posted
9/6/11: Romney’s First Tax Cut For The Rich
Promising not to cut taxes for the rich, Romney proposes a plan that would extend the Bush tax cuts, eliminate capital gains taxes for those making under $200,000, cut corporate taxes, and eliminate the estate tax. In all, it adds up to a $6.6-trillion cut that would have little benefit for the middle class, which doesn’t enjoy the same benefits from a capital gains cut as the rich.
2/22/12: Romney Introduces A New Tax Plan
Under pressure from conservatives, Romney scraps his first plan in favor of the current plan, which maintains the Bush tax cuts, provides another 20-percent rate reduction for all Americans, cuts corporate taxes, and eliminates the estate tax. Romney says he will eliminate unspecified tax loopholes and deductions to pay for the plan. Romney promises he won’t cut taxes for the rich. He also promises his plan won’t add to the deficit.
2/22/12: Romney Promises To Cut Taxes For The 1 Percent
After criticism from fellow Republican presidential candidates, Romney asserts at a primary debate that “we’re going to cut taxes on everyone across the country by 20 percent, including the top 1 percent,” contradicting his previous assertion that he wouldn’t cut taxes for the rich.
3/1/12: Tax Plan Will Lead To $4.8 Trillion In Lost Revenue
The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center scores Romney’s plan, finding that it would cost $4.8 trillion over the next 10 years. TPC does not take into account Romney’s plan to pay for his tax cuts, since he hasn’t yet proposed a specific way to do so. TPC found that Romney’s plan would give the average millionaire nearly $260,000 in tax cuts.
4/15/12: Romney Names Two Deductions He’d Eliminate
Romney tells donors that he would “probably eliminate” the mortgage interest deduction on second homes for high-income Americans, as well as deductions for state and local income taxes. That still falls far short of paying for his plan.
4/16/12: Advisers Walk Those Comments Back
Romney aides walk back those comments, saying Romney’s fundraiser remarks were only in response to questions from donors and shouldn’t be taken as policy proposals.
6/4/12: A $5 Million Tax Cut For Himself
Citizens for Tax Justice issues a study finding Romney would save $5 million under his own tax plan.
7/17/12: Media Begins To Press Romney To Name Deductions, He Refuses
Romney refuses to name deductions he would eliminate when pressed by CBS host Bob Schieffer. He also claims his tax plan won’t reduce the “share of the tax burden” paid by the wealthiest Americans, a canard meant to hide his massive tax cut for the wealthy.
8/1/12: Romney’s Plan Would Raise Taxes On The Middle Class
The Tax Policy Center returns to the Romney tax plan, attempting to find out how he would pay for it. TPC finds that there is not enough revenue to be gained through the elimination of deductions for high-income earners to pay for the tax cut, so to avoid adding to the deficit, Romney would have to raise taxes on the middle class by as much as $2,000.
8/9/12: Conservatives Start Coming To His Defense
Matt Jensen of the American Enterprise Institute responds to the TPC study by noting that it didn’t take into account Romney’s proposal to eliminate the deduction for interest on state and local bonds (an investment break that, according to general Republican thinking, should receive a tax break). Romney said previously that such a deduction was “on the table,” but has not said it would definitely be eliminated under his plan.
8/16/12: Even With Conservative Additions, The Plan Doesn’t Add Up
TPC re-analyzes the plan and concludes that Jensen assumed more savings than could be realized from the elimination of the deduction for interest on state and local bonds. “Our main result still holds,” TPC writes.
8/23/12: Romney’s Corporate Tax Cuts Also Raise Middle Class Taxes
The Tax Policy Center analyzes Romney’s corporate tax plan, which would reduce revenues by $900 billion over 10 years. TPC had previously assumed Romney would pay for his corporate tax cut by eliminating corporate deductions, but that isn’t the case, according to the Romney campaign. TPC finds that Romney’s corporate cut would cost middle class taxpayers another $2,000 if he wants to maintain current levels of revenue.
8/28/12: Romney Advisers Adopt Bad Math
Romney adviser Martin Feldstein writes an editorial in the Wall Street Journal dismissing the TPC analysis. Feldstein’s math, however, excludes the corporate tax cut, redefines middle class, and overstates savings that could be gained from the elimination of upper-income tax breaks.
