Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's pure greed in every sense of the word to think any one human being on this planet is worth or deserves or should be entitled to $40+ million dollars. It's absolutely not necessary and speaks to the huge problem with humanity and society. And Romney is small change. There are families in this world and the USA that have 100 times that much wealth. Just like there is no reason why Ted Turner should ever be allowed to own millions of acres. It's just pure and utter rampant greed. You can debate ideology all you want. Liberal this, conservative that. Won't change the fact that humanity is on a sinking ship of survival. Unless we wake up and evolve as human beings there will be more war, more economic hardship, less resources, more concentration of capital into the hands of a few, and LESS INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY! Just because someone can get as rich as they can doesn't mean they should. We live on planet with finite resources but operate on an economy based on infinite growth and profit. Makes absolute no sense whatsoever from a scientific, economic, or moral perspective. But the people at the top really don't care. They've got us all believing that there is plenty to go around and if we just work hard enough, pay more taxes, and swallow whatever the soup of the day Wallstreet feeds us we can all become like Romney. It's afterall the American dream right? Haha...........
Greed is a moral term. Stop trying to shove your religion and morality down our throats.
Not "anti-Semetic" , just anti underwear magical thinking.
Anti-Semetic and anti-Mormon both. You can't get around it. Mormons and Jews both wear an undergarment to remind them of covenants they have made with God. You've got to use the same standard when judging them, that is unless you want to be a hypocrite. Hmmm... which label would you prefer, jojajn, "anti-Semetic" or "hypocrite." Because one of them definitely applies.
Romney doesn't need to justify the lower tax rate on capital gains. A Democrat Congress did that in the 1970's by passing the current capital gains tax rate. The rationale then was to encourage investment. I don't believe in using the tax code to encourage or discourage any kind of behavior. But are you saying you disagrre with the Dems who passed this tax rate?
Actually, current capital gains rates were part of the original Bush cuts in the 2000's and passed via reconciliation -- you know, the parliamentary procedure that the GOP objected to for health care reform.
There is no empirical evidence that they encourage investment.
Moreover, Romney takes advantage of the perfectly legal, although it shouldn't be, hedge fund hoophole, that lets high priced hedge fund managers pretend that their salaries are really capital gains and taxed at a lower rate.
The Republican spin machine gets cuter by the minute. The guy is what's wrong with American. He earns more money than just about about all of us and he pays less in taxes percentagewise than the rest of us.
So what if he donated to charity? If most of us earned that much money I daresay we wouldn't care all that much how much was left over either.
Face it. Your problem with Romney is that he's a Republican. If he were a Democrat you'd have no problem with him. Every candidate the Dems have ever run (excepting maybe Harry Truman) were super wealthy. Didn't stop you and the rest of the Dems from supporting them.
Indeed. Somehow I don't feel good about filthy rich politicians, it raises certain questions and suspicions...
Funny, not too long ago becoming a millionaire meant you made it, you were rich, and it was relatively rare. Nowadays it is almost taken for granted and people have tens or hundreds of millions
Can you pinpoint precisely when you began feeling queasy about rich politicians?
Because as far as I know we live on a finite planet with 6 billion other people. That little "gem" may not mean much to you as a human being now.......but give this world another 100+ years when the cheap oil runs out, the rainforests are all chopped down, our fresh water resources have all been polluted, our oceans are overfished, cancer is now like catching the common cold because our food supply and environment are so toxic. but yeah........who cares if one human being in in a country with a population of 350 million owns 2+ million acres right? Who cares if a good portion of our food supply is owned, controlled, and otherwise manipulated by 5 rich and powerful families. LOL...........you're clueless. Stuck in your own retarded world of political and economic ideology that has no bearing on reality or the planet on which you live. But maybe the Russians and the Chinese will find a new earth for us.
This is something you look for in a leader ??? I prefer my leaders to be a little more in touch with the common peasants.
Thank goodness Barack and Michelle "Marie Antoinette" Obama are in touch with the common people. That's if you assume the common people are composed of Hollywood elites, Wall Street power brokers and Marxist academicians.
Can you pinpoint precisely when you began feeling queasy about rich politicians?
Maybe Congress needs to pass a law prohibiting anyone with money from running for President of the United States. It does seem to some people that being wealthy is reason enough for someone to be disqualified. Perhaps good-looking people should not be allowed to run either.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.