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.
Just let it go sanrene. You were defeated pages ago. Everybody has started stupid threads. I still remember my "Change the National Anthem" thread. (which I still stand by) Rather than embarrassing myself. I let the thread die a slow death without me. Maybe you should do the same
And the comparison they did was inadequate, obviously.
Some might have that opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzie679
Just let it go sanrene. You were defeated pages ago. Everybody has started stupid threads. I still remember my "Change the National Anthem" thread. (which I still stand by) Rather than embarrassing myself. I let the thread die a slow death without me. Maybe you should do the same
Defeated? Because a bunch of liberals claim it to be so? I think not. They do this on virtually every thread and on every thread they fail - they don't like the topic, or the title, or the content, or the quotes, or the time a post was made, or any number of deflective, specious reasons.
Btw, if they don't want a response from me, maybe they should stop addressing me...you think?
Because if you're trying to make a case that expatriation has increased under one particular President, it makes sense to look at the numbers during AT LEAST the two previous Presidencies. Just comparing the previous two years is clearly an inadequate comparison when the current President has only been in office for just over one year. His numbers, statistically speaking, don't establish a trend because he's been in office too short of a while. Whereas, the previous administrations have enough time in office to establish what the expatriation trends were during their Presidencies. And the numbers are available, because by law since 1996, the IRS/Treasury Department has to issue notices in the White House Federal Register quarterly of those persons surrendering their American citizenship.
It's one thing when RWers insist on being entitle to a different opinion.
It's something else when they feel entitle to a different set of facts.
What different set of facts would those be?
That the number giving up their citizenship "soared" last quarter?
That the number was larger than all of 2007 combined?
That the number was double that of 2008?
That a portion of those gave obama's tax and regulation policy as the reason?
Which would it be?
Here, can you dispute these facts?
Quote:
The number of American citizens and green-card holders severing their ties with the U.S. soared in the latter part of 2009, amid looming U.S. tax increases and a more aggressive posture by the Internal Revenue Service toward Americans living overseas.
According to public records, just over 500 people world-wide renounced U.S. citizenship or permanent residency in the fourth quarter of 2009, the most recent period for which data are available. That is more people than have cut ties with the U.S. during all of 2007, and more than double the total expatriations in 2008.
Quote:
Ya, like facts and questions you can't answer .......
Every relevant question to the topic of the thread has been answered. Try again.
That the number giving up their citizenship "soared" last quarter?
That the number was larger than all of 2007 combined?
That the number was double that of 2008?
That a portion of those gave obama's tax and regulation policy as the reason?
Which would it be?
Every relevant question to the topic of the thread has been answered. Try again.
What portion gave Obama's tax and regulation policy as the reason????
I remember, what, THREE??? out of the FIVE HUNDRED, who said that American taxes and regulation had a role in their decision. But can you establish that it was actually changes in taxation and policy made by Obama's administration that they were complaining about? I don't think you can, based on what the article says.
What portion gave Obama's tax and regulation policy as the reason????
I remember, what, THREE??? out of the FIVE HUNDRED, who said that American taxes and regulation had a role in their decision. But can you establish that it was actually changes in taxation and policy made by Obama's administration that they were complaining about? I don't think you can, based on what the article says.
Do you really think all five hundred would be interviewed? I'd say the new regulations and the coming taxes are reason enough and probably make up the majority of people who are surrendering their citizenship.
Just as Americans here are alarmed and upset, you can bet those living abroad feel the same way.
Quote:
Because if you're trying to make a case that expatriation has increased under one particular President, it makes sense to look at the numbers during AT LEAST the two previous Presidencies. Just comparing the previous two years is clearly an inadequate comparison when the current President has only been in office for just over one year.
Obviously, the author of the piece didn't think so.
Don't be fooled, these new policies already enacted as well as newer ones being put into place are going to tax the heII out of middle and retired America. Those receiving free benefits from these tax hikes are the very ones happy to see them and why not?
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.
