I have my problems with PolitiFact, but they did decide that President Obama’s main critique of Mitt Romney’s tax plan was correct. People making a million dollars a year in cash income would receive an annual $250,535 tax break. People in the top 1% of cash income would receive an annual $725,716 tax break. He’d also eliminate the Estate Tax, allowing a new aristocracy to develop in our country. So, it’s in this context that we must examine Kathleen Parker’s column today. For example, should we be impressed by the following?
Romney’s opponents seem to be aghast that he has made money for investors (aren’t we all investors?), though they studiously ignore other greed-less facts: He never took a dime in salary for heading the Olympics in Salt Lake City nor as governor of Massachusetts, to mention a couple.
It’s true that Romney makes most of his annual income off of dividends and capital gains he earns by investing his fortune. But he made $374,327.62 in 2010 on speaker’s fees alone. That’s a figure, by the way, that Romney characterized as “not very much” money. Kathleen Parker thinks people are just hating on the Romneys’ success out of some kind of pony-envy, but we’re really appalled about something completely different. We’re appalled that he wants to cut way back on programs to help the poor and middle-class survive and advance in our society at the same time that he wants to hand out a $250,000 annual income tax break to millionaires. Over a four-year presidential term, that would be a million dollar tax break to everyone who made a million dollars a year for those four years. You can’t make a proposal like that when you are worth a quarter of a billion dollars and then complain about the budget deficit and call for massive cuts in social spending, and then think you’ll be above criticism.
As for Ann Romney’s horse, Ms. Parker doesn’t get into the specifics for a good reason. Apparently, the Romneys formed a corporation to deal with this horse, and they declared a $77,000 loss in 2010 for that corporation. If the corporation ever makes any money by, for example, breeding this Olympic-performing horse, they can write off those losses. And you thought the Olympics were about amateur sports!
Apparently, for the Romneys, the Olympics are a business investment. And if they are successful in making money off the Olympics, you and I get to fork over the cost of feeding and training Ms. Romney’s horse. That makes me a lot less impressed with Romney’s decision to donate his salary when he worked for the Olympic Organizing Committee.
That’s why Kathleen Parker’s argument is so unconvincing:
The issue of Ann Romney’s horse is yet more ideological nonsense from the left, intended to portray Republicans generally and the Romneys specifically as enemies of The People. Riding horses is framed as just one more example of how out of touch the Romneys are with everyday Americans, though Democrats didn’t seem to mind that Jackie Kennedy was an avid horsewoman.
We didn’t mind when John Kerry went windsurfing either, but that became quite an issue for the right. If this were nothing more than tit-for-tat squabbling, Parker’s hypocrisy would still be staggering. But this is about how Romney’s policies would line the pockets of people who are so rich that they can spend nearly $80,000/yr on a single horse while telling the rest of us that we have an unaffordable social safety net that must be slashed down to the bone.
Am I missing something? Is anybody besides Kathleen Parker going on about the damn horses? To me it’s just a non sequitur. My problem with Mitt Romney is that he’s a lying, soulless bloodsucker, and Kathleen Parker’s response is that Jackie Kennedy had a horse?
yeah, that, and we all wanted a pony as kids so we hate the Romneys.
Where I grew up in New Jersey we would have called Romney “a rich jerk-off,” and that would have been the end of it.
The Republicans are the enemies of the people.
They have proved that and are still continuing to make life worse for everyone but them.
The issue of Ann Romney’s horse is yet more ideological nonsense from the left, intended to portray Republicans generally and the Romneys specifically as enemies of The People. Riding horses is framed as just one more example of how out of touch the Romneys are with everyday Americans
No, that’s just gravy. The big story is the way the people at the top of the economic get to cheat and manipulate it for their own advantage, often at the expense of others, including the general public.
Taking advantage of the opportunity to explain the proper pronunciation of “dressage” while holding up a picture of Mitt Romney looking awkward is just the cherry on top.
Progs…plenty of poor and middle-class folks love horses…
Keep digging your grave…
It’s dress-awzh’.
You put the emphasis on the “-awzh,” Arthur. Dress-awzh.
