Romney Releases 2011 Tax Returns

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Romney didn't inherit his fortune. Unlike John Kerry, of course, who married into his ... twice.

I suspect Romney had to work hard for his $250M where as some are just born with the silver spoon or marry into it. But until I am one of them, I think it sucks that people can make so much money on CGs and pay less taxes percentage wise than a common secretary pays on his/her income tax.

Hopefully some day, sooner rather than later, I will be on this board cheering and clapping for 15% capital gains tax (and laughing at the secretary . . . or criticize them for accepting their situation and feeling like they are entitled to more of my money)
 
I suspect Romney had to work hard for his $250M where as some are just born with the silver spoon or marry into it. But until I am one of them, I think it sucks that people can make so much money on CGs and pay less taxes percentage wise than a common secretary pays on his/her income tax.

Hopefully some day, sooner rather than later, I will be on this board cheering and clapping for 15% capital gains tax (and laughing at the secretary)

You're already cheering for it based on your posts in this thread. You just don't realize it, yet.
 
You're already cheering for it based on your posts in this thread. You just don't realize it, yet.

Not yet papag, right now I am of the opinion that 15% is too low for long term CG and that neither Romney nor Obama paid their fair share of taxes.

Maybe when I win my $200, I can go the Mitt and Barrack life style. :D
 
Last edited:
Romney didn't inherit his fortune. Unlike John Kerry, of course, who married into his ... twice.

Plus, I must have missed where Romney has "chilled" anywhere. He chaired Bain, he left Bain to take over the SLC Olympics, he then ran for governor of MA, and after that, ran for President twice, winning the nomination the second time around.

I wonder what's wrong with that?


You must have added to your post after I responded.

I can see why you think I'm slamming Romney on this issue. I'm really not (in this thread) I slamming the 15%, it should be higher.

Although Denny has made me reconsider explaining the advantages of people more likely pulling profits off the table because the rate is so low. Buying and selling is good for wall street, but I don't think it would slow down if raised to 25%. Who knows?
 
"i dont pay more than are legally due. And, frankly, if I had paid more than are legally due I don't think I'd be qualified to become president. I'd think people would want me to follow the law and pay only what the tax code requires."

"I pay all the taxes that are legally required and not a dollar more. I don't think you want someone as the candidate for president who pays more taxes than he owes."

umm, he left a few million in deductions on the table, paying around a half a million dollars more than he had to... so......
 
Shouldn't these religious people give ALL of their money away?
 
why? That's not what we're called to do. In fact, it seems a lot like this post from a few years ago:
2009 BrianFromWA said:
From the website in the OP:
"Christians are required by Christ, without question, to provide for the poor, to the fullest extent that God has provided to themselves."

I'm very glad that the Proverb was put up, because the Word is powerful, but I'm not sure why they don't use prooftexts for "what they believe", like the quote above. Because I see a few places in the Bible where God speaks to us about care for the poor/needy/widows. And I'm not sure that's the conclusion I draw.

God presents us with three general ways in the Bible to take care of the poor and needy: 1) through the family, 2) through the church, and 3) through individual charity. The applicable passages for these three ways are Deut. 14:28, 29, Numbers 18:24, Matthew 6:1-4 and 1 Timothy 5:3-16.

Now, the first two ways are pretty clear.

People's first obligation is to the needy, poor, widowed and orphaned in their own families. Then, they have an obligation to the needy, poor, widowed and orphaned in their local church organization.

God established the pattern for this kind of church giving in Numbers 18:24 and Deuteronomy 14:28, 29. The money was not given just to anyone who showed up. Those able to work but don't do not qualify for help. Also, those who have families to take care of them don't qualify, nor do widows under age 60 qualify, according to 1 Timothy 5:3-16.

Matthew 26:11 says, "For the poor you have with you always..." It's not going to change b/c of some sweeping social change. It's been since the late 60's that LBJ declared his "War on Poverty". People are still poor. But there is a model for how to deal with the poor in order to most effectively help them in their need, from the blessings we've been given.
Jesus modeled a life and ministry of compassion to the poor. How?
1. He mingled with them (Luke 5:1-11)
2. Ate with them (Luke 5:27-32)
3. Comforted them (Luke 12:22-34)
4. Fed them (Luke 9:10-17)
5. Healed them (Luke 5:12-16)
6. Ministered to them (Luke 7:18-23).
I would submit that those called to walk in His image should do the things He did, not have Caesar (or Congress) give them a cash handout.

