Presidential Debate Thread - Obama vs. Romney (2 Viewers)

[snogger]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

Yes, he has, but it can't if he intends on not raising the tax liability on the middle and lower classes. That's the rub. The math doesn't add up and it's been brought up a million times here in the various FFA threads. It's a bold faced lie, much like Obama's lies around healthcare.

There are two solutions to the current "Tax Code"Either go with the CBO's recommendations of removing 99% of deductions and reduce the tax rate for all..

Or go with FairTax!

 

[Politician Spock]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

 

[dparker713]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

And that's everything in this discussion. There aren't enough loopholes and deductions to close for the rich alone to cover an across the board 20% tax cut and hike in military spending. It cannot be done. If you start lopping off mortgage deductions for everyone, now you're making progress. Mitt claims he won't do that. Sorry, you'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class to make the numbers work.

You'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class if we're ever going to get back to a good place fiscally. Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or incompetent. Unfortunately, when you are running for political office, you can't be honest about that. If a presidential candidate tried to run on the truth, his campaign would be dead in the water.

How about we start with an effective tax rate for the richest people and corporations thats not lower than someone earning 50k a year and then go from there?

Sure. Real quick, what was your effective federal tax rate last year?

25.1%

 

[sublimeone]

OBAMA: There has to be revenue in addition to cuts. Now, Governor Romney has ruled out revenue. He’s ruled out revenue.ROMNEY: Absolutely

Why not raise additional revenue by spurring economic growth? Why does it have to be in the form of higher taxes? Why does the government need to take even more? Why can't the government tighten their belts, reduce spending and allow the American people to get the economy back up and running?Romney said it best, trickle down government does not work. This whole system was built by individuals working and creating products and services, building businesses, employing others and creating wealth for themselves. Obama's solution is more government. That is his solution to every economic problem, create more programs, spend more money etc... it simply doesn't work.

 

[Mello]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

It won't work. We've been doing this. Too many of those jobs that are created are overseas and help no one except those that already have money and foreigners.

 

[NCCommish]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

And that's everything in this discussion. There aren't enough loopholes and deductions to close for the rich alone to cover an across the board 20% tax cut and hike in military spending. It cannot be done. If you start lopping off mortgage deductions for everyone, now you're making progress. Mitt claims he won't do that. Sorry, you'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class to make the numbers work.

You'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class if we're ever going to get back to a good place fiscally. Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or incompetent. Unfortunately, when you are running for political office, you can't be honest about that. If a presidential candidate tried to run on the truth, his campaign would be dead in the water.

Right...so his answer/plan really isn't an answer/plan at all but somehow the $5 trillion still isn't 5 trillion in Romney's mind

It's more complex than that. What if a tax rate decrease results in more employment and more people paying taxes? Then it really isn't a tax decrease in the amount of what existing taxpayers are paying, because you have to factor in the new tax revenue that is generated.

Can we please stop espousing this thoroughly discredited clap trap. Hhave you not paid any attention the last ten years? We have given huge tax cuts to the richest individuals and corporations. Even if we cut out the recession Bush had horrible job creation numbers after his huge tax cuts. Every two term President, other than Ike, had double digit job growth. With much higher taxation. It is a myth that tax cuts create jobs. We did the experiment it failed.

 

[CrossEyed]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

And that's everything in this discussion. There aren't enough loopholes and deductions to close for the rich alone to cover an across the board 20% tax cut and hike in military spending. It cannot be done. If you start lopping off mortgage deductions for everyone, now you're making progress. Mitt claims he won't do that. Sorry, you'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class to make the numbers work.

You'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class if we're ever going to get back to a good place fiscally. Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or incompetent. Unfortunately, when you are running for political office, you can't be honest about that. If a presidential candidate tried to run on the truth, his campaign would be dead in the water.

Right...so his answer/plan really isn't an answer/plan at all but somehow the $5 trillion still isn't 5 trillion in Romney's mind

It's more complex than that. What if a tax rate decrease results in more employment and more people paying taxes? Then it really isn't a tax decrease in the amount of what existing taxpayers are paying, because you have to factor in the new tax revenue that is generated.

It's still a shift in burden to the middle class (which he's said won't happen). It's just now, with a larger middle class the "per person" amount is smaller, however, the overall burden of that segment of the population has increased. Again, he said he wouldn't increase the burden on the middle class.

