E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Mitt Romney promised this past weekend that the wealthy would “still pay the same share of the tax burden they’re paying now” and that he’s “not looking for a tax cut for the very wealthiest.” And: “I'm not looking to reduce the burden paid by the wealthiest.”
He added, “I’m looking to bring tax rates down for everyone.”
That’s what he said on CBS’s Face the Nation, despite the Tax Policy Center’s analysis earlier this year that showed that those making more than $1 million a year would get a $146,000 a year cut from Romney’s plan (by lowering the top rate to 26.6%) – and that the poor would pay more than it currently does (because the base would be broadened).
(Here's the Tax Policy Center's full table laying it out.)
So what’s changed? Nothing, says Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the center, who conducted the original analysis.
The key, Williams says, is Romney’s language. And Romney’s very careful here to say, “pay the same share of the tax burden.”
That means that if his plan cuts the rate for the wealthy, which it does, then he has to make that up with which “tax preferences that he’d get rid of,” Williams said. In other words, the only way the wealthiest would pay the same share is if Romney closes unspecified tax loopholes. And that is where Romney has been vague.
Though he promises to perhaps get rid of certain deductions, he has yet to specify which. When Face the Nation moderator Bob Schieffer pressed Romney, he declined to say what he would do.
“Well, we'll go through that process with Congress,” he said, adding he’d consider certain deductions and exemptions.
Asked what his ideas are now, Romney again cited Simpson-Bowles, the bipartisan commission formed by the president to find a solution that would reduce the nation’s debt and deficits. But he would only say “deductions and exemptions,” and didn’t specify which.
In fact, it would likely be very difficult for Romney to find the deductions necessary to keep the wealthy from paying the same share, because, as Williams points out, there aren’t many “deductions or exemptions” that have an outsized benefit for the rich outside of capital gains, dividends, and exclusions for municipal bond interest.
Things like state and local tax deductions and the popular mortgage-interest deduction discussed in Simpson-Bowles, Williams said, would most benefit the middle- to upper-middle class.
Romney has already said he would not raise the capital gains tax; he would keep it at the current rate of 15 percent for those making more than $200,000 a year. So that’s one lever eliminated to make up the difference.
He has said he would at least “consider taxing some ‘carried interest’ at regular income tax rates,” the New York Times wrote. But it’s not at all clear if he would actually do that, something the private-equity and hedge-fund world would strongly oppose.
“It is really hard to maintain the distribution, maintain the same share of taxes that they are paying now,” Williams said of the wealthy under Romney’s plan.
He also points out that Romney would “extend the Bush tax cuts, but kill the Obama tax cuts,” like the earned-income tax credit expansion, child-care credits, educational tax credits, making them “less generous, less refundable.” And: “The people hit by that almost exclusively are not the rich at all.”
Obama, by contrast, has promised to raise taxes on the rich. “Every budget,” Williams noted, Obama “said he’s going to raise taxes on rich.”
But there wouldn’t be enough revenue generated from the so-called Buffet Rule -- which would tax capital gains, as if it were regular wages – or eliminating oil and gas subsidies, popular with Capitol Hill Democrats, to make a big dent in the nation’s debt and deficits.
So, the choice is: A vague plan from Romney that, of what’s known so far, disproportionately benefits the wealthy and isn’t at all clear that it would raise enough revenue to offset its cost; or Obama’s, which targets the rich, but also would do little to close the nation’s deficits.
Leave a Comment:
Yeah!
The wealthy will pay the same share right about the time pigs begin to fly!
Any word yet if Willard is in favor of cutting the loop-hole which allows him to write of $77K per year in losses related to Annie's ballet dancing horse?
These simpltons are again picking and choosing what they want to include and score of the Romney Plan. If you take it without the total redesign of the tax code, you get what the Tax Policy Center( a group run by former Democratic activists). What they redesign of the tax code does is the same thing it did under Reagan. He lowered the top tax rate to 28% yet doubled tax revenue during his time in office. Democrats used the same excuses as they are now. But the wealthy actually paid more in the end because thousands of tax credits and deductions were discontinued. This is total selective spin.
How funny.
I'd like to pay the same AMOUNT as Feisty, or better yet Amy.
But looky at Feisty talking about losses. Like she has ever done anything but take her exemption and standard deductions.
It's the tax code. It sucks. You no likey-like, tell your congress critter. Until those monkeys actually do something I'll be doing everything to minimize my tax burden.
Just like the rest of you all.
Spin it, Ray, spin it. After all, you've got to make it sound as if Romney's plan is a good plan otherwise why would anyone vote for him. It's reverse Robin Hood. No matter how much you spin it, Ray, to blame the democrats, the Tax Policy Center is a nonpartisan group.
Simpson/Bowles included approximately 4:1 in spending cuts to tax increases, yet Romney has publicly stated that he wouldn't even accept a 10:1 deal. How the heck does he support Simpson/Bowles if he won't raise taxes? And, the only specifics he is willing to give are to kill the earned-income tax credit expansion, child-care credits, and educational tax credits. But his plan doesn't favor the rich at all? This guy is a complete tool, as is anyone in the lower 99% that thinks Romney's plans will do anything to benefit them.
He flip-flops so much that its ridiculous to even attempt to figure out what NitMitt is going to do based on anything he has said in the past, which also includes just hours in the past.
That's an understatement. His whole campaign has been vague since it started. This guy is eventually going to have to pay the piper and start clarifying what he intends to do as POTUS. Can't wait for that. The wheels will fall off shortly afterwards and then it's good-bye Willard, nice knowin' ya', c ya' wouldn't wanna be ya'!
I'm telling ya GT!
I have flash-backs to when I was a kid and my guppy escaped it's fish bowl the way he flops around!
The bottom line is this: Mitten's has nothing to run except the, "Vote for me because I'm not Obama" theme. That's it, nothing else, nada.......
Obama/Biden 2012
And how did Reagan double the tax revenue in office - why sillies, he did it by shafting the middle class with one of the largest tax increases in history. Before you bend down and lick the boots of St. Reagan, at least acknowledge he ran one of the biggest taxation scams in the country's history.
http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=488 -- The Sad Legacy of Ronald Reagan
http://www.factcheck.org/treasury_tax_expert_to_bush_clintons_increase.html
If this country and its "poiticans" want to see the national debt go down...we have to have jobs...and so far, not one republican has worked on anything that concerns jobs. Actually , no one in congress has worked on jobs...they all are only interested in the elections and their own well being.
I have flash-backs to when I was a kid and my guppy escaped it's fish bowl the way he flops around!
Feisty,
Yeah, but I'll bet when your guppy flopped, it did it with more character, which more than I can say for this used car salesman......
Mitten's is like a used car salesman who is told that if he doesn't clear the lot of all the cars by November, he's going to be fired. So whatever he says, you might want to think twice about believing him.....
Obama/Biden 2012
Yet... these right wing guppy's are willing to buy a Bass-O-Matic from this pathological douche-bag!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BQFv83QJ2Y&feature=player_detailpage
Yeah... but... that's because my guppy was trained in
dressageballet! ;o)And we hear from Mr. Spanks yet again . . .
You seem to have a burr in your bonnet. What in the world do you know about Feisty's taxes? Absolutely nothing, of course. Just wanted to jump on the "get Feisty" bandwagon, huh? That seems to happen with a lot of Romney supporters.
What redesign of the tax code? Until he is willing to identify which deductions and tax expenditures he would get rid of he does not have a redesigned tax code - all he has maintaining conditions for the wealthy and lowering the income susceptible to taxes to "broaden the base."
Punting it off to "we'll work that out with Congress" is the dumbest thing I have heard so far this election year.
Poor SpankMe - he is unable to post a comment as a stand alone - the little leg humper is always along for the ride! ;o)
Like it helps his cause... lmao!
Feisty can fly? Who knew...
This guy is eventually going to have to pay the piper and start clarifying what he intends to do as POTUS.
I'm still waiting for Obama to DO what he clarified.
Yes, on her broom.
The republicans are the only party that realizes that the only way out of this economic recession is REAL growth, not tax and spend Keynesian tricks.
If 0bama was smart, he wold simplify the income tax code, lower rates across the board and remove the thousands of deductions that cloud up tax season every year.
my2cents, do a little research... Obama has kept the majority of his promises...
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/
The broken promises are largely the result of GOP obstructionism, however his promises kept and the ones in the works are nearly 61%! So to claim he has not done what he said he would do is simply a GOP spin with no regards for actual fact.
Maybe if the government would STOP THE SPENDING, cut the Waste, and Fraud people would not mind as much about the taxes? Its like buying stock you look at the companies books invest and expect a return unlike Obama and company that continue to flush our tax dollars on Solyndra and other failures.
Obama response is what does someone rich relate to the poor and middle class? Well would you rather invest in a crack street junkie? Wake up and vote Romney because the other choice does not have clue!
here's a few facts for you
My property values are worth 20 - 25% less
My 401 K is worth less
My taxes in every regard are higher because someone or something has to spend more than they take in.
I continue to work harder and longer to just stay the same.
I see an administration who spends his time protecting the Illegals instead of reducing unemployment, balancing a budget and all the other things that allow me to pursue life, liberty, happiness, etc. Let's continue to pander to the population segments who take from the system instead of contribute. Let's fight for the union pensions but do nothing to fix Social Security - ad infinitum
Romney WON'T RAISE his tax rate of 13%. He won't refuse to accept his Presidential pay. He won't make the OIL COMPANIES not get subsidies from those who actually pay taxes. He will make the Government pay for the SECRET SERVICE addition to his mansion in California. Oh wait. I am sorry, he said he won't be taking vacations from the White House so that mansion rebuild in California isn't needed. Of course, he and his wife will pay for all their trips to France, Spain, China. What? You say the TAXPAYERS will have to pay for those trips with his five sons and their wives.
Fisting Redhead in Roselle...maybe if you had gone and got a college education and made enough to actually had some deductions, you wouldn't be so critical. Having a child out of wedlock after having the guy bolt after waking up sober after a night with you must have really put you on the road to Hussein's "give me" philosophy. To bad you don't get do over's....looks like the leg humper is you!!!!
hmmmm, lets see, "THEY AREN'T PAYING THEIR TAXES NOW" so still paying their share is equal to paying nothing all over again.
