Jump to content



Photo

Mitt Romney's $5 Trillion Tax Cut Plan Explained

web

  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#31 shakey

shakey

    It's soooooo Educational

  • 11,021 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 04
  • Location: Austin, Tx

Posted 16 October 2012 - 21:32

Here is the thing - we keep hearing from libs that Romney doesn't have a plan. They say that Romney/Ryan cannot explain their plan. it was said in the comments here that the plan on their web site has no information in it. So how does a supposedly non-existent plan with no information add up to $5 trillion? We have Obama's own campaign flip-flopping (sorry, evolving, because Obama and his surrogates don't flip-flop, they evolve) one minute saying it is $5T, the next it will not be $5T then it is $5T on a plan that supposedly does not exist but does exist to not have much information. Who are we to believe, CNN, Politico, or Obama's campaign? I don't know which of their evolvings I am to believe.


...... really?

Previously, Governor Romney has said that his tax plan would cut all individual income tax rates by 20%, eliminate the AMT, eliminate the estate tax, and eliminate taxes on investment income for low- and middle-income taxpayers. He would also extend all of the Bush-era tax cuts that are scheduled to expire at the end of 2012.
Those tax cuts would reduce federal revenues by $480 billion in 2015 over and above the cost of extending the Bush tax cuts. Allow for some growth in income, and the total comes to over $5 trillion over ten years.


http://www.forbes.co...illion-tax-cut/


#32 chrisj1968

chrisj1968

    copyrighted!! ©

  • 4,266 posts
  • Joined: 17-June 08
  • Location: United States

Posted 16 October 2012 - 21:36

He doesn't seriously think he can cut $5T in taxes, does he? :s


Yeah since libs haven't figured out to decrease the debt. cut taxes AND S.P.E.N.D.I.N.G

#33 Growled

Growled

    Neowinian Senior

  • 41,508 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08
  • Location: USA

Posted 16 October 2012 - 21:37

We are going in circles on this crap yet again?

#34 shakey

shakey

    It's soooooo Educational

  • 11,021 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 04
  • Location: Austin, Tx

Posted 16 October 2012 - 21:49

We are going in circles on this crap yet again?


It only goes in circles because stupid wont take :p

#35 Astra.Xtreme

Astra.Xtreme

    Electrical Engineer

  • 8,178 posts
  • Joined: 02-January 04
  • Location: Milwaukee, WI

Posted 16 October 2012 - 22:12

You're a low information voter if you think that page actually details one word about how anyone could possibly accomplish (financially!) the nonsense Rmoney's trying to sell you...

The rest of us are smart enough to see the lies presented before our very eyes.


Just like how Obama is telling the complete truth about his plans, right? So that must mean that just because somebody votes Romney, they are "low information". Or are you saying that both candidates are full of sh*t? I'd tend to lean towards the latter.

#36 shakey

shakey

    It's soooooo Educational

  • 11,021 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 04
  • Location: Austin, Tx

Posted 16 October 2012 - 22:15

Just like how Obama is telling the complete truth about his plans, right? So that must mean that just because somebody votes Romney, they are "low information". Or are you saying that both candidates are full of sh*t? I'd tend to lean towards the latter.


So you take Romney's nothing over this http://www.taxpolicy..._transition.pdf ???? Dude, come on....

#37 Growled

Growled

    Neowinian Senior

  • 41,508 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08
  • Location: USA

Posted 16 October 2012 - 22:17

I say they are both full of ****, myself.

#38 Enron

Enron

    Windows for Workgroups

  • 9,740 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 11
  • OS: Windows 8.1 U1
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900

Posted 17 October 2012 - 02:58

Democrats can't even design a web site properly. I click on the button and it doesn't do anything.

#39 Sandor

Sandor

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,959 posts
  • Joined: 28-November 03
  • OS: Win 8.1

Posted 17 October 2012 - 03:29

Troll Level: Over 9000

#40 IsItPluggedIn

IsItPluggedIn

    Neowinian

  • 897 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 11
  • Location: Sydney, Australia
  • OS: Win 7

Posted 17 October 2012 - 04:38

So here is the problem. You cant get the budget back on track without increasing revenue or cutting expenditure.

But everybody hates it when you increase tax's, so you say ok ill cut spending, then everybody is up in arms about loosing their jobs or not having enough funding for such and such.

So to win the election you have to fumble your way through some hidden tax increases or hidden expenditure costs, or just drive the country into the ground. Although most of the people in politics aren't in it for the country so the last option is the one they take so they can get in.

So really these arguments are just going to go around in circles because nobody wants to give up the facts because then they would never get in. Its a popularity contest and the person who hides their secrets the best wins.

#41 rfirth

rfirth

    Software Engineer

  • 4,223 posts
  • Joined: 11-September 09
  • Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana
  • OS: Windows 8
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 620

Posted 23 October 2012 - 07:08

So, Romney's plan is to cut taxes. This will lead to about a $5,000,000,000 shortfall over 10 years. He plans on paying for this by removing tax loopholes and some deductions... so that people end up paying the same rate, making it revenue neutral.

But if that's the case, why cut taxes at all? You end up paying the same amount whether the tax cut is implemented or not. You must realize that this is a circular plan that does absolutely nothing to help us, right? In the best case, it does nothing. In the worst case, it adds to the deficit.

The only way to solve this problem is to cut spending and raise taxes slightly... but wait to raise taxes until the economy is strong. Or, just cut spending. Unfortunately, it sounds like Romney wants to spend even more money on our already over-funded military. That only leaves Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid cuts... because you sure aren't going to save $1,000,000,000/year (to simply fix our current deficit, ignoring any additional pressure a tax cut would add) by cutting PBS and Planned Parenthood.

The math simply does not add up.