9/12: GOP Advisers Adopt Bad Math, Part II
Princeton professor Harvey Rosen, a former Bush adviser, publishes a study that assumes Romney’s plan will work because it will generate enough economic growth to pay any revenue loss, ignoring that the same logic was applied to other GOP-led tax cuts, including those signed by George W. Bush.
9/12: Romney Cites Five Debunked “Studies” To Back Up His Plan
Romney begins citing “five studies” that show his tax plan can work. Those studies are most likely Jensen’s, Feldstein’s, and Rosen’s, all of which have had their problems exposed. The other two are thought to be Wall Street Journal editorials that assert Romney’s plan is “mathematically possible” but add no new information.
9/9/12: Conservative Tax Expert Admits The Plan Doesn’t Work
Alan Viard, a tax expert at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, tells the New York Times that Romney will have “to cut rates significantly less than 20 percent if he wants to honor his other goals.”
9/10/12: Romney Adviser Still Can’t Name A Deduction He’d Eliminate
Romney adviser Tara Wall can’t name a single loophole or deduction Romney would close to help pay for his plan. Instead, she says “energy independence.”
9/25/12: Romney Adviser Admits The Plan Doesn’t Work
Romney adviser Kevin Hassett, also a fellow at AEI, says that if Romney can’t pay for his plan by eliminating deductions, he “would have a different change in rates.” That is, the tax cut would be smaller.
9/30/12: Paul Ryan Can’t Explain The Math Behind The Plan
Asked to explain the math of Romney’s tax plan on Fox News Sunday, vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan says, “I don’t have time.”
9/30/12: Ryan Says ‘Keeping Tax Rates Down’ Is The Number One Priority
In the same interview, Fox host Chris Wallace asked Ryan what the number one priority of the tax plan was, if it couldn’t achieve both tax cuts and deficit reduction. “Keeping tax rates down,” Ryan said.
10/3/12: Romney Says ‘Number-One Principle’ Is Not Adding To The Deficit
In response to virtually the same question, Romney asserted that his number one priority was not “keeping tax rates down,” but avoiding increases to the deficit. “My number-one principle is, there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit,” Romney said during the first presidential debate.
10/3/12: Romney Proposes A New Idea — It Still Doesn’t Work
Ahead of the debate, Romney floats a new idea to pay for his plan: he will cap the amount of deductions each taxpayer can use at $17,000. This proposal would still fall well short of paying for Romney’s plan, according to TPC. And worse, it could curtail deductions for housing and health care that benefit the middle class.
10/3/12: Romney Walks Back His Own Support
In the first presidential debate, Romney seems to walk back support for his own tax plan. When President Obama criticizes the plan for adding to the deficit or raising taxes on the middle class, Romney says he would “absolutely not” support such a plan. Seemingly ignoring TPC, an AEI expert, and his own adviser, he then reasserts that his plan will cut tax rates by 20 percent and adhere to three principles: it will not add to the deficit, it will not cut taxes on the rich, and it will not raise taxes on the middle class.
10/3/12: Romney’s Web Site Debunks His Own Claims About The Wealthy
Romney’s campaign web site refutes his debate claim that he won’t cut taxes on the rich.
10/9/12: Romney Tweaks His Newest Idea, Making His Tax Math Even ‘Fuzzier’
On CNN, Romney adopts the idea to cap tax deductions he proposed just a week earlier. Instead of capping deductions at $17,000, he’ll now cap them at either $25,000 or $50,000. As the Washington Post’s Suzy Khimm notes, though, this makes the math of Romney’s tax plan even harder to work out. Placing the cap at $25,000, the Tax Policy Center found, would make it possible to avoid raising taxes on the middle class. It would also generate significantly less revenue. Placing it at $50,000, though, would render it irrelevant, since even taxpayers in the top 1 percent averaged only $43,208 in deductions last year.
10/9/12: Romney Needs “Flexibility”
Romney admits to the Des Moines Register that he will need “flexibility” to make his tax plan add up. At this point, it is no longer clear what tax plan Romney actually supports.
