Social Question

mazingerz88's avatar

Why would some Americans want to have a President who has deposited huge amounts of money abroad?

Asked by mazingerz88 (18495 points ) July 11th, 2012

It’s just business. It’s none of our business. That’s the American dream. Nothing wrong with being successful. Sure. But wouldn’t America be better off with a President who is upper middle class if not middle class and not uber wealthy-?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

29 Answers

JLeslie's avatar

His wealth does not matter to me at all as long as he has not done anything illegal with his money.

The good thing about the wealthy is they know how to make money. I am not talking about running a business, I am talking about the path to wealth. What it takes psychologically, physically, the sacrifice, education, focus, savings, investing, knowledge of our system, etc. Someone like Romney grew up with wealth so he had a distinct advantage, different than someone like Clinton who grew up very modestly, but made his way to wealth.

Maybe the best combination is growing up poor and middle class and then becoming wealthy to know and understand all of America and have good ideas on how to help all Americans. Being wealth is a different world, but each place on the socioeconomic strata is its own world.

Add in America is a huge country. A northeasterner has trouble understanding a southerner, and a southerner might have trouble understanding the life of a west coaster, and a big city person might have trouble identifying with people who live in rural areas, and everything in between.

Cruiser's avatar

Well…with the banking crisis still very fresh in my mind I don’t blame him or anyone for stashing cash anywhere but in US banks. Plus the FDIC only insures up to $250,000.00 per account and with his millions that would be cumbersome to have that many accounts to track. Plus maybe the Swiss offer more than the tenth of a percent interest US banks now offer.

Aethelflaed's avatar

Why exactly is “just business” also “none of our business” when he’s not only running for president, but using his success at business as a reason we should vote for him? That seems like saying we’re only allowed to use that criteria if it’s a positive.

missingbite's avatar

It used to be quite easy to own a Swiss bank account. Many people have done it and we are living in a Global Economy. I have no problem with Romney having enough money to have or need a Swiss bank account. Many corporations leave a lot of their assets overseas to protect them from our taxes. Apple and GE come to mind. Isn’t Jeffery Immelt up there in the Obama Administration?

JLeslie's avatar

@Aethelflaed Who is saying none of our business? I haven’t been watching the news. Or, do you mean a jelly?

mazingerz88's avatar

@Aethelflaed It’s what an acquaintance of mine felt a rich politician might think if people wanted to know where each and every dollar of his came from and went to. It’s prejudice against successful people and all that. It seems candidates like Romney is out of touch with the middle class and Obama is out of touch with business hence I’m wondering what kind of status should a US President have to be better if not the best president there is.

Aethelflaed's avatar

@mazingerz88 If Romney wants me to care about his dollars, he better show me where they came from and where they went to. If he doesn’t want to use that as a reason for me to vote for him, then fine, but if he wants to use it, then it’s open to both praise and criticism.

JLeslie's avatar

I think business experience and wealth are two separate things. They sometimes go together. Are we talking about a wealthy person stashing his funds outside of the country, or business experience?

bolwerk's avatar

Romney’s business practices are clearly odious, but they’re probably the very least of his problems. His exact policies are perhaps a little hard to pinpoint, but judging by the fascists lining up to support him, they are no doubt exceedingly bad for the general public.

But how exactly is someone with a middle class or even upper middle class income supposed to become POTUS? Obama or Clinton are about as close as you can get to approximating an “upper middle class” presidential candidate, in that at least they were born in relative poverty and able to work their way up to the status of ivy league Bildungsbürgertum and party hack. The next closest thing you get is someone like Reagan, where someone is born in relative poverty and becomes really famous for some other God awful reason. Bush was a faker, a Connecticut Yankee-turned-cowboy-hat-donning-clown, and many other presidents (Kennedy?) just didn’t even care enough to try to fake it.

phaedryx's avatar

“Why would some Americans want to have a President who has deposited huge amounts of money abroad?”

Because they’re using a different criteria to decide who to vote for

Uberwench's avatar

Depositing money abroad is the least of my concerns when it comes to Romney. Actually, it’s not a concern at all. Like @Cruiser said, it makes sense to have money all over the world if you can. It’s insurance against economic collapse. That’s different from what people might make of his business and accounting practices, though.

Qingu's avatar

“Well…with the banking crisis still very fresh in my mind I don’t blame him or anyone for stashing cash anywhere but in US banks.”

And I’m sure this is really what you believe Romney’s motivation was, @Cruiser!

Cruiser's avatar

“I’m sure this is really what you believe Romney’s motivation was”

@Qingu I never said THAT ;) Whatever his “real” reason(s) were….I know I don’t trust my own banks past the $250K limit.

Qingu's avatar

Uhuh. And I’m sure you’d move it to a Cayman’s account just for the feeling of trust and security that offshore bank accounts are renowned for… not to dodge paying taxes or anything.

Cruiser's avatar

Hell yes I would! Until we get a Government that is responsible enough with the tax dollars I give them I will take every tax dodge I can get @Qingu.

Qingu's avatar

Well, then.

Why were you pretending that it had to do with the security of the US banking system instead of blatantly dodging taxes?

Jaxk's avatar

Just so I understand, Romney has never been ‘Poor’ so he can’t possibly understand what it’s like. Is that the problem? So what. What he needs to understand is how jobs are created. Not what it’s like to be unemployed. We need someone that understands Business and finance, interest rates and how they work, inflation and national debt. Who cares if he knows what it’s like to be a shoe salesman in Topeka Kansas.

