Big Spender? Tax Cutter? Tax Hiker?

Status
Not open for further replies.
kokonut said:
That's pretty much an insult being called an idiot. Interesting that some are looking the other way. I thought AD made it clear on that.
Click to expand...

It has been going on for a week....nothing *shrug*
 
Jiro said:
Post #17.
Click to expand...

Again, that makes no sense. *shrug* I mean that is flat out stupid really. "Hey here is a group saving responsibly and that is not a burden on the system.....Let's discourage that." :lol: The sad truth is it is an effort to drive them into HIS plan. Which further disproves his "If you like your coverage...." BS
 
TXgolfer said:
Again, that makes no sense. *shrug* I mean that is flat out stupid really. "Hey here is a group saving responsibly and that is not a burden on the system.....Let's discourage that." :lol: The sad truth is it is an effort to drive them into HIS plan. Which further disproves his "If you like your coverage...." BS
Click to expand...

You don't understand about Obama at overall.

These nonsense posts are no good.
 
TXgolfer said:
Again, that makes no sense. *shrug* I mean that is flat out stupid really. "Hey here is a group saving responsibly and that is not a burden on the system.....Let's discourage that." :lol: The sad truth is it is an effort to drive them into HIS plan. Which further disproves his "If you like your coverage...." BS
Click to expand...

better contact GOP and Romney then. They're the one who came up with it in the first place.
 
Business - Derek Thompson - Romney's Tax Plan Is More Complicated (and Politically Risky) Than You Think - The Atlantic
Mitt Romney has two tax principles. First principle: I'm cutting taxes. Second principle: "People at the high end" should pay the same share of total taxes. Sounds simple enough. It isn't.

About that first principle: Romney wants to extend the 2001/2003 tax cuts cuts permanently and cut each marginal tax rate by a fifth. That would bring the top marginal tax rate, now at 35 percent, down to 28 percent. To make up some lost revenue, he says he'd eliminate some deductions and exemptions.

About that second principle: "People who are at the high end" stand to keep a lot of extra money when Romney cuts their tax rates by 20 percent. But they won't pay a higher share of overall taxes? Something's gotta give. Remember: About 50% of the country doesn't even pay federal income taxes, and the top 1% pays more overall federal taxes than the bottom 60% combined.

To dig deeper, here's a breakdown, via TPC, of various brackets' share of income and share of federal taxes (income, payroll, etc). The bigger dark-blue pizza slice is the bottom 80 percent. As you move clockwise, you go up the income ladder.

Screen%20Shot%202012-06-20%20at%2011.38.40%20AM.png


You can take a lot of lessons away from these charts including: (a) Yes our tax system is progressive; and (b) yes, the rich pay a lot of taxes, because (c) wow, they sure do capture a lot of the income to begin with. But back to Romney.

Let's assume that Romney's definition of the "high end" is the top 5%. I'll direct your attention to the orange, light blue, and purple pizza slices in the right graph that represent the top 5%.

In order to keep those slices the same shape (which is Romney's second principle) while massively cutting income taxes (Romney's first principle) you have only three choices. You can eliminate a lot of popular deductions among rich people, like mortgage interest, which is a tough sell for donors. Or you can say, Screw it, we're just going to shrink the size of the pie dramatically and make do with much lower revenue and higher deficits, which is a tough sell for independents. Or, somewhat complicatedly, you can have the top 5% pay the same share, concentrate your tax cut on the 80-95% of Americans, and then ask the bottom 79% to pay a higher share, which is a tough sell for 80% of the country. (Or, really, you can see all three things at the same time.)

The upshot is that Romney's simple two-principle approach to tax policy isn't so simple. And no matter what, all conceivable Romney plans violate my own first principle: Don't permanently cut taxes.
Click to expand...
 
TXgolfer said:
The major flaw here is that "shrinking the pie" would necessarily increase deficits. The hope is that spending would be reduced as well.

I am in favor of eliminating deductions, reducing revenue/spending and requiring everyone to pay their fair share. So the Romney plan is not half bad as long as there are spending cuts.
Click to expand...

half? more like 1/3
 
kokonut said:
That's pretty much an insult being called an idiot. Interesting that some are looking the other way. I thought AD made it clear on that.
Click to expand...

Calling someone a Liberal is much more degrading from your desk than calling someone an idiot. OK? Face it, you have fans, and you have foes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top