Obama said he would cut the deficit in half.

 

[Mello]

OBAMA: There has to be revenue in addition to cuts. Now, Governor Romney has ruled out revenue. He’s ruled out revenue.

ROMNEY: Absolutely

Why not raise additional revenue by spurring economic growth? Why does it have to be in the form of higher taxes? Why does the government need to take even more? Why can't the government tighten their belts, reduce spending and allow the American people to get the economy back up and running?

Romney said it best, trickle down government does not work. This whole system was built by individuals working and creating products and services, building businesses, employing others and creating wealth for themselves. Obama's solution is more government. That is his solution to every economic problem, create more programs, spend more money etc... it simply doesn't work.

Cutting taxes in the hopes that people and businesses use that money to grow businesses, create jobs, and increase revenue is the very definition of trickle down economics.

 

[dparker713]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

This is the same discredited theory that led to 1929 and 2008.

 

[Jackstraw]

No it's always going to be a 5 trillion dollar tax cut. How you pay for it doesn't change that.

If all that happened was elimination of tax deductions, that would be a tax increase. If the change includes a rate deduction (a tax cut) AND includes elimination of tax deductions (a tax increase), then net is not the entire amount of the rate deduction. The net is the difference between the two.

That's the rub. He's got a set in stone tax cut and goes all wobbly on the tax deductions. I just hope and pray the electorate gets a straight answer out of him before its too late.

 

[CrossEyed]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

And that's everything in this discussion. There aren't enough loopholes and deductions to close for the rich alone to cover an across the board 20% tax cut and hike in military spending. It cannot be done. If you start lopping off mortgage deductions for everyone, now you're making progress. Mitt claims he won't do that. Sorry, you'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class to make the numbers work.

You'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class if we're ever going to get back to a good place fiscally. Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or incompetent. Unfortunately, when you are running for political office, you can't be honest about that. If a presidential candidate tried to run on the truth, his campaign would be dead in the water.

How about we start with an effective tax rate for the richest people and corporations thats not lower than someone earning 50k a year and then go from there?

Sure. Real quick, what was your effective federal tax rate last year?

25.1%

Sounds like you need a better tax strategy. Good news is that you make a lot of money, so you've got that going for you.

 

[The Commish]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

And that's everything in this discussion. There aren't enough loopholes and deductions to close for the rich alone to cover an across the board 20% tax cut and hike in military spending. It cannot be done. If you start lopping off mortgage deductions for everyone, now you're making progress. Mitt claims he won't do that. Sorry, you'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class to make the numbers work.

You'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class if we're ever going to get back to a good place fiscally. Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or incompetent. Unfortunately, when you are running for political office, you can't be honest about that. If a presidential candidate tried to run on the truth, his campaign would be dead in the water.

Right...so his answer/plan really isn't an answer/plan at all but somehow the $5 trillion still isn't 5 trillion in Romney's mind

It's more complex than that. What if a tax rate decrease results in more employment and more people paying taxes? Then it really isn't a tax decrease in the amount of what existing taxpayers are paying, because you have to factor in the new tax revenue that is generated.

It's still a shift in burden to the middle class (which he's said won't happen). It's just now, with a larger middle class the "per person" amount is smaller, however, the overall burden of that segment of the population has increased. Again, he said he wouldn't increase the burden on the middle class.

Obama said he would cut the deficit in half.

What does that have to do with what we were talking about?

 

[Joe T]

My take on the debate

 

[tommyboy]

when you lose the NY Times, its pretty bad

There are two more chances for the president to change tactics, or at least to show up to the debates energized and nimble: President Xanax just doesn’t cut it.

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/cool-hand-barry/?hp

 

[dparker713]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

And that's everything in this discussion. There aren't enough loopholes and deductions to close for the rich alone to cover an across the board 20% tax cut and hike in military spending. It cannot be done. If you start lopping off mortgage deductions for everyone, now you're making progress. Mitt claims he won't do that. Sorry, you'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class to make the numbers work.

You'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class if we're ever going to get back to a good place fiscally. Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or incompetent. Unfortunately, when you are running for political office, you can't be honest about that. If a presidential candidate tried to run on the truth, his campaign would be dead in the water.