What about normal people? I'm not Jesus...I'm not healing anyone, right?
1. Tabitha, whose job was helping the poor (Acts 9:36-41).
2. Barnabas supplied the needs of the poor (Acts 4:36-37)
3. Barnabas and Paul collecting for relief efforts from the famine in Judea (Acts 11:27-30) and Corinth (II Corinthians 8-9).
4. Paul was committed to "remembering the poor" (Galatians 2:7-10).

We are to look after orphans and widows in their distress (Luke 3:7-11), and we are told that true repentance is evidenced in sharing food and sustenance with the poor. Selfless giving is honored and blessed (Luke 6:38 and II Corinthians 9:6-8); a sign of genuine faith (James 2:14-17).

God Himself is a cheerful giver and promises to repay any kindness shown to His children with abundance and blessing. Proverbs 14:21 tells us we will be happy if we are kind and generous to the poor. In Psalm 41:1-2 we read, "How blessed is he who considers the helpless; the Lord will deliver him in a day of trouble. The Lord will protect him, and keep him alive, and he shall be called blessed upon the earth." Proverbs 11:25 states, "The generous man will be prosperous and he who waters will himself be watered."

What's the difference between the stuff above and government support? II Thessalonians 3:6-12 talks about only feeding someone if they work. What about care for widows? Well, do you know what the Bible says about widows who deserve help from the church? They have to meet a number of wickets:
(I stole this from some online sites dealing with this)
• Desolate - I Timothy 5:5 (No living husband, children, nephews etc.).
• Over 60 years old - I Timothy 5:9.
• Never been divorced - I Timothy 5:9.
• Well reported of having done good works for others - I Timothy 5:10.
• Brought up her children - I Timothy 5:10.
• Lodged strangers - I Timothy 5:10.
• Washed feet, humbly served others - I Timothy 5:10.
• Relieved the afflicted - I Timothy 5:10.
• Followed every good work - I Timothy 5:10.

No one is saying to let these people starve and suffer. What I'm saying is that no one pushing for this "health care for everyone" and putting up a proverb quote should be asking the government to do a darn thing--they should be looking after people themselves. Have the doctors in their church put on free clinics. Have the nurses in the church help with baby checkups. Have some of the widows make meals. Pay to send guys to trade schools. Have contractors in the church hire poor people and teach them a job. Instead of giving away cash to buy food, give them a fishing pole. Create community gardens. Whatever.

Just don't give me this "you're not a good Christian unless you support the gov't going another 1T into debt to do things people should be doing themselves or getting help with from their family, friends or community"
 
Last edited:
why? That's not what we're called to do. In fact, it seems a lot like this post from a few years ago:

I was thinking of this statement in the bible

"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Matt. 19:24
 
I was thinking of this statement in the bible

"Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Matt. 19:24

Oh and I was referring to the fact that Romney donated 30% of his income to charity in 2011, not talking about taxes, etc.
 
There's only two things you need to enter the Kingdom of God:
1.
Romans 10:9 said:
If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord...”
and
2.
the rest of Romans 10:9 said:
believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

All of the Ten Commandments, Golden Rules, Sermon on the Mount Parables, etc. were to show you that unlike almost every other religion ever, you cannot get there on your own. In pre-Christian Judaism (which Christ is tossing upside-down in his ministry), being rich allowed you more to spend on temple sacrifices, more to tithe, etc. and therefore a "better chance" as they saw it to be pure and enter Heaven. Jesus said "nope...being rich won't help you."

As I'm reading the tax returns, it looks like (from a secular perspective) of the $14M or so Romney made last year, he gave about $2M to the gov't and $4M to charity. that seems to be about 43% of his income going away, which I'm sure is more than Obama's secretary, even if she somehow paid a ridiculous 20% in federal income tax, which I can't understand. I mean, I make a decent wage, and I don't come close to 20% federal income tax.
 
Oh and I was referring to the fact that Romney donated 30% of his income to charity in 2011, not talking about taxes, etc.

Fair enough. I was going off of the statement of "Shouldn't these religious people give ALL of their money away?" and asking "why?", because that's not what the Bible tells us to do.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top