EPTPresident Obama Re-Elected - Page 188
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Hey guys! We'll be closing this thread shortly, but we will make an American politics megathread where we can continue the discussions in here. The new thread can be found here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=383301 | ||
|
gasmeter
United Kingdom249 Posts
| ||
Kaitlin
United States2958 Posts
On July 18 2012 07:09 Danglars wrote: This tax credit is not the be-all and end-all of helping businesses keep their healthcare. Even CBO says it is likely that some will not be able to keep their employer health insurance (Effects of ACA on Employer Health Insurance. They say only 3 million to 5 million people will get their coverage from their employer. Flip side is the cost to the employer offering their employees health insurance. Gruber, the bill's architect, says that insurance premiums will rise from between 19% to 30%! Guarenteed issue and community ratings taken together are huge stresses on the insurance companies forcing them to raise prices to compensate for their higher expenses. Please, understand that a tax credit for offering their employees health insurance comes as small consolation when they see a very real possibility that the cost of doing so will trump every tax credit for them in the bill. Obama throws employers a bone, to be sure, but it still may not be enough.source Let's not forget that tax credits only help offset actual taxes, which are imposed on income. If a company isn't making much money, or not a profit at all, they still have to pay the increased expenses of higher health insurance costs, while not getting benefit from the tax credit. So, for the companies that can least afford the increased cost, they are the ones least helped by the tax credit and hit the hardest. One more straw to break the company's back and make it more difficult for them to remain in business. Of course, if they go out of business, employees become unemployees. | ||
|
coverpunch
United States2093 Posts
On July 18 2012 12:18 farvacola wrote: Go and discover the basics of reading comprehension because I'm not addressing Bain capital at all and am instead merely indicting the actions of companies such as GE and P&G. There are far better means with which to attack Romney. Thanks for the condescension and empty repeated reference to private equity, I'm now oh so enlightened. I'm not trying to be condescending, this just started because you talked about "massively overhauling the system" but I don't think you understand the context or role of this thing you're trying to overhaul. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21677 Posts
Atleast hes being honest.... | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
As the saying goes: I may not see a fire but I smell smoke. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15689 Posts
| ||
|
Lightwip
United States5497 Posts
| ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
Edit: to the comment above, the dems are never going to let go of this issue, if Romney doesn't release them, he is done for plain and simple, his strongest points are being turned against him. He probably paid so low in taxes that he is too embarassed to release them : p even 0%? | ||
|
Jaaaaasper
United States10225 Posts
| ||
|
coverpunch
United States2093 Posts
On July 19 2012 05:33 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: It doesn't take a Sherlock Holmes to know that Romney is hiding something if his returns were pristine then he would have released them a LONG time ago. Yet he hasn't. As the saying goes: I may not see a fire but I smell smoke. Welcome to the Birthers' world. You'd think we would have learned after this decade that this argument is meaningless for everything from the war on Iraq to Obama's birth certificate. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15689 Posts
On July 19 2012 05:59 coverpunch wrote: Welcome to the Birthers' world. You'd think we would have learned after this decade that this argument is meaningless for everything from the war on Iraq to Obama's birth certificate. Tax returns and birth certificates are only similar in the sense that they are both being requested. However, it is not common for presidents to submit their birth certificate. Further, Obama even did give his birth certificate. Also the fact that Romney asked Kennedy to give up his tax returns: http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/11/340682/flashback-romney-tax-return/ Tax returns are extremely relevant. We deserve to know about a potential president's finances. It really does say a lot. If there is a lot of abuse of tax loop holes by the rich, which we need to fix, but Romney does the very same things, how likely am I going to think Romney will fix those? The following website details the tax returns of a lot of past presidents: http://www.taxhistory.org/www/website.nsf/Web/PresidentialTaxReturns/ This isn't some wildly outlandish request. | ||
Falling
Canada11350 Posts
