DiscussMormonism.com

From Democratic strategist Bill Buck writing at CBS:

But the source coming to Harry Reid for these revelations adds a level of intrigue. Reid just happens to be the highest-ranking member of the Mormon Church in the history of this nation.

It is likely that Senator Reid’s source shares the Mormon religion with Reid and Romney.

That message will not be lost on Romney. If the Bain fortress is not a fortress; if people are talking, Romney knows that trouble lies ahead.

And the motivation for this leak may not be political. It is likely personal and tied to the Mormon Church.

Specifically, if Romney was hiding money from the IRS he may have hidden money from his church.

It is expected that members of the Mormon Church tithe a minimum of ten percent of their incomes. But if Romney was not paying taxes and hiding money, then his disclosure – which itemizes deductions, including to the church – would tip off his actual income to the IRS.

From Washington Wire

WASHINGTON — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) on Thursday escalated his attacks on Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, standing by earlier comments that he had been told by a “credible source” that Mr. Romney didn’t pay taxes for a decade — but offering no evidence to back up the claim.

Mr. Reid’s new attack, in a statement circulated to the press, came hours after Mr. Romney called the claim wrong, saying on  Sean Hannity‘s radio show that Mr. Reid should “put up or shut up” and “describe who it is he spoke with.” Mr. Reid has said several times that he was told Mr. Romney had not paid taxes in certain years. He hasn’t identified his source. In an interview this week with the Huffington Post that drew widespread attention, Mr. Reid repeated his charge that Mr. Romney had paid no taxes over a period of 10 years and said the the source was an investor in Bain Capital, the private-equity firm that Mr. Romney previously ran. Mr. Reid also said he didn’t know if the source was correct.

Specifically, if Romney was hiding money from the IRS he may have hidden money from his church.

Doubtful. I run a business which makes money. I don't pay tithing on that money because it's part of the business. When I draw a salary, then I pay tithing on that. Romney may have millions, but until he uses it personally, or converts it from one form to another, he's generally immune from taxes (and tithing). This immunity is by design, to allow business and investments (and therefore wealth) grow. Now Obama has sent us spiraling into the largest growth in government spending in world history and he needs a source to plunder. Notice that the economy get worse as a result of all this government spending, not better. Obama's just given the money to his cronies whereas the Bush tax cuts actually stimulated the economy.

So Obama now taxes a lot more of this money in businesses which hits the middle class and small businesses. His "tax the rich and protect the middle class" is a scam. He's already made an end run (called in part 'Obamacare') to tax the middle class where most of the wealth is.

A business owner, such as myself, therefore has less money to pay employees or make capital investments for instance. Much less. This is why economic growth died as soon as Obamacare passed. Business owners were waiting to see if Obamacare would be blocked. Now that it looks to remain, businesses remain in the same state and the middle class has to pay more taxes and fees and penalties with less salary and jobs available.

Obama has to be unseated now because he's grabbing power much like the PRI did in Mexico in the last century. Mexico finally threw off the PRI but they remain a threat and Mexico still hasn't recovered.

bcspace wrote:

Specifically, if Romney was hiding money from the IRS he may have hidden money from his church.

Doubtful. I run a business which makes money. I don't pay tithing on that money because it's part of the business. When I draw a salary, then I pay tithing on that. Romney may have millions, but until he uses it personally, or converts it from one form to another, he's generally immune from taxes (and tithing). This immunity is by design, to allow business and investments (and therefore wealth) grow. Now Obama has sent us spiraling into the largest growth in government spending in world history and he needs a source to plunder. Notice that the economy get worse as a result of all this government spending, not better. Obama's just given the money to his cronies whereas the Bush tax cuts actually stimulated the economy.

So Obama now taxes a lot more of this money in businesses which hits the middle class and small businesses. His "tax the rich and protect the middle class" is a scam. He's already made an end run (called in part 'Obamacare') to tax the middle class where most of the wealth is.

