How will Mitt Romney Save America ?


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : How will Mitt Romney Save America ?

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next
Author Message
BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,449,735
RAC: 5,703
United States
Message 1286417 - Posted: 21 Sep 2012, 21:30:47 UTC - in response to Message 1286381.

One curious thing to note in the returns -- Romney *intentionally* understated his legitimate church deductions by something like $2M -- so that his tax rate would hit 14%. If he had taken the full amount of deductions, his rate would have been below 10% -- but since, during the run up to his nomination he stated the return would show 14%, he was 'compelled' to understate the deduction in order to make the numbers fit his statement.

Note, should Romney not win the election, he can always file an amended return...

And yes, Reid was full of it in tossing lying stones at his fellow church member. These LDS folks ought to be civil and truthful when dealing with one another.

Profile Do Keep Trying
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9201
Credit: 1,278,714
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1286419 - Posted: 21 Sep 2012, 21:34:34 UTC

Middle of the road is someone who has voted for both Democratic and Republican presidential candidates across their voting history, in nearly equal numbers, and I would be willing to be that, as I have done just that, I am a very small minority here.

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,449,735
RAC: 5,703
United States
Message 1286422 - Posted: 21 Sep 2012, 21:37:02 UTC - in response to Message 1286391.

Skil, a few things -- first, nearly all Romney's income is in dividends and capital gains. Under the Bushcut rules of 2001 that really maxes out at 15%. So it is quite easy for the Mitt's rate to be that low. It is the same for just about everyone making millions a year. (Not true for movie stars or sports stars unless they have very creating accounting schemes).

There was a time when dividend income was not given a favored rate -- pre-Bush.

If the Democrats and Teapublicans remain intransigent -- that higher rate will be in effect on January 1. The Bushcuts end, absent congressional action, at the end of this year. That's part of the 'fiscal cliff' the press is yammering about (the other large component is squestration which imposes across the board cuts of about 9% in the budget (aside from things such as Medicare and Social Security) INCLUDING the Teapublican sacrosanct defense budget.

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,449,735
RAC: 5,703
United States
Message 1286423 - Posted: 21 Sep 2012, 21:37:50 UTC - in response to Message 1286419.

Sarge, I have and will vote for Republicans. I have not and will not vote for Teapublicans.

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,432,110
RAC: 163
Korea, North
Message 1286427 - Posted: 21 Sep 2012, 21:46:19 UTC - in response to Message 1286423.

I have voted for republicans before. I've not seen any recently that aren't predecided on their opinions, I tend to default against such characters
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 1751
Credit: 3,596,474
RAC: 8,028
United States
Message 1286462 - Posted: 21 Sep 2012, 23:40:10 UTC - in response to Message 1286419.

Middle of the road is someone who has voted for both Democratic and Republican presidential candidates across their voting history, in nearly equal numbers, and I would be willing to be that, as I have done just that, I am a very small minority here.

LOL I guess I must be middle of the road then, I pretty much voted R until my early 40's then I gravitated to mostly D the last 25 years or so.
____________

Profile Guy
Volunteer moderator
Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 1987
Credit: 29,154,914
RAC: 132,062
United States
Message 1286464 - Posted: 21 Sep 2012, 23:58:07 UTC - in response to Message 1286391.
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 15:53:04 UTC

--

betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 1751
Credit: 3,596,474
RAC: 8,028
United States
Message 1286471 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 0:12:24 UTC - in response to Message 1286464.

Guy, a big part of it is called shared sacrifice. Have you ever been on a team either in sports or business?
____________

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,449,735
RAC: 5,703
United States
Message 1286480 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 0:38:39 UTC - in response to Message 1286464.

Guy, a 45% tax on the upper edge (say at $1M and up won't do it -- I think that's too high a rate anyway). Taxing dividends as regular income would be what I'd go after first (again above a certain income level).

But raising revenues in conjunction with budget cuts is what is needed. You can't get there with revenue increases along, and you can't cut the budget to get to balance without new revenues.

As I noted earlier (likely missed in all the chaff), the current Fed spending is something like 24% of GDP, Current Fed revenues are 16%. 11 years ago, the numbers were 20% for each. I think that can be achieved only if there is a bipartisan sense of governance. Go after a long term 20% decrease on the spending side (that is down to 19% to 20% of GDP -- as GDP grows the amount of the budget can grow). Get revenues up to historic rates (20% of GDP). That can be done -- but not if (like the Democrats push for) the only revenue moves are directed at the wealthy (ie those making more than $250K a year). If you revert dividend income to 'regular' income status that will help as well. But somewhere in the mix, the middle class and dare I say it, some of that '47%' will be tapped for taxes as well.

betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 1751
Credit: 3,596,474
RAC: 8,028
United States
Message 1286483 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 0:47:19 UTC - in response to Message 1286480.

Barry, shame on you, trying to logical or pragmatic does not seem to be part of today's politics.
____________

Profile Do Keep Trying
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9201
Credit: 1,278,714
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1286491 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 1:37:50 UTC - in response to Message 1286483.

Barry, shame on you, trying to logical or pragmatic does not seem to be part of today's politics.

+1!!!
(Hi, Guy!)

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2347
Credit: 1,160,997
RAC: 185
United States
Message 1286514 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 3:13:41 UTC

LOL I guess I must be middle of the road then, I pretty much voted R until my early 40's then I gravitated to mostly D the last 25 years or so.
____________


If you are not Democratic when you are young you have no heart. If you are not Republican when you are older you have no brain.

