34 year old Joe is unlicensed and owes back taxes!

[mikeylikesit]

If your question/comment/opinion is a plant, the answer is fry his ass.

[Gutenberg]

Yeah, they have, in fact. There have been numerous stories about how Joe would have to pay additional taxes on his income in the unlikely event the business ever netted that much.

It is not an ad hominem attack. When a plumber makes a public spectacle of himself complaining about taxes and then turns out to be not a plumber and indeed a tax cheat, it's news.

[karsen]

His question is still valid.

[Lux Interior]

karsen wrote:
His question is still valid.

Indeed it is.

He will pay less taxes under Obama's plan.

Therefore he can save more money.

Therefore he can buy the business faster.

And he can pay the extra $12-$1500 in taxes on his $250,000 in taxable income.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/taxes.asp

http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/15/smallbus...2008101611

Obama answered his question. Just because he didn't get the answer he was trolling for (i.e. "Yes! I'm evil! I am going to RAISE your taxes because I hate small business owners!" - or something similar) doesn't mean he didn't get an answer.

[Jimmypoo]

His question may be valid, but his question has been answered pretty well, even during the first debate.

And his question didn't cover the various structures of how any corporate entity can/will be structured to
avoid the taxes that he is purportedly so fearful of.

So without a CPA analysis of the best way to establish this business, its payroll, its cost of doing business
and how the owner of the company is set up to own stock in the business and pay himself at the lowest
tax rate of just 15% on dividends, then this argument is pointless - it was used by McCain and it backfired,
and an individual who wanted to be party to it now finds himself in the spotlight that he should have had
enough sense to AVOID, because ANYONE claiming income, whether they are on 60 Minutes or a subject
of the debates, is ENOUGH to make the IRS look closer at someone.

My brother used to be an auditor in FL, and one 60 Minutes that ran with overhead flying shots moved
the IRS to conduct the same flight until they matched the house and discovered who they were talking
about.


No sympathy for the ignorant. NONE.

You say you're selling coke - and it's really just aspirin, you go to jail for selling coke. Same rules apply
here. You fill out a credit app that you lie and say you earn 3x what you really do --- ?? These are forms
governed by US Law, and you've just invited the IRS to see if you have this money, and if you do, you owe,
and if you don't, you LIED, and perjuring yourself on a document overseen by federal law is a
great way to toss a salad.

[MacGurl]

I got this from a friend (am waiting on a link for the source) -

1) There's a Joseph Wurzelbacher of Cincinnati, OH, who owns a corp called JCC Investments, organized 2000.

2) Same person also owns a Livestock company organized 2005 called Joes' and James' Livestock.

3) Same person owned a corporation called USA 1007 CONGRESS 10, LLC, which was incorporated in Delaware and organized in 2005 - the name appears to be a pseudonym for an apartment complex in Austin TX, which is something contractors do when they intend to do their own sales.

4) A Larry Wurzelbacher in OH owns a company called Plumb Crazy, Inc. Shall we start taking bets on whether this is the company that Joe is looking to "buy"?



Also - I found this - http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/16/134429/81

Was Joe the Plumber a "plant"? :dunno:

Kathy

[michaelb]

I think it is irresponsible for McCain to drag an "ordinary" citizen into his campaign without that person's consent and without doing some basic fact checking first. Obviously he planned to do this as a stunt at the debate by bringing him up by name. Are they really so incompetent to have not thought about what this would mean to that person?

[wurm]

I think that regardless of how the numbers break down or who or what Joe is or isn't, the bottom line and the big issue at hand seems to be Obama's comment about "share the wealth" and whether it should be the government's job to do so or an individual's.

[MacGurl]

I don't believe Barack used the term "share the wealth" himself, that was something "interpreted" by Joe. Barack said "Spread the wealth", which I think is different.
Full video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRPbCSSXyp0

Kathy

[karsen]

MacGurl wrote:
I don't believe Barack used the term "share the wealth" himself, that was something "interpreted" by Joe. Barack said "Spread the wealth", which I think is different.
Full video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRPbCSSXyp0

Kathy

"Share the wealth" or "spread the wealth"... what's the difference? The message is still the same.