Thread: Romney's Tax Plan Exposes GOP Priorities

Originally Posted by jpn

Romney's tax plan makes his and the GOP's priorities plain.
Or perhaps I should say "priority", singlular, because there is obviously only one priority.

To cut taxes.

Period.

Especially on the rich.

If Romney really means what he says :rolleyes: about paying for the massive tax cuts (mostly for the already rich) through eliminating tax expenditures, then his plan would pay for the tax cuts for the rich primarily through ultimately raising taxes on the rest of us. Because the tax expenditures as a whole tend to benefit the middle class more than the rich.



It's all been spelled out by the non-partisan Tax Policy Center.

If you think that the already rich, currently enjoying the lowest overall tax rates in the last 80 years need a tax cut and the middle class should pay more taxes to pay for it, if you think that's the best way to address the deficit and stimulate the economy, then vote Republican.

If not, vote Democratic. Your nation, and your nation's pocketbook, will thank you for it.

Isn't Romney just trying to help those who need it most?

Otherwise, they won't hire us...to be their gardeners.

It's really hard to cut taxes for those who don't pay any in the first place.

Of course this thread:

Romney's economic plan.

Wasn't good enough for you, was it?

Not nearly enough bile...

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by USCitizen

Otherwise, they won't hire us...to be their gardeners.

Are you sure you are even qualified for that?

Originally Posted by tsquare

Of course this thread:

Romney's economic plan.

Wasn't good enough for you, was it?

Not nearly enough bile...

Neither candidate has a valid plan.

Originally Posted by OldmanDan

It's really hard to cut taxes for those who don't pay any in the first place.

True that their jobs being exported to enrich a few.

Originally Posted by USCitizen

Neither candidate has a valid plan.

I post for you... so you don't even have to click the link the 80 some points... and you claim there to be no plan.

How nice it must be to be you...

Originally Posted by tsquare

I post for you... so you don't even have to click the link the 80 some points... and you claim there to be no plan.

How nice it must be to be you...

I need you to tell me how Europe is doing.
And yes, I have a follow to whatever your answer is.

Originally Posted by michael h

True that their jobs being exported to enrich a few.

The jobs were exported because you wouldn't pay an extra $200 for a flat screen TV made here.

Originally Posted by OldmanDan

The jobs were exported because you wouldn't pay an extra $200 for a flat screen TV made here.

The price of TVs didn't fall until several months after the 2008 crash.
You can post all the self-serving, emotionally assuaging bullsh!t you want but it doesn't change the facts.

Originally Posted by OldmanDan

It's really hard to cut taxes for those who don't pay any in the first place.

That's illogical. If it were true, then eliminating tax expenditures on the lower 90% of income earners would not raise their tax liability. But it does.

So you need to try again.

Originally Posted by jpn

That's illogical. If it were true, then eliminating tax expenditures on the lower 90% of income earners would not raise their tax liability. But it does.

So you need to try again.

Say what?

Originally Posted by USCitizen

Neither candidate has a valid plan.

I agree. But one is still obviously better than the other:

Neither candidate is offering a realistic tax plan, because the fact is that the federal government is going to need more revenue than either is currently proposing. But the two men are not equivalent in their unrealism: Obama is proposing to raise revenue by around $80 billion a year compared with current policy, while Romney is proposing to cut revenue by around $450 billion a year compared with current policy. Obama is inadequate; Romney is intensely, screamingly irresponsible.