Romney tells millionaires what he really thinks of Obama voters

[Denny Crane]

except you make up that 25% with no loopholes estimate. Romney refuses to comment. Why?

Because he's not going to eliminate ALL loopholes, and which to eliminate he's willing to open for discussion. He's looking at simplifying the tax code, reducing the RATE, but being revenue neutral (at least) which means eliminating loopholes.

The Ryan plan is similar.

 

[maxiep]

It should be noted that the bi-partisan 1986 tax reform act had the same principles: lower rates and close loopholes. What's wrong with that approach today?

 

[STOMP]

It should be noted that the bi-partisan 1986 tax reform act had the same principles: lower rates and close loopholes. What's wrong with that approach today?

those paying for our approach today (who've paid off both parties) would be the main problem

STOMP

 

[Denny Crane]

 

[maxiep]

those paying for our approach today (who've paid off both parties) would be the main problem

STOMP

So, you have one candidate that proposes to close loopholes so the government isn't playing favorites (Hello to Goldman Sach and General Electric) and one candidate that openly engages in crony capitalism. It seems if that's your beef, there's an obvious choice.

 

[Denny Crane]

Here's a chart that reflects the effects of all those changes to the tax code over the years.

 

[barfo]

So, you have one candidate that proposes to close loopholes so the government isn't playing favorites (Hello to Goldman Sach and General Electric) and one candidate that openly engages in crony capitalism. It seems if that's your beef, there's an obvious choice.

Yes, the latter candidate, because at least he's honest. The first one is just lying, because he knows he can't close the loopholes.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Yes, the latter candidate, because at least he's honest. The first one is just lying, because he knows he can't close the loopholes.

barfo

Loopholes were closed before in the Reagan years. Why can't all the new ones (and some others) be closed now? All it takes is a vote in congress and it's done.

 

[barfo]

Loopholes were closed before in the Reagan years. Why can't all the new ones (and some others) be closed now? All it takes is a vote in congress and it's done.

A small number of loopholes were closed (and new ones were opened) in the Reagan years.

Sure, it just takes a vote in Congress. Have you noticed Congress accomplishing anything lately?

barfo

 

[Further]

I work hard and pay income taxes, I have worked since the age of 14, paying my way through school, and paying my way through life. At times working two full-time ane one part-time job. I donate time and money to charity and have never believed myself to be, or acted as a victim. The government has never taken care of me and I hope they never will. I am voting Obama.

 

[maxiep]

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-secret-video-of-romney-talking-to.html

 

[Denny Crane]

I work hard and pay income taxes, I have worked since the age of 14, paying my way through school, and paying my way through life. At times working two full-time ane one part-time job. I donate time and money to charity and have never believed myself to be, or acted as a victim. The government has never taken care of me and I hope they never will. I am voting Obama.

And on the 7th day, you rested.

 

[Denny Crane]

A small number of loopholes were closed (and new ones were opened) in the Reagan years.

Sure, it just takes a vote in Congress. Have you noticed Congress accomplishing anything lately?

barfo

I notice congress passes thing when the president has leadership qualities.

Clinton managed with republicans controlling house and senate. Reagan managed with opposition party in control of congress, too.

 

[barfo]

I notice congress passes thing when the president has leadership qualities.

Clinton managed with republicans controlling house and senate. Reagan managed with opposition party in control of congress, too.

Neither of them managed to eliminate all loopholes in the tax code, or anything close to it.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Neither of them managed to eliminate all loopholes in the tax code, or anything close to it.

barfo

You don't have to close them all, just enough to generate the revenue required. Though you could, since it'd be easier to just write a bill that says "everyone pays 10% and there's no deductions."

 

[maxiep]

Good for Romney: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...s-were-not-elegantly-032830339--election.html

 

[STOMP]

I do blame congress, but the congress of one party is likely to go along with what its president (of the same party) wants.

And things sure looked pretty good up until the results of the 2006 election kicked in.

It wasn't the results of the 2006 election that ran up our credit card. That imbalance was incurred by having 2 wars off the books, the Medicare Part D Drug Co. give away, the void of Bush's "temporary" tax cuts, the house of cards that was the housing industry/Glass-Steagal gonzo, and our manufacturing base overseas because of bad trade policies (NAFTA). Things were anything but rosy in 2006 (I left off quite a bit more bad stuff). Both sides of the aisle share some blame for the decisions that brought us to that precipice as both kneel to the same $$$ to finance their campaigns, but it's a fact that the government massively expanded from 2000-2006. Remind me which party presided over that?

