WASHINGTON — Mitt Romney, during a private May fund-raiser captured on video, talked disparagingly about nearly half the electorate, saying they were “dependent on government” and could not be convinced to “take personal responsibility” for their lives.
In blunt terms clearly not intended for public consumption, Romney said that 47 percent of the country’s citizens see themselves as “victims’’ and will, without fail, vote for President Obama.
Comments
My 87 year old father in law, a WWII veteran and disabled, is one of these 47% leeches. Good to see Romney wants to get him off the dole. Ironically, the guy is pretty senile but would vote for Romney if he could leave the nursing home. I don't think he sees himself as a victim, however.
The Democrats evidently are waging biological warfare, they have infected Romney with FOOT IN THE MOUTH DISEASE
He just won my vote. The Democrats are supposed to be the party of science and truth, but they don't challenge the veracity of Romney's statements. Since FDR, Democrats have understood, the more people on the dole, the more votes and power for them. Once you get 50% of the people on the dole, you have a permanent majority.
I'm dismissing 50% of the major presidential candidates, the one who fails to acknowledge the millions and millions of senoir citizens and veterans who are a large part of the 47% of AMERICAN CITIZENS that he completely dismissed as irrelevant, because they do not currently pay income tax. Those living breathing people include my 84 year-old mother, and my 90 year-old father-in-law, disabled in by a German sniper in WWII. These people worked hard, fought our wars, paid excise, income, and social security taxes all their working lives, and still pay sales taxes and other taxes today. It's become clear Romney doesn't really care about 99% of Americans, though remarkably he still expects a majority to vote for him.
I was dumbfounded at Ann's RNC plea that "you may not like Mitt or agree with him or what he stands for, but you need to vote for him". Say what? Why would people vote for someone who despises them?
He's not wrong and you have to put this in perspective. Obama is trying to convince anyone who gets a check for whatever ason from the taxpayers, that they will lose it if Romney is elected. I've read that 47 pct don't pay taxes either.
Numeral, it won't matter to you, jonrobin2, migh et al, but at least pretend you deal with facts/reality when discussing this topic. As noted in the Economix blog in the New York Times, "The nonpartisan and highly respected Tax Policy Center derived the 47 percent number - it is actually 46 percent, as of 2011 - and published an excellent analysis of it last summer.
It found that about half of the households that do not pay federal income tax do not pay it because they are simply too poor. The Tax Policy Center gives as an example a couple with two children earning less than $26,400 a year: The household would pay no federal income tax because its standard deduction and other exemptions would simply erase its liability.
The other half, the Tax Policy Center found, consists of households taking advantage of tax credits and other provisions, mostly support for senior citizens and low-income working families.
Put bluntly, these are not households shirking their tax liabilities. The pool consists mostly of the poor, of relatively low-income working families and of old people. The tax code is specifically designed to reduce the burden on them. [ http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/the-reasons-behind-the-people-who-pay-no-income-tax/ ]
Senior citizens (my mother) and verterans (my father-in-law), don't pay taxes, but they built this country and fought our wars, and made America great. Romney's message is no different than the one he had at Bain for the employees at companies he gutted: Your work may have built this place, but I don't need you now, can make a bigger profit without you, so, you're fired. Being heartless, and lacking a shred of loyalty may be okay in business, but sorry, those are fatal shortcomings in a president.
Now I understand why Paul Ryan is still running for re-election in Wisconsin. If he had some guts, he would resign right now. Z.
Numeral- "He's not wrong." Are you kidding? He's wrong on the fact that none of those 47% would vote for him. Many of those folks are elderly and on SS. He despises them but they will vote for him. On a deeper level he is way wrong. As a disabled veteran I'm not a victim. I worked all my life. I get SS, Vet. Benefits and my retirement and earned them all. I also am heavily invested in stocks. A leech, a victim? I don't think so. Perhaps the few thousand millionaires who pay no taxes are leeches, but I'm not. However, beyond that anyone who can simply dismiss with disdain, who seemingly is unaware of the number veterans and elderly amongst that 47 percent does not deserve to be President. He shows himself to utterly and completely out of touch with vast swaths of American's. I never realized how much of a Dickens character Mitt truly is. "Are there no poor houses?" "Let them die and reduce the excess population." By the way I also pay taxes do what does that make me in Mitt's world, a sorta leech.
