Romney in secretly taped video: Obama voters ‘dependent’ on government

reply to post by RealSpoke


That's the first time I've heard Romney tell the truth

[The point is everything was BALANCED BY THE TIME ROMNEY LEFT OFFICE]

In Massachussetts, Romney took on deficit and turned it into a surplus. (Romney did not accept a BAILOUT as Governor and endend his reign with a huge surplus)

reply to post by RELDDIR


I think Romney would disagree with you.

Romney's own telling of the story, is how that hope for the 2002 Olympics was also restored through $342 million in direct federal funding and an additional $1.1 billion in indirect financing from Washington..

Source

reply to post by RealSpoke


While we occasionaly agree, I always like your posts...for the most part.

I have no problem paying my taxes. Though I do have a problem as to where that money goes.

My one big problem I have is though, for years I recieved a tax refund. Maybe a couple hundred every year. Never really cared whether I got it or not. I was audited once and they found they had to pay me.

Now that I'm retired, I find that I have to pay more into the system that I already pay into. Tax me year 'round...I'm ok with that. But come Apr 15th they want more!?

Give me a break!

Originally posted by RealSpoke

And that he is 100% wrong. The majority of people on welfare are rural people that vote republican.

Well that is not really true... 25% of republicans are poor. That just may suggest that there is a percentage of the poor population that do not want Government subsidies, or better put, enslaved by government subsidies.

RealSpoke,

Let me ask you an honest question here...

Do you think that poor people who get on subsidies ever get off them, AND do you think it doesn't create generation to generation mindset of how to get on Government subisities and not how to get off them?

Originally posted by RELDDIR
Like I said, the Chinese are WILLING TO WORK.

reply to post by RELDDIR


So...what you are really saying is that the unemployment issue in the US is not a GOP problem or even Obama's fault...our high unemployment rate is because Americans are not willing to work?

*whew*

I am relieved to be finally finding that out.
Thank you.
I guess that also means that Romney and other off-shore investors are completely justified in their support of foreign economies since their people are willing to do what Americans are not?
It also suggests that we are spending way too much money on immigration control for the sake of American jobs being taken by immigrants! They aren't taking anything! We are gifting them those jobs that we do not have any use for, anyway, since we are not willing to work.



You do realize this changes everything, don't you?
Imagine...a veritable politico-savant of such staggering proportions as yourself...hidden in our midst all along!
I am writing YOU in for POTUS on November 6, RELDDIR.



Hope you don't mind.

Seems like the majority of this thread ended up being a diversion from the OP, which was Romney shooting himself in the foot.

In the last few weeks, he has given some serious ammo to the incumbent. And with election funding the way it is, Super Pacs spending tens of millions on each side, these rounds will be shot in all directions.

Of those 47% that don't pay income tax and Romney doesn't feel he doesn't needs to focus on, a pretty good chunk are collecting social security. Romney was actually leading among the 65+ demographic before this, and there could be a shift.

Especially in a key state like Florida, where there is a large elderly population.

Bloomberg is a pretty conservative source:

You can mark my prediction now: A secret recording from a closed-door Mitt Romney fundraiser, released today by David Corn at Mother Jones, has killed Mitt Romney's campaign for president.

Today, Mitt Romney lost the election

Romney is probably right that 47% of people paying no income tax is a negative indicator on the state of America and that too many are collecting benefits. He is wrong to write off these people as a portion of the electorate that he need not focus on during the campaign.

I'm registered independent and consider myself pretty neutral. I live in NY, Obama is going to win here and I'm going to vote for him. But I am by no means a total supporter.

But even for the most passionate Romney supporters (or more accurately in many cases Obama haters), it shouldn't be denied that this leak will be hugely damaging.

If I were the Obama campaign, I wouldn't attack Romney directly by quoting him. I would just constantly bring up the 47% figure and how the Dem party believes it helps the lower income brackets, and let people make the association themselves.

Originally posted by PatrickGarrow17
Seems like the majority of this thread ended up being a diversion from the OP, which was Romney shooting himself in the foot.

Yes.
Thanks for the reminder!
Let's get back on track.

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by RELDDIR

 

Because it's reality? Mitt Romney was the CEO of Bain while outsourcing to 3rd world countries..creating slave factories.