Dress-awzh.
What’s the point?
That “Dressage” is a French word with a specific pronunciation? Pathetic.
Horses are much more honest than Humans…they are beautiful creatures that demand respect, but respect character and leadership…
Any human being who has not interacted with horses is missing at least tiny part of what it means to be human…these creatures have aided our well being for centuries…I challenge any Prog here to write up a family tree where horses did not significantly aid in the well-being of their ancestors…
Shameful.
By the way, I’m not Arthur Gilroy, but the evil Liberty For All…
Boo apparently banned me from the site, despite my contributions…even though I never used any personal attacks against anyone on this blog…
So…I’m sure Boo will prevent Arturo Gilroy from appearing again…Maybe I’ll try Art Gilroy next time…
But I’ll be back…
See you then…
you were auto-banned for poor overall ratings to your comments. I didn’t ban you intentionally.
However, it’s quite likely that you will be auto-banned again. It’s up to the community.
Sure. Where I live more horses are bred and stabled than anywhere else in the country.
I know of zero locals who own one. Cant afford them. They are all owned by 1%ers who come to the “country” to ride.
They do create local jobs for stable hands and ferierrs. Trickle down, you know.
Hmm…our first horse was named Hail Mary…she was nearly starved to death by her previous owner…the horse rescue that we donate to was called one day to try to save her…she was so malnourished that she could not stand up…her owner was going to shoot her, unless the crew got her up to walk…there were severe thunderstorms in the area, with hail…the rescue crew prayed…she got up, and miraculously walked into the trailer…
We adopted her…but she still died two months later…but she was happy that so many people cared for her…
That’s how we “one-percenters” ended up owning horses…fuck you self-righteous ass holes.
Living where I do “rescue horses” are a huge and recurring problem. Not that there are a lot of horses to be rescued but because of the cause and difficulty of fixing it.
Namely it is because horses are really friggin expensive to keep. These are not cats. Rescuing is way beyond the means of the SPCA.
If a stable owner gets on even a little hard times it is all too easy to not have the massive cash flow needed to care for horses. Then it is hard to find people who have the wealth to rescue them. And as you point out the horses are easily damaged and not necessarily seen as a good “return” on the large “investment” required.
Oh. And fuck you.
Have a nice day.
I apologize for the expletive.
But then why do you resent “one-percenters” who can afford to rescue these horses? We will take care of as many of them as we can. Why?
My favorite horse is Ruby…we got her when she was six months old…she was in a rodeo in South Carolina, when she broke into a stallions pen and ate his food…he tore a chunk of flesh out of her left thigh…my wife and I had to treat it every day for months…now she’s three years old…quite a Gal! She doesn’t put up with shit!!!
Setting aside the title of this article which should have made clear to you that I don’t resent anyone for owning horses, the problem here is quite obvious.
Let’s say you rescue a horse that is actually worth something, at least potentially. Maybe your uncle dies and his racehorse needs a caretaker. So, you set up a corporation and pour all the costs of caring for uncle’s racehorse (and training it to race) into the corporation as losses. Then you sell the horse for a big chunk of money. The corporation makes a big profit. But you don’t have to pay any taxes on your profits because you’ve made the taxpayer pay for all your corporation’s losses.
This is the kind of thing that annoys people. If you were actually a horse breeder, obviously you’re running a business and your costs offset your profits. But to just take your one horse and treat it as a corporation so that you shift the cost of its upkeep onto me and everyone else? That’s greedhead behavior. And multiply that behavior many times over for how Romney actually went about making his fortune. Because the horse is the least of it. His whole business was basically indistinguishable from how the mob squeezing every last penny out of companies before forcing the owners into bankruptcy. And he’s keeping accounts in tax haven in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands to avoid paying taxes here in the United States.
It’s not about your horse or Romney’s. It’s about being a greedhead while you tell people they have to work longer to get less from their Social Security and Medicare, while taxes are at a 60-year low.
Then change the tax code…don’t blame Romney for studying the tax code, and utilizing it’s write-offs.
Actually, there are a lot of decidedly non-one-percenters (like me) who rescue horses and take care of elderly useless equines long past their return on investment years.
