Mitt Romney: ‘I’m not concerned about the very poor’

Things can change fast. At this point, Santorum is the only Republican beating BO in latest Rasmussen poll as someone else pointed out:
(I'm sure that will change too) I think MR is going to self destruct before GE

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_santorum_vs_obama-2912.html

 

In 2006 your poverty rate was 11.1% yours having risen from 2004
In the US it was 12.5% having fallen from 2004-5

Perhaps you should refrain from your disparaging statements until you know what you are talking about.

Why is it Austrialian's are so jealous of the United States? Does it go back to having to be saved by us in WW2?

 

Best way to deal with trolls like bluesguy is IGNORE him/her. The entire planet knows U.S. is greatest country on this earth and many who don't remember why they have the freedoms they now have or weren't taught it in school just have resentment/jealousy.

 

Originally Posted by Bluesguy View Post
In 2006 your poverty rate was 11.1% yours having risen from 2004
In the US it was 12.5% having fallen from 2004-5

Perhaps you should refrain from your disparaging statements until you know what you are talking about.

Why is it Austrialian's are so jealous of the United States? Does it go back to having to be saved by us in WW2?

Go look up what trolling is and then come back and see if you can refute the facts I posted and can add anything of substance to the thread.

 

This forum is about elections and candidates. NOT Your country vs. Our country. So posting that krap here is Trolling.

 

I was responding to this

So before you engage in you specious accusations know what you are talking about.

 

It is heartbreaking to see the ard life the "poor" in America live

 

At least this is one point he cannot be accused of being a flip-flopper on.


And a reply to the poster above with the "Ammenities in Poor Households" chart:
You do realise that one month of rent often costs more than that whole list of consumer electronics combined? (not including the car of course)
And many "households" are hispanic families that are really quite large and overcrowded. When the household contains five or six adult members who collectively own two old cars, they are still poor. Many poor people rely on cars that have severe engine problems, and when the car finally breaks down, some cannot afford to have it fixed.

 

Seems to me he should not be worried. The "poor" in America have it pretty good when you look at the facts

But libs never seem to want to do that.

 

if the poor have it "pretty good" in America, the rich have it better than ever to an obscene degree. If one extrapolates the curves that describe the growing disparity between rich and poor in America, within a few more decades, the rich will own (*)(*)(*)(*)ed near everything and the rest of us will own (*)(*)(*)(*)ed near nothing. When less than five hundred American families own more than what is collectively owned by half the population - AND those rich families pay an effective tax rate that is less than that paid by those lower 50%, it seems clear to most level headed folks that some adjustments need to be made.

 

But when you get section 8 housing it doesn't cost you.

They surveys show that our poor have more sq/ft per person than the middle class families of Europe.

They used to be able to buy better cars until Obama's cash for clunkers scheme but the fact remains that per household they own 2 cars and they are mostly late model. And in fact if you drive through the poor neighborhoods you find that our poor have enough disposable income to be able to rent fancy wheels to on them. You know one of the necessary family expenses.

 

nd what is worng with people building personal wealth via hard work, investing,m and taking risk?

The "rich" pay the huge majority of federal income taxes collected (the top 1% pay over 40% while eanring about 21% of the income)

As I has shown using IRS data, you could tax the "rich" at 100% and not pay one year of Obama's deficits

 

as I said... if one extrapolates the curves of income disparity, in less than 20 years, the rich will own almost everything, and everyone else will own almost nothing. If you have ever worked as a waitress or a waiter or a gardener, or a dishwasher, you know that the poorest work the hardest and the richest work the least....many of whom are rich only because their parent's were rich... many of the wealthiest of Americans have done NOTHING to earn their obscene wealth, which you slavishly protect, while the vast majority of the working poor, work very very hard and see nothing for their efforts except the fear of being one heart attack or one stroke or one hip replacement away from being absolutely destitute. I hope that America can heal itself from the divisive politics that have made such inequity acceptable.

 

Your premise is flawed, there is not a limited amount of stuff to own. The rich get rich by creating wealth and putting that wealth to work. Something low earners never seem to grasp so they instead believe they are owed part of what the rich have.

 

so the data that shows that the rich own significantly more of America than they did 30 years ago is somehow flawed? And if it is not, are you saying that there is some limit to the increasing disparity, and if so, what is it?

