NEWS: Mitt Romney: I Think I Figured It Out

CULTURE: Mitt Romney: I Think I Figured It Out

by Moby



Ok, I think I figured it out.

Mitt Romney is disdainful of anyone receiving government assistance because:

1. He comes from a rich and privileged background, so he's never needed or received government assistance.

And…

2. He comes from a rich and privileged background, so he's never known anyone who's needed or received government assistance.

Almost everyone I know has received some sort of government assistance, whether it's student loans or small business loans or Medicare or Medicaid, and almost everyone I know now pays taxes and contributes to society.

I'll use myself as an example.

I was the only child of a single working mom. We struggled a lot economically, and there were times when we lived off of food stamps and social security and government assistance. And then when I went to the University of Connecticut and SUNY Purchase I received Pell Grants and student loans.

So, according to Mitt Romney, I was part of the 47% "who are dependent upon government...who pay no income tax.” [As heard in a video obtained by Mother Jones] Mitt Romney then went on to say: “My job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

In the last 20 years I have either personally or professionally paid millions of dollars in income taxes to the state, local, and federal government. I have employed hundreds of people, who have in turn paid income taxes and in many cases have gone on to start their own businesses.

So I think it's safe to say that the government assistance my mother and I received was money well spent. I was able to go to decent schools and get a decent education, all thanks to 'government assistance.' My mother and I were able to eat, all thanks to 'government assistance.’ I was able to see doctors, all thanks to 'government assistance.' We were able to pay our rent at times thanks to 'government assistance.'

Not to mention the roads, clean water, streetlights, police departments, fire departments, clean air, libraries, public transit, electricity, etc., that all came from the government and enabled my mother and I to stay alive and live good, educated, safe, and healthy lives.

Mitt Romney comes from extreme wealth. He has never once needed financial assistance from the government, as his family had millions and millions of dollars. But there are millions and millions and millions of Americans like me who didn't come from extreme wealth and who needed help with education and food and healthcare and shelter, but who have gone on to start businesses and pay taxes.

We are not an 'entitled' class, we are not 'dependent upon the federal government' and we do not consider ourselves 'victims.' We are the hundreds of millions of Americans who had the misfortune of not being born to millionaire parents.

So I understand why Mitt Romney is disdainful of government assistance, as his parents paid for everything and he never needed help being fed or educated or looked after by doctors. I understand that in Mitt Romney's entire life he's never known anyone who's needed student loans. He's never known anyone who needed food stamps to keep their family fed. He's never known anyone who's had to spend hours in a health clinic just to get basic medical care. He's never known anyone who couldn't pay the rent.

I understand that Mitt Romney grew up with phenomenal wealth and privilege
but I don't understand why that leads him to contemptuously dismiss anyone (like my mother and I) who have, at times, needed government help with food and education and shelter and health care.

Mitt Romney is a product of wealth and privilege. That does not give him the right to loathe and dismiss the rest of us who are not the product of wealth and privilege.

Oh, for some reason I was thinking of 'Common People' by Pulp when I heard Romney's quotes.

- Moby, September 19, 2012

Related Posts:
In Defense of Discretionary Spending

Romney's comments were not well thought out or articulated.
I doubt there are many debutantes on this website. However, even the daughters of the rich and wealthy feed at the public trough via things like the mortgage interest deduction , food stamp programs which subsidize rich farmers as well as the poor. I am a libertarian and Ron Paul supporter who favors a smaller role of government in our lives.

Romney's dad was actually a great guy. Its a shame he didn't get the Republican nomination in 68 and Ron Paul didn't get it this year.

Great post!! And perfect song accompaniment

Gee... I think the point is that we have more and more people who HAVE become fully dependent on government. Multigenerational dependance. I think the point is we have more people on food stamps now than ever before in history. I think the point is, when you're getting checks from the government, you might just be inclined to vote for a party that promises you more and more and more of the same because that feels safe (regardless if there's any real money to pay for any of it, regardless if its all going to fold like a house of cards).

We're 16 trillion in debt with no end in sight, we're becoming an entitlement nation with close to 50% getting more from the government than they're paying in and clamoring for government controlled health care which we can't afford. If you have no skin in the game (getting far more than you're paying in at the moment) you're very likely to say "tax the rich - to hell with them" without any concept for how that wealth is generated and without any sense of obligation because you have one political party twisting reality with the mantra "they need to pay their far share" when the so called rich already pay 90% of all the taxes. What the hell is FAIR about paying 90% of the taxes when some pay nothing? Many of the "rich" are businesses that are just holding on, can't expand, and face an uncertain future because of Obama care.