You are so full of baloney, Attaturk. You know he's not talking about the elderly and veterans. You should listen to some different news channels for a change. George Stephanopolis and the "quivering leg", Chris Matthews Alphabet media characters have misled you.
Pro fox-if Mitt is not talking about the poor and the elderly he should adjust those percentages.What he said is truly insulting to wide swaths of the electorate whom he needs in November .Many, many people who fall under his definition were planning on voting for him.Now, maybe not so much.
Of course people will vote for the candidate that will give them what they need to survive, after all, what would we americans do without our government, we couldn't function.
I know, "Let them eat cake." I think that theme was rejected some time ago. Without government we have chaos and those down on their luck will have little chance to get back in the game. Take a look at lousy governments around the world and judge for yourself what the purpose of government is. Thomas Paine called government "a necessary evil" because of our "wickedness." People on their own do not always do the right thing and squash rights and allow their fellow citizens to decay when with some help they can contribute to making the society better. If you look at the US, those states with the higher taxes and contribute more to the Feds than they get back, are most prosperous. Those who get more than a dollar back for every dollar sent to Washington are states with low taxes and serious poverty. Without aid from the wealthier states they would be sunk.
Not 'let them eat cake' this time but "if they have no money to eat, why don't they just sell stock like we did?"
While he clearly loves Military contractors he does not particularly like the folks who put on the uniform. Won't mention them at his convention and he does not like all of the government benefits they EARNED while in uniform...to him they are free-loaders on the dole!
This comment has been removed.
Welcome to Romney world. Individuals and families have paid in taxes so if they or someone in their family is down on their luck or never had the chance to save enough for a decent retirement they or their family would have a chance at a livable life. It is decidedly off base and the mark of a cloistered politician that he does not understand society's Social Contract and continues not to understand even after the manure hits the fan. However I thank Mitt Romney. He has forthrightly told what Republicans believe. Let people starve or live on the edge or depend on charity or hopefully they have a rich uncle to make it through. This is not what a society is for. Tom Paine remarked: "No one joins a society to be worse off."
"Didn't have the chance to save for retirement?" Most people work for 40 years, in 40 years, people didn't have a chance to save anything at all? Don't expect too many people to believe that.
Pats Girl-if you are 29, come back in 20 years and brag about how much you have saved.
I suggest we all dismiss 50% of the major presidential candidates, the one who apparently fails to understand that millions and millions of senoir citizens and veterans are among the AMERICAN CITIZENS he dismissed as irrelevant. These living breathing people worked hard, fought our wars, paid excise, income, and social security taxes all their working lives, still pay sales taxes and other taxes today, and deserve a President who doesn't just cast them to the curb like a 'redundant' Bain employee.
And???? So this is a big story why? He spoke the truth.
In context, a favorite liberal claim, he is correct. Also, if this had been a secret tape of Obama saying somehting similar the press would not be critiquing the comment but asking the Romney campaign if they planted the person and if they should repudiate the remarks and find out hwo taped it.
But it was not the president, it was Mitt, Mr. Entitled.
Missing the point Resterling
Oh, outrage, outrage! It is so sweet. Only in Taxachusetts would the chorus swell in vibrato with words to inflame. Mr. Obama and you believers love wallowing in self-pity. Well, get a life! The "rest of the story" is that the blind, iron clad votes Democrats count on are all immutably immersed in seas of self pity. Gathered within that 47% are those beloved teacher's unions in Chicago and all those career welfarers who live on food stamps, medicaid and social welfare programs. Don't forget those registered illegal alien voters lined up in that 47%. Woe is me to need to I.D. to prove who I am to vote - TRAVESTY! Facts are facts and the truth is no matter how bad or disastrous the last 4 years of Obama's reign has been, you believers will vote for him.
I don't think there is any real need for outrage. I suspect that writing off 47% of the population in a race where the percentage needed to win is between about 47% and 51% will not much improve Mitt's "likeability" rating. Or, perhaps of more significance, his chances of winning.
Do you have a cite for your claim about voter fraud and "illegal aliens"? Or...or...could you be spouting from the patoot? I suspect the latter.
