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.
Not even going to read through this thread. You do realize that the President only earns $400,000 right? So it's no surprise that he'll have a lower tax rate than his secretary. You're making something out of nothing.
Sports athletes - you add absolutely nothing of value to the USA - make MILLIONS of dollars and most of those folks are sitting on the bench!
The way for correcting tax code injustices is through reform and not through donations.
Too bad it's not about reform, it's about a political theme in an election year. If reform was so important, he could have done something about it long ago. And his only concrete proposal on tax reform on the table right now is the Buffett rule, which wouldn't correct the injustice of him paying a lower effective rate than his secretary.
He is a hypocrit, plain and simple.
Is 20.5% fair? I assume most of his daily living expenses are paid for by the taxpayers. I'm glad he gave a fair amount to charity.
The Obama Rule: A President of the United States Should Pay a Lower Tax Rate Than Their Secretary.
Nobody forced Obama to take legal deductions or to tax free gift their daughters all that money.
All these liberals DEMAND confiscation of YOUR MONEY, but you don't ever seem to find them offering their own.
Mind you I don't think the President did anything wrong, in fact I bet most of the income was not from wages and would therefore be based on 15% not 35%.
BUT, since he who read off the teleprompter is so hot for the money from others, why doesn't he and maybe Biden live by example and cut a nice fat extra check to the Treasury?
Does it really require a law for Obama to act upon what he claims is in his heart? If you are a BS Democrat I guess that is does.
It is all you have and now, in sentence one above you are going to underhandly attack my intelligence. Because you still cannot comprehend that your first post was idiotic.
YOU still haven't come back and answered the question as to what the big deal is with this. It's expected, it's known, and they will probably use it as a campaign issue with regard to the tax code.
You thought you were posting something SO clever that would disparage your enemy president and you failed to do that with your fascinating intelligence.
If that is what you understood from my original post, then I still question your comprehension.
I said
Quote:
Tell me it isn't so? Obama's secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does?
Now I am not sure what you read into that, but the sentence stands on it's own merit. This would be the same president who was upset that Warren Buffet's secretary pays a higher tax percentage than Mr. Buffet pays.
If there is an issue with the taxable income level someone is paying then address that issue. If he feels that the secretary is paying too high of a level, reduce it. It's a fairly simply observation. No one is being disparaged, just the rhetoric they are using.
If that is what you understood from my original post, then I still question your comprehension.
I said
Now I am not sure what you read into that, but the sentence stands on it's own merit. This would be the same president who was upset that Warren Buffet's secretary pays a higher tax percentage than Mr. Buffet pays.
If there is an issue with the taxable income level someone is paying then address that issue. If he feels that the secretary is paying too high of a level, reduce it. It's a fairly simply observation. No one is being disparaged, just the rhetoric they are using.
Uhhh, he's trying to address that issue. Why would someone "tell you it isn't so" that he paid lower tax rates than his secretary when it's obviously the case that he did. What was your point? You went on to either outright call him a hypocrite or you chose to lead the discussion that way.
There's no denying that he latched on to Buffet's outrage over paying more percentage of his income than HIS secretary.
Uhhh, he's trying to address that issue. Why would someone "tell you it isn't so" that he paid lower tax rates than his secretary when it's obviously the case that he did. What was your point? You went on to either outright call him a hypocrite or you chose to lead the discussion that way.
There's no denying that he latched on to Buffet's outrage over paying more percentage of his income than HIS secretary.
Your point again? If you have one?
My point was really fairly simply. I don't need to call anyone anything if they are already something. If you feel that he is hypocritical in his actions, then it is what it is. If you feel he isn't then again, it is what it is.
As for addressing it? President Obama cannot even submit a budget proposal that his own party supports. How is he supposed to fix the tax rates, if he cannot even submit an acceptable budget that his OWN party supports?
Wasn't he held hostage on that in order to get buy off on extension of unemployment benefits that so many needed after losing so much when everything crashed?
And from your article:
.
If my memory serves me, he only wanted to repeal the Bush cuts for those over $250,000 but the lovely GOP would not agree. It was all or nothing.
Uhhh, he's trying to address that issue. Why would someone "tell you it isn't so" that he paid lower tax rates than his secretary when it's obviously the case that he did. What was your point? You went on to either outright call him a hypocrite or you chose to lead the discussion that way.
There's no denying that he latched on to Buffet's outrage over paying more percentage of his income than HIS secretary.
Your point again? If you have one?
How or why would Buffett be outraged about paying a lower effective rate than his secretary when he takes advantage of every subsidey (deduction) available under the tax code to lower the effective rate of his taxes and in fact litigates over tax disputes with the IRS?
If you don't see the hypocrisy in this you are simply a partisan.
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.
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.
The Obama Rule: A President of the United States Should Pay a Lower Tax Rate Than Their Secretary.
