BO pays 18%

[RA1]

Why is there not a great hue and cry about BO only paying this amount of income taxes? After all, there was such a hue and cry when it was disclosed that Romney paid only 14%. I am not a proponent or opponent of either one but what is fair is fair, or so it seems to me.

Many folks who make 100 or 200 or so thousands of dollars end up paying around 40% or more to include social security taxes, income taxes, etc. Does our president not pay social security? I realize he has a unique retirement program but still...............

Best regards,

RA1

[TampaYankee]

There might be if we knew a little more about it. Can you provide background?

As for Social Security it is my understanding that Government, Military, Postal and Railroad workers do not participate in SS and thus do not to contribute. At least that was my understanding once upon a time. I do not recall anything regarding that fact being changed.

I doubt that they have made any special tax laws for Obama or that he is treated any differently from the previous presidents. I also doubt that he benefits from any of that 'Carried Interest' bullshit that permits hedge fund owners and other Big Business tycoons to change income subject to normal taxes into magic income subject to 15% rates.

Remember also, his rate did NOT go up with the Fiscal Cliff Tax Increase because the GOP demanded an increase in the effected bracket negotiated up from $250K to $400K, more for families, I believe.

Even so, i'm interested to see how his taxes break down. I doubt he voluntarily paid an extra couple of millions dollars in tax though to improve the optics of his return. Anybody that does that is a real patriot as long as they do not file an ammended return to recover that overpayment while no one is looking.

[RA1]

I suggest there was nothing illegal about what BO paid or how his taxes were determined. Likewise for Romney. Congress for whatever reason(s) make laws that encourage a particular activity. That is a good reason. Almost always the "law" of unintended consequences intervenes at some point and various taxpayers find they might have an advantage for doing things in a certain way. Just like we can elect new members of Congress and a new administration, the Congress can eliminate so called loopholes, etc. There is no doubt the US is way overdue for an overhaul of the tax laws.

I think you are correct about government employees and that is a sticking point with me. The Congress has taken a good thing (their retirement and benefit packages) and elevated it to something many call an over privilege of the "ruling" class, which includes the US president. Where else can you work for 2 years and get a life time pension?

Before you start on the practices and abuses of corporate officers, I believe they are in the same need of overhaul as is the government. The shareholders should not put up with such but they do, just like the voters do.

Best regards,

RA1

[TampaYankee]

I think we agree much more on this than we disagree.

I believe everyone should pay in to SS and everyone should collect it, according to a sliding scale based on non-SS income, i.e. means testing.

As for government and military pensions, I believe they have been tightened up in the last decade or so. That doesn't mean more might not be needed.

I tracked down O's tax return. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/04/13/us/politics/13obama-tax.html

It looks pretty Kosher to me. I think he would have paid quite a bit more if those 'deductions' were reduced along the lines that Romney proselytized for in the election. I believe some are still in favor of that, as am I.

[RA1]

As before, no serious disagreement. My main point was that the MSM jumped all over Romney for paying "only" 14% and there are virtually no public comments about BO's 18%.

A second point is, according to the public comments by BO, I think he should have paid at least 40 or more %.

15% to SS up to around 100+ thousand and then 30% "average" on all.

Best regards,

RA1

[Guest rimchair]

I wonder if Mittens Rmoney is paying back a extra 5% of their income to the Government? BO did...

[RA1]

Could this be the same BO who has closed "the people's house" to tours for children? The same BO who spends millions and millions of taxpayer's dollars on extravagant vacations, not each year, but almost every month? Meanwhile millions are out of work and the US economy fails to improve.

I surely would give up $20,000 of my income to have all those vacations and it would be much more than 5%.

Best regards,

RA1

[Guest rimchair]

I also read where Mr. Obama gave 25% of his income to cahrity. Wonder if Rmoney Mittens will even release his tax returns this year...

[TampaYankee]

Could this be the same BO who has closed "the people's house" to tours for children? The same BO who spends millions and millions of taxpayer's dollars on extravagant vacations, not each year, but almost every month? Meanwhile millions are out of work and the US economy fails to improve.

I surely would give up $20,000 of my income to have all those vacations and it would be much more than 5%.

Best regards,

RA1

Sorry, I cannot get my panties in a bunch about Presidents taking vacations, which really aren't. People pissed on Ike for golfing and Kennedy for sailing. Then there was Ronnie and W's ranching and George H W's cigarette boating in Maine. The opposition always pisses on the opposite party President and never mention their own guy. Just part of the politics in this country.

Presidents are on the jobe 24/7 like few other people in the world. Even on vacation. And wherever the President goes the office has to go with him, whether to Israel or the G20 or Hawaii or Martha's vineyard. Pissing and moaning about any President taking vacation is just low politics.

[RA1]

I suppose we will just have to disagree about this point. I understand what you are saying and you are correct in that the opposition always has and always will complain about what he current administration is doing. However, I remember Ike and even a little bit about Truman but I do not remember any of them spending money like BO on personal trips. This is exacerbated by the current state of the economy which is not being helped by BO.

My comments do not mean that I think the Republicans are doing much either. I have little to no respect for the "ruling" class in the US.

Best regards,

RA1

[Guest hitoallusa]

Let's look at the bright side.. He pays tax as most others do. and gives money to charity. I'm not sure why he needs to pay more? In terms of absolute amount, I think he pays a lot.

