"When there is money left over, I invest it in our American industry which
puts more people to work..."The problem is that Romney put is
money in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying taxes to our great country. Is that
the kind of man we want to lead our nation? Is that the behavior we patriotic
Americans want in a leader? I don't think so.Yes, it is legal. But
it is also shameful. Remember Romney's quote when he said that he
didn't want illegals working as gardners on one of his estates. "I'm
running for president for heaven's sake..." Perhaps he should have thought
of that when sending his money to the Caymans. It might look good if your
running for office in the Cayman Islands, but for President of the United
States, we shouldn't have leaders that exploit the system to make even more
money, and yet, enjoy the benefits and protections of living in America.
I would like it if Romney would say: "The American free enterprise system
and lack of constraints on how much a person can make have enabled me to make
much more money than I will ever need to live an extravagant life style.
Therefore, not only have I paid all the taxes required by law, and not only have
I paid tithing to my church, but I am now announcing that I will transfer 90
percent of my fortune to a foundation to care for Americans who are less
fortunate than myself--those who are sick, who are out of work through no fault
of their own, who were not able to go to Stanford and Harvard on their parents'
money. My religious faith compels me to clothe the naked, feed the hungry, and
administer relief to the sick and afflicted, and that's what I'm going to
do!"I'm not holding my breath.
Romney pays around 14% on his capital gains. He doesnt work, he just collects
money. He is No way qualified to be president. He will say anything, or change
his veiw in a heartbeat, if he thinks that will get him elected. He is in the
1%, I am in the 99%. I'll vote for the man most interested in my plight
President Obama. OBAMA 2012
Curmudgeon | 7:47 a.m. Jan. 26, 2012 Salt Lake City, UT Amen!
Looking at the line-up of Republican presidential wanna-bes is downright
frightening. None of them should be President of the United States.Obama in 2012!
If Curmudgeon owns his home, he has more wealth than almost anyone else on
earth. Using his argument, why doesn't he sell all that he has and give it to
the poor?There is no minimum economic level that anyone has to reach
before he can "sell all that he has and give it to the poor".
To Curmudgeon | 7:47 a.m. Jan. 26, 2012 You're right. What you
describe is what Jon Huntsman Sr. has already done, and what he plans to do with
his fortune at his death. Somehow I don't think that Mitt Romney is cut from
the same cloth.
Do you believe that ALL things come from God, Mike?If you did, you
would know that some have been given much, others not so.God gives
to some and not to others to see how we will respond.Are we selfish,
or Are we following him , and redistribute his blessings equally.In my family, I can give a bag of M&Ms to any of my children,
and they will divy them out equally without an arguement -- because they know my
gift is supposed to be redistrubuted equally.My "Living
Will" has all my earthly possessions reditributed equally, and to strangers
who are poor.Is God not our Heavenly Father?Do you seriously
believe he gives to some - and not others - and doesn't expect us to
redistribute his blessings to all of his children...equally?Zion =
Having All things in Common.The further we move away from this, The further we slip away into Babylon.
Mike Richards:You missed a nuance of my comment. I was not
suggesting that Romney sell all that he has, but only that he allocate 90% of
his wealth to charity, which would leave him with $15-25 million (assuming the
estimates of his net worth are accurate). I think he could get by on that much.
But nice try at diverting attention from your man Romney.The higher
standard you articulated, as you know, did not originate with me. See Mark
10:21. And that counsel was given to one with "great possessions."
For those of you who would impose your views of the law of consecration upon
Mitt Romney, please remember that even Heavenly Father, who knows the end from
the beginning, must still bow beneath the rod of moral agency and allow all His
children the blessing of making their own choices with regard to their
possessions. I'd rather have God pass judgments on Mitt's Romney's disposition
of his wealth, rather than the arm chair disciples on this page, wouldn't you?
He imposes His will on no one. Neither should we.
Curmudgeon and LDS Liberal,What makes you exempt - while you are
alive - from living what you are telling the rest of us to live?Living will! What a joke. If you believed it you would give away your
possessions NOW, not when you are dead.You both seem to think that
Mitt Romney has all of his money stuffed in some mattress or in a piggy bank.