FUK U ROBMEE.
Obama 2012
Bob-1136191, well put!
Arieus, who is paying the taxes then?
I think you need to hit the books.
Romney and taxes HOW ARE THOSE FOREIGN BANK ACCOUNTS WORKING FOR YOU WILLARD?
Pretty good I wager
This guy is a lying joke
What is he doing writing his tax legislation on an ETCH A SKETCH?
What are they FLIP FLOP?
elliot-3020456
Tell that to Robmee, Bush, Boehner, that lives f the backs of the middle class and the poor that are taxed to death on everything from food, gas, clothing, and then tell it to GE that paid ZERO dollars in taxes. Then you have church and religions raking in 71 billion last year and paying zero in taxes and all the 1%ers as well.
Maybe it's you Elliot that needs to hit the books and do your research before posting.
jussayin-
Interestingly, the top 10% pay a GREATER share of the income tax burden because of the Bush tax cuts, so if we resort to the Clinton era tax rates, they will pay a smaller share of the income tax burden.
According to the non-partisan National Taxpayers Union, the top 10% paid 67.33% of all income taxes in 2000 (Clinton tax rates), but paid 70.47% of the income tax burden in 2009 after the Bush tax cuts (latest figures available).
Here's the link;
http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html
Ray W. " What they redesign of the tax code does is the same thing it did under Reagan. He lowered the top tax rate to 28% yet doubled tax revenue during his time in office"
Even under Bush's tax cuts, total Federal revenues increased by $4.79 Trillion more in Bush's 8 years than they did in Clinton's 8 years. That was a 39% increase under Bush, despite his 'tax cuts'. Any reasonable person would conclude that the Bush tax cuts more than paid for themselves by economic growth which increased tax revenues.
Also, those Bush tax cuts stimulated the economy so much that total economic activity (GDP) was 50.9% higher in Bush's 8 years than in Clinton's 8 years, an increase in total GDP of $32.9 Trillion under Bush.
An examination of Bush's real record (not the 'spin' by the left wing media) produces some interesting results.
Bass-O-Matic!!! Great old SNL reference Fiesty! One of the true classic bits from the first cast!
So are you saying that the rich don't pay taxes?
As for churches, they are protected from the state by the constitution.
Now your example of a corporation is laughable. That is the same corporation who's CEO works in the white house. And for the record, Corporations never "pay" taxes, their customers do through higher product prices.
Don't you have a flag burning or occupy protest to get to? Run along, I'm done with you.
I may be wrong, but I don't think it's the Constitution that says that churches shouldn't pay taxes.
The whole point is: with the TAX CODE as written NOW with its $1.1TRILLION in "breaks, Cuts & Caps"; Plus 45% paying NOTHING?? No; we don't want them paying the same share they're paying NOW?? The TAX CODE is the problem?? "AX THE TAX CODE", for starters; there is your "DEFICIT"??
Cut the military, not by half, by 3/4. The less meat heads burning the Curan the better and safter we will be.
You see, it's in his "words", LOL. "They" will "pay" the same "share" of the "tax" burden they do now. Figuring each quoted word to have at least two possible meanings, then what he "said" could mean any of 16 different scenarios. If the whole burden goes down because we cut social security, medicare, unemployment, education, infrastructure, and just about every program we care about, then the rich will get a huge cut and still pay their "share"... and, besides, anyone know what their "share" is? Wholesale cuts always favor the higher incomes. The same "percentage" translate to more cash at higher levels.
It's all Romney double speak of variable uncommitted positions.
Meaningless against the facts of his published plan.
Roy Wilson,
Please tell us the impact two huge unfunded wars might have on Bush GDP figures, Thanks... the wars drove the numbers... the truth now... no spin.
Please tell us how you can legitimately link tax cuts to increased revenue yet disconnect them from increased debt, Thanks... you can't... no spin.
Bob-1136191
Good analogy. The GOP plays the part of the ones that bolted while the Dems play the part of the ones that were f#$%ked... logical way to look at it.
The record speaks for itself. It's the job of the poor to support the rich. We need slaves. At least the Republicans aren't basing it on color, religion or ethnicity. It's sheer economics. If we can keep a substantial portion of the population unemployed by shipping their jobs overseas, and take away their homes, they will be willing to work for a place to stay and a few scraps of food.
Republicans have sabotaged the recovery to achieve their #1 priority, making Obama a 1 term President. They will do whatever it takes to give the rich more of the pie. CEOs are sitting on $2 Trilllion, unwilling to invest or hire, partly to make Obama look bad.
If you make $250,000 or more, it is in your interest to vote Republican. If you make less and vote Republican, you have been fooled, you are a puppet. They pressed your buttons and you do whatever they say. Brainwashed.
Everyone making less than $250,000 should vote Democrat to make their lives better.
Jesus supports Democrats.
@my2centsworth - have you heard of this massive recession we just had? Everyone's 401K, property values, income, jobs for many have been hammered or lost. And the president can offer up plans all he wants about how to help fix things but it's congress who does all the things you are asking the president to do. It's funny, because if Obama enacts an executive order then he gets hammered for it but it seems like many expect that he has the power to use executive order to do so many of these big things. Obviously, he does have influence and certainly can guide the senate and many bills have made it thru the Senate but have been killed in the house or the house has gone with a completely different approach and the two sides can't compromise. Yes, he does have a lot of regulatory power also, that I will grant, but that's not the whole solution. Now, it is true, that Obama has been off-focus at times but it's not like he hasn't been yelling for his jobs bill idea for a while. Granted, that is a government solution that adds more to our debt but, and I'm pretty well independent, I do feel Obama has made a lot of attempts, not all legitimate certainly, but most, to try and get Congress working on key things, but the House will have no part of it and you can't do it without both houses of Congress. Period.
LMarcT "Roy Wilson,.......Please tell us how you can legitimately link tax cuts to increased revenue yet disconnect them from increased debt, Thanks... you can't... no spin."
Figuring it out is 'so simple a caveman could do it' - leaving more money in consumers pockets provides them with more money to spend, which leads to economic growth and job creation, which leads to more tax revenues from the 'Progressive' tax rates. How else would you explain the 51% increase in total GDP and 39% increase in total federal revenues under Bush versus under Clinton - in spite of the devastating effects of 911 on the economy? No spin, please.
Debt increases under Obama have averaged 4 times higher than under Bush, and if you look at the average National Debt under Bush, it was a slightly LOWER percentage of GDP than under Clinton at about 62% of GDP - surprised? So was I, but it's true. Of course, it has skyrocketed under Obama, and is now about 105% of GDP, which is getting close to the 'danger zone' that has crippled Greece, Spain and Italy.
We can't afford '4 more years of Obama'.
Romney - liar, liar, pants on fire but what else is new...
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL
I have three dogs, they don't dance but are extremely cute. Do you think I could get a tax deduction for my pets?
why are all the good comments collapsed by the community? something funny going on in this newsvine.
my2centsworth-4076520
well, maybe you should blame that on the fact that the housing bubble cause prices to inflate at a fast rate - faster than normal. Houses appreciate over time. A $150,000 should not appreciate by $100,000 in 4-6 years to be $250,0000. What you are seeing is the housing market's return to what it should have been prior to the housing boom. Unfortunately, while banks made billions, the homeowners got screwed.
wrong, your 401K recovered from the 2008 Financial Meltdown.
your income taxes are lower than they have ever been. If you are referring to your real estate tax, that's your town/city's doing.
Welcome to the corporate greed: work harder, get paid less. Plus, the vacation you may have earned, don't take it because you may not have a job when you come back.
while unemployment increased from 4% to almost 8% under Bush (which by the way increased the most in 2008, and did not stop just because a new president got sworn in), it is slowly going down. Yes, too slow, but if we didn't have morons who wouldn't even vote on a bill to stop rewarding companies for OFF SHORING jobs with nice tax breaks, maybe we could start to improve our unemplyment.
Tell me, why are Republicans FOR tax breaks for companies that send jobs to other countries?????
bayllie
HUGE Applause from Dallas Texas.
ROY WILSON-336103
Roy, you amaze me each time with your figures that are totally useless.
Do you realize that wealth is a zero sum game? when someone gets a large piece of cake, the other person gets a smaller piece. And then you pay taxes on the size of that cake. Now we all know that the wealthy have been systematically getting wealthier in the past 30 years and getting wealthier ON SPEED since 2002. So all you are proving that their tax liability has been increasing because their wealth have been increasing, while the tax liability of the 98% has been shrinking due to their shrinking wealth.
But the $10,000 Romney-bucks question is: is the tax liability of the rich increasing PROPORTIONALLY to the increase of the wealth, and the tax liability has been shrinking PROPORTIONALLY to the decrease of the wealth???
You either don't understand the concept or you choose not to. I'm not sure which one is worse.
Arieus, you are probably one of those people who thought the SCOTUS ruling regarding corporations and campaign contributions was just terrible, right. At the same time you bi**h that the GE corporation pays no taxes. WAKE UP. NO corporation actually pays taxes. They just collect them from us and pass them along. GE has just figured out USING THE TAX CODE, how to do that most efficiently. The individuals who receive GE dividends do pay taxes on them.
It must be terrible to be so jealous and bitter. Or maybe just gullible.
Not specifying what you would do until you are voted in office, has not answered any of my questions.
If you wont answer any of my question and specify what you would do.
You will never get my vote let alone anyone who has questions about your plans for the Country.
And if anyone other than the 1% identifies or have anything in common with you is fooling themselves on the delusion you are lying about.
I am white upper class (close to 1% but not there yet) with a nice paying job and I surely have the cognitive skills to know when someone is lying.
But lets facts all politicians LIE, President Obama who I will be voting for is no exception.
But to think FLIP-OMNEY would not push my daughters back 50 years is a delusion I have come to realize is not worth my vote.