[TampaYankee]

I suppose we will just have to disagree about this point. I understand what you are saying and you are correct in that the opposition always has and always will complain about what he current administration is doing. However, I remember Ike and even a little bit about Truman but I do not remember any of them spending money like BO on personal trips. This is exacerbated by the current state of the economy which is not being helped by BO.

My comments do not mean that I think the Republicans are doing much either. I have little to no respect for the "ruling" class in the US.

Best regards,

RA1

Just how is Obama spending so much more money on vacations?

As for Obama not doing much for the economy, we would be much better off if the GOP put their shoulders to the wheel to help Obama. I'd settle for just having them get out of the way. Instead, they want to cut their way to economic paradise leaving the middle class and social safety net in a shambles while bestowing largesse on Big Business and the Wealth Class. The Brits and Europe have shown how austerity has lead the way to a significantly worsening economy. There but for the grace of Obama and the Senate goes the US.

It is clear to any unbiased observer and most biased observers that the #1 GOP goal was and remains obstrucitng Obama, even to the detriment of the country. They have put Party above the Country and upholding the Constitution. Their actions, arguably, have been treasoness. Those are strong words but so has their purposeful malfeasance been just as strong.

Obama's failure, and yes there is one, has been to buy in to the Deficit as the #1 problem on the table rather than jobs and the economy. He should have effectively rallied the population to demand more jobs programs including massive infrastructure development and renewal. Instead, knowing the GOP would block any big effort he went small in the hopes of tearing away few GOP senators off the pack for filibuster defeat. He should have gone on the attack and ripped the GOP a new asshole when it came to jobs and infrastructure. He needs to regain control of the House, an almost impossible task in off year elections. Now people have pretty much bought into muddling our way out of the mess over time.

[Guest hitoallusa]

I think we will come up with a new economic system that will replace the current one. It might take decades but it will be more efficient, productive and will solve many current economic issues. Before that I bet there will be some suffering and pain but we will be a me to bring our civilization to a higher level.

[lookin]

Obama's failure, and yes there is one, has been to buy in to the Deficit as the #1 problem on the table rather than jobs and the economy. He should have effectively rallied the population to demand more jobs programs including massive infrastructure development and renewal. Instead, knowing the GOP would block any big effort he went small in the hopes of tearing away few GOP senators off the pack for filibuster defeat. He should have gone on the attack and ripped the GOP a new asshole when it came to jobs and infrastructure. He needs to regain control of the House, an almost impossible task in off year elections. Now people have pretty much bought into muddling our way out of the mess over time.

Couldn't agree more. I so wanted - and still want - him to be another FDR, but he keeps stopping just short. I think his relative inexperience is what holds him back. As you say, the key is a direct connection to the electorate.

Kept hoping he would have let Clinton run in 2012 and 2016, and come back for a second term in 2020. But alas. My current hope, like yours, is that he will push mightily for a Democratic Congress in 2014 and go balls-to-the-wall for his last two years.

[Guest hitoallusa]

I always believe it is God who appoints and prepares someone to be president. So once the election is over I tend to give my full support to the one appointed. As an individual I try to do my

best within my means to do my job and help others. When our country is going in a wrong direction, I express my opinion and fight for what's right so that our representative can make right choices. Of course greed gets in the way for many people but that was the case in the past too. We came over that obstacles and came to this moment. I think we will continually do so.

[AdamSmith]

I always believe it is God who appoints and prepares someone to be president.

Then you reject a fundamental teaching of both the Old and New Testaments.

Both the Prophets and Jesus himself say very directly, over and over again, that people can act either because of the influence of God on their minds and hearts, or the influence of Satan.

Our free will to choose one or the other, and the ever-present possibility that we will choose Satan instead of God, is the core teaching of Genesis, and most all that follows.

[Guest hitoallusa]

According to the Bible, the most surprising thing is that God can bring back the dead back.. That solved everything for me. If he can do that then he must have plans for those innocent who got killed or suffered in their past life by injustice and discrimination. That means he can give anyone a second chance if he wishes. In that case Satan is irrelevant. The only thing we have to do is have faith in God and try to do good things during our life. We might make mistakes and hurt others unintentionally but I believe that God will help us make things right and help us to move on.

The authors of the Bible only could see their own time although some prophets had glimpse of the future. We need to interpret the Bible in a different way as we have done in many fields of science where new theories and models replace the old ones to more perfectly explain how this world works.

[AdamSmith]

Well, but you are really describing Buddhism, not Christianity. Which is fine, probably better, in fact.

[Guest hitoallusa]

Not necessary... The resurrection of Jesus is a powerful message.. If God can bring back the dead then there is nothing he can't do and I believe that made Jesus disciples to be so courageous and hopeful that they overcame insurmountable obstacles and endured painful prosecutions.

Whether you are a christian or not, if you look at the sky, we are seeing the past of many stars. That means someone is also watching our past out there. Maybe an alien will find a way to intervene and prevent us from destroying ourselves with weapons of destructions and turn back our history. That's why I'm so optimistic.

I believe that there is a reason while we are here. Yes we suffer and have pains in our life but we can do many things that can change the course of our future. It doesn't have to big. Just a small thing that can contribute to our society daily adds up to a lot. That kind of mindset is needed in our society and we will move closer to what Jesus described as his kingdom gradually.

I believe Jesus tried to show us our potential. He wanted to show us that we can do great things if we have faith and love to embrace those unfortunate. It doesn't have to something big. Just a small thing daily as Jesus spent his meal with his disciples will be enough for now. When good deeds add up then they will change the world.

Well, but you are really describing Buddhism, not Christianity. Which is fine, probably better, in fact.