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Romney admits to the Des Moines Register that he will need “flexibility” to make his tax plan add up.
Obama will have more "flexibility" in dealing with the Russians on nuclear Arms....What is it that he's gonna give the Russians after the election that he can't before....hummmmmm
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!! Posts: 3317 | From: CT | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: Romney admits to the Des Moines Register that he will need “flexibility” to make his tax plan add up.
Obama will have more "flexibility" in dealing with the Russians on nuclear Arms....What is it that he's gonna give the Russians after the election that he can't before....hummmmmm
Obama has no flexibility in dealing with the russkies cuz no matter what he does it's not backed by Congress....
Romney promised to name China a currency manipulator his first day in office at the last debate.
do you belive that Lockman? remebr i'm not a big Obma supporter. I'm an EX_GOP who is looking for the party to get it chit together.
do you really beleive that Romney is going to declare China a currency manipulator on his FIRST day in office or not?
i hope he does. but you have to understand how that is going to fall out and be prepared. I am always ready to bite the bullet, but i don;t think this country is prepared to bite that bullet as a whole.
This is why Romney si so dangerous. I belive he jsut said that and about a dozen other things without thinking. It sounds good to say it, but when you sit for few minutes and think about htat PROMISE? You will relaise that you and everybody esle is going to need to take care of some serious business to prepare for that declaration. Like refinance your hosue and everything you have right now. Cuz the next day after he does that? The US debt interest paymetns wills tart rising very very fast...... US debt is sold in reverse auction and the amount of bidders participating drives rates down. China will stop bidding and interest costs on our 16 trillion in debt will got to 10% very fast- are you ready fo rthat? or is Romny just bold-faced LIAR?
oh i know Obma lies too... but the 'thing " is? nobody else has ever told a whopper that big on natioanl TV and it sure seems to me that nobody but me even noticed....
which Romneye will we get? the one that calls coal plants killers or the one that wants to insure every child in America? and cut taxes too? sheesh....
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Romney Cites Study Based On Repealing Almost All Middle Class Tax Breaks To Bolster His Tax Plan
By Pat Garofalo on Oct 19, 2012 at 9:30 am
Mitt Romney has been desperately trying to refute a study by the Tax Policy Center showing that he can’t mathematically achieve his goals of reducing income tax rates while shielding the middle class from a tax increase and not adding to the deficit. If Romney is committed to his rate reduction and deficit neutrality, he would have to raise middle class taxes by $2,000, even under the most generous assumptions.
Romney has been pointing to “six studies” that he claims show that his tax plan work. However, those “studies” (which are mostly blog posts and op-eds) show no such thing.
So now the Romney campaign is touting a 2006 study from the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation that he claims vindicates his approach, telling Roll Call the study shows “how a ‘Romney-style tax plan’ could bolster growth.” According to the study, tax reform that eliminates deductions and loopholes and reduces income tax rates will slightly increase economic growth over a decade. But the study assumes that nearly all middle class tax breaks — including those for children, mortgages, and employer contributions for health care — are repealed in their entirety:
Under the proposal, all personal exemptions, itemized deductions, personal credits except for the earned income credit, and all above-the-line adjustments to income except for retirement savings deductions and the deduction for self employment taxes would be repealed. The largest categories of deductions repealed are present-law deductions for home mortgage interest expenses, State and local taxes, and charitable contributions. In addition, the exclusions for certain employee fringe benefits, such as employer contributions for health and life insurance, would be repealed. The standard deduction would remain.
The study also found that such a plan would result in the “redistribution” of income tax liability from high-income earners to the middle class. And the promised job growth is only between 1 and 2 percent over ten years (one to two million jobs), while Romney promises that his tax plan will create seven million jobs over four years.
Romney’s claims about job creation under his tax plan are almost entirely fabricated. An economic adviser for both the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations said this week that Romney’s tax plan won’t create jobs.
