Mitt Romney on his tax cut plan: The math works
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Rhiannon12866 (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).
Source: Des Moines Register
He gave a spirited rebuttal to Obamas charges, saying he would cut the federal income tax rates by 20 percent for all taxpayers, reduce the corporate rate from 35 percent to 25 percent, simplify the tax code, close loopholes, get rid of some deductions and that the adrenaline injected into the economy from these changes will bring in enough revenue that federal debt wouldnt deepen.
Read more: http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2012/10/09/mitt-romney-on-his-tax-cut-plan-the-math-works/article
SO now its adrenaline that will drive our economic growth. Give me a break please.
tridim
(45,358 posts)taught_me_patience
(5,477 posts)and it's only "magical" & "adrenaline fueled" growth that makes his plan revenue neutral.
rfranklin
(13,200 posts)lots and lots of dope!
Panasonic
(2,921 posts)and won't reveal it.
He's going to use the Bain style presidency to outsource about 75% of our jobs to China and pocket the rest of the cash.
Well, fuck Rmoney.
Fgiriun
(169 posts)This is fucking surreal.
Cosmocat
(14,543 posts)has to call it for what it is.
Seriously.
shawn703
(2,702 posts)He was for reducing taxes on the highest income wage earners before he was against it before he was for it again?
HuckleB
(35,773 posts)But the magic math will work now! It's 2012!
andym
(5,441 posts)Plus this supposedly ends up revenue neutral-- how do we pay down the deficit.
BVictor1
(229 posts)If the math works, where are the numbers?
jmowreader
(50,447 posts)Ronald Reagan tried this in August 1981 and it did two things: shrank the GDP by four percent in its first year and spiked the U3 unemployment rate (the "low" rate, not the "high" U6 rate y'all like to smack Obama around with) to 10.8 percent within 16 months.
Flat out, guys: if you are going to try stimulating the economy with a tax cut, you need two things for it to work. You need a substantial tax cut that will still leave enough money in the government's checking account for it to do business, and you need something game-changing for the taxpayers to spend the money on. When Kennedy did his cut in the 1960s, he started out with a top tax rate of 90 percent which he reduced to 70, and we were at the dawn of the computer age. So by cutting the shit out of taxes, Kennedy made it possible for businesses to start computerizing, creating millions of new jobs, and by leaving taxes fairly high after the cut was completed, the government still had money to build bridges and shoot men into outer space.
As we stand now, our government, which means Everyone In America, is Poor, and if Romney starts hacking and slashing taxes just because he's tired of his wife demanding a new watch every time they fly to Switzerland to visit their money our government will be More Poor.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)Well Stated.....
The Magistrate
(95,237 posts)"Romney loves America like a tick loves a dog."
SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)onethatcares
(16,130 posts)then you're tireder than a beaten block mason on a sunny day in south Florida after a 14 hour day.
louis-t
(23,199 posts)Delusion con-artist.
SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)OKNancy
(41,832 posts)I'm sure many middle class folks would throw tomatoes at him if they lost their mortgage interest deduction or the education deductions.
For my family those were the two big ones. Oh, and IRA contributions.
TexasLeftist
(7 posts)It works because of the one thing that he's NOT telling us. When he was Governor of Massachusetts, he didn't have to raise taxes either. He just raised FEES. Suddenly, license that was $10 to obtain become $100, small businesses saw their operating costs skyrocket, and Massachusetts families got squeezed.
If Mitt Romney is elected, we'll no longer be the Land of the Free... but the Land of the FEE.
http://texasleftist.blogspot.com/2012/10/romneys-massachusetts-land-of-fee.html
DallasNE
(7,392 posts)Did GDP take off under Bush? No, the only thing that took off was the deficit so the math absolutely does not work. The problem with the Romney plan is that it will decrease the velocity of money so there will be no adrenaline injected into the economy. Let CBO score the Romney plan -- oh, wait, that would require some details and Romney will never go there. Smoke and mirrors didn't work the last time and smoke and mirrors won't work this time either.
EC
(12,287 posts)the economy enough to absorb those cuts? The economy couldn't even grow enough to cover Bush's tax cuts. This guy is dreaming.
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)He hopes we'll believe it.
He has the M$M helping him sell it.
GOP voters are stupid, GOP strategists are evil, but not stupid.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)of whom will be buried in it.
Mi$$ RobMe. If he's your guy, you're on your own.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,146 posts)Math is not "I expect there could be a way of making this do what I say, but I haven't bothered working it out yet, and so I'll pull a a number out of my arse, with a 'whatever' thrown in for good measure". People who have 'done the math' know it can't work.
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)And never do...where the hell do they think this debt came from I wonder...
Bossy Monkey
(15,863 posts)frankenbak
(4 posts)Princeton Economist professor Harvey Rosen says that the Obama campaign is misrepresenting his paper on Romney's tax plan: "I cant tell exactly how the Obama campaign reached that characterization of my work."
bamacrat
(3,867 posts)What a dumbass. Still can't give examples of loopholes or deductions. Probably because they affect mainly the middle class.
erpowers
(9,350 posts)Romney admitted in this article that he is ignoring math in order to make his plan work. Romney ignores math in the present and in the past.
Romney ignores math in the present by stating that he does not start with math. In the article Romney makes this statement:
Meaning, I dont start off with the math and then say, Oh, does this actually help or hurt? No, no. I start off with a very fundamental principle, which is we want to reduce the burden on middle-income taxpayers, and were not going to provide a tax break to high-income taxpayers. Thats the foundation. And then theres flexibility as to how to do that.
So, Romney and his team do not say we want to give a 20% tax cut how will the math work out. They say we want to give a 20% tax cut we'll figure it out.
Romney later goes on to ignore math in the past by saying that he looked to Ronald Reagan as an example for his current tax cut policy. Romney fails to take into account the fact that during the Reagan presidency there were deficits and the debt increased. Reagan and company failed to find enough revenue from other sources to make up for the lost tax revenue.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)might not be the best idea. Starting with a principle and hoping the math works out is a faith based solution which has been tried far too many times and failed each one of them.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)He cannot just talk sense to the american people. He has to say clearly, and with no ambiguity or nuance, that Romney is wishing away the huge shortfall in revenue his new tax cuts will cause.
NYtoBush-Drop Dead
(490 posts)Home of the late, great Bob Feller. RIP, Bob.
surrealAmerican
(11,339 posts)... need to be for that to work? I'm guessing somewhat higher than this nation has ever seen.
BeyondGeography
(39,276 posts)SoapBox
(18,791 posts)I wouldn't trust you with my trash.
truthisfreedom
(23,113 posts)He's going to saddle the middle class with his 20% tax cuts for the 1%.
BrainMann1
(460 posts)cstanleytech
(26,080 posts)and especially for those of us like myself who are in the bottom 20%.
LaPera
(6,486 posts)Progressive dog
(6,861 posts)They get tax cuts and then they can loan it back to the government. Free ride for the wealthy.
tclambert
(11,080 posts)"I is magic!"
Rhiannon12866
(202,961 posts)Please consider reposting in Politics 2012 or GD. Thanks!