Romney's Message Is Changing/Romney Secret Tape (merged)

[emmiedahl]

I have seen in several places that Republicans tend to have lower earnings and education than Democrats, especially in Caucasians. I think it is a party of vastly wealthy men and then the people at the bottom who buy the idea that giving the wealthy an even bigger share of the pie will somehow benefit them.

I want an itemized list of those who receive assistance. Is he counting college kids on students loans amongst that percentage?

What Romney said: "Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax."

Romney's about on target — 46 percent of U.S. households paid no federal income tax last year, according to a study by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. Most do pay other federal taxes, including Medicare and Social Security withholding. And they're not all poor. Some middle-income and wealthy families escape income tax because of deductions, credits and investment tax preferences.

Why they don't pay:

—About half don't earn enough money for a household of their size to owe income tax. For example, a family of four earning less than $26,400 would owe no taxes using the standard exemptions and deductions.

—About 22 percent get tax breaks for senior citizens that offset their income. (Elderly)

—About 15 percent get tax breaks for the working poor or low-income parents. (Working class parents)

—Almost 3 percent get tax breaks for college tuition or other education expenses. (College students)

Who they are:

—The vast majority have below-average earnings: Among all who don't owe, 9 out of 10 make $50,000 or less.

—But some of the wealthy escape taxes, including about 4,000 households earning more than $1 million a year.

Compare that to the average Obama voter and, well, there is some overlap but not a lot. Mitt lied, once again.

—Most are employed: Sixty-two percent of the Obama voters work, including the 10 percent working only part time. A fourth are retired. Five percent say they're temporarily unemployed.

—Most earn higher-than-average wages. Fifty-six percent have household incomes above the U.S. median of $50,000. Just 16 percent have incomes below $30,000, and about the same share (20 percent) have incomes of $100,000 or more.

—They're all ages but skew younger than Romney's voters: Twenty percent are senior citizens and 12 percent are under age 30.

—They're more educated than the overall population: Forty-three percent boast four-year college degrees or above; 21 percent topped out with a high school diploma.

http://news.yahoo.com/mitt-romneys-47-p ... ction.html

[mpheels]

I want an itemized list of those who receive assistance. Is he counting college kids on students loans amongst that percentage?

I looked it up last night, and of course I can't find the page again. I did have to go through several layers of blogs and link to finally find the primary Census Bureau data table. As far as I can tell, the 49% includes Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security Retirement, Social Security Disability, Supplemental Security (for people w/ disabilities who do not qualify for SSDI), Railroad and other federal retirement benefits, unemployment insurance, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (welfare), and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance (food stamps). There was also a miscellaneous "other" group, but it was way too small to include things like student loans, or even free/reduced school lunch.

[Linnea]

I looked it up last night, and of course I can't find the page again. I did have to go through several layers of blogs and link to finally find the primary Census Bureau data table. As far as I can tell, the 49% includes Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security Retirement, Social Security Disability, Supplemental Security (for people w/ disabilities who do not qualify for SSDI), Railroad and other federal retirement benefits, unemployment insurance, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (welfare), and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance (food stamps). There was also a miscellaneous "other" group, but it was way too small to include things like student loans, or even free/reduced school lunch.

So, for instance, if Mittens himself outsourced your job to China, he then counts you as someone who doesn't take responsibility for your own life. Lovely.

[Swamptribe]

Watching a documentary: Wal-Mart The High Cost Of Low Price. They just did a segment on factory workers in China, who live in dorms, and are charged for the privileged even if they don't want to live in the dorms. How they are coached to lie when the inspectors come over. they work 7 days a week, and make less than 3 dollars a day.

They are showing the conditions of workers in Bangladesh now. Not any better. Hell, the guy sent over to inspect the factor is talking about how the conditions made him break down in tears.

Yet, Romney is telling his supporters what a wonderful place his factory is for the workers. How they just love to be there.