How about we start with an effective tax rate for the richest people and corporations thats not lower than someone earning 50k a year and then go from there?

Sure. Real quick, what was your effective federal tax rate last year?

25.1%

Sounds like you need a better tax strategy. Good news is that you make a lot of money, so you've got that going for you.

If I made more, I'd be paying less. Makes total sense, right?

 

[Politician Spock]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

It won't work. We've been doing this. Too many of those jobs that are created are overseas and help no one except those that already have money and foreigners.

Small businesses don't send jobs overseas. Romney's plan isn't corporate friendly at all. They will at the very least keep paying the same amount of taxes, and probably more. It's the middle class that will pay less. This has been Obama's calling card for years now. There's not a big difference between what Obama and Romney want to accomplish. In both instances the rich will pay more and the middle class will pay less.

 

[sartre]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

Yes, he has, but it can't if he intends on not raising the tax liability on the middle and lower classes. That's the rub. The math doesn't add up and it's been brought up a million times here in the various FFA threads. It's a bold faced lie, much like Obama's lies around healthcare.

Those that suggest the math does not add up are ignoring an important variable. How can we reduce the deficit?1) decrease spending

2) increase taxes

3) grow the economy

You could theoretically decrease taxes AND increase spending, without adding to the deficit, if government policy resulted in a more robust economy. The math can work. Whether Romney's policies would foster economic growth is a separate question.

 

[CrossEyed]

What does that have to do with what we were talking about?

Politicians exaggerate (I'm being generous here) while they are trying to get elected. Nothing new.

 

[Joe T]

What continues to baffle me is the insistence that tax cuts drive growth as if this is an economic law. If you plot the marginal income tax rates versus GDP growth, they show no correlation. It's a nice idea, though.

what is the r-squared?

 

[Politician Spock]

No it's always going to be a 5 trillion dollar tax cut. How you pay for it doesn't change that.

If all that happened was elimination of tax deductions, that would be a tax increase. If the change includes a rate deduction (a tax cut) AND includes elimination of tax deductions (a tax increase), then net is not the entire amount of the rate deduction. The net is the difference between the two.

That's the rub. He's got a set in stone tax cut and goes all wobbly on the tax deductions. I just hope and pray the electorate gets a straight answer out of him before its too late.

The deductions need to be decided in congress... where they originated.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

I think you know better than this. No one seriously believes that you can cut taxes by Trillions from our current rate levels and see that revenue replaced through growth.

 

[sublimeone]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

This is the same discredited theory that led to 1929 and 2008.

a tax cut caused the great depression?

 

[CrossEyed]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

And that's everything in this discussion. There aren't enough loopholes and deductions to close for the rich alone to cover an across the board 20% tax cut and hike in military spending. It cannot be done. If you start lopping off mortgage deductions for everyone, now you're making progress. Mitt claims he won't do that. Sorry, you'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class to make the numbers work.

You'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class if we're ever going to get back to a good place fiscally. Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or incompetent. Unfortunately, when you are running for political office, you can't be honest about that. If a presidential candidate tried to run on the truth, his campaign would be dead in the water.

How about we start with an effective tax rate for the richest people and corporations thats not lower than someone earning 50k a year and then go from there?

Sure. Real quick, what was your effective federal tax rate last year?

25.1%

Sounds like you need a better tax strategy. Good news is that you make a lot of money, so you've got that going for you.

If I made more, I'd be paying less. Makes total sense, right?

If your job paid you more and you didn't do anything differently, you'd pay more. If you invested and gained some if your income from capital gains, you'd pay less. Maybe you need to start giving more to charity.

 

[lod01]

Also, I'm fine with Romney lying if that's what it takes to get more fiscal responsibility into the oval office.Obama lied, so I'll consider the parties even if Romney gets in.

But, as I pointed out to you and you alluded to last night, Romney has no plan for fiscal responsibility.

Other than he intends to work positively with congress instead of Obama's negative working relationship with congress (both pre and post 2010)... and congress is where the fiscal responsibility needs to happen. The president can't dictate fiscal policy to congress like Obama has tried over and over again.

In Obama's last campaign, he said he would work with Replublicans and change the culture in Washington.When George W. Bush ran, he said he would work across the aisle and change the culture in Washington.What makes anyone think Romney has the interpersonal skills to work positively with Congress? This is a pretty hollow campaign promise.