And then there are the one-percenters who pay staggering sums to import European Warmbloods for upper level competition and then form corporations around them to write off the staggering expenses of keeping these decidedly NON-rescue horses.
This is what a non-one-percenter like me deals with, something which a .001-percenter like Ann Romney never needs to dirty her hands with:
That is a beautiful horse!
Thank you. I detest most of what you write here, but I do believe you genuinely love horses, so there’s that in your favor.
That, by the way, besides being lovely (when he’s not furry, unkempt and filthy), is a 20-year-old former field hunter (previous owner hunted him, not me) with a wonky left hind suspensory, kissing spines, hock arthritis, and a voracious appetite. He and his paddock buddy go through at least a bale a day of hay (seven bucks per bale), with commensurate output at the other end.
Oh, yeh — I’d also point out that for every one-percenter rescuing horses, there’s dozens breeding them for quick futurity wins and profits, or buying made horses for competition, then dumping them on the market to god knows what fate when the desired profit’s been wrung from them (quite often having screwed them up physically and/or mentally in the process); and it’s horses like those who tumble down the care scale till they bottom out in rescues.
I live in a very horsey area, rich and poor, and I see plenty of folks with limited means who do without so that their horses can live well; I also see some extremely wealth folks who treat their horses like crap and treat them as disposable toys.
But why am I wasting my time on this troll?
Please explain what I said about resenting anyone who rescues any horse.
Please explain what I said to resent any 1%er.
There is a difference between earning wealth, which is fine, and using that wealth to corrupt a system such that it pulls the ladder up on others trying to earn it.
Sorry, but you still sound like an angry asshole.
Hmm…well, I am angry (and probably an asshole), because your progressive ideology is ruining this country…
Pull the ladder up? What a joke. In 1996, I earned 6,000 for the entire year (supporting my wife, debilitated with back paid (see John Sarno))…had to donate blood plasma to pay for groceries…
But then I read “Think and Grow Rich” by Napoleon Hill…I read more and more authors that explained that I, and I alone, through my thinking, was responsible for my life…
BTW…this was in the 80’s…even though I was dirt poor, I voted for Ron Paul (!!!), Libertarian Party candidate for President in 1988!!!
I am reaching the ladder down, yelling to you to WAKE THE FUCK UP! (To quote my kindred spirit, Arthur Gilroy)..
Wake Up! You control your life…you are the Captain of your Ship!
Your Prog’s victim (i.e. I am a consequence of what others do to me) is ruining this country!
Good for you. Sound like you have a plan for running your life. That’s largely irrelevant to the topic.
This is a discussion of what would be sound, sustainable and ethical policy and the corrupt politics keeping it from happening.
Want people to make and benefit from the same personal choices as you.? Want the tax code changed? Good luck with that so long as those benefitting from those tax incentives can ever increasingly buy the status quo. Good luck so long as they see the easiest way to create more wealth is to squeeze it out of the tax code or on the backs of the middle class.
Nobody hates 1%ers because they have enough money to own horses. The point is how where that money comes from, and how so much of it resides in the hands of so few while so many other people, many of whose labor generates that income, are left to subsist on whatever scraps manage to “trickle down” to them.
The fact that 400 people can own half of the wealth in a nation of 320 (or so) million is inexcusable. It’s the definition of evil. Hoarding wealth that one could never spend in several consecutive lifetimes while others go hungry, homeless, and sick without treatment, and then to blame those same people for their misfortunes is beyond pathological. To borrow a phrase, it’s “uniquely American.” Except it’s not unique, save for the scale upon which it’s being perpetrated.
And fuck you for trying to conflate horse ownership with the very genuine and legitimate loathing that some of us feel toward the hoarders at the top of this economic shitpile underneath which we find ourselves suffocating. If you really are one of the 1%, which frankly I doubt, do all of us a favor next time you find your heart breaking over a horse and do something to help a fellow human being in even worse straits.
And BTW, hijacking another user’s nick for non-satirical purposes is super creepy.
I might add that the 1% looks down its nose at us. That is galling.
