Hypocrite Obama takes almost $400K in tax deductions

[JohnRich 4]

News:

Hypocrite Obama takes almost $400K in tax deductions

Remember this from Obama’s State of the Union address last week:

“If you make more than one million dollars a year, you should not pay less than thirty percent in taxes… In fact, if you’re earning a million dollars a year, you shouldn’t get special tax subsidies or deductions.”

Below for your viewing pleasure is a picture of Barack & Michelle Obama’s 2010 tax return. On page 2 one will see the Obamas in spite of Obama’s quote above, made $1,795,614 and took $373,289 worth of deductions:

The “everyone but me” rule applies here.

Obama paid approximately $454,000 in taxes which amounts to 25% of his income, not the 30% he lectures should be paid by “millionaires,” and he is one.

Anyone who wishes to peruse the entire 59-page return, it can be found here.

Full story and tax return: KTRH

Hmm, I wonder what happened to: "At some point you have made enough money"?

[kallend 1,677]

Quote

News:

Hypocrite Obama takes almost $400K in tax deductions

Remember this from Obama’s State of the Union address last week:

“If you make more than one million dollars a year, you should not pay less than thirty percent in taxes… In fact, if you’re earning a million dollars a year, you shouldn’t get special tax subsidies or deductions.”

Below for your viewing pleasure is a picture of Barack & Michelle Obama’s 2010 tax return. On page 2 one will see the Obamas in spite of Obama’s quote above, made $1,795,614 and took $373,289 worth of deductions:

The “everyone but me” rule applies here.

Obama paid approximately $454,000 in taxes which amounts to 25% of his income, not the 30% he lectures should be paid by “millionaires,” and he is one.

Anyone who wishes to peruse the entire 59-page return, it can be found here.

Full story and tax return: KTRH

Hmm, I wonder what happened to: "At some point you have made enough money"?

Is he proposing that he and Michelle should be exempted from a new rule?

If not, your rant is just silly.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[headoverheels 292]

I don't think anyone, except those indulging in hyperbole and a few idiots, is suggesting that paying more taxes be voluntary. There is nothing odd or inconstant or hypocritical here.

[jgoose71 0]

It's called leading by example. We'll leave it at that.

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

It's called leading by example. We'll leave it at that.

Right. Glad someone "gets it".

The detractors here apparently think that one who proposes a new rule shouldn't bother to set the example themselves by living their own life under that guideline, and should instead continue to do as everyone else while advocating something different.

It would be like instructors telling their students that hook turns are bad and should be banned. But instead of setting a good example by doing a normal landing pattern, they continue to land with hook turns themselves. And when questioned about it, they would simply say; "Well, no one has passed a rule against it yet, so I'm going to keep doing it."

Yeah, that's really leading from the front.

[tkhayes 146]

that's about the stupidest example of 'hypocrisy' I have ever seen and even you, JohnRich, could do better than that - or maybe you can't.....

One could applaud the President for following the tax law perhaps....

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

that's about the stupidest example of 'hypocrisy' I have ever seen and even you, JohnRich, could do better than that - or maybe you can't.....

One could applaud the President for following the tax law perhaps....

Like those millionaires he says aren't paying their fair share?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Andrewwhyte 1]

This argument is the same one used against Warren Buffet. They are both advocating for a rule change and their critics pillory them for not being martyrs. I have no problem with anyone, the president included, using the tax code to their advantage. The problem is with the tax code, not the tax filers.
To draw comparisons: The problem is with the liability laws, not the litigation lawyers. The problem is with the political fundraising legislation, not the contributors.

[billvon 2,469]

Yeah, geez. That's like a skydiver that jumps a smaller canopy advocating for more canopy training before people downsize.

[jgoose71 0]

Quote

Yeah, geez. That's like a skydiver that jumps a smaller canopy advocating for more canopy training before people downsize.

To make your example fit, it would be a skydiver who started out jumping a 2.5:1 wing load with out training saying everyone else must attend canopy training. If you are already jumping a high wing load, you must up size until the training is complete (special exemptions for friends so they have an advantage at the next swooping competition, gotta pick the winners and loosers you know).

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[lawrocket 3]

On both sides, what's wrong is wrong unless their guy does it and what's right is right unless the other guy does it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[headoverheels 292]

Quote

Quote

that's about the stupidest example of 'hypocrisy' I have ever seen and even you, JohnRich, could do better than that - or maybe you can't.....

One could applaud the President for following the tax law perhaps....

Like those millionaires he says aren't paying their fair share?

I haven't seen anyone suggesting that they just volunteer to send in more money when they feel like it. This is really a pretty bad example. Maybe a few good souls will send in more local money for school construction, rather than having everyone vote on a bond issue.

[ShcShc11 0]

yawn.

since when did Political discussions centered around such pointless debates.

It would be nice to have a talk again (such as the ones in 1991) about the U.S role in humanitarian situations (e.g: Bosnia and Rwanda).


Cheers!
Shc

[ShcShc11 0]

Quote

On both sides, what's wrong is wrong unless their guy does it and what's right is right unless the other guy does it.

or we can rightly acknowledge the goods and bads on both sides.

But truth is, people will always tend to side on one place more because they don't have time to do the extensive / time-intensive research.


Else people would go on to talk about the real policies that have been laid out and rightly criticize them.
e.g:
The Ryan Plan which is supposed to be deficit-neutral. However, there's a 850 billion $ gap in which he says he would close tax loop holes without really specifying the which loop holes. (I don't even think we can get even 30 B$ in tax loop holes closures).



