the money you and I make to support ourselves is called income and is taxed up to 35 percent

[phantom power]

the money you and I make to support ourselves is called income and is taxed up to 35 percent, but the money Mitt makes raiding companies with borrowed money and extracting draconian management fees from captive companies that have no choice but to pay them is called "Carried Interest," and taxed at a top rate of 15%.

The ostensible excuse for this outrageous difference is based upon a built-in cultural value judgment, which says that the work Mitt Romney does raiding companies with borrowed money is more valuable than the work ordinary people do laying asphalt or teaching autistic children. Here's what one private equity spokesperson said by way of explanation for this difference:

Steve Judge, the president of the Private Equity Growth Capital Council, a trade group for private equity funds, said carried interest is a way to reward risk takers in a way that tax havens do not. "They don’t have the purpose of incentivizing risk taking," Judge said. "That makes it inappropriate to blend carried interest with them."

So the carried interest tax break is a way to "incentivize" the kind of work Mitt Romney does. One wonders then if the relatively higher tax rates paid by teachers and librarians and cops is ... what? A disincentive? Anyway, it's this skewed set of obligations that Mitt Romney thinks is "fair."

The Obama administration, if it wanted to, could make a lot of hay over this. It could say, “Mitt Romney doesn’t want to release his tax returns for years and years during the last decade. But the years for which he did release returns, he paid a rate that’s less than half of what most ordinary American professionals make – and he thinks that’s 'fair.'"

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/obama-not-reid-should-be-taking-on-mitt-romneys-tax-record-20120809#ixzz2349BejKI

[MineralMan]

1. Rich folks get elected and make the rules.

The rest of us pay.

[mike_c]

2. +1

[dodger501]

3. One of the biggest fallacies of taxing the rich

at the same rate as us is that you will scare them away, they won't risk their money.
Bullshit. What are they going to do then, go to work at the factory or the car wash?

[hifiguy]

4. +1 Back in the days of Ike and JFK

there was no incentive for executives to loot their corporations because they'd be taxed up the wazoo on it. So the money went back into the businesses for things like R&D.

[RC]

5. DING!, DING!, DING!

We have a winner! The very last thing that will be done is the very first thing that needs to be done.

[Egalitarian Thug]

14. Yes, but that was before the nation got stuck on stupid. n/t

[hifiguy]

15. Can't argue with that! nt

[Egalitarian Thug]

16. I'm sure it's a deficiency on my part, but 35+ years later I'm still stunned at how truly awful

we have become.

[Scuba]

17. What hifiguy said.

[woo me with science]

6. K&R

[Wilms]

7. These people are incentivesed to destroy companies.

Bad idea.

[AllyCat]

8. The more I read, the more pissed off I get.

These people have more loopholes, strategies, and advantages than every taxpayer in the world combined. Shame on them. Then send them to jail.

[Hydra]

10. The scary thing is that they are graduating to simply making their "play" legal

Why have obscure loopholes when you have the police and military on your payroll? All they have to do is say "If you have more than 100 million in assets, you are exempt from all laws."

Bet that's coming, too.

[Blue Owl]

9. You pay more, Mitt pays less.

You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less. You pay more, Mitt pays less.

Repeat as necessary!

[99Forever]

11. It ain't just Mittwitt, my friend.

In fact, he's kind of a piker compared with the real money assholes. Try it this way:


The 99% pays more, the 1% pays almost nothing.

[HiPointDem]

12. +1

[HeiressofBickworth]

18. Remember Leona Helmsley

who famously said only the little people pay taxes. I think that sums up the Republican viewpoint on the matter.