imagine that David Axelrod will now say, I'm glad Mitt put this issue behind him. This will drag Mitt's taxes back into the debate. And there's not many days left. I just can't imagine why they would do this. There are 40 days left and you have now made more of them about Mitt's taxes....you don't serve a life sentence and then confess afterward. They've taken their beating on this (already) ... I just don't understand how a (being) 'little pregnant' strategy (works)."
Other Republican operatives have emailed in with a similar reaction - that the summary is going to revive, instead of settle, questions on an issue where what had seemed to be the worst was already behind Romney.

I saw this as well. The Romney campaign continues to commit political malpractice. Did anyone think that this was going to help the campaign? All it does is refocus everyone on the fact that Romney pays less taxes than average working Americans. And the way they released the return information actually raises MORE questions about his taxes. I'm wondering if the 2009 tax payment was really a penalty for the amnesty in repatriating illegal tax shelters. Or if any of these years were 1040X returns (amended).

You freakin dems are hilarious.

Release the taxes!! Release the taxes!! What's he hiding??!!!

Taxes released.

Gosh how stupid to release the taxes!! What a dummy!!!

It would funny if it wasn't so pathetically transparent.

(09-21-2012 05:36 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  You freakin dems are hilarious.

Release the taxes!! Release the taxes!! What's he hiding??!!!

Taxes released.

Gosh how stupid to release the taxes!! What a dummy!!!

It would funny if it wasn't so pathetically transparent.

Where are his 2009 Taxes?

(09-21-2012 05:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:36 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  You freakin dems are hilarious.

Release the taxes!! Release the taxes!! What's he hiding??!!!

Taxes released.

Gosh how stupid to release the taxes!! What a dummy!!!

It would funny if it wasn't so pathetically transparent.

Where are his 2009 Taxes?

Where is the requirement that he release them?

(09-21-2012 05:40 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:36 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  You freakin dems are hilarious.

Release the taxes!! Release the taxes!! What's he hiding??!!!

Taxes released.

Gosh how stupid to release the taxes!! What a dummy!!!

It would funny if it wasn't so pathetically transparent.

Where are his 2009 Taxes?

Where is the requirement that he release them?

None. There's no requirement that a President be anything but born in the USA and be over 35 years old. But I think we should know more about a President than .. he's alive, he was born here, and he is older than 35.

I think a Presidential candidate should disclose his financial records for five years, so that we can see how the candidate operates and where his money comes from. We still don't know.

(09-21-2012 05:43 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:40 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:36 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  You freakin dems are hilarious.

Release the taxes!! Release the taxes!! What's he hiding??!!!

Taxes released.

Gosh how stupid to release the taxes!! What a dummy!!!

It would funny if it wasn't so pathetically transparent.

Where are his 2009 Taxes?

Where is the requirement that he release them?

None. There's no requirement that a President be anything but born in the USA and be over 35 years old. But I think we should know more about a President than .. he's alive, he was born here, and he is older than 35.

I think a Presidential candidate should disclose his financial records for five years, so that we can see how the candidate operates and where his money comes from. We still don't know.

And if he elects not to, we should make up stories as to why he didn't.

(09-21-2012 05:14 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 02:32 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Romney gave away 30% of his income last year. What a scumbag he is. He doesn't care about regular people.

How much of it went to a political organization masquerading as a charity...

If so, blame the IRS.

Quote:How much of it went to charitable trusts?

Do you even know what this is? What do you think this would accomplish (i.e. how would it be bad?)

Quote:
How much of it went to true charities?

According to the IRS' rules, 100% of it.

(09-21-2012 05:43 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:40 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:36 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  You freakin dems are hilarious.

Release the taxes!! Release the taxes!! What's he hiding??!!!

Taxes released.

Gosh how stupid to release the taxes!! What a dummy!!!

It would funny if it wasn't so pathetically transparent.

Where are his 2009 Taxes?

Where is the requirement that he release them?

None. There's no requirement that a President be anything but born in the USA and be over 35 years old. But I think we should know more about a President than .. he's alive, he was born here, and he is older than 35.

I think a Presidential candidate should disclose his financial records for five years, so that we can see how the candidate operates and where his money comes from. We still don't know.

Sure you do. Bain Capital. As to what you think, how is this any more "rational" than those who think Obama should release his college grades so we can know how smart he is?