Nukeman-837193
are you serious?????? Corporations may be taxed on their incomes, property, or existence. The United States taxes corporations under the same framework of tax law as individuals. If corporation makes profit, corporation pays taxes, unless they have a accountant with a huge imagination - like a loss on a 1/3rd ownership of a horse or keeping your money off-shore.
The taxes collected by corporation are for example sales tax or payroll tax. Those are passed on. They do not belong to the corporation because the corporation acts like a collection agency (simply said). It makes everyone's life much easier that way.
Dude, seriously educate yourself before speaking. Look at an income statement of any publicly traded company. Seriously!
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=GE
ItsAboutTime-3704531
thank you.
GE does pay taxes, just not to the USofA
If history proves anything it is that societies make the same mistakes over and over again. The fall of every great empire is usually based on three things. First is an unsustainable debt load and a shrinking tax base. Second is a huge unsustainable military spread around the world. Third is a deep seated belief that God is on your side and that you will always be the most powerful country in the world. Arrogance.
The solution is obvious and has been carried out by other countries with success. Most notably Canada in the 90's. Cut spending and raise taxes on everyone. Convince the people that they are making an investment in their children's future by making sacrifices today. Austerity measures work because people invest in a business or society when it gets its books in order and cuts its debt load. Unfortunately, to do so means touching what politicians deem untouchable. Military spending, Medicare and Social Security. Good luck with that.
Hopefully Winston Churchill will be proven correct when he said that "American's can always be counted on to do the right thing.......after they have exhausted all other possibilities. " If not then our economic future is pretty bleak. Hello China.
sirie
I know why you picked GE but what GE does is what 66% of other corporations do -LEGALLY. They do business in this country, and cry poverty because of taxes while paying none or very little while laughing all the way to their Cayman Island bank.
Let's give zero tax liability to any company that hires 100% American labor while tax heavily those who do not. If they don'tlike it, they can go do business in Russia, and some other company will take their place.
Bayllie, It is only a zero sum game to a Marxist or a Keynesian who doesn't believe that the private sector can create capital.
In the real world, a capitalistic society can create wealth without making another entity poorer.
Read up on your Adam Smith, I suggest The Wealth of Nations.
Hopefully you will give this some thought and stop blaming your short stack on someone else's tall stack.
Even under Bush's tax cuts, total Federal revenues increased by $4.79 Trillion more in Bush's 8 years than they did in Clinton's 8 years.
Also, those Bush tax cuts stimulated the economy so much that total economic activity (GDP) was 50.9% higher in Bush's 8 years than in Clinton's 8 years, an increase in total GDP of $32.9 Trillion under Bush.
So easily checked... so wrong! What numbers are you using? Here's my source:
1992 - total direct revenue = $1.1T GDP = $6.3T
2000 - total direct revenue = $2.0T GDP = $9.9T
2008 - total direct revenue = $2.5T GDP = $14.4T
elliot-3020456
You just unbalanced my universe. Please explain or provide a reference so I can get some sleep this weekend... Thanks!
Ballie,
Thanks for some good posts, as far as Roy Wilson goes, I agree with your post #1.49 above, but I would offer that Wilson has always been very self-possessed, pompous and loose with facts and stats in his posts, and so perhaps you would be better off just ignoring him, as I, and many others, do.
LM, read the wealth of nations... I think i wrote that in the post that you are responding to.
You want to see the "new" federal tax code that Romney would adopt? Just look at the new Koch/ALEC written tax code for the State of Kansas.
The bill signed will cut the individual income tax rates of 6.45 percent, 6.25 percent and 3.5 percent to just two rates at 4.9 percent and 3 percent. It will also eliminate state income taxes for the owners of partnerships, S corporations and limited liability companies. In addition, it exempts from taxes income from farms, royalties on minerals, oil, gas copyrights and patent, and real estate rental income.
Yes, that's correct - they eliminated taxes on partnerships, meaning doctors and lawyers will pay no state taxes on partnership income.
Naw - I want Romney to get all Obama like with the tax law. Obama says he will not enforce immigration laws, cool.
Romney can then choose not to enforce certain tax codes.
I'd like him to start with the AMY.
Seems fair and all, right?
Hey Wm - are you saying there would be less double taxation? Awesome.
Golly Wm. it's almost like you have no idea about how this actually works.
Say, how about you go look into LLC and Professional Liability Companies.
Aw, who am I kidding. SO ThinkProgress is against it, eh?
Wm-375815, thanks for the report from Kansas. That's a whole new level of robbing from the poor to give to the rich. Those businesses, doctors, lawyers and farmers need roads and bridges but they are not required to share in the cost of such trivial things. City and local governments might as well close their doors since revenue sharing will be nonexistent.
So Dominico - it's nearly 7:00 your time.
Got Holder?
Come on Dominico, we all know you are aware of that little meeting.
Dominico, you are aware of it, yes?
Oh and Jody, dear - you say we are not required to share, and yet I suspect I pay more in taxes each month than you do in a year.
So how about you step it up a tad.
Cause right now it just ain't fair.
How is lowering taxes "robbing from the poor"? How stupid.
Moonbats only care about punishing the successful, because they are envious and also worship inefficient Government as their God,. whose appetite for stealing our property is never exhausted.
They've also eliminated the State Rebate on the sales tax on food. Way to stick it to the poor again. What little I just looked at Kansas tax rates they seem to vary by city. Not sure where they're going to be able to take all that, but you can be sure sales taxes at the least will skyrocket.
Oh, poor, poor Spanky - has it so rough that after taxes, he can only afford to take the Mrs. to the local Outback for those $9.99 ribs once a week - and just leave enough for the 27+ tacos for Spanky Jr.
Sounds like price are about to fall in Kansas. After all it is the customers that provide the revenue for the taxes that were eliminated.
Romney refuses to acknowledge what taxes and exemptions he would eliminate to balance out his tax break for the rich but he knows. The only 2 deductions capable of offsetting a 5 trillion over 10 year cut would be the home mortgage and employer health care exemption. Romney will never admit an intent to eliminate what's really the only deductions the middle class have left. The good thing is most will be able to file short form if Romneys elected.
I just want to add this to Spanky. There is nothing unlawful or unconscionable about double taxation. It may not be efficient. It may discourage economic activity (or encourage tax avoidance). But it's not confiscation, if it's the best way a society can devise to raise revenues to accomplish what is needed to organize and run an civil society. Remember, a government is needed to keep the poor off the streets and the rich out of our pockets.
Tax cuts have NEVER created a job, despite what the GOP says. If tax cuts were really creating jobs, then there would be no tax-cuts left. Tax cuts only embolden the rich and make them richer, while saddling the burden onto the middle-class and poor.
Wormney is the one who 100% out of touch. Mittens & Ann took over $77K in tax deductions for their horse and its dressage, which included several $1000 saddles.
Wormney will continue the destructive economic policies of the Reagan/Bush/Bush eras. Reagan started the snuffing out of the middle-class, Bush almost got the job done. Wormney will end them once and for all. Also a Wormney Presidency will bring war with Iran, Russia, China & North Korea.. Unemployment at 10%+ end of year 1. Gas upwards of $8-$12/gallon because of the war with Iran.
Kansas unemployment has also dropped From 7.6% in 2009 to 6.1% as of April, 2012. By cutting taxes, where they have, the unemployment will drop even further in the next 2 years.
Good Job Republicans and Gov Brownback.
Romney is richer then the president plus ten senators (combined).... think about what he will do!
DB Akron...you are really happy with the Kansas unemployment rate dropping from 1.5% from 2009...to 2012? Oregon has dropped about 3% over that same time period.
Yes...Kansas has a lower unemployment rate. But then the Kansas economy is based almost entirely on agriculture which is less subject to economic downturns because one of the few things people can't give up is food.
Oregon actually RAISED taxes some on the wealthy in order to prevent layoffs of middle class government workers...and we had the second highest GDP growth in the country last year...just behind North Dakota which has a "socialist" state run bank.
The fact which conservatives just never seem to get is that you can give all the tax breaks in the world...but a company is never going to hire a worker they don't need in order to meet customer demand.
Gee Larry - so you think you deserve the mortgage deduction? I am a middle class guy, have never been able to afford a house out here in CA, and so I have rented for the past 37 yearsm subsidizing you. Now why is it that you get a big fat break on your "rent" and I don't? Why is it that you can establish a large net worth while I am "forced" to throw all my money away in rent like all the POOR PEOPLE, who subsidize YOU?
Seems that liberals are pretty greedy too. Just like the one's out here in CA who protested the latest budget cuts that were going to reduce some programs for the poor and cut union wages by 5%. Yeah, they protested, saying it was wrong to stick it to the poor, and then the democrat leaders pulled the language out of the Jerry Brown bill that would have reduced the union wages, but kept in the cuts for the poor.
See, in this 24/7 news cycle, liberals cannot get away with their lies and smears as easily.
So please, explain why me, as a lower middle class guy, or everyone who is poor, should subsidize your house, just because you make enough and were able to save enough for a down payment, or were given money from parents, or had a stable job long enough for you to buy? Why should the poor pay for your tax cut? And if the cut is so big that it can make a HUGE difference in the revenues to the government that your people claim is the most important thing on earth, why are you getting a break? Why can't you rent, or pay for your own house without a subsidy that amounts to hundreds of billions every year?
DB Akron & dizzykat: Here is a little wake up call. If you count companies like here in Manhattan firing everyone, and believe me everyone over 50 so they can hire college students (which I hate to say this but it is true, but it takes two to three (2 to 3) college students to do the same job as these seasoned workers that actually have a work ethic) is one way to lower the unemployment numbers. They pay them less and the fired workers have only minimum wages jobs available locally. This one company has so many law suits for age discrimination against them that several are considering a class action suite so every one is covered. I assume the company would rather pay a law suite than to pay retirement to many of these employees because the retirement would actually cost more. So replacing jobs with minimum wage jobs is a benefit only to the company's. Not to the local economy and to hundreds of workers. If they are doing that here in Manhattan KS, they they are doing the same thing across Kansas and it is forcing many families who for 15 years have been contributing to the local economy actually start being supported by the local community. That is Brownbeck's plan and result, they cut these company's taxes and the companies get rid of their experienced worker so they can train young kids at less pay (even though over 50% doesn't even know the definition of what work ethics are. It is about time the truth gets out there as Kansas in reality is being destroyed from within!