We're at a tipping point, a utopian fantasy of socialism while countries like Greece are going under from the same types of policies. Please wake up to reality before reality swallows you. Socialism only sounds good on paper. In reality, when you take to much from people they simply stop producing and then everybody gets poorer. Think about it. If I asked you to work an extra 40 hours a week and I took all the money you earned for 36 of those hours or even 20 of those hours wouldn't you just be inclined to stop working all the extra hours? Most would. That's socialism. It conflicts with basic human nature. I'm not going to bust my arse for somebody to sit on theirs.

And for the record, I grew up in a single parent home too. I grew up in a shack the size of a single car garage as a kid. My mother worked to keep food in our mouths in a job that just paid the bills. I took out loans for school. I don't credit the government for having done a thing for us. The roads and schools and everything else were built by THE PEOPLE. You don't credit the government for the sweat and work of THE PEOPLE who make it work unless you have some warped view of what a representative republic is.

When the amount spent on food stamps is less than 1/10th the amount spent on the military, I think we can find something other than helping out poor people to blame the debt on.

Federally subsidized loans?

Absent a government to levy & collect taxes, then use those taxes to hire people and materials to build roads, how do you think they get built?

In short, the government provides no benefit because you're only willing to credit it with any negative impact it's had on your life. Which is very typical of small government ideology and remarkably dishonest.

Ya gotta love how these "it's socialism!!" types pretend that they never make use of the medical system (thus getting nothing for their money), and that there is no chance of something happening that might make them unable to work.

I'm with Coyote on this one. So Romney is trying to say that the American economy is in such a terrible state because of "poor people"? I'm just a dumb Canadian, and even I can see that that is total B.S. Canada is social programs, there are subsidies for everything and everyone, even "free" health care. Does this guy really stand a chance of getting elected?

That's because we pay all of that income tax.

Sadly, yes.

I think his comments came out of one of his board meetings. He pointed out a fact and commented on reality. I can think of few things that he said that were in-actuate.

It's not the poor that are the problem, it is government both helping and enabling.

So why waste their time and money trying to win over part of the population that will never vote for him, because he might take away some of their income.

Board meeting? What? This was an expensive fundraising dinner for the ultra-rich.

Also, how is the government helping poor people a "problem?"

That's because we pay all of that income tax.

Damn, I knew that there had to be a catch

As Rachel Maddow pointed out, it's entirely possible that Romney himself may be one of the 47% of Americans he despises, since he may well have not paid federal income tax for several years - the majority of his tax payments are likely capital gains from investments, separately taxed at a low 15% and able to be offset by losses and loss carry forwards under certain conditions (like, say, the 2008 financial market crash) to reduce tax payments to zero.

Nice job, Mittens! You've offended half the country (including much of your base, if they think about it and add 2 plus 2) and you've also handed a huge hammer to the opposition and the press to beat you with while ramping up the pressure to release your taxes to prove you're not as much of an idiot and hypocrite as you seem to be.

His team should have him "trip" and break his jaw so they can wire it shut until after Election Day. Drinking Ensure through a straw for the next 6 weeks would be a small price to pay to increase his chance of winning through silencing his campaign's worst enemy - himself.

No Govt. assistance unless you're Mitt Romney

I like graphs.



Oh, and I'm really starting to think that there's a good chance of Romney being in that "other" 6%.

Thank you Moby for speaking in favor of the people! I appreciate you taking the time to do so. I'm a Union member and come from a Union family. I'm just normal everyday middle class and i do my share of helping those that are less fortunate. I lend my skills with Rebuilding Together repairing homes of less fortunate, low income, or disabled people. It's sad to see how much of society turns the other cheek. Not everyone has a choice in the world, some are just given a bad hand.

Thanks again for helping to be a voice for the people!

I think his 47% remark is just him trying to pave the way for another fraudulent election. I supposed if he won 53% of the vote no one would be too suspicious. After all, Americans have the lowest voter turnout of any industrialized nation, it'd be plausible albeit disillusioning. Greg Palast discusses the fact that over 5 million voters, likely to be exclusively democratic voters I imagine, were denied their vote in the last federal election in this blog. http://ballotbandits.wordpress.com/
Couple that with zero paper trail and diebold's complete lack of oversight and you'd be a fool, imho, to not read between the lines. Your elections are bought and paid for, wholly determined in advance without anyone ever casting a vote. This remark by Romney just solidifies it in my mind. Which is to say nothing of the fact that the 47% statistic is total bullshit. The number is far greater.

Wow. Just... wow.

I found the remark about how the rich pay all the taxes laughable. It reeks of ignorance and self-preference or at least stockholm syndrome . Look up some statistics not compiled by a right-wing rag. Romney pays less of a percentage of his income in taxes than an average american and the wealthy have countless offshore tax havens and loopholes through which to cheat the system. Then there's corporate tax breaks and gov't subsidies. What planet are you living on? Does Fox News count as news there?

And even if said person weren't wrong, if they own 90%, ought they not to be contributing 90% of the tax revenue?