So, I suppose my family is a member of the "you people" Mrs.Romney referred to. Many more working Americans have probably been "victimized" by Mr.Romney than their desire to pull themselves out of the putrid,self-loathing, 47% class of voters he has written off.
How arrogant. First, he did not inherit, his father was alive so he just gave him the money. It's their money and they can do what they want with it. But he just has to twist the truth. So it is OK for Mitt to use the tax code to avoid taxes, but not working people. All of you who think he wouldn't't touch SS etc., just wait if by some crazy accident he gets a chance. He has contempt for real work because he has never done it.
Stop the jealousy. At least give Romeny credit for working hard and being successful. Sorry that you are so miserable.
There's no jealousy in being outraged by Romney's exploitive behavior at Bain. There's no jealousy in criticizing someone who wormed his way into companies run poorly by his b-school buddies, paying them off with golden parachutes and then raiding the retirement and cash accounts. There's no jealousy in criticizing a man who would attend client meetings -- at client expense -- *only* if they provided a white limo to pick him up and drop him off. There's no jealousy in criticizing a man who has so little regard for truth that, when told that market reports to validate his Bain goal don't exist, he'd order his staff to make them up. This is not jealousy - it's outrage that someone who had so many advantages is so unprincipled that he stomps on ethics and exploits honest, hardworking people. George Romney is turning over in his grave.
And Romney is wrong where?? He's simply saying what so many of us are thinking. God forbid (oops, can I say that 3-letter word?), we strive to get people working and drop the welfare percentage. Politics is a business, and if there is one thing successful businesses do is keep alive their market. What would happen to the Democratic party if everyone prospered? Think about it.
I can relate. I too have been trying to explain how polls can be showing 47% of American voters still supporting Obama. Tempting to guess that they must all be on the government dole than just admit they're clueless. One can reach people who depend on the country staying fiscally healthy, but how does one reach the clueless?
You should be Romney's new campaign manager. You're hired! Get out there and call everyone stupid. That will work. You can even help him pack his bags to head back to Belmont.
This is why Willard Romney won't release his taxes.....he is one of those 47% and it would hurt his message.
GE did not pay any income taxes. I agree they, and other large corporations are "entitled leaches."
Obama's bailout of GM was one big butt-kiss to the unions, at our expense. He looks good and it costs me money. Oh, and protectionism of businesses unable to compete isn't a free-market economy; it is socialism.
This is simply another case of Mitt telling people who aren't in his world to get lost. TELL MITT TO GET LOST IN NOVEMBER BEFORE HE THROWS YOU UNDER THE BUS.
Maybe 47% of us pay no income taxes because we don't earn enough? Women and minorities together make up a 60% majority of the workforce, yet we're paid 20%-25% less than our white male peers. Equal pay for equal work would certainly generate more income tax revenue, but I don't hear Romney eager to make that happen. Have the rich actually done this to themselves?
Unlike Obama, Romney tells the truth. The truth hurts sometimes. Half of the country doesn't care about taxes because they do not pay any income taxes. It's time to stop blaming people who work hard and make it.
It seems like the so-called "tax-payers" are the miserable ones, and they're looking for someone else to blame for their own personal dissatisfaction with their lives. So, ergo, it must be those lazy slackers who are "stealing" your hard-earned money, huh? Except that a huge swath of that 47% is, as other commenters have stated, retirees, veterans, disabled, etc. Do you think they shouldn't be supported by other citizens? Or, since they didn't manage to predict their future misfortune, they should be discarded? No, it's not a surprise that "many people think these thoughts" or that Mitt R-Money does, because people are irrational and will believe what they want to believe, even if the facts prove otherwise. What's interesting is that Mitt dared to say it all out loud. Tsk-tsk, Mr. Candidate. You're showing that you're not ready for prime time.
It's not the truth. In fact it's a complete mis-representation of both the people involved and the tax code.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/the-reasons-behind-the-people-who-pay-no-income-tax/?hp
The nonpartisan and highly respected Tax Policy Center derived the 47 percent number – it is actually 46 percent, as of 2011 – and published an excellent analysis of it last summer.
It found that about half of the households that do not pay federal income tax do not pay it because they are simply too poor. The Tax Policy Center gives as an example a couple with two children earning less than $26,400 a year: The household would pay no federal income tax because its standard deduction and other exemptions would simply erase its liability.