MisterWonderful
When you buy a house, a bank gives you mortgage. You pay back the principal + interest. The interest is the bank's income so the bank pays taxes on that income. You are not subsidizing ANYTHING becuase someone is paying more than the stupid deduction. Just because you don't want to move where you can afford a house does not mean that you have the right to complain.
You bitching about a few hundred dollar deduction that a home owner may or may not get????? Home buyers give a huge boost to the economy. Not only do they create jobs (contruction + repair) but they support the Lowe's, and the Home Depots.
Let's not forget the real estate tax that supports the town's schools, police, firefighters. YOU don't pay that so STFU.
Tell me, what happened after 2008 Financial collapse when people stopped buying homes, huh?
Mr. Wonderful, I'll tell you why: because the tax cut was priced into the houses of every middle class person who has bought a house while the interest deduction has existed. I.e., if not for the deduction, we'd have had to buy cheaper houses. Now you say cry me a river, but that's the system we were working under. We were not overreaching, we were buying what we could afford. I do feel fortunate we were able to buy a modest house, but we are very middle class. If our taxes suddenly go up by thousands a year (and that's what we're talking about in California), that's money that we used to put back into the economy that we no longer can. Hold off on big purchases like appliances, cancel the cable, no vacations. Now multiply our situation by the number of middle class people with mortgages who can take the deduction. That's why.
Bob--Envious liberals, class warfare -- more moonbat talking points. Can't you brainwashed Foxies come up with new material? Sorry, were you about to break out Socialism and Obamacare? What the heck is the matter with Kansas.
Sounds good to me. This is reasonable if you include slashing government spending by 40%. That's a plan I could get behind. Eliminate the deficit and start paying down the debt so my kids and grandkids aren't each saddled with an enormous debt by the generation before them. Finally some common sense and maturity! He's got my vote!
Here we go again with more MSNBC drivel about the wealthy somehow not paying taxes. Their ideology prohibits them from acknowledging that it is these very same wealthy that pays the tab for the country and Obama's madcap spending.
When facts are presented showing the wealthy pay virtually all the taxes collected, the ideologues go comatose and continue spewing their irrational rhetoric.
Once again; the top 1% pay 37% of all taxes and the top 5% pay more taxes than the remaining 95% combined, a fact made all the more astounding considering 50% pays no taxes at all.
I don't know what you mean by envious liberals .I have already given the definition of liberal.Why don't you say that you hate voters ,or cyclists or something else that is equally inane ?If you wish to continue to express hatred for someone you should at least know what it is that you are hating .
Think about what an education could do for your spelling and message clarification. Who knows what you are trying to say here.
Wet Willy is a bit wet behind the ears.
Obama's "madcap spending" is a lie. Growth in government spending is less under Obama than any president since Nixon, Republican or Democrat. Clinton was the only other president who spent less than Obama during that same time. That Fox News talking point has been disproven time and time again. Leave it to an uninformed Republican not to know this.
http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/govt-spending-per-capita.jpg
As far as the top 5 percent paying 95 percent of all taxes. That, too, is a right wing misnomer designed to mislead.
When all federal, state, and local taxes are taken into account, the bottom fifth of households pays about 16 percent of their incomes in taxes, on average. The second-poorest fifth pays about 21 percent.
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3505
Once again, I suppose I have just wasted time sharing the facts with someone so filled with misinformation I'm not sure they can even comprehend any of this.
Son, I suggest that you tune out Fox News or cut off whomever is dispensing this nonsense to you. It makes you look like an idiot. No wonder you have to post such drivel under a pseudonym.
Sorry Mister Wonderful but even your right wing buddies wouldn't approve of Romney eliminating the home mortgage deduction or employer health care exemption which would make 10-15,000 that's currently untaxed fully taxable. You call yourself a lower income middle class taxpayer but root for Romney because you're jealous most in the middle class can deduct their home mortgage?
I guess you'll be jumping for joy if Romney gets elected as you obviously have no problem with Romney raising our taxes to give himself a tax cut. Why don't you have a problem with someone like Romney who probably paid a lower tax rate then you having thousands of tax breaks made especially for him and rooting for him to take the only 2 the middle class have left?
Scenario: The year is 2013. Republicans control the White House and the Legislature. A two Party System is outlawed. The Military, the Judicial System, including Prisons, and many other functions of Government are taken over by Corporations. The EPA, FAA, OSHA, Social Security, the IRS, etc. are dissolved. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights no longer exist in the present form. Corporations will rule and your vote becomes mute and this Nations name will be the United Corporations of America.
Not feasible? That depends upon your vote. Remember Corporations and the 1% already controls the majority of our Politicians to a large degree. With a stacked deck, they can totally control our lives with a flick of a pen.
The freedom to vote, we enjoy today, has finally reached the point when it is no longer reverent.
Mark bohannon 2.23
You are certainly behind the times. Obama's outlandish claim of spending less than every president since Nixon has been quickly debunked and the "creative" bookkeeping he used to support his claim would land any ordinary accountant in prison. This is why Obama no longer speaks of those claims.
You are indeed addled by your ideology. It is a fact that the wealthy have historically financed the government and created jobs and continues to do so unless impeded by a socialist administration. You can cook up and twist numbers all you want to make yourself comfortable but the government would quickly go broke were in not for the contributions of the nations wealthy.
Finally, all or your cackling cannot escape the fact that half of American households receive some sort of government handouts. Who do you thing is financing that?
I think you would be very comfortable in the collective working at your assigned meaningless job, as long as it isn't too demanding.
COuld someone point out one instance where a tax cut improved the job situation? So if we got rid of taxes completely we would all have work? Huh?
The GOP is insane. Trickle down III. It never worked before so it HAS to work this time.
Oh, PLEASE. Set the capital gains rate back to regular income and DONE! INSTANT BUDGET SURPLUS!
Wm.-375815.........You make no sense. Partnerships and Subchapter S Corps do ot pay ANY taxes now, 0 ! How can they be cut ? S Corps and Partnerships income all ( 100% ) flows to the stockholders or the partners and they pay taxes at the personal rate. The whole PURPOSE of Sub S Corps is to avoid the double taxation, that is why their rate and partnership rate is 0% You can't cut 0% !
Just how big a % do you think the " rich " should pay? Should they pay the same % GE ( Jugheads buddies ) paid, 0%? Should they pay 50%? 60%? 70%? How much of the money they worked for should Jughead be able to steal from them?
All this weekend is about is, those donors letting Mittens know what they want for their donations. After all they are buying their president.
Oh the Romney plan, a plan that will get you a new house. A poor house.
Yes, more wealth through taxation.
Really seems to be working in Cali, Illinois, Greece, Italy, Spain and of course France.
What'dya think Job1 - 75% be enough for you?
Golly even Billy Clinton and Obama know higher taxes are bad.
O did adopt Bush's rates, right?
You bet he did.
Spanky. America is one of the lowest taxed nations in the developed world. 15th lowest to be frank with you. Tax cuts have crippled this nation to the brink of destruction. Before the senile one Reagan was in office corporate tax rates where upwards of 80%, now they are down to 35%.. Lots of wealth to the rich, while America has crumbled.. Yeah your sides policies work.
Think again Spanky..
Travel
The actual maximum corporate rate is 45%. The average tax paid is 35%. The other countries maximum rates are 35% and lower.
The other killer is that off shore earnings are taxed by both the foreign entities AND by the US IF the corporations bring the money back to our shores. If they bring that money back to the US, they will lose over 50% of the profits to Federal, State and Local Taxes.
We have billions upon billions kept off shore and reinvested into production outside the US because they are doing better over there as long as they stay over there.
If you want the greedy corporations to pay taxes, why not start with GE, you know, the company whose CEO is the Jobs Czar - Jeffrey Immelt? The guy who is supposed to be growing jobs for the Obama crew, while his company builds new factories in CHINA!!!!
It sickens me the level of dishonesty about what is actually going on in DC all the while these folks make up lies about what might happen with Romney.
At this point, ANYONE is better than Obama. Hillary Clinton is better than Obama. The Three Stooges are better than Obama. Our only hope is to elect Romney, and turn the Senate conservative. Anything else and we will be making Greece look good in just a few years.
Spanky. How is eliminating taxes for the rich (The trickle down theory) good for the county?
It has not worked - Corporations are sitting on 2 Trillion Dollars. Why?
MisterWonderful
GE does what 66% of corporations do in this country - pay no taxes - so why single out GE other than a stupid talking point?
Does the GE CEO get special treatment or something becuase if they do, please provide proof.
DB Akron
where the hell did you get 45% from???? The US corporate maximum tax rate is 35% and that does not mean every company pays that. As a matter of fact 2/3rds of companies PAY NOTHING!
But by taking advantage of MANY breaks and loopholes that other countries generally do not offer, the US corporations pay only slightly more on average than their counterparts in other industrial countries.
The absurdity of the US tax code - full of subsidies, shelters and special breaks — has made American multinationals world leaders in tax evasion.
If a company does not want to pay taxes to do business in this country, they can go elsewhere. I hear Russia is a safe country to do business in. There will be PLENTY of companies to take their place.
Why don't we try an experiment? Get rid of all Federal Taxes other than on liquor and import tariffs. Get back to the colonial model which the Teapublicans seem to favor. Give it a couple of years and see what happens.
If lower taxes spur economic growth, no taxes should create boom times.
15th lowest? O gee... Why aren't we the lowest? We have the biggest economy. So we have 14 other economies that tax less? Explain why we are the HIGHEST corp tax rate. Explain why those that can DO send their cash overseas. TRILLIONS of dollars are held overseas. Drop the rate and watch TRILLIONs come back here from our country.... AND Trillions from other countrys.
The simplest economic formulas are lost by liberals over a tree beatle or the word God being used. I really don't think Romney cares of a man wants to marry another man or somebody wants to end a fetus life. I don't care either. We just need someone to fix this mess. Obama is way over his head.