Cheers! :)
Shc

[marks2065 0]

Quote

Quote

On both sides, what's wrong is wrong unless their guy does it and what's right is right unless the other guy does it.

or we can rightly acknowledge the goods and bads on both sides.

But truth is, people will always tend to side on one place more because they don't have time to do the extensive / time-intensive research.


Else people would go on to talk about the real policies that have been laid out and rightly criticize them.
e.g:
The Ryan Plan which is supposed to be deficit-neutral. However, there's a 850 billion $ gap in which he says he would close tax loop holes without really specifying the which loop holes. (I don't even think we can get even 30 B$ in tax loop holes closures).



Cheers! :)
Shc

but it is a start and mostly follows the guidelines set forth by Obama's debt commission. the left laughs at this budget and Obama is ripping Ryan and the right on this budget that mostly follows follows the guidelines put together by Obama's own people. Obama and the left or hypocrites and liers.

[SkyDekker 1,150]

Quote

It's called leading by example. We'll leave it at that.

Did he advocate people not taking advantage of current tax laws?
I am sure Obama is a hypocrite, almost all of us are. But this is a piss poor example.

[kallend 1,677]

Quote

Quote

It's called leading by example. We'll leave it at that.

Did he advocate people not taking advantage of current tax laws?
I am sure Obama is a hypocrite, almost all of us are. But this is a piss poor example.

For 2011 the Obamas made $789,674 and paid tax at an effective rate of 20.5%, which is a lot higher than Romney pays.

Obama's proposals would lead to the Obamas paying higher taxes. Romney's proposals would benefit Romney.

Some look out for themselves, some look out for the country.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

It's called leading by example. We'll leave it at that.

Did he advocate people not taking advantage of current tax laws?
I am sure Obama is a hypocrite, almost all of us are. But this is a piss poor example.

For 2011 the Obamas made $789,674 and paid tax at an effective rate of 20.5%, which is a lot higher than Romney pays.

Obama's proposals would lead to the Obamas paying higher taxes. Romney's proposals would benefit Romney.

Some look out for themselves, some look out for the country.

Perhaps Obama needs a better accountant. HR Block isn't the best a preparing complx tax returns.

[airdvr 200]

Quote

Quote

Quote

It's called leading by example. We'll leave it at that.

Did he advocate people not taking advantage of current tax laws?
I am sure Obama is a hypocrite, almost all of us are. But this is a piss poor example.

For 2011 the Obamas made $789,674 and paid tax at an effective rate of 20.5%, which is a lot higher than Romney pays.

Obama's proposals would lead to the Obamas paying higher taxes. Romney's proposals would benefit Romney.

Some look out for themselves, some look out for the country.

Make sure to let me know when you see one.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[champu 1]

Quote

Perhaps Obama needs a better accountant. HR Block isn't the best a preparing complx tax returns.

You don't improve your tax liability by way of how you prepare your return at the end of the year (at least not leagally). By the time you're filing it's all water under the bridge. If you give all your information to two accountants and they come up with different numbers then at least one of them is simply wrong.

What you do with your money during the year, however, can have a large impact on your tax liability. There are simple measures that you'd rightly call someone a fool for not taking advantage of all the way to legal gray areas that many choose not to venture into.

Given two people with very-high incomes paying disparate tax rates it's wrong to automatically conclude that one, "needs a better accountant."

[Gravitymaster 0]

My accountant helps prepare in advance by employing tax strategies that defer tax liabilities. Apparently you missed the intent of the reference to HR Block as they simply prepare taxes (for the most part. Although they do have a Premier Service for coprporations). My point is that the disparity between Romney's rate and Obama's might be due to tax planning.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

For 2011 the Obamas made $789,674 and paid tax at an effective rate of 20.5%, which is a lot higher than Romney pays.

I thought the Obamas made $1,795,614. That's what page 1 shows. And a total tax of $453,770 - seen on page 2.

I'm far from a tax guru or even a math guru. Where'd you get your numbers?

And why is what Romney made important when the President says that the President should be paying more?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[mirage62 0]

Quote

that's about the stupidest example of 'hypocrisy' I have ever seen and even you, JohnRich, could do better than that - or maybe you can't.....

One could applaud the President for following the tax law perhaps....

OH BULLSHIT. When it came out that Romney paid and EFFECTIVE rate of 14% very few on the left said "it's just good that he follows the tax laws"

Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little

[kallend 1,677]

Quote

Quote

For 2011 the Obamas made $789,674 and paid tax at an effective rate of 20.5%, which is a lot higher than Romney pays.

I thought the Obamas made $1,795,614. That's what page 1 shows. And a total tax of $453,770 - seen on page 2.

I'm far from a tax guru or even a math guru. Where'd you get your numbers?

Los Angeles Times, April 13, 2012, 9:14 a.m.
By Michael A. Memoli

Amid an aggressive campaign on what he calls "tax fairness," President Obama's own tax burden in 2011 was the lowest of his time in the White House.

The president and first lady reported a joint adjusted gross income of $789,674 last year and paid $162,074 in total federal taxes, or about 20.5%.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

that's about the stupidest example of 'hypocrisy' I have ever seen and even you, JohnRich, could do better than that - or maybe you can't.....

One could applaud the President for following the tax law perhaps....

OH BULLSHIT. When it came out that Romney paid and EFFECTIVE rate of 14% very few on the left said "it's just good that he follows the tax laws"

Obama has government lawyers and accountants Romney has private coporate attorneys and accountants. No wonder Romney pays a lower rate. And they want to manage my healthcare.