The other half, the Tax Policy Center found, consists of households taking advantage of tax credits and other provisions, mostly support for senior citizens and low-income working families.
Put bluntly, these are not households shirking their tax liabilities. The pool consists mostly of the poor, of relatively low-income working families and of old people. The tax code is specifically designed to reduce the burden on them.
He who pays less in taxes than most middle-class Americans, because of dubious tax loopholes, castigates those who are poor, disabled or elderly? And he thinks Latinos have advantages over him? WOW! Here's an idea, Mitt: Get rid of the 47% moochers by outsourcing them to China.
"Us versus them" was useful when dealing with foreign threats, especially military threats, but to dismiss half of the people you want to govern as 'them' is cynical and Machiavellian.
A rare moment of candor for the Governor. Another reason why the American voter isn't going to elect a financier to be President. They never have and certainly will not so soon after his industry created the largest re-distribution of wealth out of the middle class.
Any politician who casually writes off 47% of the electorate should consider another line of work, because he's just explained why he can't an election.
Why don't you listen again to what Romney said (if you even did in the first place). He is not writing off any voters. He is just not making an effort to get their vote because he correctly believes that these people have already made up their minds. They believe in a "give me" government and will only vote for the Socialist Obama. He instead will concentrate on getting the votes of the undecided. You morons want to make an issue of anything Romney says. Why don't you instead make an issue of Obama's lack of accomplishments and non existent leadership ?
Retired, I suspect you're old enough to remember when real socialists roamed the Earth and people were polite and respectful of each other in print. Calling the current president a socialist and referring to people who politically disagree with you as "morons" tells us everything we need to know about what you've come to at this stage of your life.
Obama? I wouldn't back him if you paid me! Wait....on second thought.....
All I know is that the rich have got theirs, everyone is scrambling to say they support the middle class, but no one cares about us in the lower class. (A question to the savants: lower class sounds wrong, it's usually called the "lower classes", but, if there are multiple classes below the middle class, what are they named. Now the "middle class" is solidly only a single class, and the "upper class" is a label that is never used -- it would be a travesty, like calling a woman a "female"; Can someone straighten this out?
considerit said, "Women and minorities together make up a 60% majority of the workforce, yet we're paid 20%-25% less than our white male peers."
Women are the majority. Women own more than 50% of all the privately owned assets in the country. How did they do it? Divorce. And now women also make up more than 50% of college students, and more than 50% of those in law school and medical school.
There is another part to this story that would be nice to have. Take a wild guess that at least some of the folks at a $50K/plate fundraiser for Mitt have made $ on government contracts. Does that make them more leaches of the government than the folks who get enough money for beans and cigarettes each week? Who's really the group who are sucking the system dry? There also is a follow up report this morning of comments about the Palestinians, mid-east peace, and foreign policy coming out of this same event that add to the horror of Mitt's candor. This guy is a walking disaster. Whether you are red or blue leaning, this story is a sad statement on the electoral process for our country. A country can be stronger with two mature, intelligent, and thoughtful viewpoints which contribute to a strong balance. Mitt has proven himself to be a nightmare. The conservative viewpoint needs a viable candidate. Mitt is only a candidate for SNL skits.
Nothing he is stating is not true - and actually - we have seen an increase in those getting food stamps and on government aid. This is not a win for Obama. First, to have 47% of Americans not paying taxes is just unfair. I understand that some groups are too poor to pay anything, but is it really 47%? I don't think so. I wouldn't mind even a symbolic tax of $100 a year ($2 a week), just to contribute. Why? Because this group is taking advantage of all these social programs and not contributing. As usual, there is the assault on the wealthy. As we live in Mass and pay 5.3% income tax on top of federal, do you realize that the wealthy pay over 40% in income taxes already? This group gives almost half their money and we complain? Really? I would rather see loopholes closed before we raise taxes and there is a way to make this fair. I could not deduct my student loan interest once I got over $57K or something per year, why not do the same thing?