A business owner, such as myself, therefore has less money to pay employees or make capital investments for instance. Much less. This is why economic growth died as soon as Obamacare passed. Business owners were waiting to see if Obamacare would be blocked. Now that it looks to remain, businesses remain in the same state and the middle class has to pay more taxes and fees and penalties with less salary and jobs available.

Obama has to be unseated now because he's grabbing power much like the PRI did in Mexico in the last century. Mexico finally threw off the PRI but they remain a threat and Mexico still hasn't recovered.

What a bunch of baloney. And I say that, with all due respect (which is not much), as a business owner.

If you don't think that your employees will be better off in the long run with affordable health care than with a few extra dollars in their paycheck (that could all disappear and then some in the event of an illness without affordable health care) then either you have not run the numbers of you don't care much for your employees.

Any Republican who opens their mouth about Romney vs Obama when it comes to health care should first consider the fact that the most important piece of legislation that Romney ever has (or even will) be responsible for was universal health care in Massachusetts.

The fact that Romney is running against himself on that issue (as well as many others) should be a tip off as to his uncanny ability to change direction on a dime. This lack of conviction and make-it-up-as-you-go-along Mormon style is what lead to his incredible gaffes on the international stage, and an important reason why the polls have him sitting nearly 100 electoral votes (those are the ones that count, BC) behind Obama right now.

bcspace wrote:A business owner, such as myself, therefore has less money to pay employees or make capital investments for instance. Much less.

You own a business with employees? If so, how is it that do you don't deduct capital investments and employee salaries and benefits (such as insurance premiums) BEFORE paying taxes, like the rest of us do? Why would you use your after-tax money for such things?

Again, Mormon celebrities are exempt from standard rank and file Cult rules. Garments, attendance, tithing, rules - all exempt. All the Cult cares about is the PR.

DrW wrote:make-it-up-as-you-go-along Mormon style

Don't forget no-accountability-to-the-little-people-whatsoever Mormon style

Regarding the Mo-on-Mo violence between Brother Harry and Brother Willard...

A business owner, such as myself, therefore has less money to pay employees or make capital investments for instance. Much less. This is why economic growth died as soon as Obamacare passed. Business owners were waiting to see if Obamacare would be blocked. Now that it looks to remain, businesses remain in the same state and the middle class has to pay more taxes and fees and penalties with less salary and jobs available.

Did you happen to follow my long running debate with Krose here, bc, where Krose argues that net, after tax profit has nothing to do with incentives and economic calculation relative to new hiring, business expansion, or new investment?

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=24907&p=617911&hilit=net+profit#p617911

Oh, never mind, I see that you did make at least one comment there. Interesting though how leftists assume that taxes could rise to near 100% of all gross income without affecting savings, investment, and entrepreneurial incentives.

I wonder if they were "born that way?"

Droopy wrote:Did you happen to follow my long running debate with Krose here, bc, where Krose argues that net, after tax profit has nothing to do with incentives and economic calculation relative to new hiring, business expansion, or new investment?

And if you did, you have seen how Droopy was thoroughly owned in that debate, having chosen to bluster, and then run and hide, instead of showing any facts or evidence.

Not once did he show where new hiring and expansion are (for some unknown reason) not deductible before taxes are applied, as other business expenses are. He had plenty of opportunities, but he failed to do so. It should be easy for him to show, using IRS documents, where such deductions are not allowed.

Perhaps he just has a testimony, based on faith and the answer to prayer, that his assumptions are True. After all, it just feels like he must be right. "Truthiness" rules.

krose wrote:

bcspace wrote:A business owner, such as myself, therefore has less money to pay employees or make capital investments for instance. Much less.

You own a business with employees? If so, how is it that do you don't deduct capital investments and employee salaries and benefits (such as insurance premiums) BEFORE paying taxes, like the rest of us do? Why would you use your after-tax money for such things?

exactly.

and i wish our political press would just once in my lifetime pose this question to a republican presidential candidate. the right has been swallowing their own spin on this point for so long that i'm not sure they're even aware any longer how non-sensical it is.