I'm sorry that reality hurts you

Ok, so Bain invested into 77 failing companies...can you list those companies that he outsource all the workers to 3rd world nations?

Another thing is you talk a lot of crap without putting the numbers so show the numbers...




Please list the "slave" pay scales of those 77 companies and compare it to these...side note...my mother in-law paid rice field workers 3 dollars per day...that is sunrise to sunset for 3 dollars and that was considered good income.

Now lets talk the real stuff....

Companies are in the market to make profit...IF they are going to get the crap taxed out of them, IF they are going to need to pay union wages, IF they are going to pay utilities etc that ALL far exceed anything they can compete with to make a profit they will take their stuff overseas...it is simple.

You my friend do not seem to want to blame the Government for anything, BUT the Government plays a big role in whether companies go overseas or stay home.

Lastly....think about the jobs that is being done overseas...the average American will not go into a field and pick fruit next to illegal aliens for 5 times the pay, and they will not do the jobs that are outsourced overseas either.

Originally posted by queenannie38


Yes.
Thanks for the reminder!
Let's get back on track.

Or.......

Hide the Elephant in the room.



Dependent on Government?

The two were critical of the public welfare system, and their strategy called for overloading that system to force a different set of policies to address poverty. They stated that many Americans who were eligible for welfare were not receiving benefits, and that a welfare enrollment drive would strain local budgets, precipitating a crisis at the state and local levels that would be a wake-up call for the federal government, particularly the Democratic Party, thus forcing it to implement a national solution to poverty. Cloward and Piven wrote that “the ultimate objective of this strategy [would be] to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income...”[2] There would also be side consequences of this strategy, according to Cloward and Piven. These would include: easing the plight of the poor in the short-term (through their participation in the welfare system); shoring up support for the national Democratic Party then-splintered by pluralist interests (through its cultivation of poor and minority constituencies by implementing a national solution to poverty); and relieving local governments of the financially and politically onerous burdens of public welfare (through a national solution to poverty).

Cloward–Piven strategy

Originally posted by miniatus
I am fairly well off.. I pay a lot in taxes.. I still get the luxury of buying a new car and buying crap I don't need.. I DESERVE to be taxed more.. and in fact I pay extra into the system.. I get it refunded, but i still pay it in .. I do so voluntarily .. I donate .. I give to the humane society .. I contribute to local musicians.. I volunteer at food drives..

I think it's important to do so .. I'm part of a community .. I have a skill that's earned me money.. that money comes from those that need my skill.. so I contribute back to the community where that comes from.. how is that evil? .. I see people paint the portrait of socialism as if it's SO evil that they took and expect to give back anything.. *hiss* .. heaven forbid they contribute back to the place where they live.. what kind of silliness is that? ..

There are loopholes int he tax code that let them get away with nonsense... they can pay the minimum .. and donate and get a break for doing so .. I don't even report my donations! .. I just do it..

I can't stand the greed that is built into some people.. it's sickening... AND THIS .. coming from an atheist .. IMAGINE

edit on 9/17/2012 by miniatus because:

Right on! This is basically what my wife and I did when we lived in the USA (she is a citizen, I'm a permanent resident, a year short of citizenship). We paid through the neck, and did not bitch (much, it still hurt to pay those taxes). We donated to charities, and we still had money to buy silly # with

Mind you according to Romeny, we were not middle class, because we did not earn $250K.

I got laid off in May 2010, from the Pharmaceutical industry. It was not poor performance (I was personally bringing in about 14 million a year to my company), it was "out sourcing" to China that killed my group. We had one of the most cutting edge process development labs in the world, and in the end, loosing me, my supervisor (who'd worked for the company for 30 years) and the other group members, made more sense financially, the company could not compete with China (India they could). So my last project was to pull apart my lab, which I'd worked 5 years to have running smoothly, and be cutting edge, and drive bits 45 minutes north for another group in the company to use. I got to set it up. Oh then I got to walk out the door on my last day (with my boss) and begin moving back to New Zealand.

Despite paying taxes for almost a decade. Despite being a model citizen. Despite having sponsors. I got no back up in the system.

