Your Moral And Intellectual Superiors

Hardly surpising. For socialists the ultimate measure of success is the ability to demonstrate failure.

DrD, exactly. Socialism wants everyone to be at the lowest bottom denominator, well, except for those that are more equal than others.

As for the media lapdogs denouncing Romney's private sector success, I can understand how these media lefties relate to the political Marxism which denounces individual success, they really have never worked in the private sector per se, MSM news organizations are a kind of government licenced monopoly which are in bed with government for subsidy and patronage. One of the takers as it were. Part of the expansion of the corporate welfare culture. Not surprising anti free market, anti-capitalism exists in this regressed corporate culture.

No one has honed the politics of envy quite so finely as President Obama and his party. My concern is that this demagoguery about capital gains taxes vs. income and other taxes was tried in the 1972 campaign by Senator George McGovern. It went precisely nowhere then. That is has been brought back, with a vengeance, suggests a major spike in economic illiteracy.

A socialist applauds when a leader gives away other people's money. That whole redistribution is more important than production mindset.

A charitable human applauds when a leader gives away his own money.

That swipe by the big Zero really PO'd me. f**ker.

An astute politician could utilize the income tax vs capital gains tax to advantage by suggesting that they be the same, at the lower rate, not higher. The problem with that idea is that spending would have to be lowered to account for the lowered revenues, but the overall effect on the economy would be positive, I'm thinking.

And that was the crux of it right there - at the heart of all these lefty's ideology is their hatred for those who produce wealth. And keep it.

Never mind Obama's million dollar book sales.

Of course journalists think this way, and it is why the are so contemptible. They are the only human endeavour that extracts its natural raw materials for free. They get free stories and news and re-craft it into the message or more news which then then sell back to you. They don't pay for their resources so naturally they think all things should be free. It is why the MSM look down on Tabloids, because Tabloids will at least pay for their raw material. If the MSM had to pay for the raw material and pay for every interview then we might see some care and honesty in how they present it.

I find it surprising there hasn't been footage of this released yet. Imagine a clip of some reporter saying something ridiculous about conservatives or Romney, followed by a clip of them cheering from last night. You could out 50-60 people the first week.

Honest (an extinct kind) journalism would be reporting on all the foreign money flowing into Obama's campaign, since that is actually note worthy.

No, the wealthy DO produce wealth but they don't keep it. Even if it's just sitting in a bank, it provides the capital for that bank to make small business loans, to provide mortgages, etc.

The money of the wealthy is the basic raw resources of an economy. Without it, that nation couldn't even extract oil from the ground much less build a factory that produces cars.

What people also ignore about Romney's personal income tax is that his income doesn't come from wages, which are taxed at one level only. It comes from investments, which are taxed TWICE. Once at the corporate or capital gains level, and once at the personal level. So, at the personal level, Romney may pay only 14% but that same investment has already donated to the government in the ratio of 35%. So, 35 and 14, hmm, that's a 49% tax on his wealth.

Oh, and Romney gives 30% of his income to charity. That's in addition to the ah, 'charity' that is called Government. So, 30% of his income goes directly to those in need. But 49% of his investments and personal income goes to the bureaucracy, waste and Solyndra projects of Obama.

@ Ken (Kulak)
Socialism wants everyone to be at the lowest bottom denominator, well, except for those that are more equal than others.

Very tragic. Very true.

Maybe the 'journalists' should be asking why Obama didn't raise the capital gains tax on investments when he had control of the House and Senate. (stupid idea I realize but if you're gonna bitch about it then act on it)

On the other hand, not everyone is gushing over Mitt Romney. There are some inconvenient details about how Mitt created all this wealth, or at least who ended up paying for it all.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/07/05/249422/goper-vulture-capitalist-mitt-romney/

I'm no Obama fan, so don't accuse me of being a leftist. I'm just wondering how America is going to be better off with a man who destroys jobs and companies for his own personal gain. He's now claiming he is going to bring jobs back to America. I sincerely doubt that.

Kevin, the central argument of your little argument has been roundly debunked. It is true that Mitt Romney is a successful businessman and the left hates that except if you do it by dressing like a hooker for movies or playing basketball or whatever. Anyway keep focusing on that because it's really working for your guy.

Kenin F (one wonders if the F is for FOOL)

Bain capital would save those companies that could be saved, and shut down those that couldn't and do so profitably. Try getting informed and understanding things before you spout off about them.

ET

U flubed your math on your post:-))))

35% and 14% of the remainding 65% does not equal 49% over all:-))))

NME666- I didn't explain it properly.

The investment profits are taxed at 35%. Then, some but not all of that profit, which has already been taxed at 35%, goes to Romney as his income.[The company has to keep a lot of profit to use for more investment; it can't give it all to its investors. So, some goes to Romney.]

This personal income is then taxed at 14%. And from this personal income, Romney gives 30% of it to charity.

Kevin F., I do hope you realize that the link you posted takes you to Iran's television network which
hosts George Galloway's rants. Consider the source of the article you referenced and its value in this discussion.

Kevin F., not only is your 'article' from the Mullah controlled 'PressTV' of Iran, but you should really check out the website of the author, Webster G. Tarpley.

Off the charts crazy. Way to lose credibility there, Kevin.