He probably won't. But I know Obama doesn't.

I know that neither will nor care to.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

And that's everything in this discussion. There aren't enough loopholes and deductions to close for the rich alone to cover an across the board 20% tax cut and hike in military spending. It cannot be done. If you start lopping off mortgage deductions for everyone, now you're making progress. Mitt claims he won't do that. Sorry, you'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class to make the numbers work.

You'll have to put some of the burden on the middle class if we're ever going to get back to a good place fiscally. Anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or incompetent. Unfortunately, when you are running for political office, you can't be honest about that. If a presidential candidate tried to run on the truth, his campaign would be dead in the water.

Right...so his answer/plan really isn't an answer/plan at all but somehow the $5 trillion still isn't 5 trillion in Romney's mind

It's more complex than that. What if a tax rate decrease results in more employment and more people paying taxes? Then it really isn't a tax decrease in the amount of what existing taxpayers are paying, because you have to factor in the new tax revenue that is generated.

Can we please stop espousing this thoroughly discredited clap trap. Hhave you not paid any attention the last ten years? We have given huge tax cuts to the richest individuals and corporations. Even if we cut out the recession Bush had horrible job creation numbers after his huge tax cuts. Every two term President, other than Ike, had double digit job growth. With much higher taxation. It is a myth that tax cuts create jobs. We did the experiment it failed.

It's possible lower tax rates would coincide with higher growth. It's possible higher tax rates would coincide with higher growth. In fact over time both would almost certainly be true, just as making no change to tax rates will result in both higher and lower growth. Cutting taxes is expansionary fiscal policy, but when they are deficit funded tax cuts the expansionary effects are tempered by the expectation of higher future tax obligations. I'm not sure where any of this leaves us with Mitt, since he is now saying he isn't proposing a tax cut, just a redistribution that somehow comes off of small businesses and lands.... nowhere.

 

[Politician Spock]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

This is the same discredited theory that led to 1929 and 2008.

The velocity of money slowing down is what led to both 1929 and 2008.With more than 15% of the working capable people in the country not earning income, and paying income tax, increasing the velocity of money has a great opportunity of producing real growth and increasing tax revenues.

However, when very few working capable people in the country are not working, increasing the velocity of money has very little chance at producing growth and tax revenues.

 

[adonis]

Debate winner:

Style: Romney

Substance: Obama

And I must say, this was the first time I saw an Obama I didn't particularly like. I agreed with him on the facts, but what he seemed lack was a desire to convince others of his view or bring them on board. It seemed like he was simply saying...I know I'm right, and if you simply liste to my words, you'll agree.

Now, I agree that he was right on most of what he was saying, but I missed any passion trying to convince those who disagreed with him to come to his side. It gave me a glimpse into what republicans in congress have likely dealt with, which is a guy who seems to believe he has right on his side And that should be enough. That's not to say the republicans didn't act childishly in response to his off-putting personality, but certainly what I saw last night gave me a glimpse of the more reserved Obama that's likely present behind closed doors.

He still has my support, but I'm more aware of his flaws as a guy who can bring people together, than before.

Again, I'm not saying the deadlock is his fault, but I certainly can see how he would rub folks the wrong way. (Even if there was no right way to rub them to get bipartisan support).

 

[sublimeone]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

I think you know better than this. No one seriously believes that you can cut taxes by Trillions from our current rate levels and see that revenue replaced through growth.

No one seriously believes the federal government can keep spending at astronomical levels, continue to create more programs and pay for it all with tax increases.

 

[17seconds]

Worst debate performance last night (by far): Jim Lehrer

The guy never asked a pointed question to either candidate. He never prefaced a question with a specific problem the candidate has had during the campaign.

to paraphrase him...

"OK we're going to talk about taxes now... GO!"

"Let's talk about healthcare..."

"How about the deficit, what are you going to do there guys"

horrible

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

It is hard to speak for an hour and a half of blaming someone else for the issues in the US and not having a plan to fix any of the problems. Let's cut the guy some slack.

I thought Romney did OK. Don't be so harsh on him.

To be fair, Romney is the only one presenting any ideas at all.

fixed.

Yes, Romney's idea seems to be that we can have everything we can have our cake and eat it to, as long as we do [redacted].