Do I support Obama? Nope, I was lucky enough to be an impartial viewer of his last campaign, and well it was mostly fluff. Do I support Romeny? Oh hell no, if I was not middle class earning over 100K, then screw him! Ron Paul, nah not a chance.

So basically, Romeny, you screwed up. You've probably handed this to Obama. *shrug* Oh and your choice for VP is a dick (I lived in WI when I was in the USA )

Oh and I'm not a Christian either (I'm a neopagan) it must be us "ungodly types" which are the issue .... damn that supposed separation of state and religion clause.

Originally posted by Noinden
made more sense financially, the company could not compete with China (India they could).

That is the point...companies in the states can not compete with how our Government handles things... I blame the Government....kind of hard to blame Romney since he is not the Government...


BTW China will soon reach the point where they will not be THE outsourse and jobs will come back to the USA...

We saw it with Japan and China will soon reach the critical point where workers will demand a better life and it will just not be cost effective anymore...ya for us...

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Originally posted by Noinden
made more sense financially, the company could not compete with China (India they could).

That is the point...companies in the states can not compete with how our Government handles things... I blame the Government....kind of hard to blame Romney since he is not the Government...


BTW China will soon reach the point where they will not be THE outsourse and jobs will come back to the USA...

We saw it with Japan and China will soon reach the critical point where workers will demand a better life and it will just not be cost effective anymore...ya for us...

Just remember. That outsourcing started with Clinton. Signed in with Bush.


They are ALL the same.

The Republican cheerleaders are just trying to do damage control here and claiming Romney is telling the truth



This is a pie that Mitt Romney will not even be getting a crumb from.

And I just got home from work, I worked 12 hours today and pay my fair share of taxes. Never been on Food stamps before in my life.

I guess I'm never taking responsibility for my life



Stick a fork in Mitt!

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17


There is a comment below the Bloomberg article that made me feel like saying DOH!

"Mitt is part of the 47% that dont pay taxes - wink wink!"

On the Mitt Romney Wikipedia page one finds the following tidbits:

• Romney and his wife contributed $1 million to the Olympics, and he donated to charity the $1.4 million in salary and severance payments he received for his three years as president and CEO.
  
• Earnings from the book were donated to charity.
  
• When his father died in 1995, Mitt donated his inheritance to BYU's George W. Romney Institute of Public Management.
  
• He declined his governor's salary during his term.
  
• Because the private equity business continued to thrive, this deal brings him millions of dollars in annual income.
  
• In 2010, Romney and his wife received $21.7 million in income, almost all of it from investments such as such as dividends, capital gains, and carried interest. For 2010, the Romneys paid about $3 million in federal income taxes.
  
• An additional blind trust exists in the name of the Romneys' sons that was valued at $100 million in 2012. That trust, created in 1995, allows the Romneys to transfer money to their heirs outside their estate, taking advantage of sophisticated tax planning techniques used by high-net-worth families.

So...in a way that comment is true...at least to the extent of Romney's ability to avoid paying income tax...such as donating income (is that a double deduction, maybe?) or just refusing his salary altogether. One of the measures he has revealed about his economic plan is that he would extend the Bush era 15% tax rate on dividends and capital gains for income > $200,000 annually and eliminate it altogether for those falling under that line.

15% of $21.7 million is $3.3 million...which is the tax he paid on his own capital gains.
He has said all along that he has paid all the income tax that he was obligated to pay by law...not that I ever thought he was lying on that count...this just shows how personally irrelevant income tax is to Mitt, too. One has to wonder if Mitt can really "connect" to these ideas any better than the 47%?

reply to post by Xtrozero


In the case of the Pharma industry, it is NOTHING to do with government (in the USA) and every thing to do with how China market themselves.

They have a larger base to get skilled workers from, meaning they can do things that you just can't do in the USA. An example is purification. Running a purification technique known as chromatography is NOT cost effective in the west, it takes time, and human resources. In China, break it down into units one person can handle, thorw three shifts at it, and hey presto, it's done. Just don't expect it to be repeatable outside of China.

Similarly they don't give a fat rats rear over the environment, thus cutting costs. THUS do you propose ignoring the enviroment? If so, I invite you to be beside a plant doing some Phosgene chemistry, then talk to me.

