The irony is that Romney will blow the deficit wide open

#26
#26
lawgator1 said:
First, I agree that a lot of that investment you list does not help. Alternative energy will become economically viable long term when fossil fuels are expensive enough that the balance changes. I have great faith in private sector technology and investment to get us there, the government doesn't need to be in that, at least not significantly (exception is I think university research is worthwhile government effort).

Second, the key in my mind remains a combination of infrastructure projects and tax cuts for the middle class. The former more long term, the latter shorter term. And to be revenue neutral cut all federal programs by 10 percent, including the military, end the wars, and eliminate the Bush tax cuts on those making over a million a year.
Click to expand...

Romney is advocating tax cuts for the middle class - so is Obama. Can't possibly see how they magically work if Obama does them but don't if Romney does.
 
#27
#27
BigPapaVol said:
yes and I can assimilate the information far better than you can. The hacks you keep linking don't have enough to make a pronouncement either way, so they default to absurd assumptions to support a goofy worldview.

If he's serious about eliminating the deficit, his policies can work, but he'll have to hammer some loopholes and hammer some corporate taxation loopholes, including wiping out previously issued tax credits. I'm not against the policy, but stocks will take a lick for it. In my mind, that's fine because all of the QE rounds have overblown the market to ridiculous proportions.
Click to expand...


I can accept your comment about where you are on it and that you understand it better than I do. No problems there.

But at least we are in the same boat that we haven't seen enough to convince either of us that Romney's plan will be revenue neutral and not raise middle class taxes.
 
#28
#28
volinbham said:
Romney is advocating tax cuts for the middle class - so is Obama. Can't possibly see how they magically work if Obama does them but don't if Romney does.
Click to expand...

his tax cuts for the middle class are revenue neutral with his tax increases on the middle class
 
#29
#29
lawgator1 said:
I can't believe that the man perhaps most skeptical on this board of pledges to cut government spending, by either party, is willing to accept a broad strokes proposal like this that does not add up and just hope that somehow they figure out a way to make it work.
Click to expand...

I doubt it will be truly revenue neutral. However, the contention that it will massively raise the deficit - particularly in the manner which Obama claims (and you) simply doesn't hold water.

He's outlined his principles for tax policy. The specific final rates, deduction roll backs etc. will be influenced by Congress just as Obama's have.
 
#30
#30
Lowering the taxes does not always produce the results the GOP says it does. With the Bush 2 tax cuts, the US debt increased 4.9 trillion dollars during his term in office.

The US debt has gone up 10 trillion dollars during Bush/ Obama.

DebtReaganObama.png
 
#31
#31
lawgator1 said:
I can accept your comment about where you are on it and that you understand it better than I do. No problems there.

But at least we are in the same boat that we haven't seen enough to convince either of us that Romney's plan will be revenue neutral and not raise middle class taxes.
Click to expand...

You should then revise your OP since you definitively stated what the impact would be and then implied we are hypocrites for not trashing it along with you.
 
#32
#32
volinbham said:
You should then revise your OP since you definitively stated what the impact would be and then implied we are hypocrites for not trashing it along with you.
Click to expand...


That's actually a valid point. I can't change it, though, not that I know of.
 
#33
#33
I really would like a list of the deductions Romney plans to cut.
 
#34
#34
Also, the thing about raising middle class taxes is a complete canard. Romney never, never, ever proposed that. The notion comes from the TPC's first report that says he would have to do so to reach his deficit goals. Big difference. Then TPC revises that and says he wouldn't have to raise middle class taxes.

Romney never proposed it. One group suggested he MIGHT have to and then recanted that claim. It's a total BS claim and doesn't require more specifics from Romney unless you believe its' correct to say Obama will raise middle class taxes (income) since his plans can't be paid for as described.
 
#35
#35
volinbham said:
Also, the thing about raising middle class taxes is a complete canard. Romney never, never, ever proposed that. The notion comes from the TPC's first report that says he would have to do so to reach his deficit goals. Big difference. Then TPC revises that and says he wouldn't have to raise middle class taxes.

Romney never proposed it. One group suggested he MIGHT have to and then recanted that claim. It's a total BS claim and doesn't require more specifics from Romney unless you believe its' correct to say Obama will raise middle class taxes (income) since his plans can't be paid for as described.
Click to expand...


Right, its that it seems to be the only alternative if the plan is not revenue neutral. Romney says it is, but as far as I've seen the only people who agree are pro-Romney groups that have a heavily vested interest in maintaining supply side policies.
 
#36
#36
rjd970 said:
I really would like a list of the deductions Romney plans to cut.
Click to expand...

Obamacare had to be passed to see what was in it.

We have to elect Romney to see what the details of his plans to repair America.
 