We have one of the worlds highest corporate tax rates at 35% however our average actual corporate tax is 18% one of the lowest in the world. Corporations like the rich have their built in exemptions, It's the same reason Romneys tax rate should be 35% but he manages to actually pay a 14.9% rate.
And that poor house will be costly. Maybe they will also open a Corporation controlled Debtors Prison for those in constant debt and without means.
Right Wing Wacko: Corporations pay off Officials in EVERY Country, including here. And PS: To those that still think we a the largest producer of goods, just turn you purchases around or look under them for the label that states where it is made. Even those made here are made from imported parts and merely assembled here. Made in the USA or made in America is simply passe. Even the majority of our fresh produce is imported. Have you ever seen a banana farm within this Country?
Hey you dumb righties, you gave Bush 8 years to destroy our economy, why are you only letting Obama have 4 to fix it. You are all a bunch of hypocrites, when republicans are in office its ok to spend like there is no tomorrow (remember 2 wars and 2 tax cuts put on the credit card), but when a democrat is in office its time to stop the spending, anyone with half a brain can see the hypocrisy of your party.
And if you think for 1 second that Mittens is going to fix anything, you are in for a rude awakening.
Exactly!!! He's Mr. smoke and mirrors when it comes to tax policy and what he'll do!! This is why the debates are so important ladies and gentlemen of the right and left to actually here and see what these guys are actually proposing and we can have an up or down vote which one will be better for your situation.
-
Gov Romney hasn't even been formally nominated. Slow your roll there Jeffie. He'll continue to fill in the blanks. He actually has leadership experience, management experience, and a history of more success than failure.
Whereas Obama has a record of being a bit of a story teller (more and more "facts" in his little book are turning out to be fairy tales - hilarious and sad all at the same time) from his "I'll turn this thing around in 3 years or I won't deserve to be re-elected" to "you gotta pass this stimulus right now, no more talk, got to get people working in those shovel ready jobs" that he later LAUGHED about while millions of American families were losing their homes and life savings, while he was building rockstar tour buses and spending our money like there was no tomorrow.
He is a fraud and a failure. The debates are going to be great. One guy with proven success, the other in need of teleprompter fairy tales.
Mister:
If you are indeed middle class poor, How can you possibly support Republicans? Don't you get it?
Republican brainwashing is as effective as the Soviets ever were, but it's time to free yourself.
I have a mathematical disconnect with Romney's statement. If the current share of taxes paid by all income classes stays the same, a tax cut for the highest incomes must mean a tax cut for the lowest incomes, therefore income taxes for all must be reduced. If that is the case, how can we not reduce tax revenue overall and increase the budget deficit?
Maybe he is counting on hyper-inflation to erode the national debt.
I predict Romney won't do well in debates. Trying to sell giving himself a huge tax cut and being unwilling to say what deductions or exemptions he'll cut to pay for them won't cut it. ( We all know Ryans plan was to cut the mortgage interest deduction and employer health care exemption as the only 2 big enough to cover it.)
There's little he can claim about Bain other than try and deny they did anything to maximize profit whether it helped or hurt our country and how many jobs he shipped overseas. You know he'll avoid talking about his term as governor as much as possible.
Romney can say anything and he knows it.
Why?
Because stupid Consumers/Christians will vote for him purely based on him being Republican, being 'religious', not being black, fearing brown people, hating homosexuals, and to save stem cells and fetuses.
Busloads of ignorant conservative 'Christians' will save his day - they're not concerned about bankruptcy or tax rates.
I cant wait for the debates, finally Obama will show the country what a liar Mittens is. Will he finally ditch the righties to tack to the middle or will he continue to pander to the far right that dont have the numbers to even vote him in.
Tricky, Mitt--hw reminds me of tricky Dick. Romney was talking about the income tax rate; he failed to mention he will raise them on the middle and low wage earners and that he wants to eliminate capital gains and estate taxes even though only the wealthiest among us pay those and, his $57,000 per day income would then be tax free!
Why did they ever get dropped to less than zero (rebates for taxes never paid) for some?
So those people didn't starve in the streets.
Oh, I forgot, private charities will take care of all of them.
When did being "fiscally conservative" come to mean, firing teachers, neglecting to fix roads, and cutting healthcare assistance for low income people, in order to keep taxes low for "job creators" who seem to suck at "job creating"?
Amy hits all the lame moonbat talking points..."firing teachers" "cutting assistance" ....cant you come up with new material?
When the debt started to approach 100% of GDP.
Economic reality is a bummer, right Amy.
And oh by the way, could you please pay more in taxes?
Or how about go create a job?
Fair is fair you know.
Spanky - Under Reagan and both Bushes, when they were dealing with a recession, ow many government workers did they get rid of to bring the deficit into balance?
Be truthful....
Amy, it's a Ronald Reagan thing. It was Reagan who turned fiscal responsible into a joke line; he turned this country from a creditor nation into a debtor nation; Bush 43 doubled down on it; and Romney will double down on Bush 43. Then people elect democrats to clean up the mess and conservatives block their efforts while blaming democrats for failed government when the GOP starved it to death at all levels from cities to states to federal.
Don, you're asking the impossible of Spanky; truthful is not in his vocabulary.
The truth is the GOP added government jobs under each of those administrations because they know the truth, to jump start the economy during a recession, you don't cut government jobs, you add them or at least maintain the same level. If state governments had been provided money as President Obama wanted, the economy would be well on the road to recovery.
LMAO! Spunkman wouldn't know the truth if it bit him in the a$$. He's a troll that's barnacled himself to this site. Like cockroaches, you spray, bomb and spray again and they keep coming back. He'll leave after his man Romney gets sent packing in November.
Ha - Spanky-truthful - thank God there was a paragraph between those words. They certainly don't belong in the same sentence.
Teacher are (AND SHOULD BE) paid by local and state taxes. If you want your taxes to increase just get on your local or state ballot. No one in state A should pay for a teacher, fireman, policeman, or any other person in another state.
tony knows a lot about roaches, hmmmm!
The Job creators that Romoney constantly refers to, only create jobs where the labor cost is lowest. Cina, Viet Nam, Bangladesh, India..........
Forget not that the poster child for fiscal train wreak, Greece, is in it's predicament because its citizens refuse to tax themselves (or to pay taxes owed) to pay for the essentials of government. All the while cherishing the perks decades of communist party rule lavished on the populace.
You are all tools of the establishment. All you do is lob the same bombs back and forth and demand that the other people get on your side or they are unamerican or stupid or sheeple. It is exactly what they want, and the establishment always gets what they want. We need to stop being so divided. We need to use common sense. There are poor people who are that way due to no fault of their own, there are also poor people who are just lazy and want to leach, you are both correct. All we do is fight amongst ourselves, why they do whatever they want. Nothing will ever change until we the people change it.
Sorry about the rant, but the polarization here is dis-heartening.
Bob in Virginia-5210392
Amy hits all the lame moonbat talking points..."firing teachers" "cutting assistance" ....cant you come up with new material?
............Bob, this isn't a standup talent contest, "new" isn't the issue, it's whether the points still apply or not. Have you been able to clearly, logically and intelligently refute (or refudiate as Sarah would say) them? If so, well please, let's hear it!
LOYALTEXAN
Forget not that the poster child for fiscal train wreak, Greece, is in it's predicament because its citizens refuse to tax themselves (or to pay taxes owed) to pay for the essentials of government
......So what do we call them, Norquistians?
Ho hum; yet another slanted MSNBC hit piece, on behalf of their masters at Obama campaign HQ in Chicago.
More class warfare crap....but at least envious libs can feel better if the rich pay more taxes, nevermind the private economy is crappy and unemployment is at high levels...
Bob - If you ask the middle class to pay for 100% of the defict reduction (Ryan Plan) and you give over $4 trillion to the rich in tax reductions to the rich, is that class warefare....
Or is it class warefare when it goes just one way.
Since I paid 35% in taxes last year while making $325K and Romney paid 13.9% on 24 million, is that class warefare.. Or is that fair in your mind.
"oh, but he's a job creator and he knows that if they (his corporate butt buddies) don't get their way, they'll pack up and leave!"
So ie; like spoiled little brats, they'll take their toys and go home. There, I answered it for you Virginny Bob. No need to reference your Karl Rove manual.
The middle-class may now be talking about class warfare; the wealthy, instead, are practicing it.
Bob, I'm sorry you feel this is a hit piece. I was actually just trying to answer the question in the headline, would the wealthiest pay the same share if he could wave a magic wand under his plan. The truth is that we just don't know because he hasn't been specific about what and how much he would close loopholes, eliminate deductions, or exemptions. We know what he proposes on changing tax rates. For those making more than $1 million, it would go from about 35% currently to 26.6%. So, if that income group is going to pay the same share, Romney would somehow have to make up the difference. We just don't know what he would prefer to do. That's all. As I noted, it's not like there's much from Obama in what he would do in an ideal world -- specifically -- to close the deficits. He argues, instead, that it's the short term that's more important. Romney and Republicans argue the massive debt is more important and that something specifically should be done now. Romney just won't say exactly what.
Feisty:
THERE YOU GO AGAIN. Name calling and potty mouthed. You're helping bring down MSNBC. Good luck with that.
You know you struck a nerve when the hacks at MSNBC have to come out and defend their BS class warfare 0bama cheer leading yellow journalism.
One minute Romney says that he wants to lower taxes for everyone. Then it says he wants to broadens the base and that the poor will pay more. How is that lowering taxes for everyone? This guy is either stupid or is lieing thru his teeth. Some of us might be poor compared to him but we are not stupid. He thinks that we are to believe him. Well he may as well have told us that he wants a moon base on the moon by 2014 with rental property.
I'm surprised he responded to the troll. That's more attention than he deserves.
Domenico...no truth is you are being called out for writing slant pieces that your site is known for. At least be honest now that you are busted.
GT...You have been on the receiving end of your avitar a little to many times..your head is filling up.