[mpheels]

Via Gawker, a political blog called Squashed did the math to figure out how many hours of work at minimum wage it takes to support a family of four and pay income tax. Assuming paid holidays, vacation, and sick leave it would take 24 wage earning hours per day to make enough for a family to "overcome" the existing basic deductions and credits. They worked on the premise that only one parent was working and the family takes the bare minimum of credits/deductions. With two adults working, there would be more credits (child care), so each adults would need to work 12+ hours a day. Damn lazy leaches, wanting time to actually sleep, eat, and spend time with their families!

[emmiedahl]

That is the thing--with all the talk about entitlement and laziness, the average working poor family is working damn hard. So there are two ways to deal with this: you can take a supportive approach which includes making sure they have necessities and access to improving their lot (the liberal way) or you can blame them, judge them and let them continue to flounder (the conservative way).

Working 12 hours a day qualifies as personal responsibility to me, and I suggest Romney give a try sometime.

[formergothardite]

I'm just amazed at how many people I know who are on government support yet don't think Mitt was talking about them when he made that statement. My cousin who is on WIC, food stamps and Medicaid. Yes, he was talking about you. But she won't see that. I think people are just so set it the idea that they must vote republican that they won't pause to look at what he is really saying.

[mpheels]

I'm just amazed at how many people I know who are on government support yet don't think Mitt was talking about them when he made that statement. My cousin who is on WIC, food stamps and Medicaid. Yes, he was talking about you. But she won't see that. I think people are just so set it the idea that they must vote republican that they won't pause to look at what he is really saying.

I have a similar cousin. She is on SNAP, uses the free lunch program for her kids, and I'm pretty sure her kids are enrolled in CHIP (they are too old to qualify for medicaid at her income, but would qualify if they were younger). She just went back to school to get a nursing degree, and is using Pell grants to pay for it. Her grandmother (my great aunt) is very ill, and will not live through the end of the year. I'm geographically the closest relative, and will likely be driving 1+ hours out of my way to give cousin a ride to the funeral when it happens b/c she doesn't have a car (wrecked it last year, 10th car she has totaled in 15 years, I'm happy to give her a ride if it keeps her off the road). Despite all this, she posts crap on Facebook about Welfare Queens and being a proud Republican. Maybe we should make a mockumentary a la "Day Without a Mexican" except "Day Without a Handout."

[Kira]

Romney is releasing his full 2011 tax return at 3pm EST. According to some reports he's admitted to amending his taxes because it wouldn't look good running for office. So insted of 9% it's 14%. President Obama paid 20%.

[lilwriter85]

I have a similar cousin. She is on SNAP, uses the free lunch program for her kids, and I'm pretty sure her kids are enrolled in CHIP (they are too old to qualify for medicaid at her income, but would qualify if they were younger). She just went back to school to get a nursing degree, and is using Pell grants to pay for it. Her grandmother (my great aunt) is very ill, and will not live through the end of the year. I'm geographically the closest relative, and will likely be driving 1+ hours out of my way to give cousin a ride to the funeral when it happens b/c she doesn't have a car (wrecked it last year, 10th car she has totaled in 15 years, I'm happy to give her a ride if it keeps her off the road). Despite all this, she posts crap on Facebook about Welfare Queens and being a proud Republican. Maybe we should make a mockumentary a la "Day Without a Mexican" except "Day Without a Handout."

I think a mockumentary like that will made someday and a Michael Moore type filmmaker will be behind it. I mentioned having relatives in the 47% that support in Romney in previous posts. This thread makes me wonder about a former neighbor of mine. This neighbor had severe bipolar and he started collecting social security disability when he was 19 and he also received food stamps. This guy never had a job prior to collecting SS. His mom was renting one of the duplex units next to us. The guy used to see my boyfriend jogging on the street and he would chat with him. He used to get on my boyfriend's nerves because he would talk about being a Republican and he would also bash women on welfare all the time. My boyfriend is very sympathetic towards people with mental illnesses or disabilities and he understand that some people with disabilities or illnesses will never be able to work. The neighbor used to tell my bf about doing small odd jobs for cash. We did wonder about that guy's mental state and if he is truly unable to work. That guy moved in with his dad sometime in late 2010 and we would see him here and there last year hanging out at his mom. The mom moved away in April or May of this year. I wouldn't be surprised if that guy is a Romney supporter and he probably thinks he isn't one of the 47%

[Jezebel Duggar]

I think him and his whole family should be forced to work in the sweat shop he owned. He seemed to think paying people nothing was such a great idea, so lets take away all of his money and see if he can pull himself out of poverty on the amount he paid the "girls" he employed in China.