You are a candidate for the wizard of OZ. Maybe you should change your name to OZfan, Er perhaps OZfan2

Profile Do Keep Trying
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9201
Credit: 1,278,714
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1286515 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 3:20:05 UTC - in response to Message 1286514.
Last modified: 22 Sep 2012, 3:20:37 UTC

LOL I guess I must be middle of the road then, I pretty much voted R until my early 40's then I gravitated to mostly D the last 25 years or so.
____________


If you are not Democratic when you are young you have no heart. If you are not Republican when you are older you have no brain.

You are a candidate for the wizard of OZ. Maybe you should change your name to OZfan, Er perhaps OZfan2


I know you're an intelligent man, William, but when it comes to politics, why do you tell the simple stories? (Follow the link, rethink Occam's Razor.)

P.S.-Hi, Guy!

betreger
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 1751
Credit: 3,596,474
RAC: 8,028
United States
Message 1286520 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 3:56:02 UTC - in response to Message 1286514.

William, I guess the Republicans moved away from me with the religious right and Reagan. I am inflexible on separating church from the state.
You are correct, being that way is not the way to get ahead in our current society.
A wise person once told me "There are only two things which can not be taken from you. "Your education and your integrity."
____________

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,449,735
RAC: 5,703
United States
Message 1286521 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 4:05:13 UTC - in response to Message 1286483.

Sadly -- so true. The thing is, folks are looking for budget realism. From what I've seen the Democrats are slightly -- but only slightly -- more realistic -- at least they *talk* about budget cuts along with the revenue increases. The Teapublicans seem to be Norquistified regarding tax increases of any sort.



Barry, shame on you, trying to logical or pragmatic does not seem to be part of today's politics.

Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 1075
Credit: 371,536
RAC: 4,227
United States
Message 1286534 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 5:35:46 UTC

Romney doesn't have to save America, he just has to not give it away. No President can "save" America but an inept President can contribute to it's downfall.
____________
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required.

Profile Ex
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Mar 12
Posts: 2892
Credit: 1,562,015
RAC: 1,294
United States
Message 1286540 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 6:01:43 UTC - in response to Message 1285888.
Last modified: 22 Sep 2012, 6:05:41 UTC

I think Mitt will save America by continuing to run a singularly inept campaign which will tilt the election away from Teapublicans -- not only for President, but also for the down ticket (Senate, Congress and state offices). If that happens it would be the most patriotic thing Romney has done in his life.

HAHAHAHAH! :-D

This one was rich with humor guys. Thanks for the laughs everyone.
____________
-Dave #2


3.2.0-33

BarryAZ
Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 11,449,735
RAC: 5,703
United States
Message 1286543 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 6:15:23 UTC - in response to Message 1286534.

Bob, from the campaign that Mitt has run, I think that he has demonstrated he has the inept thing well in hand.

Terror Australis
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 14 Feb 04
Posts: 1626
Credit: 200,788,466
RAC: 66,332
Australia
Message 1286563 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 8:13:46 UTC

It really disappoints me the the Republican backers who have posted on this thread have had nothing constructive to say. They just keep singing from the same old hymn book and they are fixated on the tax rate payable by the top 1%.

Fact: The US government has to increase revenue

Fact: The US government has to cut expenditure

Fact: Even the complete abolition of all Social Services would not save enough money to balance the books.

Fact: Therefore the US government (either party) has to look for a balanced way to raise revenue. Income tax is not the only way of doing this. There is raising company tax, raising the rate of royalties payable by mining and oil companies, even legalising and taxing marijuana.

Mr DeWoody, Guy et al. What are your honest and well thought out solutions to the problem ? Singing from the Tea Party song book or knocking the Democrats is NOT a solution. This problem existed before Obama became president. Bush's two unfunded wars have as much to do with the situation as anything Obama has done. Surely you do not think that every member of the 1% got there by hard work and building businesses from the ground up. A lot of the newer members got there by speculation and rorting an already corrupt financial system.

Which ever party gets the Presidency and control of congress after the November elections they have a hard road in front of them and a lot of people are going to be upset. The juggling act will be to make sure everyone is upset equally. How will/should Romney accomplish this ?

T.A.

Profile Ex
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 12 Mar 12
Posts: 2892
Credit: 1,562,015
RAC: 1,294
United States
Message 1286574 - Posted: 22 Sep 2012, 8:43:08 UTC
Last modified: 22 Sep 2012, 8:47:35 UTC

It really disappoints me the the Republican backers who have posted on this thread have had nothing constructive to say. They just keep singing from the same old hymn book and they are fixated on the tax rate payable by the top 1%.


BAZ is a republican, and one that I'm on board with. I'm a democrat sure, but in this day and age I'm on board with many Republicans of before my time (pre-Reagan).

BAZ HAS proposed some good ideas and does so on a regular basis...

And I believe Barry said specifically: Raising taxes on the 1% is not enough "it's a dream to think it is" (I paraphrase)

Ah, here it is:
I think that can be achieved only if there is a bipartisan sense of governance. Go after a long term 20% decrease on the spending side (that is down to 19% to 20% of GDP -- as GDP grows the amount of the budget can grow). Get revenues up to historic rates (20% of GDP). That can be done -- but not if (like the Democrats push for) the only revenue moves are directed at the wealthy (ie those making more than $250K a year). If you revert dividend income to 'regular' income status that will help as well.

____________
-Dave #2


3.2.0-33

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · Next

Message boards : Politics : How will Mitt Romney Save America ?

Copyright © 2014 University of California