How did you get 47% pay no taxes from the statistic that 47% of taxpayers have incomes below the threshold for which income tax is owed? Look at your pay stub (or your husband's). There's Federal witholding, State witholding, FICA (payroll tax, which goes to Social Security), and FICAMED (which goes to Medicare). 47% of tax payers have net income (after deductions, such as for your mortgage interest, child tax credits, etc) that is low enough such that the receive back the income witholding, but they still will have paid state, FICA and FICAMED. Also, they will not get back the interest the federals earned on the witholding. You should check out your own 1040 forms. If you itemize your deductions, and got a refund equal to the amount of Federal Taxes witheld, they you yourself might be among those 47% you apparently despise. Lastly, the only people making money who aren't paying FICA or FICAMED are those whose income is derived from capital gains (like Romney). That would only apply to capital gains and interest income. Money he earned from speaking fees, however, are subject to FICA.
We live in the age of, Say Anything. #SayAnything2012
www.theroot.com/category/views-tags/sayanything2012-0
What's the problem ? Romney is just explaining what the liberals want : an entitlement state. Socialism. Is there really anyone left in this Country that doesn't know that? I can understand why the Democraps would be mad upset if it was a lie but it's the truth. Too bad they won't admit it, he's just telling it like it is.
Really. Seems that crowd contains the elderly, the disabled, the working poor, and others down on their luck. Most have paid into society and now need some help of their own. If not them then their families. A nursing home costs $10,000 a month. Want to take some personal responsibility for that or use contributions from everyone for people who spent a lifetime contributing to this country.
Really OETKB ? I have my own family to support. I don't want to support yours, that's your job not mine or the government's. Trade in your Mercedes for a Chevy and use the money you save to buy your family dinner.
All these nasty condemnations are so full of baloney! Stop listening to George Stephanopolis and that "quivering leg" Chris Mattews amd tje alphabet media. You all know he did not write off any group of underclass voters. His entire statement will never hit print or TV or radio. The independents will decide this election. No words, no reasoning, no reality of the last 4 years of national disaster under the Obama fund raising period will change a "believer's" vote. How about talking about that 3 day celebration of Killing Osama Bin Laden at the DNC convention causing worldwide riots. That, "foks" really was inciteful! And, How about all you "folks' who are going to be paying that 3.8% real estate tax for Obamacare when you sell your homes. Are you going to celebrate that? I'm sure all those 22% unemployed people are going to vote for the "Bama"
!
Better check again. He very clearly wrote off the 47% of people who don't pay income tax. He ignored the other taxes they paid and that many of them are working poor.
Those who don't pay taxes do not care about paying 3.8% tax when they sell their house because they DO NOT own a house. They lost it in the recession thanks to Dodd-Frank. No money down or interest only mortgages. They NEVER should have been given a mortgage in the first place. The only fools here are those that pay taxes and just want the government to leave us alone.
Why do people assume that liberals are lazy Are "pseudoconservatives" so intellectually lazy they believe the propaganda without examination. I worked forty years, paid 12% of my salary to retirement, and built a 401k. I don't get SS or medicaire. And I am a proud liberal. But I am not foolish enough to not know that along with hard work, I was lucky. Why can't someone as lucky as Mitt not see that.
The truth hurts. I'll bet 90% of those 47% vote for Democrats, not only for president, but for all political offices. The other pillars of the Democratic constituency are public sector unions and the super-rich Hollywood types.
I'll take that bet since you're completely wrong. "Out of the 10 states with the highest percentage of filers with no liability, all but one — Florida — are reliable Republican stalwarts.
This map, however, only measures Americans who file tax returns without liability. Millions of others have some income, but not enough to file a return. Those people, combined with the 52 million who make up this map, comprise the 47 percent.
Of course, just because people don't pay income taxes doesn't mean they don't pay any taxes at all. Here's another breakdown of the 47 percent, which shows how nearly two-thirds of that 47 percent pay payroll taxes. Most of the last third are comprised of the elderly (who also tend to vote reliably Republican) and people who make less than $20,000 (big Obama supporters)."
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romney-47-percent-no-income-tax-map-red-republican-states-2012-9#ixzz26pxwZFRf
OK. I've listened to the tape. In its entirety. What's the big deal? Why are Romney's comments inaccurate? And why is he apologizing? This sort of political rhetoric - spoken by a candidate and grounded in facts that he cites - could only be considered shocking in that alternate left-wing universe inhabited by people who surround themselves by others who think as they, and who are lead around by the nose by opinions such as those ventilated on the pages of Mother Jones. Given the incontrovertible truth that approximately 47% of Americans don't pay any income taxes, the larger point is the need for a simpler, fairer, and less complex tax code that broadens the tax base.