Also the fact that Romney asked Kennedy to give up his tax returns: http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/11/340682/flashback-romney-tax-return/ That's actually really funny, but not too surprising. I mean a lot of politicians change their positions based on political gain, but with Romney it seems every position he currently holds, he has opposed in the past somewhere. And every position he currently opposes he's supported in the past somewhere. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On July 19 2012 06:07 Mohdoo wrote: Tax returns and birth certificates are only similar in the sense that they are both being requested. However, it is not common for presidents to submit their birth certificate. Further, Obama even did give his birth certificate. Also the fact that Romney asked Kennedy to give up his tax returns: http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/11/340682/flashback-romney-tax-return/ Tax returns are extremely relevant. We deserve to know about a potential president's finances. It really does say a lot. If there is a lot of abuse of tax loop holes by the rich, which we need to fix, but Romney does the very same things, how likely am I going to think Romney will fix those? The following website details the tax returns of a lot of past presidents: http://www.taxhistory.org/www/website.nsf/Web/PresidentialTaxReturns/ This isn't some wildly outlandish request. No it's not wildly outlandish, though it's asking for more than most presidential candidates have given... according to: http://www.taxhistory.org/www/website.nsf/Web/PresidentialTaxReturns/ | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15689 Posts
On July 19 2012 06:29 JonnyBNoHo wrote: No it's not wildly outlandish, though it's asking for more than most presidential candidates have given... according to: http://www.taxhistory.org/www/website.nsf/Web/PresidentialTaxReturns/ Its 1/6 as many as Obama, 6 years less than W Bush, 6 less than Clinton, and 4 less than Reagan. Even Bush Sr gave up 3 years. No matter which way you put it, Romney is less willing to tell the American people about his finances than anyone in recent history. Romney also recently held the belief that politicians ought to release more of their taxes. As shown by the link I posted before: http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/11/340682/flashback-romney-tax-return/ | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On July 19 2012 06:36 Mohdoo wrote: Its 1/6 as many as Obama, 6 years less than W Bush, 6 less than Clinton, and 4 less than Reagan. Even Bush Sr gave up 3 years. No matter which way you put it, Romney is less willing to tell the American people about his finances than anyone in recent history. Nope. It is less than Obama but you are confusing returns released while in office with returns released before taking office. | ||
|
Adila
United States874 Posts
| ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
On July 19 2012 06:29 JonnyBNoHo wrote: No it's not wildly outlandish, though it's asking for more than most presidential candidates have given... according to: http://www.taxhistory.org/www/website.nsf/Web/PresidentialTaxReturns/ The precedent for disclosing your financial history was set by -- oddly enough -- George Romney in 1968, when he released 12 years. I don't think releasing tax returns is mandatory, but it's become customary for candidates to be transparent as possible about their finances, which is what makes Romney's refusal seems so odd. It would essentially make him the least transparent presidential candidate in 30 years. In regards to the Birther movement, you would have to believe that Obama not only faked his birth certificate, but he also managed to evade and fool the CIA, IRS, US State Department, and Hilary Clinton's rabid campaign during the 2008 Democratic Primary, all of whom have vetted Obama in some form or another over the past 50 years of his existence. Not to mention you can't find a single credible witness or person that can confirm he was born anywhere other than Hawaii. Honestly, if Obama wasn't American, serious evidence would have surfaced by now. I don't think the fake Birther controversy and the legitimate strangeness of Romney's refusal to release more tax returns is comparable. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On July 19 2012 07:14 Defacer wrote: I don't think releasing tax returns is mandatory, but it's become customary for candidates to be transparent as possible about their finances, which is what makes Romney's refusal seems so odd. It would essentially make him the least transparent presidential candidate in 30 years. Do you have any evidence to back up that statement? He's released his 2010 return, given estimates on his 2011 return and said he'll release it when it's filed. How does that compare with other candidates in the past 30 years? From what I can tell that's the norm. If you have evidence that says otherwise, please share and I'll be happy to change my opinion on the matter. | ||
|
coverpunch
United States2093 Posts
On July 19 2012 07:14 Defacer wrote: I don't think the fake Birther controversy and the legitimate strangeness of Romney's refusal to release more tax returns is comparable. The comparison is the assumption of saying "I have no evidence of fire but I smell smoke". The Birthers said that about Obama's unwillingness to release his birth certificate as a candidate and now people are saying that about Romney's tax returns. They don't have to feed the trolls. Now, I agree that tax returns reveal a lot more information than a birth certificate. But is it relevant to Romney's credentials to being a good president? Not really. If he doesn't have trouble with the IRS then his tax returns are kosher. The best you can actually do is that Romney's poor handling of this situation and his retirement from Bain doesn't speak well for his political skills. He's tripped himself up pretty badly and maybe that means he won't do well in convincing Congress to produce some meaningful laws or Iran to step down its nuclear program. | ||
| ||