If I see my retirement account dropping like a rock, I don’t go to the local homeless guy to seek advice. Albeit, he does know what it’s like to have no retirement savings. I go to the most financial savvy guy I can find to help me out. And guess what, he’s probably rich.

I will never understand this penchant for finding someone poor or destitute to be president. That is a loser.

Qingu's avatar

I think it’s important to be able to empathize with poor people. Having once been poor helps, but it’s not a requirement. There are wealthy aristocrats who understand the challenges and frustrations involved despite never having faced them himself.

Romney doesn’t really seem to be one of those people, though. He sort of reflexively said he’s “not concerned about the very poor,” because they have a safety net (that he wants to drastically cut, of course). He believes in a fraudulent mythology that poor people could easily succeed in America if only they pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps; he doesn’t seem to understand that there are forces at work that aim to keep poor people poor and dependent. Many of his statements about poor people and macro-economic policies directed towards them strike me as either stupidly naive or else psychopathically deceptive.

That said, it would be nice if Romney had some special understanding of how to create jobs in a depressed economy with the government’s tools. His experience as a equity manager, however, has absolutely nothing to do with this. Though it’s kind of cute that @Jaxk is pretending that it does, like the good old Republican mouthpiece that he is.

Jaxk's avatar

This from a guy that thinks, if we could just raise taxes, the economy would take off. Too bad he wasn’t a Community Organizer, that would really be pertinent. We’ve been waging a war on poverty since the Johnson administration and spent $Trillions on government handouts. The problem has only gotten worse. But let’s keep going down this road, I’m sure it will start working any day now. Nothing stupidly naive or psychopathically deceptive in that. More proof that we need someone smarter than a bag of hammers for president.

Cruiser's avatar

@Qingu There was no “pretending” on my part. I simply explained the more obvious reasons he or anyone with cash on hand would do. Simple facts is all.

Qingu's avatar

@Jaxk, “This from a guy that thinks, if we could just raise taxes, the economy would take off.”

I never said this. And in many discussions with you, I have repeatedly said that raising taxes is counterproductive to economic recovery. You’ll note also that the guy I support, Obama, has repeatedly lowered taxes—some of which (payroll tax cuts) were opposed by Romney’s people.

Did you forget or are you just being dishonest like usual?

Qingu's avatar

@Cruiser, except the simple fact is that “security” is not ever a non-marginal incentive to offshore your financial holdings. Dodging your tax obligations is.

And I think the simple fact is that you knew this perfectly well when you posted your original comment, and were simply being dishonest, as seems to be the pattern for conservative posters.

Cruiser's avatar

Color it however suits your agenda @Qingu…that appears to be your liberal modus operandi

JLeslie's avatar

@Qingu I am pretty sure when Romney said I am not worried about the poor, I think he meant we already have systems in place for them, I don’t think he meant he doesn’t care about them.

Qingu's avatar

It was a botched attempt to prove that he was laser-focused on the middle class, yes.

But I think it does reflect a deeper, market-worshiping ideology, where he believes rich people objectively deserve their wealth, and if you are poor, that’s simply the market doling out your value (in their case, lack thereof) as a human being.

JLeslie's avatar

@Qingu I don’t know. I certainly do believe a lot of people around me have that ideology, but for whatever reason I hate to think of Romney. It has to do with my own assumptions, stereotypes, and generalizations about what I think most moderate Republicans are compared to the right wingers, and I am slow to see Romney as a right winger knowing his past politics. This why I am waiting for the debates with Romney and Obama. I want to hear what Romney says when he already has the nomination and is one on one with Obama and not playing to a community crowd in come corner of the country. I really hope the person hosting the debate does not just ask what the candidate believes and feels, but also what they are actually going to do about a particular topic. Like I don’t care of Romney is pro-life as long as he does not actively try to change laws that will take away a woman’s right to choose. I am fine that he participates in his religion, believes Christ is his Lord and savior, as long as he doesn’t try to get prayer back into school (I don’t believe he would want that) and what exactly is he going to try to push through concerning taxes, etc.

Ron_C's avatar

Where Romney’s money is stored is less important than what he intends to do with our money. Running a country is almost the exact opposite of running a business.

A country must not be run from the top down, that’s fascism. Elected official represent citizens and must consult with them. Decisions must be based on the desires of the citizens, not the representatives’ desires.

A country is designed to combine resources to accomplish, as a country, what cannot be accomplished by individual citizens. Roads, Railrpads, and safey and financial regulations are good examples. There is no way to compare that with running a business.

If you use work history as a criterion for picking a president, then a University president, or Governor would be a much better basis than a Businessman, especially one that dealt in Vulture Capitalism.

Qingu's avatar

@JLeslie, in the event that Romney becomes president, I hope you are right, and that he is simply lying through his teeth to appease his rabid base and will upon election turn out to be a pragmatic moderate. It’s certainly a possibility. A lot of his background makes him seem very pragmatic, which I actually respect (also why I like Obama). I think he’s obviously more intelligent and less ideological than GW Bush, which is also good.

That said, at a certain point, the man says what he says, and supports policies that he supports. He wholeheartedly supports the Ryan budget, which will shred the safety net for the poor people he says he is not concerned about. His tax plan involves giving massive tax cuts to wealthy people, unpaid for of course (which means if he wants to even attempt to balance the budget, Medicare and social safety net programs will get the axe). And al of his comments about “class warfare” and “job creators” and people “jealous of his success” sure make him seem like he drinks that Ayn Rand kool-aid, just like many wealthy people do.

JLeslie's avatar

@Qingu I like to think if he becomes president he will be pragmatic, and probably just blame the democrats maybe if he can’t get everything he has said he wanted. Save face with his party or some sort of thing.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther