Mitt Romney blimp makes emergency landing near Fort Lauderdale Read more here: http:

[Sheik]

I guess we'll see who makes more sense in a few weeks.

 

[superpunk]

We're not talking about the election results we're talking about your boy's plan. It doesn't add up, it is condemned as fraudulent by economists, so I ask you again how exactly are they paying for these tax cuts?

They won't tell us what tax loopholes they are going to close to pay for it.
The numbers on jobs don't add up, so their idea that these cuts are going to be payed for by getting people back to work is similarly bogus.
They won't support an increase on top earners to offset the deficit caused by their proposed tax cuts.

How are they paying for it? Why on earth would you vote for someone on the basis of him helping the economy when his plan is this nonsensical, condemned and flat out shitty? Have you bothered thinking about this at all?

 

[VA Cowboy]

W

Why on earth would you vote for someone on the basis of him helping the economy when his plan is this nonsensical, condemned and flat out shitty? Have you bothered thinking about this at all?

You should ask the 53% who did just that 4 years ago.

 

[superpunk]

no u

 

[VA Cowboy]

That's what I thought...you have nothing.

 

[superpunk]

No u

 

[VA Cowboy]

Obama has no plan for the next 4 years. Just keep continuing with the failed policies of the last 4.

 

[jeebus]

We're not talking about the election results we're talking about your boy's plan. It doesn't add up, it is condemned as fraudulent by economists, so I ask you again how exactly are they paying for these tax cuts?

They won't tell us what tax loopholes they are going to close to pay for it.
The numbers on jobs don't add up, so their idea that these cuts are going to be payed for by getting people back to work is similarly bogus.
They won't support an increase on top earners to offset the deficit caused by their proposed tax cuts.

How are they paying for it? Why on earth would you vote for someone on the basis of him helping the economy when his plan is this nonsensical, condemned and flat out shitty? Have you bothered thinking about this at all?

I think he was extremely clear on what loopholes he would close, all deductions. He would put a cap on deductions (he threw out numbers from $17,500 to $50,000) with the possibility the cap being stricter on higher incomes (but it already would be stricter because they use more deductions). Now if you think that the entire states of Ca, Florida, and New York takes a 10% tax deduction for state income tax, which would basically evaporate, we are talking about a huge increase in revenue.

It seemed like most of the economists judged Romneys plan by Obamas description of it. So yea, it wouldnt work then, but everybody at the debate saw Obama pretending he didnt hear any specifics (specifics he wanted to start a special interest attack on Romney) while Romney clearly outlined a huge step forward in reducing loopholes that still allowed people the flexibility to keep the parts of the tax code that were most vital to them.

 

[superpunk]

I think he was extremely clear on what loopholes he would close, all deductions. He would put a cap on deductions (he threw out numbers from $17,500 to $50,000) with the possibility the cap being stricter on higher incomes (but it already would be stricter because they use more deductions). Now if you think that the entire states of Ca, Florida, and New York takes a 10% tax deduction for state income tax, which would basically evaporate, we are talking about a huge increase in revenue.

"Mr. Romney has pledged that his tax plan will not add to the deficit, so he would have to find ways to make up the lost revenues. But an analysis released Wednesday by the Tax Policy Center found that capping deductions would not yield enough revenue to make up the roughly $5 trillion that Mr. Romney’s various tax proposals are projected to cost over a decade.

The center calculated that eliminating all deductions, which would go much further than Mr. Romney’s proposal, would yield only $2 trillion over 10 years if tax laws were changed along the lines Mr. Romney has proposed.

“Even if you zero out itemized deductions, you’re still not going to get there,” Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, said in an interview. “The dollars just aren’t big enough.”"

It seemed like most of the economists judged Romneys plan by Obamas description of it. So yea, it wouldnt work then, but everybody at the debate saw Obama pretending he didnt hear any specifics (specifics he wanted to start a special interest attack on Romney) while Romney clearly outlined a huge step forward in reducing loopholes that still allowed people the flexibility to keep the parts of the tax code that were most vital to them.

So your idea is that economists are reviewing the plan based on hearsay?

Horseshit.

 

[VA Cowboy]

Horseshit.

no, u

 

[dbair1967]

lol

 

[dbair1967]

who fucking cares?

in the debate your boy wanted to make an issue out of semantics, something very specific and whether Obama had said that very specific thing.

He had.

Your boy looked like a stuttering doofus.

Only to a libtard like yourself.

To people with half a brain on this stuff, Romney looks like a real President and a real leader. Not this piece of garbage commy we have in there today.

 

[dbair1967]

Obama has no plan for the next 4 years. Just keep continuing with the failed policies of the last 4.

More deficit! More blaming of Bush! More bending over and taking it up the ass from terrorists! = WINNING

 

[dbair1967]

That's what I thought...you have nothing.

sounds like he has alot in common with commy in chief

 

[dbair1967]

Gallup poll updated today- Romney 51%, Commy 45%

http://www.gallup.com/poll/157817/election-2012-likely-voters-trial-heat-obama-romney.aspx

 

[superpunk]

always love when dbair stops in for his substantive tea party ****** talking points

no ur a communist

 

[superpunk]

Mitt Romney may or may not secure the presidency of the United States, but he appears to be in an optimal position to win Mayberry.

"The Andy Griffith Show" is the second-most Republican-leaning program in the country, as measured by the partisanship of the political ads that run during its episodes. Only the Olympics saw a higher percentage of Republican ads, according to a Yahoo News analysis of the filings reported to the Federal Communications Commission by the TV stations in the top 50 media markets.

There you go. If you vote Republican you are voting with a base whose favorite show is the Andy Griffith show. IOW old people, stay at home welfare recipients, kids who are pretending to be sick to stay home from school and KKK members.

 

[jeebus]

*edit* post in response to sp's claim that "economist" say romneys plan is not viable because elimnating all deductions onky adds 2 trillion over 10 years

Eliminating mortgage interest deduction alone would add a trillion in revenue over the next 10 years, so yea I think your economists are liars if they say removing all deductions would only raise 2 trillion. Especially because the state and local tax deduction, I believe is larger or on par with that. Then there is the charity deductions, Education deductions, depreciation, and everything else.

There was a few great articles about fact checkers, it was neat because they specifically referenced a few things you enjoy posting, but the basic point was the fact checking industry is such a joke because they are openly political and manipulative. Basically the fact checking websites are more in accurate than the politicians.

 

[jeebus]

Why won't anybody believe sp? He is quoting economists!! Besides the 100 billion in housing credit deductions, states take in 750 billion a year in tax revenue, figuring the average tax rate at 25%, there is 175 billion a year in deductions. Assuming Obama doesn't grow the economy at all in 10 years, these two alone will account for 2.75 trillion in additional income. But that can't be, democratic college professors claim there is only 2 trillion in deductions possible. Who are you going to believe, your lying eyes or "fact checkers"?

 

[jeebus]

Charities receive over 300 billion a year. Assuming those are deducted and a tax rate of 25% and no increase in the economy, that is another .75 trillion in additional income. 3 deductions and I have counted almost twice the revenue that sp claims is possible. But it must be right, "economists" said so!!