 

So it is clear you suffer form wealth envy as well

Most people do earn their wealth from hard work, long hours, taking risk, and investing in companies that help grow the economy

It has always amazed me the arrogance of libs who say people either did not "earn" their wealth or do not deserve to keep it when most of the libs in DC fit their very description of the people that want to punish for being successful

At what point does the wealth become "obscene" When is someone paying their "fair share" io taxes? 50% of their income? 60%?

Now it is divisive when people oppose the lefts obsession with destroying the people who currently pay the majority in taxes? The same taxes that fund those "anti poverty" programs that libs hold so dear

Instead of trying to punish the rich, or continuing to show your hate for them - you should be thanking them for the trillions of dollars they have handed over to the government (only to watch that money be flushed down a very costly toilet in the name of liberal compassion)

 

It would seem that you would have us believe that "libs" only want to "punish" those rich Americans who do not share their political beliefs. There are MANY rich liberals (and moderates and independents) who understand that the Bush tax cuts - along with the idiotic and counterproductive unfunded Iraq war - were the primary reasons for the economic mess we have found ourselves in. The fact remains, many many Americans GOT rich during the Clinton years and with the tax rates that were in place at that time. Many AMericans got rich - and the middle class grew and prospered - during the Eisenhower years when tax rates were MUCH higher than they are now. I would guess that, not only is Warren Buffett RICHER than YOU are, but he is a lot more intelligent, and experienced concerning the effects of marginal tax rates on wealthy Americans AND on the economy. I think I'll value HIS opinion on this issue a lot more than I will value YOURS.

 

No it is generally just anyone who has been successful and has a lot of money.

And neither of the two you mentioned had anything to do with it.

The fact remains that Clinton's tax increase cost us revenue by slowing down the recovery that had started two years earlier, it was when he was forced to sign the Gingrich/Kasich tax cuts that the economy boomed and revenues increased so that along with the spending restraint he opposed we had brief surpluses.

With lots more deductions so that the effective rates were actually lower and the highest earners paid a smaller share of total taxes.

Actually he doesn't appear to know much about taxes.

 

If those rich people feel they are undratxes, they can send a check to the IRS. Buffett of course has owed back taxes for years and has yet to pay up

So if raising taxes brings economic prosperity why are states like CA and NY still struggling to balance their books and have high unemployment?

Seems libs will never understand if you want to tax any activity you need to encourage that activity. Jacking up taxes never encourages economic growth or risk from investors

 

the fact remains.... America HAS prospered and thrived with tax rates higher than those enacted by the Bush tax cuts. To suggest that returning to those tax rates is an automatic prescription for doom and gloom is not supported by historical fact.

 

The fact remains we prospered and thrived MORE and the tax revenues were HIGHER at the lower rates. To suggest going back to the higher rates will produced a recovery and a thriving economy is shear folly and not supported by historical fact.

 

Facts? What unbiased facts conclusively show that higher taxes helped America's economy more then lower taxes have?

Why not just tax everyone 100% then and have the government buy everything for Americans?

 

A more complete quote changes the context.

"I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs a repair, I’ll fix it."

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...oncerned-poor-article-1.1015303#ixzz1mHC6lJDg

 

Actually the thing is politicians can't get power from the poorests and the richests. Modern democracy and western state systems depend heavily on the middle class. the US is the most powerful country and not because of the richests, but because of her powerful middle class. Romney is honest on this issue and he doesn't say that he cares about the poorests.

 

Just a few simple questions..

How does President Obama care about the poor ?
Did he lift them up..give them a job..a better education or a safer world?
Did he pay off their student loans..their under water house payments ?
Did he revitalize the decaying urban environment and stop the black on black sense less killings and gang wars ?
Did He bring the white folk and people of color closer together to build a better tomorrow ?
Did he close Gitmo and reach out and calm the world about American aggression ?
Did President Obama lead us away from OPEC and oil dependency ?
Did he give us a fair and transparent reading of every bill he presented ?

Is your gas price lower this summer than when he took office ?
Is the price you pay for Food cheaper?
Is your home worth more...or less than 4 years ago ?

Did that safety net under Obama save you ?
Of did his policy drive you deeper into it ?
If Obama "cares " more about the poor...why doesn't he speak to them instead of holding fund raisers with big money ?

Why Doesn't President Obama use this Whitney Houston moment to have a conversation with America about the continuing poisoning of our nation ?
How many Black social leaders/superstars have to die a violent or senseless death before a black leader speaks out ?

Why hasn't this HIP.. young.. cultural black president cared MORE about his own people ?
The ones he organised ?
The ones HE LEFT BEHIND.??

The USA government is His safety net.
It is broke...and needs fixing.

Romney 2012.