As the details slip out on Romney's tax plans, the bean counters are saying it would only add to the national dept. Here's a recent fun read from Salt Lake... http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/54913013-82/romney-tax-taxes-cut.html.csp

STOMP

 

[maxiep]

It wasn't the results of the 2006 election that ran up our credit card. That imbalance was incurred by having 2 wars off the books, the Medicare Part D Drug Co. give away, the void of Bush's "temporary" tax cuts, the house of cards that was the housing industry/Glass-Steagal gonzo, and our manufacturing base overseas because of bad trade policies (NAFTA). Things were anything but rosy in 2006 (I left off quite a bit more bad stuff). Both sides of the aisle share some blame for the decisions that brought us to that precipice as both kneel to the same $$$ to finance their campaigns, but it's a fact that the government massively expanded from 2000-2006. Remind me which party presided over that?

As the details slip out on Romney's tax plans, the bean counters are saying it would only add to the national dept. Here's a recent fun read from Salt Lake... http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/54913013-82/romney-tax-taxes-cut.html.csp

STOMP

Medicare Part D was a fucking disaster. Why are we subsidizing drugs for all seniors?

The repeal of Glass-Steagall was arguably the worst piece of financial legislation in the 1990s. If you're "too big to fail", you're too big.

The Community Re-Investment Act was a nightmare as it forced banks to subsidize bad loans which eventually flooded the market.

As for George W. Bush, I don't think anyone would argue he was a small government conservative; he was a social conservative who believed in big government like his father.

Finally, that editorial is from the Washington Post, and isn't an economic analysis at all. The Tax Policy Center/Brookings Institution analysis has shown to be a joke and has been debunked by a Princeton economist. What some economists won't acknowledge is that lowering taxes increases economic activity, even though the data time and time again show it to be the case.

 

[MARIS61]

He's much more generous to those people than am I. I'm happy to help the helpless; I'm not too thrilled to help those who can, but refuse to help themselves.

And all he said was that they were going to support Obama. It wasn't close to calling them people who cling bitterly to their guns, their religion and people who aren't like them as a way to explain their frustrations.

He said everyone who votes for Obama is a freeloader.

In truth, Mitt "Cayman" Romney is the biggest freeloader in politics.

 

[MARIS61]

Um, the majority of those polled with incomes under $45k (which the IRS says is the point at which most--not all-- pay no income taxes)

This is an absurd bit of disinformation. Mind-boggling nonsense.

 

[donkiez]

speaking of freeloaders

http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2012...more-to-israeli-defense-budget-than-israelis/

 

[Eastoff]

speaking of freeloaders

http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2012...more-to-israeli-defense-budget-than-israelis/

another redditor?

 

[maxiep]

To me, what Mother Jones think is a "gotcha", I think is an opportunity. This election should be about big things. What's bigger than the idea of the dependency society vs. the opportunity society?

 

[maxiep]

Too perfect: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-romney-fundraiser-video/?wprss=rss_campaigns

 

[donkiez]

another redditor?

Always and forever! Although Im not a big fan of cats..... more of a dog person.

 

[Denny Crane]

It wasn't the results of the 2006 election that ran up our credit card. That imbalance was incurred by having 2 wars off the books, the Medicare Part D Drug Co. give away, the void of Bush's "temporary" tax cuts, the house of cards that was the housing industry/Glass-Steagal gonzo, and our manufacturing base overseas because of bad trade policies (NAFTA). Things were anything but rosy in 2006 (I left off quite a bit more bad stuff). Both sides of the aisle share some blame for the decisions that brought us to that precipice as both kneel to the same $$$ to finance their campaigns, but it's a fact that the government massively expanded from 2000-2006. Remind me which party presided over that?

As the details slip out on Romney's tax plans, the bean counters are saying it would only add to the national dept. Here's a recent fun read from Salt Lake... http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/54913013-82/romney-tax-taxes-cut.html.csp

STOMP

Obama seems to think that the way to run an economy is to quadruple down on what Bush did. So sue me if I'm 4x as pissed now as I was when Bush was in office

 

[MARIS61]

speaking of freeloaders

http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2012...more-to-israeli-defense-budget-than-israelis/

American taxpayers give Israel over $3 billion per year (over $8 million per day), more than to any other nation, despite the fact that Israel is smaller than New Jersey and is in the top 30 richest countries in the world.

 

[maxiep]

http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/18/d...ted-by-pointing-out-um-their-entire-strategy/

I can see why Democrats are so offended. How dare Mitt Romney say they’re dependent on the government? Only Democrats get to say they’re dependent on the government!

 

[Eastoff]

http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/18/d...ted-by-pointing-out-um-their-entire-strategy/

Cute, a reminder about using the N word and how it's not fair to whites!

 

[maxiep]

Cute, a reminder about using the N word and how it's not fair to whites!

And here you have the crux of the election: The right wants to talk about large issues (debt, deficit, opportunity vs. dependency, projecting strength vs. leading from behind, etc.) and the left wants to talk about small issues: Mitt Romney's tax returns, contraception, perceived racism, etc. Gee, I wonder why the left doesn't want to talk about the large issues facing this country?