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.
Who'd a thunk that the truth would be offensive to the left? Well, it's no surprise to many of us.
Anyway, what Romney didn't say was that 47% is really just the start. These 47% represent about 65.8 million (out of 140 million) tax returns, and have no direct personal incentive to control spending, reduce the deficit, etc. since they do not pay for any of it.
But consider another large group, public sector employees. There are 22.2 million of them-about 16.7 percent of the total workforce, or about 1 in 6 workers. This number is actually slightly down in recent times, mostly due to layoffs by local governments due to lack of tax revenue. Governments employ 20 percent or more of workers in nine states - The Business Journals
In general, they also have a personal interest in bigger government, higher taxes, and even deficit spending, since it all gets filtered through their pockets. I'm just talking about their incentives here; their personal principles might be diametrically opposed. If you add these 22.2 million to the 65.8 milion (the 47%), now you are up to 88 million, or 62 percent.
We could add several other groups to the mix--people who don't even file, such as college students, the long-term unemployed, etc. Many of them have even stronger incentives to support higher taxes, spending, and government than the 47%. Another significant group is government contractors, lobbyists, and the like, who are not directly employed by government, but make their livelihood from it.
Many of these people will still support conservative principles and vote for Mitt Romney. But to do that, they have to set aside their own personal interest in favor of the common good. Romney was exactly right; it's an uphill battle for conservatives these days,
Is this a proposal for tax hikes? You call that a conservative position?
Ronald reagan would NEVER have called low income working people "takers". You known why? Because his policies enabled the low income earners to pay as little as zero percent tax.
Is this a proposal for tax hikes? You call that a conservative position?
Ronald reagan would NEVER have called low income working people "takers". You known why? Because his policies enabled the low income earners to pay as little as zero percent tax.
All right--I really thought I was *done* with this topic. I cannot believe how much you Romney-zombies are missing the boat on this. No "leftie" refuted Romney's claim that 47% of people pay no federal income tax. In fact, Romney didn't make up that number. It is not "Romney's" number. It's an easily verified fact based on 2011 numbers. If you read the DOZENS of threads on this forum, you will see that no one is arguing that this number is incorrect. How on earth did you miss that?
This is what was being debated. From your own Politifact Article. Bolded emphasis is mine.
Quote:
In his remarks, Romney used broad strokes to characterize millions of people who he said solidly support President Barack Obama.
"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what," Romney said in the video. "All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what.
That's the debate. The words he chose to describe those 47%. That's just not true. There are a good number of "rural whites" who fall into that 47% category that are voting for him. There are college students who make less than the $6,000 threshhold of income that will be voting for him. There are seniors on social security who pay no federal tax, who will be voting for him. There are wage earners above $100,000 and $200,0000 in that 47% who have no federal tax liability who will be voting for him. There are members in the military who pay no federal tax who will be voting for him. Yet he chose those words above to describe each an every one of them.
Before Romney used that "fact" he needed his people to break down that 47% and find out what percentage of that 47% actually are leeches on society. Yes, they are in there. And in fact, some of those leeches are probably voting for Romney. He just made a serious error in speech when he made those statements.
As for Politifact, my dog could have verified the "47% paid no income tax" statistic. It's public knowledge.
Last edited by ChristineVA; 09-30-2012 at 05:17 AM..
All right--I really thought I was *done* with this topic. I cannot believe how much you Romney-zombies are missing the boat on this. No "leftie" refuted Romney's claim that 47% of people pay no federal income tax. In fact, Romney didn't make up that number. It is not "Romney's" number. It's an easily verified fact based on 2011 numbers. If you read the DOZENS of threads on this forum, you will see that no one is arguing that this number is incorrect. How on earth did you miss that?
This is what was being debated. From your own Politifact Article. Bolded emphasis is mine.
That's the debate. The words he chose to describe those 47%. That's just not true. There are a good number of "rural whites" who fall into that 47% category that are voting for him. There are college students who make less than the $6,000 threshhold of income that will be voting for him. There are seniors or social security who pay no federal tax, who will be voting for him. There are wage earners above $100,000 and $200,0000 in that 47% who have no federal tax liability who will be voting for him. There are members in the military who pay no federal tax who will be voting for him. Yet he chose those words above to describe each an every one of them.
Before Romney used that "fact" he needed his people to break down that 47% and find out what percentage of that 47% actually are leeches on society. Yes, they are in there. And in fact, some of those leeches are probably voting for Romney. He just made a serious error in speech when he made those statements.
As for Politifact, my dog could have verified the "47% paid no income tax" statistic. It's public knowledge.
Can your dog do my math homework? But seriously, you are also missing the boat. Yes, Romney broad brushed the statement. BUT, the larger point is that TOO MANY people are not paying ANY TAXES! We need more people contributing to society. If we can get 75% of people paying taxes then that is a good start. It's easy to vote for more taxes when you aren't paying any. I need free stuff, and our country is broke. Why don't we tax those evil rich people?
Romney clearly did not mean that the 47% not paying income tax were all not going to vote for him. For example, many seniors that don't pay tax do support him. And they should. Obamacare will cut medicare immediately by $716B which will cut services to them. Also, Obama will raise taxes on dividends from 15% to 44% hurting seniors more than anyone.
You can be sure the liberal moderators will ask Romney what he meant at least 5 times during the debates.
Can your dog do my math homework? But seriously, you are also missing the boat. Yes, Romney broad brushed the statement. BUT, the larger point is that TOO MANY people are not paying ANY TAXES! We need more people contributing to society. If we can get 75% of people paying taxes then that is a good start. It's easy to vote for more taxes when you aren't paying any. I need free stuff, and our country is broke. Why don't we tax those evil rich people?
I don't disagree with you at all on that. Those tax cuts and loopholes were made LONG ago and have spurred on this really unfair tax system. The part I am missing is how that issue is this president's fault. I am furious that the Bush Tax Cuts were allow to continue under Obama and I do agree that people should pay some sort of federal income tax. Both my kids (21 and 17) work at part time jobs that make under the $6000 per year. They get every bit of their federal income tax money back. I don't really see why that is necessary. But it is the way the tax code is written and it's not anything new/recent. The whole tax code needs to be rewritten.
I'm just not sure how that correlates to Romney's statement that he won't get votes. It's an entirely different matter.
Romney clearly did not mean that the 47% not paying income tax were all not going to vote for him. For example, many seniors that don't pay tax do support him. And they should. Obamacare will cut medicare immediately by $716B which will cut services to them. Also, Obama will raise taxes on dividends from 15% to 44% hurting seniors more than anyone.
You can be sure the liberal moderators will ask Romney what he meant at least 5 times during the debates.
I'm a reasonable person. I don't know Romney but I'm pretty sure I know what he was getting at too. I think he did mean that there is a certain segment of the population (the welfare queens and those people that want free phones) that won't vote for him. I *get* what he really meant to say. But he phrased it so poorly that it kinda takes my breath away.
I'm a reasonable person. I don't know Romney but I'm pretty sure I know what he was getting at too. I think he did mean that there is a certain segment of the population (the welfare queens and those people that want free phones) that won't vote for him. I *get* what he really meant to say. But he phrased it so poorly that it kinda takes my breath away.
at least your smart enough to get what he meant!!! Good points kid!
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.
But seriously, you are also missing the boat. Yes, Romney broad brushed the statement. BUT, the larger point is that TOO MANY people are not paying ANY TAXES! We need more people contributing to society. If we can get 75% of people paying taxes then that is a good start. It's easy to vote for more taxes when you aren't paying any. I need free stuff, and our country is broke. Why don't we tax those evil rich people?