 

[Fennis]

Worst debate performance last night (by far): Jim Lehrer

The guy never asked a pointed question to either candidate. He never prefaced a question with a specific problem the candidate has had during the campaign.

to paraphrase him...

"OK we're going to talk about taxes now... GO!"

"Let's talk about healthcare..."

"How about the deficit, what are you going to do there guys"

horrible

We need the dude from Newsroom to moderate the next debate

 

[dparker713]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

This is the same discredited theory that led to 1929 and 2008.

The velocity of money slowing down is what led to both 1929 and 2008.With more than 15% of the working capable people in the country not earning income, and paying income tax, increasing the velocity of money has a great opportunity of producing real growth and increasing tax revenues.

However, when very few working capable people in the country are not working, increasing the velocity of money has very little chance at producing growth and tax revenues.

Ahh, so trickle down couldn't work in 2008 because things were already falling apart, but now that they have fallen apart it'll work brilliantly!

 

[Slapdash]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

Something D O O economics. Voo-doo economics.Real growth will only come from increases to real wages for everyone not in the top tax bracket. That or time for those same consumers to deleverage themselves. Tax cuts are no substitute.

I can't believe the right is still hitching their horse to this discredited "tax cuts pay for themselves" bull####.

 

[sublimeone]

It is hard to speak for an hour and a half of blaming someone else for the issues in the US and not having a plan to fix any of the problems. Let's cut the guy some slack.

I thought Romney did OK. Don't be so harsh on him.

To be fair, Romney is the only one presenting any ideas at all.

fixed.

Yes, Romney's idea seems to be that we can have everything we can have our cake and eat it to, as long as we do [redacted].

No, Romney believes in supporting the system that made us the worlds economic superpower. Obama supports more government. We are not going to get this country back on track with more government and higher taxes. We have to grow and that happens when the focus is on creating an environment where individuals and businesses grow... not government.

 

[dparker713]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

I think you know better than this. No one seriously believes that you can cut taxes by Trillions from our current rate levels and see that revenue replaced through growth.

No one seriously believes the federal government can keep spending at astronomical levels, continue to create more programs and pay for it all with tax increases.

You do realize Obama articulated a plan to cut 2.5 dollars for every dollar in tax increases, right? Now I don't think that's a high enough ratio, but he's hardly talking about paying for everything with just tax increases.

 

[humpback]

How about we start with an effective tax rate for the richest people and corporations thats not lower than someone earning 50k a year and then go from there?

Sure. Real quick, what was your effective federal tax rate last year?

25.1%

Sounds like you need a better tax strategy. Good news is that you make a lot of money, so you've got that going for you.

If I made more, I'd be paying less. Makes total sense, right?

More nonsense, or are you really this clueless about our tax code?

 

[Tau837]

Truth matters -- and in one of the few times that I've ever agreed with Newt Gingrich -- it will be on the innate dishonesty in Mitt Romney. He's certainly had practice lying in business -- it's highly unlikely he told Kaybee toys that they planned to bankrupt their decades-old company and lay off 15,000 workers, but they did., and Ampad, and others.. Not too mention his taxes.

Prime example last night.

Romney's charge on Obama's $716-billion Medicare cut.

Mitt Romney repeated a somewhat misleading claim that President Obama cut $716 billion out of the Medicare program for current beneficiaries.

The president's healthcare law does reduce future spending on Medicare, but those savings are obtained by reducing federal payments to insurance companies, hospitals and other providers, and do not affect benefits for people in the Medicare program.

It is still unclear what effect these cuts will have on the program in the long run. And Romney accurately cited concerns that they may ultimately affect beneficiaries.

Several experts, including Medicare's independent actuary, have warned that the planned cuts may force some providers to either close or to stop serving Medicare beneficiaries.

I'm sure it was just an oversight on your part. You know, since truth matters.

How do your post negate that? Romney's statement is still wrong. The president's healthcare law does reduce future spending on Medicare, but those savings are obtained by reducing federal payments to insurance companies, hospitals and other providers, and do not affect benefits for people in the Medicare program.In your bolded statement the word may is key - the plan itself does not cut $716 billion out of the Medicare program for current beneficiaries.