It's not an "incontrovertible truth" -- your solution is based on wishful thinking.
There are two primary ways to pay no (or negative) federal income taxes. The first is to be poor, and the second is to be elderly. In 2011, of the 18.1 percent of American households who paid no federal tax (meaning, no federal income or payroll tax), more than half were elderly, and most of the other half were non-elderly people making below $20,000 a year. The other sliver, roughly one in 20 non-payers, were people who made more than $20,000 in household income.
The reason being poor helps is because, with a combination of tax credits (like the earned income credit and the child credit) and deductions, many people earning under $20,000 a year can zero out their overall rate. The primary reason being elderly helps is that Social Security benefits aren't taxed as income, so if all (or most) of your income comes from your monthly Social Security check, your taxable income is marginal or non-existent.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romneys-47-who-are-dependent-on-the-government-2012-9#ixzz26pz179KB
esfsdfsdf seems to have forgotten about the illegals working under that table that enjoy my over-priced healthcare
Mitt said it quite clearly afterwards, Im not saying sorry for this but I could have said it better. Every one knows what he saying, Its the millions in this coutry who are able bodied, have kids and dont take care of themselves or their children. They rely on everyone else to do it. Before we raise taxes on anyone we should be looking at the ten million free loaders in this country not working and actually taking money from us rather than taking more from people working and doing what they are supposed to do. And again, its not 47%. And the safety net is good but needs to weeded out by millions. Then look at raising taxes on everyone if need be.
80% of the forty seven percent mentioned by Romney are either working or retired.Romney is so far off that the only thing you can say its he just doesn't care what he says.Its all about the money, and it always will be for Mitt.
@Giermund: according to NBC it's 87%. 95% when you add in veterans and folks on SSI.
Perhaps someone could explain to me how those states with the highest rates of households paying no income tax are also those states that most reliably vote Republican? http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/UserFiles/Image/Fiscal%20Facts/20100524-229-nonpayers-map-.jpg It is hard to imagine Mitt's quote as anything but an unintentional attempt at electoral suicide.
Mass is 49? Looks like games with statistics that liberals love to play with. The South most like does have more working poor, who do deserve tax breaks. The fact that mass is 49 ruins your whole arguement with this link. Im guess well fare recipients are not counted so the numbers are skewed---your thoughts?
The map is from the Tax Foundation -- look them up. They're a non-partisan think tank which has been around since 1937. That said, how does Mass ranking near the bottom for people who pay no taxes invalidate anyone's argument except Romney's?
Does everyone remember the woman who gleefully exclaimed "now I dont have to worry about putting gas in my car, now I don't have to worry about paying my mortgage"? This is the mindset of a lot of people. Romney was not far off the mark with his comments.
I've no idea what you're talking about. Did you even read the article? That's not at all what Romney is saying. Watch the video if you don't believe me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnB0NZzl5HA
This comment has been removed.
this is a test
Even if you feel this way, only a dope would say it out loud, regardless of how friendly a forum. I find it unsettling that a presidential candidate is happy to say one thing in front of a group of extremely wealthy patrons, but realize it is a disaster in front of the majority. Who is this guy going to worry about if elected. But elected he will not be.
This comment has been removed.
It's true - is it not! What is truly amazing is the gaffes made by Obama which the press refuses to acknowledge - the avoidance of printing the many, many missed opportunities and the pathetic 4 years wasted with Obama in the oval office. Howabout Obama's failure to follow through on his campaign promises - NADA - NADA - NADA. The press REFUSES to print anything negative about Obama - I am with Clint Eastwood when he calls Obama the ‘greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people. This was only made possible with the American press!
Wow. Your use of bold has convinced me. Obama is a hoax and Romney's comments don't matter. What was I thinking? The facts lie!