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
i'd raise taxes on everybody. 1% even if you are poor- we all benefitted from this disgraceful defict, we aren't being robbed at this level, we are being robbed by crooked govt officials and even the lifetime civil serviants tho...
i'd freeze all spending budgets until the whole govt erases 11 trillion of the defict that is unacceptable.. leaving 5 trillion which we can handle.
i'd also put out serious bounties for reporting on on waste fraud and abuse in govt and cut spending that way with a goal of bringing the deficit down to 5 trillion or less, and the tax increases would be tied to that goal...
i'd make it easier to fire people for non-performance in government jobs.
i'd reward govt employees and managers for coming in under budget. instead of the current program which rewards them for wasting money.
in other words? congress people could get re-elcted by figuring out how to reduce the defict so thay can campaign on getting your taxes cut back down for you...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why dont we cut the pensions of congress? Why isnt Obama taking a stand on insider trading by congress? Why does he not fight to fix that like he does his health care law?
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
i find it impossible to actually givea chit...
the only hting that distrubs me is that the GOP will not change because they weren't required to by the elctorate to change in order to get heir power back... Obama loses, and Hillary will prolly be President in 2016, know why? cuz Romney isn't going to make a damn thing better either..nothing he campaigned on will actually increase jobs, it will only increase profits for a few wealthy people, and they roll their profits into investmetns in other countries these days....
and Hillary as president will prolly mean i will be looking at Costa rica or Brazil as a new home... cuz i find her totally unplatable, which is shame cuz i would gladly vote for woman that i can support.... can't support her.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why cant you support Hillary? Shes a good Democrat isnt she?
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: Why cant you support Hillary? Shes a good Democrat isnt she?
cash, you really do wake up every morning with no recolletion of your past dontcha? to be honest? cash , it's peole just like you that have allowed the GOP to sink to the depths it has.... in the 50's? you'da been a proud democrat.... it's actually creepy..
i just laid the future down for you. the congressioanl GOP, instead of recovering the power by reforming itself into something to be proud of spent the last three years working to make sure that the coutnry cannot move forward. the GOP nominated a peerson who stands for NOTHING. literally. Romeny runs against his own policies over and over agin...
coal power was a killer when he ran in Mass.. govt mandated health care was good... if he wins? it will be by 1% because a few people already forgot EVERYTHING he said in the GOP nomination campaign. let GM and the rest of the US auto go bankrupt so China can buy them at a fire sale... that's what Romney wanted. Romney and his ilk beleived they could outmaneuver the Chinese in the BK courts, but in th end? China was the ONLY place liquid enough to provide the cash. they would have owned it all..
he says he will name China a currency manipulator his first day in office... LOL..
sure he will.. i hope he does... but i ain't holding my breath..
i told you a few months back that i am deeply entrecnhed in the Ag biz. i stand to gain personally if he wins, the Mormons are dalso deeply entrenched in the agbiz and he will look after it better than Obama has... but the country does not stand to gain if he wins, in fact? if he does what he says he will do? we will be in a real depression by the end of his term. as to hillary? i am on record her for years as being willing to vote for anyone but hillary, i even predicted she would run in 2008 several years before she did... Romney? he is by far the second most unlikely presidetnial candidate with any chance at all in the last 100 years... second ONLY to Obama....
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: Why cant you support Hillary? Shes a good Democrat isnt she?
cash, you really do wake up every morning with no recolletion of your past dontcha? to be honest? cash , it's peole just like you that have allowed the GOP to sink to the depths it has.... in the 50's? you'da been a proud democrat.... it's actually creepy..
i just laid the future down for you. the congressioanl GOP, instead of recovering the power by reforming itself into something to be proud of spent the last three years working to make sure that the coutnry cannot move forward. the GOP nominated a peerson who stands for NOTHING. literally. Romeny runs against his own policies over and over agin...
coal power was a killer when he ran in Mass.. govt mandated health care was good... if he wins? it will be by 1% because a few people already forgot EVERYTHING he said in the GOP nomination campaign. let GM and the rest of the US auto go bankrupt so China can buy them at a fire sale... that's what Romney wanted. Romney and his ilk beleived they could outmaneuver the Chinese in the BK courts, but in th end? China was the ONLY place liquid enough to provide the cash. they would have owned it all..
he says he will name China a currency manipulator his first day in office... LOL..
sure he will.. i hope he does... but i ain't holding my breath..
i told you a few months back that i am deeply entrecnhed in the Ag biz. i stand to gain personally if he wins, the Mormons are dalso deeply entrenched in the agbiz and he will look after it better than Obama has... but the country does not stand to gain if he wins, in fact? if he does what he says he will do? we will be in a real depression by the end of his term. as to hillary? i am on record her for years as being willing to vote for anyone but hillary, i even predicted she would run in 2008 several years before she did... Romney? he is by far the second most unlikely presidetnial candidate with any chance at all in the last 100 years... second ONLY to Obama....