Lastly, Greed is the problem. Rather than want quality, and assurance that it's done to code (on every level). Companies are too busy trying to make erectile disfunction pills, and blood cholesterol lowering treatments, for as little cost as possible, and thus Dubious quality stuff from CHina, is still MUCH cheaper than good quality western work.

For example:

I worked on a project, where I could cut the cost of making one product down to $40 a kg (do NOT ask it gets sold at), and at a quality far in excess of what had been previously made (99.999% pure). It was not taken beyond my small plant scale (a few 100Kg made) test runs. China could sell crap stuff for $12 a Kg, and also controlled the world suply of one of the starters. Basically economics wins every time. It's not the government, so much as greedy executives, and shareholders.

Oh and I live under Shrub and Obama, both were as bad as the other IMHO or as good as the other. Indeed the recent double dip recession (I'd call it a depression) is as much Bush's fault as it is Obamas.

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by Erectus

 

Already proven wrong for the millionth time. The majority of people on welfare are rural people who vote republican.

That has been said too many times been reading Gobbels?''

“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over”

So how does that explain that there are more people on welfare in California a heavily democratic state than the entire population of Indiana, and other states?

hmmm?

Then someone needs to figure in that in a country with over 330 million Americans over 30 million illegals less little over 100 million vote.

Seems some people are not taking other factors in to that welfare payroll.

Originally posted by neo96


So how does that explain that there are more people on welfare in California a heavily democratic state than the entire population of Indiana, and other states?

hmmm?

One word.
Entitlement.

Californians count on the wealth of farming but would prefer their rivers to remain wild rather than tapped. They like tasteful redwood decks but demand someone else fell their trees for the wood. Californians drive imported SUVs but would rather that you drill for oil off your shores rather than they off theirs. They pride themselves on their liberal welfare programs, but drive out with confiscatory taxes the few left to pay for them.

Californians expect cheap imported labor to tend their lawns and clean their houses, but are incensed at sky-high welfare and entitlement costs that accompany illegal immigration. Lock ’em up, they say — but the state is bankrupted by new prisons, constant inmate lawsuits, and unionized employees.

In short, after Californians sue, restrict, mandate, obstruct, and lecture, they also get angry that there is suddenly not enough food, fuel, water, and money to act like the gods that they think they have become.

All these explanations may be valid. But less discussed is the underlying culprit: a weird sort of utopian mindset. Perhaps because have-it-all Californians live in such a rich natural landscape and inherited so much from their ancestors, they have convinced themselves that perpetual bounty is now their birthright — not something that can be lost in a generation of complacency.

Accounting for California’s Suicide

reply to post by queenannie38


Yeah, that's funny. There are all kinds of loop holes in the tax code that are generally only available to the wealthy and corporations. Also, many of the wealthy donate their money to private schools like BYU which tend to help other high earners much more than the poor.

To be fair, Romney has donated a good amount to more urgent causes. And I pretty much equate donations with tax payment, since the majority of government spending is going to the needy.

But I don't really think donations should be a tax write off in the first place. It perpetuates the problem of too much federal spending. I would love to see a shift toward the private sector when it comes to taking care of the needy.

Romney's finances are certainly a little sketchy, and he could have easily avoided the problem by taking his money out of Swiss and Cayman banks and reinvesting in US treasury bonds for basically the same return. But that would have locked his money up for some years, and the US gov't hasn't looked like the most stable investment at times recently.

I don't have a huge problem with Romney, I think he's a pretty good leader. But he's forced to say stuff like what's in the OP because his party's base has responded to the current admin. with increasing extremism.

reply to post by PatrickGarrow17

Romney is probably right that 47% of people paying no income tax is a negative indicator on the state of America and that too many are collecting benefits. He is wrong to write off these people as a portion of the electorate that he need not focus on during the campaign.

Especially since 20% of them are college students.

reply to post by RealSpoke


You're right, killing himself in the young demographic.

And maybe even more, a lot of these people are disabled or have disabled family. That is a huge point to be exploited by the Obama campaign considering the way Romney framed them as hopeless victims with no initiative.

Probably similar to the sympathy gained from the countless stories of people struggling to pay for health care after being denied for pre-existing conditions in Obama's '08 health reform platform.