The difference is, It's not illegal to be a "marginal" student and yet graduate and claim to be smart.
It IS illegal to misrepresent your taxes. Yet here we have democrats claiming that Romney has done something illegal, despite the fact that there is an agency charged with keeping that from happening, while claiming that Obama is smart, yet nobody is charged with verifying that

(09-21-2012 03:28 PM)TheDancinMonarch Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 03:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  And his effective rax rate for 2011 was 14.1%. For comparison, mine was 11%. That's a HUGE advantage when you start applying that to Mitt's money.

So what! If it's legal, it's OK. If you don't like the law, change it. Don't be critical of someone for taking a legal action.

What do these Liberal Fwads what Mittens to do?...Voluntarily pay more than is legally necessary? Not even they can be that GD stupid.

(09-21-2012 05:43 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:40 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:36 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  You freakin dems are hilarious.

Release the taxes!! Release the taxes!! What's he hiding??!!!

Taxes released.

Gosh how stupid to release the taxes!! What a dummy!!!

It would funny if it wasn't so pathetically transparent.

Where are his 2009 Taxes?

Where is the requirement that he release them?

None. There's no requirement that a President be anything but born in the USA and be over 35 years old. But I think we should know more about a President than .. he's alive, he was born here, and he is older than 35.

I think a Presidential candidate should disclose his financial records for five years, so that we can see how the candidate operates and where his money comes from. We still don't know.

You don't make the rules. Mittens did MORE than is necessary and PAID the legally due theft to the government. THIS is DONE.

(09-21-2012 07:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:43 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:40 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:36 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  You freakin dems are hilarious.

Release the taxes!! Release the taxes!! What's he hiding??!!!

Taxes released.

Gosh how stupid to release the taxes!! What a dummy!!!

It would funny if it wasn't so pathetically transparent.

Where are his 2009 Taxes?

Where is the requirement that he release them?

None. There's no requirement that a President be anything but born in the USA and be over 35 years old. But I think we should know more about a President than .. he's alive, he was born here, and he is older than 35.

I think a Presidential candidate should disclose his financial records for five years, so that we can see how the candidate operates and where his money comes from. We still don't know.

You don't make the rules. Mittens did MORE than is necessary and PAID the legally due theft to the government. THIS is DONE.

Fo - Tom and Maxi's real issue is that Romney chose what charities to give to......as you know, only people like Tom and Maxi are smart enought to know how to spend Mitts money. Therefore, Romney should have half his money confiscated so that people like Tom and Maxi can spend it on things they deem important.

It doesn't matter that he legally gave to charities......it wasn't the correct charities.

Maxi's point of view can be summed up by his own words.

"People can't be trusted with their money." - Maxi

Tells you all you need to know about where he comes from.

(09-21-2012 08:46 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Maxi's point of view can be summed up by his own words.

"People can't be trusted with their money." - Maxi

Tells you all you need to know about where he comes from.

Actually Max and his ilk can be summed up with one word.....Envy.

You may remember a thread entitled, "I hope the government enjoys my raise."
http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=583645

The resident commies argued my 17%, up from 14% from my previous pay rate, "progressive rate" income tax (and 40% of my total raise) was about right.

Now they argue Mitt's 14% isn't enough and most millionaires pay 45 - 50 percent

All from people who pay negative percentages. Is there a word for that?

(09-21-2012 08:42 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 07:42 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:43 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:40 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(09-21-2012 05:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Where are his 2009 Taxes?

Where is the requirement that he release them?

None. There's no requirement that a President be anything but born in the USA and be over 35 years old. But I think we should know more about a President than .. he's alive, he was born here, and he is older than 35.

I think a Presidential candidate should disclose his financial records for five years, so that we can see how the candidate operates and where his money comes from. We still don't know.

You don't make the rules. Mittens did MORE than is necessary and PAID the legally due theft to the government. THIS is DONE.

Fo - Tom and Maxi's real issue is that Romney chose what charities to give to......as you know, only people like Tom and Maxi are smart enought to know how to spend Mitts money. Therefore, Romney should have half his money confiscated so that people like Tom and Maxi can spend it on things they deem important.

It doesn't matter that he legally gave to charities......it wasn't the correct charities.

Actually, I'm simply questioning Mitt's real commitment to charity. You know in the organic meaning of the word. Charity is giving of oneself without expecting a reward. Giving money to a private building fund that will be used for exclusive purposes isn't exactly charity. It may be per the IRS.