Eliot, I'm sorry you feel that way, though I'm not sure my reply or my article have to do with "class warfare." I'm not arguing the merits of Romney's tax plan, just trying to see if his plan would do what he says he'd like it to do, and how. I think that's something we try to do with both men running for president.
And I would, as I have before, call for a more measured level of discourse here, please. We understand passions run high in politics, but no need for gutter name calling. For the most part, we allow you to police yourselves, and we're not going to go in and try and catch everything and delete every comment. Just realize, everyone you're talking to is a real person, not a caricature.
I don't understand why anyone thinks that calling names and making broad assumptions about people is conducive to conversation. I don't know how much anyone here makes and you don't know anything about my life, so why do some say hateful things about others that are just nasty? Since when did being unemployed, middle class, lower income class, poor, or rich become an insult and grounds to verbally assault people? As Domenico said, you are all talking to people.
We don't know by sitting at our computers why someone has or doesn't have houses, jobs, or whether they pay this tax or that, and insulting people because they have nothing, little, enough, or a lot doesn't get us anywhere. If you don't like Romney, just vote for Obama. If you don't like Obama, just vote for Romney. Find a vision of this country that fits your preferences and vote for that, and before you vote do research. Don't read one site or set of comments and call it research.
If you don't like an article that is your right, and if you don't like a new site you can choose to go elsewhere or troll it and be nasty to all the people there. I'm not just saying this about MSNBC, but about any site. You think what you think and I think what I think...people who attack each other have stopped thinking. You can join the fray and stoop to nastiness or step back and see it is a thread on a website and not worth a fight. When Romney says what he is going to do you like it or you don't...why call people names over it?
Because frequently it's all they've got. They have no desire to debate; only to excoriate anyone who has the nerve to disagree with them.
Threre has always been class warfare in America. The escalation happened under Reagan in the 80's. The monied class has always been on the winning side and until Reagan there was a middle class which was largely untouched by the class warfare. The systematic destruction of unions has destroyed the middle class. A graph showing the decline in union membership is virtually identical to the graph of the decline of the middle class. So time to wake up.
If you are not a member of the upper,(monied) class, the Republicans have been at war with you for 30 years. Many of you have assisted them bring your own destruction.
The elected Republican does not exhibit Christian ideals, Jesus would be appaled at the way Republicans have used His name. "Empty your purse so that the hungry may eat."
Domenico - excellent points; keep up the good work.
I find it amusing that Mitt Romney can't answer a single question on anything. Would you repeal the Lilly Leadbetter act (we'll have to see), would you cancel what the president just did on illegals (we'll have to see), what tax loopholes would you close so that the rich paid the same taxes, ie. provided you lowered their overall rate (We'll have to see).
How long does this guy think he can get along with not answering anything. Does he think we'll vote for him AND then find out what he's going to do.... I know, it worked in Wisconsin with Gov Walker, but I'd be surprised if people buy into this, Obama's a bad president, he doens't know what he's doing, but I'm not going to tell you what I'm going to do to fix anything....trust me...
And since he's flip-flopped on everything he's ever been for or against, if anyone votes for this guy, they've got problems..
No way this guy gets elected. Worst run presidential campaign ever run...
Yet Romney is tied in most polls, with the failure now occupying the White House...
The worse you make Romney look, the worse this reflects on how much of a failure Obama is...
bob- wait till the debates- is Romney going to refuse direct questions as he did on the news shows on Sunday. The Ryan budget clearly states what tax's they will cut which increases the deficit but after TWO years Rep. Ryan cant decide what tax loopholes he will close to pay for the tax decrease. Two years and waiting. Yet Mittens thinks the Ryan Budget is Marvelous
Remember the word DEMOGRAPHICS Bob in Virginia.
Hey bob- 180+ and counting filibusters. Even the Dream Act passed Congress in 2010 but was killed by Republicon filibuster.
On the night BEFORE Obama's inauguration RepubliCON leadership meets to discuss Republican stretegy to make Obama a one term President.
Feb 2009 Demint tweets "we will break him" referring to Obama
Why cant your side admit that rather then cooperate you choose to delay, deny, and impede Obama from day one. Run on that. Tell the American People how the party that runs on the motto Country First Immediately turns around and uses 180+ and counting filibusters- the most ever in a 3.5year period in our ENTIRE History.
Run on YOUR RECORD- without cooperation there can be no governance- that is how our system was created. You are the party of NO- run on it. But you cant because you know what the reaction will be. So keep on LYING
And how many house passed bills has Harry brought to the floor of the Senate? Be real on just who the obstructionist are.
Romney say "We will have to see" because he does not know himself. Besides isn't that sort of like saying we will have to pass that bill to see what is in it. I guess you have to have an IQ of 80 to be a politician.
People who will vote for Romney are stupid and dumb not unless of course to those greedy millionaires and billionaires and wall street vultures that would benefit Romney administration if he wins. Though they already benefit this tax loopholes from the Bush administration that cost U.S.A trillions of dollars giving tax incentives/loopholes to corporates who outsource our jobs to other countries,giving subsidies to china who made business in U.S.A, tax breaks for oil/gasoline investors who profits trillions of dollars that goes to their own pocket or hiding in Swiss bank. Endless of tax loopholes for very rich people who pays less or half of the tax rate with the middle class when Romney and Republicans wins, not to mention yet the unpopular war that the Bush administration created which put Americans more in debt crisis, cost of that war alone is trillions. President Obama inherited all those mess from the Bush administration and yet there are narrow minded Americans expect President Obama to turn around the country like a magician and listens to those foolish and crook Republicans who accused President Obama a failed president? Common sense people, who is a far better President and accomplished significantly the most? Is it the Republican President like the Bushes and Nixon? Or the Democrat Presidents like Clinton (who left big surplus to Bush administration) and President Obama who did an amazing job with over half of his first term alone. In fact, President Obama is one of the best President in the earth.He have done such an amazing job that no President have ever done by killing Osama Bin laden and his successor, saving trillions taxpayers money by ending the war. He pushes the Obama Care which America deserves and should have been for a long time.Without Obama Care people who has a pre existing chronic/acute and serious condition it would be very impossible for anyone to get a healthcare,and countless college student will be no health insurance, and this will be paid by taxing more money to those very rich. This is why the reason it will be a disaster to Republicans if President Obama will get a second term because President Obama will tax more the very rich to give a fair share to our citizens.It is nonsense that middle class and hardworking americans were paying more tax rate than those very rich like Wall Street people,Romney and those corporates getting tax loopholes outsourcing our jobs to other countries.And yes, no more tax loopholes and no more additional trillions pockets for oil business. Now,if you ask yourself about what will happen to our country if Romney will be the president? It will be a disaster! Get the facts, and do serious research how bad he was governing one state where we lived when he was a governor in Massachusetts. Romney governed badly one state already and gush if we will talk about Romney governing the whole country? God of all God please don`t let it happen. Also Romney himself has his own Solyndra using secretly taxpayers money to invest and went bankrupt just like how he handles when he was at Bain Capital. Solyndra was funded and started by the Bush administration.Republicans will go way out of stupid lies and manipulate everything they can to prevent President Obama and Democrats to sit in the house because it would mean misery to them and subtraction to their loopholes. America will cripple severely in the hands of Romney and Republican politician.
He doesn't have to answer anything.
He knows that enough Consumers will vote for him anyway for many of the wrong reasons - i.e. God, baby Jesus, stem cells, abortion, Republicanism, fear of homosexuals.
He'll give Obama a run for his money without having to make a single solid statement.
That doesn't speak well of most Consumers, does it?
The Kansas tax law gets weirder as I look at it. All the partners in a law firm would pay no state taxes, but their associates and secretarial help would.
It would amaze me if anyone would actually believe that the taxes on the wealthy would stay the same! And his goal is to kill the Obama taxes and yet keep everyone paying the same "share" of the taxes.
Extend the Bush tax cuts? Now let's see, who would that benefit? Certainly not the poor or middle class! Eliminate the Obama tax cuts? That will certainly NOT benefit the poor or the middle class--in fact, it would cause significant harm to them, as their incomes will effectively become much lower. And it will make no difference whatsoever to the rich.
I find it misleading, if not flat out dishonest, that Mr. Romney refuses to disclose WHAT tax deductions he is planning to get rid of. This means to me that he is making no commitment whatsoever to the people.
He's not even pretending he's going to help the poor and middle class. I don't like that.
Kirigami,
"He's not pretending hie's going to help the poor and middle class". What is wrong with you people? I've been through both classes in my lifetime and I never felt that any President, or government entity was obigated to help me. I always thought hard work would pay off and it did. Quit looking for something free, get off your asses and work harder. Our Country isn't going down hill just because of our Government, a lot has to do with this "you owe me" attitude. It's disgusting!
Dave d
Get over it there are alot of poor and middle class that have worked hard all of thier lives and don't want handouts. You are the one that is disgusting.
Ted,
You are right. Isn't that what I must said? People that have worked hard all of their lives are proud of their accomplishments. They don't look to the government, they depend on themselves. It's the 'give me" crowd that disgusts me. ....and they should disgust you, as well.
Dave D, Thank you for that 'very courteous' (sic) and 'well-worded' reply. You wrote:
'"He's not pretending hie's going to help the poor and middle class". What is wrong with you people?'
First of all, I'm not even remotely sure who you mean by "you people." Are you suggesting that those who have paid into Social Security all of their working lives are not now entitled to receive it? And why does that make them "you people?" . . . some amorphous group who walk around with "YP" on their foreheads? (YP for You People, in case that slipped by you.) Or are YP's the one who would like to continue to receive child care credits, or educational tax credits? Does this mean they shouldn't have that ability?
You also wrote:
Hard work does often, but not always, pay off. What exactly do you mean by your second sentence . . . "quit looking for something free, get off your (unnecessarily rude word) and work harder." In no way am I asking for something that I have not EARNED, and I'm not sure how you might have construed that from my comments. By the way, it seems like we must have had some of the same experiences, such as working hard all our lives! Do you intend to receive Social Security, or do you feel that would be inappropriate, as it's part of the '"you owe me" attitude'? Hmm, what about Medicare? Or is that also inappropriate?