It was frightening to hear him talk about that Chinese sweatshop, knowing he has a chance to be president. It seemed to me that he would love to have the 47% working in sweatshops right here in America.

18 hours a day, sleeping there, 12 to a room, on bunkbeds three high, while he was just raking in the cash. Didn't bother him a bit.

[formergothardite]

It was frightening to hear him talk about that Chinese sweatshop, knowing he has a chance to be president. It seemed to me that he would love to have the 47% working in sweatshops right here in America.

18 hours a day, sleeping there, 12 to a room, on bunkbeds three high, while he was just raking in the cash. Didn't bother him a bit.

It was chilling to hear someone who could end up leading our country care so little about people. He is pro-life as in he wants the babies born, but after that he doesn't care. He really just doesn't care.

[Witsec7]

It was chilling to hear someone who could end up leading our country care so little about people. He is pro-life as in he wants the babies born, but after that he doesn't care. He really just doesn't care.

In the tape he expressed how he could cut more federal jobs and departments and he wanted to cut more but he would be facing union opposition.

[Sprocket]

You want a break? Why should we give you a break? You are perfectly capable of pulling yourself up on your own. You don't NEED a break. If we gave you a break you would not gain anything from this valuable learning experience. If we gave you a break you would not appreciate that break because you haven't earned that break all by yourself. If we gave you a break we'd have to give everybody a break and where would that end?

Now, back to business; Trickle down economics. It doesn't work and has been proven not to work. So why do you want it when it will only make the economy worse? I'll keep asking Jericho, because you know, you seem to have all the answers.

Bwahahahahahaha! :lol: Did all of the Republicans get the memo that everyone needed to give them a break when it got a little too hot in the kitchen, so to speak? Maybe that memo went around like the "gay agenda" and the "feminist agenda". It was probably sent out as the "WAAAHHH! agenda". Ann Romney needs to go far far away from my television. We need to lay off of Mittens? Hardly. Does she think that all her headship had to do was show up and all of America would gasp in relief that the big business man (*cough* white man *cough*) had rode in on his equally white horse and saved us from the ebil Obama? She better hope that Mitt doesn't win the White House because his criticism would be x1,000 if hell freezes over and he pulls off a victory.

p.s. Did anyone catch that Ann Romney told a group of latino voters that they need to get over their biases and vote for Willard?

p.p.s. Who's watching the Jon Stewart/Bill O'Reilly debate? I'm betting on Mr. O'Reilly having his ass handed to him on a very witty and humerous platter.

[Anxious Girl]

* butting in just to say * Bill 'O Reily wouldn't know good humor if it kissed him in the ass.

[Sprocket]

* butting in just to say * Bill 'O Reily wouldn't know good humor if it kissed him in the ass.

I love the youtube clips of Jon Stewart on his show. He makes Bill look like a (bigger) ass on his own turf.

[Witsec7]

I had been search for these comments earlier in reference to Romney's anti-union comments.

"And my recommendation would be clean house, immediately. The SEC, the CFTC are disaster areas," an attendee tells Romney in the video.

"I wish they weren't unionized," Romney responded, "so we could go a lot deeper than you're actually allowed to go."

[emmiedahl]

I had been search for these comments earlier in reference to Romney's anti-union comments.

I just want to point this out because I think, in my addled-post-exam brain that he is implying you cannot effect change when a union is present. You CAN fire union employees for incompetence. You CAN. A relative of mine is a school administrator and has fired a teacher this year. There is a process, you need to follow the process and document the lack of competence, offer re-training, and then if they don't respond then the union is fine with you firing them. You cannot just fire anyone for any reason but you can fire them for a good reason. You can "clean house".