I have allowed the GOP to do what? I didnt vote for McCain, and did not vote for Bush second term. Where do you come up with this stuff all the time to make up your arguments?
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Romney clearly and plainly said that requiring peopl to purchase health care insurance was GOP/Conservative principle when he signed the Mass. mandatory purchase health care law The one that says you take of yourself without looking for handouts.
I actaully agreed with him then, and still do with that statemnt. That's personal accountability. And most govt' regulations were origianlly designed to make sure people are held accountable for their action - i also realise that they are moslty poorly constructed and do not actaully achieve the goals- instead they tend to favor large corporations that already have access to lots of Capital....
the Romeny that won the GFOP nomination got it by running AWAY form all of that cash... the only way Romeny will be good for the coutnry is if he breaks almost every single one of his campaign promises. he may do that....
then Hillary will run against him and beat him on that or she will beat him on the bad-worse economy we will actaully have if follows all of the promises he made to teh GOP's to get nominated... either way we are all going to hell'na bucket, and i am just going to enjoy the ride form her on out...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Romney is the biggest liar and flip flopper I have ever seen. If he is elected I am sure the will be a revolution for sure.
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
romeny sounds like Obama tonight... i think he agreed with every facet of obama's foreign policy except that he would do the same thing more better.... boring.... even drone usage, in fact/ if i didn't know better i'd think romeny was running to be obama's VP....
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
This debate sucked. I am so glad they are over now.
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What are you talking about getting to the mediterranean sea?
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: What are you talking about getting to the mediterranean sea?
quoting romeny, he said syria was was their (irans)only route to the sea...
watch for ahwile this week, it'll be made fun of by Jon Stewart for sure......
what's really funny now is that i see GOP's claiming that Obama was too offensive... this offensiveness is what won Romeny the first debate, but now it will be used aginst Obama... watch and see.... th4 angry balck man is back....
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mitt: I love Israel more. Obama: No, I do. Mitt: No, actually, it's me. Obama: Nuh ah! Mitt: I DO. NO TAKE BACKS! liar lair pants on fire... sheesh...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, thats why I said this debate was pathetic. Same liners as usual. Same thing over and over.
Too bad Gary Johnson isnt able to debate.
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so. Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
whatcha think of this cash? is it true? and if it is do thihnk we can have a fair election? cuz romney wasnot even close to oabma three weeks ago, now it's supposedly a tossup... well, supposed tossups are the only way to make this scheme work- remeber, the day before teh first debate? romeny was way below the margin of error.... then despite teh fact that no debate has mattered since kennedy-Nixon, romeny suddenly pulls even?
and if romney does win do you still think there will be protests?
"Through a closely held equity fund called Solamere, Mitt Romney and his wife, son and brother are major investors in an investment firm called H.I.G. Capital. H.I.G. in turn holds a majority share and three out of five board members in Hart Intercivic, a company that owns the notoriously faulty electronic voting machines that will count the ballots in swing state Ohio November 7. Hart machines will also be used elsewhere in the United States.
In other words, a candidate for the presidency of the United States, and his brother, wife and son, have a straight-line financial interest in the voting machines that could decide this fall's election. These machines cannot be monitored by the public. But they will help decide who "owns" the White House."
Both The Nation and New York Times confirm the connection between the Romney family, Solamere and the Bain Capital investment in the voting machine company, Hart Intercivic, whose board of directors serve H.I.G. Capital.
"Mitt Romney, his wife Ann Romney, and their son Tagg Romney are also invested in H.I.G. Capital, as is Mitt's brother G. Scott Romney.
The investment comes in part through the privately held family equity firm called Solamere, which bears the name of the posh Utah ski community where the Romney family retreats to slide down the slopes."
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
