Phil Mickelson isn't the only one considering drastic changes. Millions of others are, too. Do you liberals see how this isn't going to work out well for Obama and the Democraps now? Phil Mickelson says changes are coming because of taxes and how they affect his family. Is Lefty considering retiring? He won't turn 43 until June. Scott Michaux first reported that Mickelson said he was considering retirement after his final round Sunday at the Humana Challenge. You should read his entire transcript. I've picked out a few of the more interesting quotes below. Q: When you're asked about Stricker's semi-retirement, with the political situation the last couple months ... what did you mean by that? Do you find it an unsettling time in a way? Phil Mickelson: Well, it's been an interesting offseason. And I'm going to have to make some drastic changes. I'm not going to jump the gun and do it right away, but I will be making some drastic changes. Q: Meaning leaving from California? Mickelson: I'm not sure. Q. Moving to Canada? Mickelson: I'm not sure what exactly, you know, I'm going to do yet. I'll probably talk about it more in depth next week. I'm not going to jump the gun, but there are going to be some. There are going to be some drastic changes for me because I happen to be in that zone that has been targeted both federally and by the state and, you know, it doesn't work for me right now. So I'm going to have to make some changes. Q: So why do you say next week? What is going to happen so drastic next week? Mickelson: No, but I'll probably be in the media center and I'll probably be a little more open to it because San Diego is where a lot more things, it's where I live, it's where the Padre thing was a possibility, and it's where my family is. And it just seems like a better fit than right here off of 18 on Palm Springs. Q: Is it a stance that you are taking because on the one hand, you've made a lot of money, and no matter how much they take out, you are left with a lot of money? Mickelson: Yeah. I'll probably go into it more next year or next week. But if you add up, if you add up all the federal and you look at the disability and the unemployment and the Social Security and the state, my tax rate's 62, 63 percent. So I've got to make some decisions on what I'm going to do. http://www.cbssports.com/golf/blog/...hil-mickelson-might-be-considering-retirement
phil is a great american for bringing this up. I live in the town next to his, I have spoken with plenty of people who have bumped into him. Most people say he is a really good guy. Its a shame CA is kicking him out of his home. They have kicked out just about everybody who earns enough to say they live somewhere else for over 6 months a year. Its so short sighted and stupid. 30 percent of CA pay income tax and now you are kicking out the high end. How stupid are democrats? They are attacking the successful and coddling the moochers. good plan.
Sorry, OP. Before I saw this thread I started a new thread in the Economics Forum on the exact same topic. I was not trying to steal your thunder. Certainly eye-popping news. I wonder how many Hollywood liberals are making similar plans. Here's the Forbes link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthony...-may-call-it-quits-due-to-climbing-tax-rates/
LOL Don't concern yourself with starting competing threads on the same topic. My feelings don't get bruised from like minded posters. This story is a great example of the lesson of unintended consequences of liberal taxation.
Phil and other athletes ( if you can call golfers athletes ), actors, singers and high salaried people get the worst screwing on taxes. While corporate guys ala Romney give the US the biggest screwing. It's always been that way.
Not sure about the rate of things I dont keep track But it may be possible that by the time his time is up we will say: Bush has his issues, but at least he was straighter or better then Obama. Same thing tends to happen just in a different way. Is I cause its a different person with the same goal ? I know your not a country, but what would happen if you changed yoru direction every 4 years? (or 8) 4 years does not work. not when there is so much to control.
They have the means to hide, shelter, defer and just flat out lie about income that we do not. . None of us here have the capabilities to set up offshore companies to shelter income. The system is written by and for the wealthy. We don't have access to legislatures to have tax laws written for our benefit. You do know all this already don't you? And I probably worded my statement wrong I should of said, the other tax payers get screwed by having to pay more and/or our debt goes higher because of the sweetheart deal the wealthy gets. If you're not wealthy you can screw the system by becoming a welfare sponge, who also screw the taxpayers. But hard work and paying taxes, for me at least, is a better life.