Sometimes the person in charge sucks and cannot be bothered to go through a pretty simple process, and if so that is on their lazy asses. I get tired of hearing how the teacher's union means bad teachers never get fired--No, administrators who decide it is not worth a few hours' time are the reason. And lots of bad teachers get fired.

[Stickers]

:lol:

[SayNoToMullets]

Ha! So Mittens - if life begins at conception, how old does a fetus have to be to take personal responsibility?

[lilwriter85]

Some of Romney's fellow Mormons are apart of the 47%, I wonder if he will comment on that.

[jericho]

Nope. Romney was lying as usual. Several state governors (conservative ones, I might add) are removing the requirement in their own states. Obama is not a state governor and not responsible for it.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/politics/ ... index.html

http://washingtonexaminer.com/report-able-bodied-adults-on-food-stamps-doubled-after-work-requirement-suspended/article/2508430#.UF3UAI1lR9v

Whether the states asked for it or not, Obama granted the slashing of the work requirement in the welfare reform bill. And now we are seeing the results.

Obama administration officials have insisted that their decision to grant states waivers to redefine work requirements for welfare recipients would not “gut†the landmark 1996 welfare reform law.

[jenny_islander]

You know what the work requirement does?

WELFARE RECIPIENT: Welp, as the head of a family of four, I see about $10,800 per year in benefits if you include every program we qualify for. So we're not starving, but $10,800 doesn't do much to get us out of this rut. I'm looking for jobs, looking for jobs, looking for jobs . . . no jobs.

WORK REQUIREMENT: Then you can't have the $10,800.

WELFARE RECIPIENT: Can't find a job, dude.

WORK REQUIREMENT: Take that one.

WELFARE RECIPIENT: Transportation and child care costs will eat so much of my paycheck that I will end up taking home less money than I do right now.

WORK REQUIREMENT: Not my problem. You should've arranged to grow up in an area with better employment. Oh, hey, there's a job over there!

WELFARE RECIPIENT: That one requires moving. With what money?

WORK REQUIREMENT: Not my problem. You should've planned to be somebody else's zygote. Look, there's another job opportunity right in your neighborhood!

WELFARE RECIPIENT: I applied and they said I was underqualified/overqualified.

WORK REQUIREMENT: Not my problem. You should've been able to predict 20 years ago that you would need this exact job and gone for that important degree/not wasted the money on that useless degree. You made bad decisions and now you're paying for it.

WELFARE RECIPIENT: Something is bound to turn up. Something that won't screw me even worse than I'm already screwed. Something that I'll at least get to the first round of interviews for. I'll keep trying.

WORK REQUIREMENT: Bzzt! Too late. You are going to drop off the welfare rolls and the job interview rolls and become effectively invisible. Now you're really not my problem.

[desertvixen]

jenny_islander, sad but true.

[Witsec7]

I just want to point this out because I think, in my addled-post-exam brain that he is implying you cannot effect change when a union is present. You CAN fire union employees for incompetence. You CAN. A relative of mine is a school administrator and has fired a teacher this year. There is a process, you need to follow the process and document the lack of competence, offer re-training, and then if they don't respond then the union is fine with you firing them. You cannot just fire anyone for any reason but you can fire them for a good reason. You can "clean house".

Sometimes the person in charge sucks and cannot be bothered to go through a pretty simple process, and if so that is on their lazy asses. I get tired of hearing how the teacher's union means bad teachers never get fired--No, administrators who decide it is not worth a few hours' time are the reason. And lots of bad teachers get fired.

In all my years of being a shop steward and a Union officer, every time an incompetent employe wasn't fired was due to the fact that mgmt. couldn't/wouldn't follow the contract, just cause or the standards established for progressive discipline. And my job was never to represent management. My job was to represent the worker, and give them the best representation I could, regardless of whether I thought they were a shitty worker, and regardless of how much the boss fucked up during the discipline process.