For some time now Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) has been claiming that Mitt Romney has not been paying income taxes. We now know that there are 1.9 million reasons (or dollars) from Romney's 2011 tax return that show the Silver State Democrat does not speak the truth.
Reid has never released his tax returns. And yet his hypocrisy and now proven dishonesty made him a hero to left wingers across the country. After all if you have a D after your name you can get away with all kinds of things and have the media ignore you.
One thing not getting a lot of attention is that Romney gave $4M in charitable contributions or 28% of his income in 2011. The average citizen gives just over $4400 a year to charity or a fraction of a per cent of what Romney gave. Summaries indicate that Romney has averaged around 13% given to charity over the years compared to 7% for Barack Obama.
The Silver State Hypocrite is still after Romney saying that he is manipulating the tax code. He is claiming that Romney taking only $2.25M of a possible $4M in charitable deductions was only done to "conform" with public statements. The internet is also on fire claiming that the documentation about past tax returns is worded in weasel ways.
How many people out there would give up 44% of their charitable contributions? How many people paid out a combined 38% in income taxes and charitable contributions in 2011? The answers to these questions are not readily available. It is a safe bet those numbers are 2 standard deviations above and beyond the average taxpayer.
None of this is satisfying the Obama campaign in its endless quest to divide America. Apparently giving twice as much to charity and $1.9M to the US government is not a "fair share." Now they are off on a quest to attack overseas investments and Bain Capital again.
Voters in the 47% should ask themselves some questions. If they had the income Mitt Romney had would they give 38% away willingly to charity and the government? Would they not try and protect their income from the tax man if possible?
In the interest of full disclosure my income tax rate is usually right around 30%. It has been slowly coming down as my investment income grows. I told my accountant a long time ago to not play games with my taxes. I have never seen anybody have a good experience with an audit so I would rather pay the taxes than take my chances.
It is easy for people who pay only a few thousand dollars a year in income tax to cry "fair share." If you tax Romney an extra 1% that comes out to $140,000. How many people would give up $140K willingly? If you would not you need to cut out the "fair share" rhetoric.
The tax code is broken. People can come up with all kinds of reasons who various policies make sense. The problem is every change in rate or deductions is not a function of good intentions but one of special interests.
Tax interest and dividends like other income. Tear out all of the deductions in then code including popular ones such as home mortgage payments, local taxes, and war zone income. Give everybody the first $20-30K free of tax and then put in graduated rates deduction free above that income.
Do the same thing with corporate taxes or put in a value added tax. If the rate overall becomes lower under such a code there is no incentive to take the profits overseas.
It does not appear that Romney has broken any tax laws. He is being targeted for being successful.
Private success is the enemy of the Obama campaign. Government control is its friend. How dare Romney not want to give to Obama what is Obama's.
It is class warfare. It goes along with the race and religion wars the Democrats have been fighting for years. Obama's "forward" movement appears to be a war of division.
It may be true that Romney is out of touch with the average American. However, Obama sat listening to Jeremiah Wright for years. And Obama believes the government builds business. So to say Obama is in touch with average Americans in absurd.
The goal should not be to put the person next door in the White House. It is how Alaska ended up with an unqualified quitting governor not so long ago.
The president of the United States should be someone who is beyond the ordinary individual. It should be an individual dedicated to making the right decisions even when they are not popular.
In the meantime, remember that Romney paid 38% in societal fairness in 2011. What was Obama's contribution? He kept pointing his finger at the guy who gave more to charity. After all the only charity that matters to Obama is the government.