#37
#37
lawgator1 said:
I can accept your comment about where you are on it and that you understand it better than I do. No problems there.

But at least we are in the same boat that we haven't seen enough to convince either of us that Romney's plan will be revenue neutral and not raise middle class taxes.
Click to expand...

caveat that it's a drastically better plan that anything that Obama can / will ever begin to imagine. Decent chance Obama begins ripping off parts over time.
 
#38
#38
lawgator1 said:
Right, its that it seems to be the only alternative if the plan is not revenue neutral. Romney says it is, but as far as I've seen the only people who agree are pro-Romney groups that have a heavily vested interest in maintaining supply side policies.
Click to expand...

Let's play a what if - if the plan cannot be revenue neutral without raising taxes on the middle class what do you think Romney would propose - some negative impact on the deficit OR intentionally raising taxes on the middle class to keep it revenue neutral?

Hmmmm. I wonder which a politician would choose...
 
#39
#39
BigPapaVol said:
caveat that it's a drastically better plan that anything that Obama can / will ever begin to imagine. Decent chance Obama begins ripping off parts over time.
Click to expand...


Actually, I think we saw a bit of that happening last night.
 
#40
#40
volinbham said:
Let's play a what if - if the plan cannot be revenue neutral without raising taxes on the middle class what do you think Romney would propose - some negative impact on the deficit OR intentionally raising taxes on the middle class to keep it revenue neutral?

Hmmmm. I wonder which a politician would choose...
Click to expand...


LOL, exactly my point.

F it, I say we go off the cliff.
 
#41
#41
lawgator1 said:
Right, its that it seems to be the only alternative if the plan is not revenue neutral. Romney says it is, but as far as I've seen the only people who agree are pro-Romney groups that have a heavily vested interest in maintaining supply side policies.
Click to expand...

how is it supply side? Clearly there is a supply side element, but the true difference is the talk of spreading the base via loophole closure. Sans that, it's just more Bush style tax cutting.
 
#43
#43
I think the real irony is President Obama bringing up a possible Romney deficit in the first place. Obama has had a trillion dollar deficit 4 years in a row with no sign of a revenue neutral budget in the future. Yet he's complaining about Romney's budget possibly adding 5 trillion dollars to the deficit over 10 years.

The country would be better off under Romney even using Obama's 'math' and 'arithmetic'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#44
#44
I am wondering, LG, what is your fundamental opposition to Romney? It cannot be this sticking point that you do not think he will close the deficit, since you are voting for Obama who has only ever been within twelve zeros of a balanced budget.
 
#45
#45
therealUT said:
I am wondering, LG, what is your fundamental opposition to Romney? It cannot be this sticking point that you do not think he will close the deficit, since you are voting for Obama who has only ever been within twelve zeros of a balanced budget.
Click to expand...


I've said on here many times that I don't think my own day to day life will change significantly under Romney. I think he'd be a fine president.

My issue is not with him, its with the machine behind him.
 
#46
#46
#47
#47
lawgator1 said:
The math does not work. The tax cuts he wants to make, plus the continuation of the Bush tax cuts, plus more defense spending far, far outweighs the savings from the loopholes he closes. The result is either a massively inflated deficit or higher taxes on the middle class.

Would think you so-called fiscal conservatives would be a bit more skeptical than you are, but I guess you only ask the hard questions about the other side's plan, right ?
Click to expand...

You are right. What we really need to do is to continue massive gov't spending. This is the tried and true method of getting out of ANY fiscal mess. I mean all you have to do is look at every socialist economy ever created....oh wait....
 
#48
#48
PaulieWalnuts said:
Why do you guys always blast people when they want to compare Obama and Bush, but you can't make one post discussing Romney on his own merit.

His plan will not balance the budget. Ever.
Click to expand...

It's because their extreme prejudice makes them dishonest and stupid.
 
#49
#49
Vol Main said:
It's because their extreme prejudice makes them dishonest and stupid.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And your otherworldly objectivity place you above the fray and prove you honest as the day is long. Thank goodness you've come to salvage the place and imbue it with euro socialist garbage. Look at the strength of their ideals.
 
#50
#50
lawgator1 said:
The math does not work. The tax cuts he wants to make, plus the continuation of the Bush tax cuts, plus more defense spending far, far outweighs the savings from the loopholes he closes. The result is either a massively inflated deficit or higher taxes on the middle class.

Would think you so-called fiscal conservatives would be a bit more skeptical than you are, but I guess you only ask the hard questions about the other side's plan, right ?
Click to expand...

I am not sure it is humanly possible to be worse on the deficit than Obama.

Romney might not be able to get it to where I would be satisfied on the deficit, but Obama sure as hell can't. At this point, I am not sure whether he is willfully ignorant, willfully trying to make it worse, or truly doesn't give a damn about the deficit.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top