It absolutely fascinates me that you chose to jump on some small part of what I wrote and then tried to demolish me. What's that about? Why didn't you respond to any of the "meat" in my comment? Such as:
With the minimal details Mr. Romney has given us about his plans--that he would extend the Bush tax cuts (more money for the already wealthy) and eliminate the Obama tax cuts . . . those designed to help people who need a little bit of help . . . how are we supposed to understand what on earth he is planning to do?
Or why didn't you bother to refer to this comment I made:
I stand by that comment, of course, but what I don't understand is why you didn't think THAT was worthy of your time to respond? Why ISN'T Mr. Romney willing to make any commitments to the general public? It seems like the only ones he's committing to are the many multi-billionaires who are making mega-contributions to his election campaign.
Sadly, I fear you just jumped on someone you thought you could intimidate with your mostly irrelevant comments?
And when ted patrick responds to you by posting:
you then write: "You are right. Isn't that what I must said?" Does that mean that you are calling yourself disgusting?
I have worked very hard all my life to the best of my ability, and I am proud of my achievements. At the same time, however, I don't strut around like a rooster declaring what my accomplishments have been, or even that I have lots of accomplishments that you would never guess in a million years. There's really no reason for me to talk about them in this situation.
I have never been part of the "give me" crowd. At the same time, I recognize that there are those less fortunate than I am who do need some help, and I'm delighted that it is available to them. Rather than being disgusted by them and their needs, as you claim they do for you, I see it differently. I am honored to be able to help others and pleased that I can be part of the solution.
Whew, I didn't realize how long that post had gotten! Just wanted to apologize for writing such a lengthy missive!
Neither I nor most "liberals" ever received welfare, foodstamps or any other government giveaway that right wingers seem to think we all enjoy and I imagine i've made much more in my lifetime than Dave D. However, watching someone like Romney whose only answer to what he'd do to revive the economy is to give huge tax breaks for himself and wealthy friends and paying for it with eliminating "unnamed" exemptions won't cut it.
I'd rather support someone like Obama whose every move has been to help those hurt by the train wreck Bush caused then to enrich those that already pay the lowest tax rate. Rather than mindless rants I'd rather see a right winger explain how a 5 trillion tax cut on the rich paid for by the middle class will help our economy.
Dave
The 'give me' crowd that gets the most from government is the 1%. They get tax cuts heavily slanted towards them, no estate tax so that vast invested wealth passes on, never having paid any tax at all. Then there's all the custom made loopholes and subsidies.
The rich Republicans have been waging class warfare for 30 years and they are winning. The middle class has been mostly destroyed at the same pace as unions have been destroyed.
The public has been deafened and deceived by the constant drone of right wing propaganda from talk radio and the FOX propaganda channel.
I hope enough of you can see through the lies.
When it comes to tax issues, I have a much easier time believing a man that is willing to increase his own taxes than a man that is fighting to lower his own. One is selfless sacrifice for the betterment of our country and the other is just selfishness.
So you are voting for Romney? He isn't lowering the capital gains tax you know. Obama on the other hand is paying the lower rates thanks to Bush. He didn't even choose to write a check for additional taxes to the IRS. You can you know. It is even tax decutable.
Flat tax on everyone except the very poor, 0 taxes on anyone who earns less that 30,000, 2% on those who earn less that 50,000- 4% up to 100,000-10% up to 500,000- 25% up to 1,000,000,- and 50% on everyone else and that would be applied to gross income and at the same time eliminate all deductions. Increase the minimum wage to 10.00 per hour immediately and to 15.00 per hour within five years, do you people even realise that at 15.00 per hour at a forty hour work week a person would barely break the tax limit of 30,000. How in God's name can the thieving businesses expect the lowest payed citizens to afford health,auto,home,or life insurance when you are paying them 7.65 per hour, that is less than 16,000 per year. But the rich always come up with a law requiring them to pay this, well not life or home insurance but that is because they could not even buy a home with that low of wages. I notice how the business owners are always screaming the loudest when the wage rate comes up but then you look and they are driving the new automobiles. live in a nice home, send their children to private schools and all the time denying their employees the basics of human existence. I really do not like rich people, all they do is suck the life from the poor and when they claim to give back to society they write it off as a tax credit or a business expense. I worked very hard all my life and payed my taxes and because I did not care to become rich or powerful I suppose that means I should not get back the money that was taken from me by the government without having a choice in the matter. I paid into the social security and the medicare system for forty years and I do deserve to receive my money back and with interest, as well as health care in my old age. You company's who beat me down all of the years where I worked very hard to make you rich and I now have back problems and breathing problems and even if I had the funds could not enjoy the later years of my life, should have to furnish all of us with free health and medicine without us paying a single dime. Ah, the hell with it, nothing will change in humanity, the rich get richer and the poor get stupider and poorer. Obama is not going to help make your life better nor is Romney, no one is. The rich and powerful people and corporations control every thing they do.
Near the sea: Romney wants to pay for a tax cut for the rich by eliminating the home mortgage interest deduction and employer health care exemption which would be the biggest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the rich in history. How can you possibly claim that Obama's plans are more self serving than Romneys?
"So you are voting for Romney? He isn't lowering the capital gains tax you know. Obama on the other hand is paying the lower rates thanks to Bush. He didn't even choose to write a check for additional taxes to the IRS. You can you know. It is even tax decutable."
Interesting you'd blame Obama for lower taxes he receives due to our former republican presidents tax cuts. Obama has proposed numerous plans which would raise his own taxes Romneys promised nothing except a plan to lower his own and raise them on the rest of us.
Typical Far Left, NBC blather, to prop up Obama. First of all, the rich are paying the majority of the taxes now. Half of our Country doesn't pay any Federal or State taxes, and many even get a kick back. Eliminate the deductions and it evens the field. I have no problem with the wealthy keeping their wealth. I can't believe so many do.
Poor Davey - has to keep coming back for more! ;o)
Don't like it - you are free to leave anytime!
Just STOP with your incessant WHINING!
Feisty,
Whining? I'm trying to state the obvious, but you are so far in the bag for this Administration, you can't see the forest through the trees.
Leaving? You've got me mixed up with your Far Left doorknob pals, Babs and Baldwin. Sadly they never kept their promise.
So says someone with urine running down his leg!
I still can't figure out why people like YOU keep coming back for more.... oh... wait... I believe the term I am looking for is a masochist!
Thanks for playing Davey! lol
It's been fun!
Feisty,
Fun? I don't know what the hell you're even talking about. But, then again, with doorknobs, I rarely do.
Be well.
Fisting Redhead...the only whining we see is yours...hey, how did that Wisconsin recall go for you...HaHa.
And the rich will always pay more as they should. This country has always functioned with progressive taxes. Any tax plan that limited taxes to whatever the poorest of us could pay would make Yemen look like a prosperous country. As Willie Sutton said he robbed banks because that's where the money is unfortunately since Reagan the tax rate on the elite has gotten lower and lower and our country has went from the greatest industrial power on earth to a rapidly declining one. Reagan lowered the top tax rate from 70% to 39% and paid for it by elimination of deductions on credit card interest, charitable and medical deductions, Romney intends to carry it further. How's that trickle down since Reagan worked out?
Bottom line is tha SOB paid 15% on his 40 million and I paid 42% on my 87K? Fair share my a$$.
Ron,
Well, let's see. He paid 6 million in taxes, not to mention the 5 million to charity, for a total of 11 million. You paid roughly 13K. If I'm Uncle Sam, I like him a hell of a lot more than you.
Uncle Sam likes rich people for being rich? He's gotta change and eat the rich.
So he paid 6 million and you paid about 32,000. You paid too much.
Giving to the Mormon Church is not charity. Also it's about the percentage of your income that you pay in taxes not the total amount.
Dave D
Ok, so Ron pays 42% on his $82,000. That leaves him and his family $47,560 to live on.
Romney pays 15% on his $40,000,000. That leaves him and his family only $34,000,000 to live on. Or $29,000,000 after his $5 million donation to charity.
I don't see how Romney manages to keep food on the table.
Donations to the Mormons should not be tax deductable
"Donations" to the Mormon church - in particular - are NOT CHARITY.
We should end the tax exempt status of 'churches' immediately and allow them to deduct ONLY what they in turn truly apply towards helping others.
Not fattening their coffers like the Mormon church.
Mormons take care of their own and no others and seek to spread their 'almost as bad as scientology (which doesn't merit capitalization)' faith like a skin rash.
Romney serves his masters, the 1% and the Mormon church, and no others.
If you believe otherwise, you're delusional.
why cant Romney tell us why he has Caymen Island bank accounts and Swiss bank accounts. The man who wants to be President. Tell us why? and why only one year tax return? Even your Father knew you have to release multiple years so we can decern if a trend exists- like tax avoidance
Any person with money is foolish not to.
The wealthy will pay their fair share of taxes when hell freezes over or bi partisanship becomes a regular activity in Congress. Either way it amounts to the fact that they will never be held accountable for the taxes they truly owe!
If the people of the Obama admin would pay their taxes things would get better too.
In your world what is their fair share? They use less of the government services but already pay the majority of tax dollars. Rates are meaningless. Total revenue is all that matters.
All this talk of tax "fairness" is meaningless unless one defines what one means by "fair" It is afterall an income tax and thus if one makes the largest share of the income one pays a higher income tax, seems reasonable to me. The one place where the tax code goes ascew is the determination that there are two different types of income "earned" and "unearned" Lets face it if you are a working professional (saya doctor or a lawyer) and make 250K from your practice you will pay more in income tax that some other person making the same from mostly stocks and other investments. Some how that doesn't seem fair to me.
But then again who ever said life was fair?
The rich were able to become rich in no small part to the infrastructure paid for by government. How would goods get to customers without roads? How could a company attract workers if they can't get there on roads or public transport. How could manufacturing exist without water for cooling?
The 1% use infrastructure far out of proportion to their numbers. They should pay more.