There is no 'may' about it. Cutting payments to hospitals, insurance companies, doctors, etc. will absolutely reduce the number that accept Medicare patients. My wife is disabled and is on Medicare, and we already have firsthand experience at the difficulty of finding doctors who take Medicare patients. It can only get worse if payments are reduced.

 

[jonessed]

Romney lied and liberals died.

 

[CrossEyed]

It is hard to speak for an hour and a half of blaming someone else for the issues in the US and not having a plan to fix any of the problems. Let's cut the guy some slack.

I thought Romney did OK. Don't be so harsh on him.

To be fair, Romney is the only one presenting any ideas at all.

fixed.

Yes, Romney's idea seems to be that we can have everything we can have our cake and eat it to, as long as we do [redacted].

So how is Obama paying for his ideas? Oh, right, borrowing money from China.

 

[Politician Spock]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

This is the same discredited theory that led to 1929 and 2008.

The velocity of money slowing down is what led to both 1929 and 2008.With more than 15% of the working capable people in the country not earning income, and paying income tax, increasing the velocity of money has a great opportunity of producing real growth and increasing tax revenues.

However, when very few working capable people in the country are not working, increasing the velocity of money has very little chance at producing growth and tax revenues.

Ahh, so trickle down couldn't work in 2008 because things were already falling apart, but now that they have fallen apart it'll work brilliantly!

Trickle down has never worked.But it's a moot point given Romney is not proposing trickle down economics. Taxing the rich more and the middle class less is NOT trickle down economics. It's the opposite of it, despite how many of you suggest that it's the same.

 

[jonessed]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

I think you know better than this. No one seriously believes that you can cut taxes by Trillions from our current rate levels and see that revenue replaced through growth.

No one seriously believes the federal government can keep spending at astronomical levels, continue to create more programs and pay for it all with tax increases.

You do realize Obama articulated a plan to cut 2.5 dollars for every dollar in tax increases, right? Now I don't think that's a high enough ratio, but he's hardly talking about paying for everything with just tax increases.

Interesting. Where is this articulated plan?

 

[lod01]

Yes, Romney's idea seems to be that we can have everything we can have our cake and eat it to, as long as we do [redacted].

That's how you get elected. You've got all your lemmings voting for you. You need to bring some Ds on board and convince all the remaining Rs that you are not blowing smoke up their asses without laughing. Win and then make excuses.

 

[sublimeone]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

This is the same discredited theory that led to 1929 and 2008.

The velocity of money slowing down is what led to both 1929 and 2008.With more than 15% of the working capable people in the country not earning income, and paying income tax, increasing the velocity of money has a great opportunity of producing real growth and increasing tax revenues.

However, when very few working capable people in the country are not working, increasing the velocity of money has very little chance at producing growth and tax revenues.

Ahh, so trickle down couldn't work in 2008 because things were already falling apart, but now that they have fallen apart it'll work brilliantly!

you can't be that dense.

 

[Mr. Pickles]

What continues to baffle me is the insistence that tax cuts drive growth as if this is an economic law. If you plot the marginal income tax rates versus GDP growth, they show no correlation. It's a nice idea, though.

what is the r-squared?

I don't have the raw data, but here is one plot: My link

 

[Politician Spock]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

This is the same discredited theory that led to 1929 and 2008.

The velocity of money slowing down is what led to both 1929 and 2008.With more than 15% of the working capable people in the country not earning income, and paying income tax, increasing the velocity of money has a great opportunity of producing real growth and increasing tax revenues.

However, when very few working capable people in the country are not working, increasing the velocity of money has very little chance at producing growth and tax revenues.

Ahh, so trickle down couldn't work in 2008 because things were already falling apart, but now that they have fallen apart it'll work brilliantly!

you can't be that dense.

He also believes that any law, regardless of why it exists, is collectivism.

 

[sublimeone]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

I think you know better than this. No one seriously believes that you can cut taxes by Trillions from our current rate levels and see that revenue replaced through growth.

No one seriously believes the federal government can keep spending at astronomical levels, continue to create more programs and pay for it all with tax increases.

You do realize Obama articulated a plan to cut 2.5 dollars for every dollar in tax increases, right? Now I don't think that's a high enough ratio, but he's hardly talking about paying for everything with just tax increases.

Forgive me if I don't take Obama's plan to cut spending at face value.