It is invested. Do you know what an investment is? Your home is your
"investment". If it grows in value and you sell it, you will pay
capital gains on the profit. If Mitt Romney sold his investments, he would pay
capital gains on his profits.If he made 1$10 million in profits, he
would have had to have about $100 million at risk.You have no right
to demand that he sell his investments to help the poor until AFTER you have
first sold your homes and anything else of value and have given that to the
poor. It doesn't count if you wait until after you die. It would
be no sacrifice if you enjoyed your possessions all your life while you knew
that there were poor nearby.
Mike Richards | 9:56 a.m. Jan. 26, 2012 South Jordan, Utah 1.
Living Will - I'm a Veteran, we "Servicemen" placed our lives to
defend the Constitution. The Government expected we might die, so we were given
legal counsel to and had "Living Wills" written.2. Yes -
my house was an investment. But it didn't get ME rich. My money went to the
already uber-rich, who made money from idiots like me and the other 99% who
believed their lies about real estate being a good, safe
"investment".Like I said, let the rich pay the poor.Since I can't do it any longer, they took my money.Trickle-UP
economics.Truly I am Mahan, the master of this great secret, that I
may... get gain. And Cain gloried in that which he had done, saying: I am
free; [and nothing says "Freedom" like a having great wealth]And as to the poor, the wealthy Mahan says - Am I my brothers keeper?But go ahead and promote Babylon.Worship the "Idol" of
Mammon.Treasures on Earth vs. Treasures in Heaven.Whatever....BTW - I am at peace. I have sufficient for my
Lyle's suggested "stonewall" comment for Mitt wouldn't have been
adequate even when his father was a candidate. If Mitt had used it, the reaction
would have been even more mistrust and probably a stack of rumors as well.
Tillett, referring to Gingrich: "Evidently strong positive answers win
voters, not reasonable truths."No, strong diversionary tactics
win voters. Gingrich's reply was not an answer to the question (let alone a
positive one). It was a parry to deflect attention away from his infidelity.
Lies win votes. To get the base of any party you have to bend the truth of what
you are going to do to GET THE VOTERS to the polls. Either party has to
"rally the base" of extreme people, how often are those promises
kept... rarely is the answer. Therefore Lies= more voters.
LDS Liberal,Wave the flag all you want, but EACH American pays for
the military. EACH American pledges to do all that is required to keep America
free.What JOBS have you created? Who depends on your largess for
THEIR home, their clothing, their food?Mitt Romney has spent his
money providing jobs for Americans. He didn't spend it on himself. He didn't
wrap himself in the flag and beat his chest. He took all that he had and put it
at risk so people, ordinary non-chest beating Americans could have a job and
provide for their families.He COULD have purchased a bigger house
and then claimed that his house was necessary for his enjoyment of life and as
shelter for his family, but instead, he chose to help others by investing that
money in their jobs.Don't try to divert the fact that you could have
chosen to do likewise. You could have chosen to live in a smaller house and you
could have invested the difference in a business or in the stock market to
provide jobs for others.You chose the easy path. You spent the
money on yourself. You have sufficient for yourself.
Actually Mike Richards, Romney DID purchase a bigger house in California - to
"have room for the family".
Re: RanchHand,What percentage of his income was represented in the
"new home in California"? Was it 1%? Was it 2%? What was it?How much of your income did you tap to buy your house? 30%? 40%? How
much?Start comparing apples to apples and you'll find that your
level of "job creation", that your level of "charity", that
your level of "civic responsibility", falls far short of the levels
that Mitt Romney has set for himself.
We seem to be experts on what someone else should do with the money they've
worked for and earned. Take a look at the other candidates, in fact any other
politician, and you will be hard pressed to find anyone who pays his taxes as
honestly as Romney. For example, Al Sharpton owes millions in back taxes. And,
I doubt there are few in the same crowd who have given as much to charity. Can
you safely assume that he hasn't given more? The figure out there is only what
he has reported. Here is a guy who's given more than most, but is being
criticized for not giving enough. Match it in amount or percentage, and then
you can complain.
And by the way, Romney is running for president. Pretty much a full to overtime
job. And Huntsman is making a lot of money and not working now too.