It was reported not long ago that less than 50% of the people pay any income tax at all. With all this talk of reducing income taxes to the less than 50% that do pay, they might as well just do away with it and rely on China's money to operate the government with. After all, that's what they are doing now.
Or drop the current system and get something that works. Like sales taxes that even the criminals will pay when they spend their money.
A fair chunk of that 50% is retired people. They're paid taxes all their wprking lives and paid into Social Security and Medicare.
Just pointing out that with the massive debt Obama is amassing and the fact that his government doesn't bring in enough taxes to sustain itself, something needs to be done if our country is going to survive. All debt has a limit, and just because its our government, it doesn't mean it doesn't have that limit place upon it.
Last August was a warning that our debt is so out of control that our government could shut down at the drop of a hat if it doesn't become more responsible with the little it does bring in with taxes.
How will raising taxes on the middle class to give to the rich help? Romney hasn't announced any plan that would reduce deficit spending only giving himself and his cronies a 5 trillion over 10 year tax cut and paying for it by eliminating the home mortgage interest deduction and eliminating the employer health care exemption.
The Kansas tax law gets weirder as I look at it.
Jesus the Jew - Kansas is kind of a weird State anyway. So I would imagine that their tax laws would also be..
Any State that teaches creationism in science classes, has to a few cents short of a nickel.
Obama/Biden 2012
Admittedly using a revised version of the "trickle down" argument here.... If Obama raises the capital gains to a level closer to taxable wages, perhaps "the rich", not getting as much bang for their buck from dividends, will decide that it's more profitable being "job creaters" again and we will actually have some economic growth.
And my Red and Blue friends.... economic growth is the only way any one's plan is going to come close to getting us out of this fiscal armageddon.
Or maybe they might sell off before the new rate starts and move out of the country. What would you do?
Is that what you'd do?
As Bush stated Reagans trickle down theory was nothing but voodoo economics. Allowing the super rich or corporations to keep a few extra billion doesn't create a single job. Reagan cutting capital gains taxes or the top rate from 70% to 39% and paying for it by raising taxes on the middle class was backwards. Corporations hire to produce to match demand and won't hire people to make more unless someone wants to buy it. The only thing that boosted the economy under Reagan was the massive military buildup where trillions were pumped into the economy.
80% of Rob Money's tax cuts will go to the top 5%. The bottom 95% are suckers.
Rob Money will give himself a $5 million tax cut.
It is good to be rich.
Tough to give the 50% who pay nothing a reduction. As it is the top 10% pay 80% of the taxes collected so sure the top 10% will get the best %.
jdbird: A large percentage of those 50% are elderly, in school or disabled or working the walmart jobs your elite created and your 50% not paying anything may make you feel good but is irrelevant since no matter whose president you can't get blood from a turnip. Taxing Grannies $800 a month social security check or a paraplegics won't happen no matter how many times you spout it.
Anyone supporting lowering anothers tax rate making 21 million a year who already pays a lower rate than a couple making $17,400 and paying for it by increasing taxes on the middle class is a fool drinking too much of the kool aid. No one would ever accept a middle class taxpayer paying 10,000 a year demanding his taxes be lowered because he had neighbors who paid nothing. We built the worlds greatest country with a progressive tax structure of those that make the most pay the most. Were we better off 40 years ago when we were the world's greatest industrial power or today after trickle down?
Obama's budget actually would close the deficit more than just the initial numbers say - as the middle class earn more, spend more, and earn more again, they will be generating revenues that go toward the deficit....ala the Clinton years. Remember? There once was a SURPLUS... as mythical as that sounds right now. The 1%ers - at least the Republican 1%ers - still don't understand how important it is to have a steady, thriving working class who will BUY what the wealthy captains of industry are producing and selling. Ford understood it - he wanted to pay his workers well enough that they could actually buy the Model Ts they were building. If he hadn't understood that, the Model T would have been an abject failure - few millionaires were going to pass up the Dusenberg (sp?) to buy the Model T, but it was the work horse of the middle class and millions were sold as a result.
Right you are Lib, time to remake America starting with the electrical grid, renewable energy sources, repaired and renovated roadways and bridges. We can work out way out of this, what we need is not a congress of "NO", but a democratic majority that can bring the full force of government on line to lift us up out of this quagmire of republican bull@!$%# trickle down economics, doesn't anyone remember who was in charge for 14 of the previous 16 years before the collapse? Here's a hint, it wasn't the democratic party. Now the ones who caused the mess over the 14 years they had control are complaining because Obama hasn't fixed it in the short 3 years he's been in office.
What budget?
Doesn't matter to them as long as they have an expanding overseas market.
The rich or investors "should" get deductions for creating jobs & keeping people employed.
Obama's blind need to tax incomes above $200k sent our economy further down than the democrat home loans for anyone mess did.
Higher taxes on business becomes a cost of doing business & is passed on to the consumer, making all things cost more. But hey it makes Obama sound good to the masses who want the rich guy they work for punished. Eventually they guy they work for will decide they are fed up with working 50% or more of their day & close up, move to a tax free island & retire.
Where'sa the jobs mr. genius, if those job creators are so good at creating jobs, why is there 28 million un-employed Americans? I know its all Obama's fault, not the jackasses that still have over a 100 trillion dollars of worthless home derivative instruments still on their books which makes it harder than hell to do any real investment. Face it Friedman, trickle down, lassiez-faire economic policy has cooked the goose with the golden eggs. Time to do big, BIG, government sponsored projects that will pay us back over the next century and ease us back onto the path of economic stability.
They never said the jobs would be created in this country. Apple has almost a million people working in china.
jaildbird
Same old stale arguement that has been completely discredited by 30 years of statistics.
As Ive been saying...there will be no middle class after the first 4 years of Romney being president. He will continue to cut taxes on his 1% buddies, while increasing taxes on everyone else to try and make up for it. And he most certainly WILL NOT create more jobs. The only way that happens is if the companies getting tax cuts to "create jobs" are forced to keep them in the US instead of doing what they have been..shipping them overseas.
david,
The "companies" are going overseas because of the high tax rates and because it is almost impossible to manufacture in the U.S., any longer. Overly aggressive Environmental Protection Bill's have killed American production. Don't blame the "companies", blame this Administration and Congress.
Don't forget about litigation! But you can't win an argument with a liberal by presenting facts.
Sure. A little lead in paint, or e coli contamination never hurt anyone. Look how well it works in China.
Wrong, Companies go overseas because they can get cheaper labor. Why pay even minimum wage in this country when you can hire people for $1 an hour in china? Forty years ago we were the worlds greatest industrial power because we protected our manufacturing base as china does now. Now after lowering or eliminating taxes or tarriffs on imports China's a powerhouse and we're a declining power all because we allowed people like Romney to change laws repealing protections for our industries. It will only end when we can effectively compete with countries paying the lowest wages or get a president willing to do what's best for the country and not for himself and his rich friends. I wonder if the right will understand what they've created when we're so poor we envy Yemen with millions living in shacks.
Making a statement isn't presenting a fact.
Dave D
You are so wrong.
Companies go overseas because of cheap labor. Period. End of story.
Well, there are also those pesky safety and environmental rules we have here. But yeah, cheap labor plus cheap payouts when workers are injured/killed plus a few lightly greased palms when a factory explodes equals huge profits.
Never mind all that, just trust Mittsy, he has all those years in the financial arena that makes him the better choice, you know that experience he doesn't want to brag about right now, so a clearly defined budgetary plan is un-necessary since Mitt is to the financial world what Jimi Hendrix was with a guitar, a improvisational genius. If you believe that one, I have a condo in Florida you might be interested in.
You would rather trust a man that wants to spend his way out of debt. Don't we all just wish that were possible. I still have room on a couple of credit cards.
At our current rate the credit cards will cut us off, and it will be the neighborhood payday loan sharks we'll be dealin with.
I'd rather trust a president who wants to boost the economy over one whose only stated goal is to reduce his own taxes and raise them on the middle class. Better a well intentioned president than a self serving one.
Near the sea,
My fellow Ranger, spending our way out of a depression is exactly what we did durig the Second World War. Cutting spending whether its by business, or government, means someone else is not getting paid, if you're not being paid, you're not spending. Here's an Idea, we built the Hoover Dam during the Great Depression, it cost us a bit, but it paid back more. Same thing now, our infrastructure needs a complete redo, long term benefits of these projects would certainly pay back 10 fold in increased opportunities for commerce (better roadways, a more efficient electrical grid, more access to internet, etc.) To hear republicans talk about it, is just another example of how they have learned nothing from the history of our economy. Maybe next time the republicans nominate a presidential candidate he won't be a poster boy for alcoholic rehabilitation as was Geroge W. Talk about a big government moron the repubs have someone that sent all the money overseas building up Afghanistan and Iraq.
"Would wealthy really pay same share of taxes under Romney?"
Actually everyone will pay more once we get rid of BO. The economy will boom and everyone who has a skill will pay more taxes because they will make more money.
Troll.
Sounds like Foxitis, see your doctor.
@Domenico Montanaro
Your a lousy excuse for a reporter. If you want to be a reporter then do it with the facts instead of your biased opinion. Only idiots will believe your BS reporting. MSNBC should be ashamed to have such crap reporters. Can't even stand to read this crap anymore.
BUH BYE!
Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out!
Fisting Redhead...how come we don't see you posting on the great jobs report that came out today, or the way that Putin humiliated Hussein at the G20 today...teleprompter only get you so far. He did remember to bow to the President of Mexico however, to further demonstrate his insecurity and lack of acting like a leader...a lot like you.
Angry Mad, that's really unnecessary. I understand having your perspective, but I was trying to unravel an answer to a question with facts. I'm sorry your own perspective doesn't allow you to see that.
Bob the lying flip flopper is going down. He was just saying two weeks ago that he was going to give the 1 percenters and additional 10 percent.
So go read something you like better then...geez. I get people commenting on horrible grammar, bad spelling, or confusing writing, but if you don't like an article just go read something else. Angry, do you truly think you have no biases? Just go read something else if you don't like a particular writer's work. Why call names and insult people?
Domenico's got class; others, not so much.