 

[dparker713]

It is hard to speak for an hour and a half of blaming someone else for the issues in the US and not having a plan to fix any of the problems. Let's cut the guy some slack.

I thought Romney did OK. Don't be so harsh on him.

To be fair, Romney is the only one presenting any ideas at all.

fixed.

Yes, Romney's idea seems to be that we can have everything we can have our cake and eat it to, as long as we do [redacted].

No, Romney believes in supporting the system that made us the worlds economic superpower. Obama supports more government. We are not going to get this country back on track with more government and higher taxes. We have to grow and that happens when the focus is on creating an environment where individuals and businesses grow... not government.

We eclipsed the Soviet Union through deficit spending and tax rates higher than today - the history does not match you're memory.

 

[17seconds]

If there was ever evidence we are in a "post truth" political world last night was it.

Romney won but I will be interested to see how much pushback they get on several blatant lies.

In particular the 5 trillion tax cut that seems to have vanished.

I think O was pulling some O/T on the Turkey/Syria deal and it showed.

Hasn't he always said that it will be offset by closing loopholes and eliminating deductions? The only issue is the details on which ones.

No the issue is there aren't enough loopholes in the tax code to allow him to give a 20% across the board cut, raise defense spending, and not cut any loopholes for the middle class. His math doesn't work.

So if the number of loopholes doesn't offset the entire $5 trillion created by the rate cut, then it's still a $5 trillion tax cut? The math is "all or none"?What if congress agrees on $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminnations? Wouldn't it then be just a $2.5 trillion tax cut?

And what if that $5 trillion rate cut hits the small business owner, while the $2.5 trillion in loophole eliminations hits the corporations? Wouldn't that put $5 trilloin in the middle class and take $2.5 Trillion out of the corporations who are sitting on over $4 trillion in their cash accounts instead of hiring people?

And what if that $5 trillion in the middle class spurs real growth? Wouldn't that increase tax revenues... perhaps even to the point where the remaining $2.5 trillion tax cut is wiped out as well?

This is what the Obama supporters don't seem to comprehend.

They don't want to understand it. It's the evil Romney guy's idea. If it was Obama's idea, it would be awesome!

This is the same discredited theory that led to 1929 and 2008.

The velocity of money slowing down is what led to both 1929 and 2008.With more than 15% of the working capable people in the country not earning income, and paying income tax, increasing the velocity of money has a great opportunity of producing real growth and increasing tax revenues.

However, when very few working capable people in the country are not working, increasing the velocity of money has very little chance at producing growth and tax revenues.

Ahh, so trickle down couldn't work in 2008 because things were already falling apart, but now that they have fallen apart it'll work brilliantly!

you can't be that dense.

The only time trickle down worked was under Reagan because we were coming down from a 70% tax rate. Trickle down in 2012 means not raising rates and/or reducing them by a few points. Like a pea shooter.

 

[tommyboy]

i think the best thing about this debate from Romney's perspective is that he got the chance to talk to the public on a large platform unfiltered by the Obama campaign or the liberal media spinmeisters. If you haven't been paying much attention to the campaigns so far, maybe saw a few commericals or a few nightly news casts, you would probably have the impression that Romney was a gaffe machine and a heartless *******. But you can't spin what you saw last night, at least not in real time, so those same people that are what you would call low-information voters, saw a guy that had a confident positive look on his face, spoke clearly and with authority and seemed very likable.

 

[Thunderlips]

It is hard to speak for an hour and a half of blaming someone else for the issues in the US and not having a plan to fix any of the problems. Let's cut the guy some slack.

I thought Romney did OK. Don't be so harsh on him.

To be fair, Romney is the only one presenting any ideas at all.

fixed.

Yes, Romney's idea seems to be that we can have everything we can have our cake and eat it to, as long as we do [redacted].

No, Romney believes in supporting the system that made us the worlds economic superpower. Obama supports more government. We are not going to get this country back on track with more government and higher taxes. We have to grow and that happens when the focus is on creating an environment where individuals and businesses grow... not government.

He believes in a decimated Europe, a military arms build up that fueled spending and lowered unemployment and a government paid for G.I.Bill that gave millions 1% mortages and unemployment so they could use their free college tuition and trade school skills to thrust this country into the greatest period of prosperity ever since in mankinds history?