One picture:1,000 words.
What the Romneys do with their money is their business… literally. But the picture of a horse with a corn-rowed mane prancing in a show doesn’t exactly say “middle-class” unless the Romneys are closet Amish and the horse does double duty pulling a plow during the week. It’s the same as John Kerry windsurfing or Michel Dukakis in his Snoopy helmet driving a tank.
That Ms. Parker rushes to their defense with such vigor suggests she wishes she could write off $77,000 on her pet, too.
Nice takedown, Booman. Allow me to pile on.
Parker’s “Aren’t we all investors?” aside is pretty telling. The obvious answer is:
1 – No. We’re not all investors. Only about half of all Americans have investments in the stock market. Most American workers don’t have pensions. Most 401k plans have a value of less that $50,000. A sizable percentage of Americans have no (or negative) net worth and therefore have nothing to invest.
2 – Even for those Americans who are investors (whether in housing, stocks, bonds or other assets), the value of those assets dropped about 40% from 2007 to 2010. But the superrich (like Romney) have seen their wealth rebound faster than everyone else.
It’s one thing not to have friends who aren’t investors. That can be just an accident of the social circles into which one was born or in which one circulates. It requires an almost willful blindness to make one’s living writing about politics and public policy in America to toss off a line like “Aren’t we all investors?” as Parker does here.
Two things about the horse. 1 – it’s a mare who’s 16 years old and her clock has just about tocked. 2 – Ann is not listed as a rider of the horse, her partner is. She may enjoy riding, but it would be another horse that she uses for that passtime.
Training a dressage horse is damn hard and takes years and alot of sweat and once achieved a fine tuned animal isn’t turned over to just anyone to ride.
My point is that Ann’s co ownership of the horse is truly a rich woman’s hobby, she is a spectator and Mitt’s attempt at writing it off (I understand the credit was denied) just points to a let someone else mow the lawn richiness.
Mitt may not have received a salary for his Olympics run but I’m thinking his expenses were paid and they were likely paid for by taxpayer dollars.
Mitt may not have received a salary for his Olympics run but I’m thinking his expenses were paid and they were likely paid for by taxpayer dollars.
If he wasn’t paid, he was doing the super-rich equivalent of all the brown-nosing the paroles do to get ahead in their miserable, crappy jobs.
Stuff like this is what pisses me off. Ideologically, I want to take more of the rich’s stuff; 100% tax not just on income, but on certain amounts of wealth.
But in the world we live in, I accept that money is relative. So yes, $375k “isn’t very much money.” Where that becomes an issue is, like you said, when they advocate stealing from the poor.
Seabe…take 100%…we’ll leave the country…who’ll pay for your pathetic Welfare State if We go to Costa Rica, or Switzerland?
Eat dirt.
That’s the plan. We’d like you to leave. Go leave us alone.
Bye
By all means do let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.
Pathetic, envious Progressives.
Over the last 50 years, Democrats have controlled the Congress more than Republicans…
You wrote this fuc-ing tax code…replete with redistributionism, and attempts to use the Code to manipulate Human Behaviour…
I’ve never heard any Democrate advocate a “Flat” tax, or a “Fair” tax, where there are no deductions…Republicans do that…
Yet you have the nerve to bitch about Mitt and Ann Romney using your pathetic tax code to minimize the amount Government steals from them…
If you don’t want people writing off losses, then pull your heads out and vote for a “Flat” or “Fair” tax…stop bitching…Dems wrote the rule book…
This article barely conceals your true motive…ENVY…and sense of entitlement…
You are the reason the United States is Greece in 10 years…
It’s in the last 30 years that things really turned to shit. Basically it’s the Reagan Revolution that won’t stop revolving. And probably the best tax code we had was under Eisenhower, the last decent (if you’re not Guatemalan) Republican president we had. If the US is Greece in 10 years it will be because modern Republican greed squeezed all the blood out of the rest of us (including the people dumb enough to vote for these policies at their own expense) for their own short-term gains. I don’t know how any of you sleep at night, aside from the socio- and psychopaths. I assume it’s because you’re too stupid to understand what you’re participating in.