Romney was never a Reagan fan. Guess this latest gaffe is the proof: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/17/the-real-problem-with-romneys-47-percent-gaffe/ There are two reasons the percentage of Americans who don’t write checks to the IRS has spiked in recent years: the bad economy, which Romney pledges to ameliorate, and Republican tax cuts, which Romney plans to continue. When Ronald Reagan signed into law the Tax Reform Act of 1986, he boasted, “Millions of the working poor will be dropped from the tax rolls altogether, and families will get a long-overdue break with lower rates and an almost doubled personal exemption.” Both the initial Reagan tax cuts of 1981 and indexing income taxes to inflation in 1985 had a similar effect. In the 1990s, the Republican-controlled Gingrich Congress passed a $500 per child tax credit that also wiped out the income tax liability of many low- to moderate-income households. “Fully 93 percent of the tax relief in our bill goes to taxpayers with annual incomes under $100,000, 76 percent goes to taxpayers with incomes under $75,000,” then-House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Archer, a Texas Republican, said at the time. “If ever there was a tax plan for America’s forgotten middle class, this is it.” George W. Bush expanded the child tax credit as president and also signed into law tax cuts that reduced the bottom marginal income tax rate from 15 percent to 10 percent. Both moves increased the percentage of people not paying income tax. Far from enabling the growth of government, tax relief for the working poor and middle class has made it possible to enact across-the-board tax cuts that apply even to upper-income earners. Ignoring the rising payroll tax burden of the last few decades while dismissing many of those who have borne it as deadbeats could well have the opposite effect. There is little evidence that the people who have stopped paying income tax as a result of Republicans’ policies have moved leftward politically. Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/17/the-real-problem-with-romneys-47-percent-gaffe/#ixzz26qFpCsmF
I wasn't aware of this, but troops in combat zones don't pay federal income taxes either. Does Romney think their freeloading losers?
Yes, thats what Romney wants. Another great point. Romneys number was wrong but the idea that able bodied people should take care of themselves what correct.
Reagan's plan to destroy America has finally come to fruition! Helping able bodied people take care of themselves was the entire point of the cuts you're complaining about. Great campaign slogan though: TAX THE POOR - THEY'RE LAZY.
It would be nice if the presidents stupid points, attacks on the wealthy and nonsense about people paying there "fair share" got as much attention as Romneys screw ups. That said, Romney and Ryan should fire their campaign manager and think before they speak as well. Terribly run campaign. Ryans talk about not cutting the defense budget makes me sick. The complete lack of honesty in politics is really disheartening sometimes.
The fact that you are bringing them up suggests to me that there is no lack of coverage of the President's foot-in-mouth moments at all. Or is it that you want them covered by specific networks or newspapers?
JL just similar treatment across the board by the press. Shouldnt be up to biased fox to point out some of the glaring omissions by the network news channels.
Hey, hold on. I am one of the 47% who are not paying income taxes, and the same is true for lots of my friends and neighbors. Sure, lots of them are sick, or old, and really need a helping hand, but not me. Many more of us are simply looking for FREE STUFF. Free food, free housing, free education, free daycare, free medical, free unemployment, free tax credits, it's great! And who cares? We're just taking from the government. Everyone does it. The taxpayers are stupid to keep paying into this racket, when all of this FREE STUFF is available to so many of us. Who needs a #$%@*& job? I'm talking this up because if we can get just another 4% of voters to think like us, then we'll be at 51% and we can simply vote for more FREE STUFF and only for candidates who promise us FREE STUFF. Free lunch, free booze, free porn, all that cool stuff. WE WANT OUR FREE STUFF
Damn old people. In my day, we'd just put them out on ice flows.
I know that old people and lots of others need our support......but not me, I'm not needy, just greedy. I WANT MY FREE STUFF.
This comment has been removed.
Governor Romney, who was born on 3rd base and is extremely pleased with his home run, was speaking to other incredibly wealthy people who have no comprehension of or interest in those Americans who can't borrow their start up capital from their parents. I'm glad that he's sticking by his "inelegantly" expressed words. I think that he's really expressing who he is and what he believes, in this instance anyway. Savor it!
An issue that is worse than the moochers, is President Obama who encourages govt. dependency: e.g. mortgage bailouts for people who bought houses way beyond their income capacity; second morgages to buy Mercedes & Cadillac SUVs, and the list goes on and on.
How many other people have the same opinion as Obama's Kenyan aunt, illegal immigrant, Zeituni Polly Onyango found living in South Boston public housing (defying her deportation order)! She claimed she was collecting govt. hand-outs because Americans were "stupid" to pay her.