In the last reported year of 2010, the average annual wage in the US was $ 41,673.83. It took Mitt Romney only four hours to earn that amount, however. These figures and other MoneyMitTrivia are available on the new RomneyMakes.com site. One quite notable point made on the site is that, if Romney were elected this year, his tax proposals would get him and other millionaires a tax cut of over $87,000 each. Not only is that more than twice the average American income, but Romney's plan would increase income taxes by $500 for those making that average income. The site also has some downloadable banners for anyone to use, two of which I feature below.
At the recent Republican National Convention, congresswoman (and former presidential candidate) Michele Bachmann defended her former opponent against claims he was out-of-touch with the average American.
A USA Today reporter asked her, "(T)here are those who say, 'How can someone with that kind of vast wealth really connect with the American public, really understand what the plight of the American public is?'"
Bachmann's response? "Well, President Obama is extremely wealthy. He and his wife have been wealthy for a number of years, and so I think that's really the issue."
Go on - see it for yourself in the video below: So, Bachmann says, Mitt Romney is the preferred candidate because Obama has too much money?
Of course, we could just compare their tax returns side-by-side, now couldn't we? (You can use the "view in full screen" options, located in the bottom-right corner of each of the Scribd columns below.) | ROMNEY'S 2011 TAX FILING | OBAMA'S 2011 TAX FILING | This just in for Michele Bachmann: $20,808,805 is greater than $844,585. TWENTY FIVE TIMES greater, in fact. And it's FOUR HUNDRED AND NINETY NINE times more than the average American income of $41,673.83, too. Now, call me strange, but I can't help but notice that Romney got none of the $20.8 million from actual work. That's right - his multi-millions didn't come from any job. They came from interest on his other money. From stock dividends. And from rental properties, too. So who is it exactly, Bachmann, that's out of touch with the average American household? Mitt Romney, that's who. As for Bachmann herself? She's out of touch with reality.
(This originates from the facebook page of the Americans Against the Tea Party group, and is now being circulated by MoveOn.)
What's a respectable middle-class income in the U.S. nowadays? About $40,000 year.
How much did the CEO of GE get as bonus in the year of 2010 alone? 100 times as much. (from MoveOurMoneyUSA.org) Even worse is how much this General Electric company paid in taxes for that same year of 2010. The nation's largest corporation cleared $14.2 billion worldwide that year. Yes, that's cleared - profited - netted - still had left over after all expenses. And $5.1 billion of that profit was earned inside the United States alone. So how much did GE pay in U.S. taxes on that $5.1 billion in U.S. profit? Not one U.S. cent. That's right - nothing. Making it even more sarcastic, General Electric claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion for that same year. | | Some folks have responded to my recent posting on this same subject (the execs at 6 banks receiving $143 billion in bonuses in just one year, which is equivalent to roughly 3 million middle-class annual incomes) argumentatively. As if my intention was to say those banks should have used that money to hire people, even though (those objectors claim) there was no work for them to begin with. My complaint is actually that these institutions - and GE, too - give exorbitant money to just their executives, while the regular working class gets nothing. They pay nothing in taxes, either. And how can those companies expect us consumers to pay so much for their products and services (the money from which only goes to those handful of executives, apparently) while we get nothing in income ourselves? (And still pay our own taxes, too?) | What that widely-apparent disparity in income does to our country is lead it away from the status of democracy, upon which was it first founded, and reduce the United States to a plutocracy. Rule by the wealthy. Forget everybody else. And wasn't it escape from that same plutocratic oppression that was used as a founding principle of our country? But now we've got so many politicians (especially the freako Ron Paul) promoting that same concept. *** (read about one ongoing protest to the current corporate tax situation HERE)
The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center recently released report on the effects of Herman Cain's proposed "9-9-9" tax policy. In a nutshell, it would increase federal income taxes on 84 percent of all American households. Of course, and as you can expect from a Republican candidate, the 16 percent who wouldn't be affected, and who would actually get extreme tax breaks, are those who make the most money. Households earning less than $30,000 a year would lose 16 to 20 percent of their net income, according to the Tax Policy Center's research. Those making over $200,000, however, would get to keep from five to 20 percent more. To explain it easier, we made this nifty little chart detailing the projected changes in taxes owed by each income quintile group under Cain's "9-9-9" plan, and included the top one percent and top one-tenth of one percent in income, too. Changes in Tax Burdens of Herman Cain's 9-9-9 Tax Proposals, by Income Quintiles
Republicans continue to holler for lower taxes on corporations and wealthy citizens, and in both federal and state legislatures. The U.S. is an over-taxed nation, they claim. The percentage tax revenue plays on the U.S. gross domestic product is actually quite low, however. They're actually a rather small portion. Only two other developed nations (Mexico and Chile) have lower tax ratios. From EkonomiFakta:Almost all of the countries ranking higher than the U.S. also have lower rates of poverty, lower ( much lower) rates of unemployment, higher ranks in education, and hold higher ranks in both health and life expectancy. In other words, taxes collected by those nations keep them afloat, competitive, productive, healthy and sound. Another point in argument against these GOP claims and tax policy suggestions: the US is the only nation on the planet that taxes persons who live under its own definition of poverty. For an interesting take on these figures, see the writeup on PoliticusUSA.
|
RSS Feed
