Romney surprises me
 

Romney posted this on his Facebook. I had no idea he was against tax loopholes for millionaires.

"I will cut taxes for the middle class & close loopholes for millionaires. We can?t afford another four years like the last."

What? Did he consult with Paul Ryan about this... ?

This guy changes his mind like a porn star changes panties....

:D

if he wrote it on facebook it must be true

lies. lies. lies.

If I'm elected, I will close Gitmo. Remember that one?

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

But didn't Romney do this in Massachusetts? He closed the loopholes, and raised taxes on ordinary items - marriage licenses, business licenses, gas, etc.

Romney morphs into whatever he needs to be to win.

Classic sociopath.

He raised "fees" so he could claim that he didn't raise "taxes"

See, that's how you thread the bullshit needle....

The republican house won't let him raise taxes.

I totally agree.

whoa wait a minute! :helpme

porn stars wear panties??


:1orglaugh

I don't think Romney knew he was against it either, it just sounded good at the time. That pretty much sums up his stance on anything.. He will say one thing one min and then the total opposite the next. :1orglaugh

Isn't that the same thing as saying he would raise taxes on millionaires, by closing their loopholes?

yes but dont worry, it'd never pass the House :2 cents:

I come from a state with no income tax. I can tell you there is a huge difference between fees and taxes.

*Not defending Romney, just stating my experience. :thumbsup

No, if you watched the debate. He carefully explained about 3 or 4 times that he will LOWER the tax rate and close the loopholes. So it would even out. Millionaires would not pay less or more...they will pay the same. But the effect on small businesses will be a lowering of tax rates, which will lower the cost of business, which will stimulate the economy.

They would not listen to Romney, I doubt it will get through to them

Well, he tried ( not very hard .. ) but congress made that impossible .

Let's not forget the position of the republicans after the black man entered the white house :

and :


It would be funny to see the dem do the same thing to Romney, if elected .....

He was VERY precise on the tax cut : not 10%, or 12% , ... or will see with congress ... but a firm 20% ....

Strange tough how he cannot name a single PRECISE loophole he will close ... aside from PBS .... :Oh crap

I thought the spirit of his promise was made so that the U.S. would stop detaining prisoners forever with no trial? All Congress can do is deny funding to transfer those prisoners to U.S. prisons.

How come he didn't just let them go? They don't have any pertinent info after being in Gitmo for a dozen years so it's not like we're getting any great intel from them.

I read we are spending 140 million a year to run that place.

Obama just didn't have the balls to do what he was voted in to do. He thought it would make him look "weak" politically, and just like all fucking politicians.....he cares more for his power than doing the right thing.

yeah, I do believe that's what Romney intends to do. It's exactly what Republicans preach constantly about the economy. Come out from under your rock and pay attention.

Now if Romney promises to close Gitmo or cut the military...then I would think he is lying.

You are in such a fog that you don't even realize that this taxation plan he has is exactly what his party stands for. He doesn't NEED to lie about it.
Give it a rest man. You sound stupid.

Sorry math doesnt work that way. If its neutral it does nothing. If he cuts deductions, he will have to hit the mortgage deduction.They do that, any republican wont be elected for 50 yrs. Hiring was flat under Bush and they had the lowest taxes in yrs. Lowering taxes dont make people hire, a demand for their goods and services make people hire.
There has never been a gop president in past 30 yrs that cut spending That's the bullshit they tell masses. They bitch about spending when they aren't in once they are they go hog wild. Paul Ryan, Mr. Budget voted for every unfunded bill put thru during Bush.Now he is watching the pennies. Also no one answers this if the Bush taxes cuts were so great why didnt they make them permanent? They had the presidency ,the house and the senate.
After last nights debate there is a good chance,Mitt will be president and bookmark this thread. I telling you they will spend at a level like we have never seen before. They will fuck with some middle class and poor programs but it will be spend spend.

Tony...your understanding of this is right there with your hero Obama. You don't understand it.

Obama tried that stupid "it's arithmetic" line last night and Romney destroyed him with a very, very specific explanation. I'm not going to sit here and repeat it again and again like Romney had to last night. Go watch the debate at that section where he goes into detail about it.

What's wrong with you guys? This isn't a football game. Quit blindly rooting for one side or another.

'closing loopholes' is a 'very, very specific explanation'? :1orglaugh

this is politics, you can say and promise anything you want before you get into office - obama did it too last election. Romney has a long history of flip flopping so impossible to believe him, then there's Bain Capital, his tax personal tax practices ....

he did the smart thing as a candidate last night, he won decisively. but which candidate is more trustworthy? that's not even debatable.

Romney may make a better president than Obama, the world is a very shady place and maybe a shady personality can do the job better than a straight forward earnest guy like Barack Obama. Romney could be another Clinton - best possible outcome.

Says the Romney cheerleader, when he isn't pretending to support Gary Johnson.

My hero ? I've said many times he has been a huge disappoint.. It's the truth Romney wants to increase military spending, a 20 percent tax cut. And he says any changes he makes will be revenue neutral. That means it won't bring any more money than we bring in now. So tell me the magic , I'm telling u your kidding yourself. Look at history no GOP president in 30 yrs cut costs.

Yes he was VERY specific within the time frame. He carefully explained that he is going to close the loopholes in the tax code and then lower the tax rates. He also explained that "yes" that would even it out and there would be no higher or lower dollar amount that rich people will pay. BUT the lower tax rate would indeed help the small businesses who pay the personal income tax rate.

That's pretty specific. Unless you wanted him to get out the tax code and spend the next 10 days on television reciting code while we all fell asleep.

Come on. Obama hasn't said anything in exact detail either. :)

He wants to hire more teachers because he wants to help the children. Okay. I love teachers and kids and unicorns and butterflies too...lol

Romney carefully explained over and over and over and over in last night's debate to Obama how encouraging small business will create jobs and expand the tax base and increase federal revenue. But Obama just kept saying "mathematics..." like he doesn't understand that having MORE people with good jobs paying taxes + LESS people drawing money from the govt. = MORE revenue.

Here you go from the liberal rag business week

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...-reality-check

Romney?s Tax Plan
The Claim: Romney?s tax plan can?t add up, Obama said. ?It?s math,? he said. ?It?s arithmetic.?

The Background: Romney has proposed reducing income tax rates by 20 percent and eliminating the estate tax and the alternative minimum tax. He says his plan would boost growth, while avoiding an expansion of the federal budget deficit because he also would curtail deductions, exemptions and credits. He says there are enough tax breaks for top earners that he would eliminate to avoid shifting the burden to the middle class.

The Facts: Romney?s tax plan can?t add up under congressional budget-scoring rules that don?t let him assume that economic growth will generate higher tax revenue.

Obama?s argument rests on an August analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington. That group sought to see if it was simultaneously possible to meet all of Romney?s principles: Cut tax rates, avoid shifting the tax burden to the middle class, don?t increase the budget deficit, and keep tax benefits for savings and investment.

The study found that, in 2015, $86 billion of the tax burden would be shifted to the middle class to keep the plan from increasing the deficit.

Romney?s advisers contested that analysis. They maintain they would consider some changes that the Tax Policy Center kept off the table, such as the tax exemption for municipal bonds. Those changes make the plan more arithmetically possible, though still politically difficult. Romney?s campaign hasn?t provided enough detail about what he?s proposing for deductions and exemptions to be able to analyze it completely.

Romney said in the debate that his plan wouldn?t cut enough tax breaks to offset all of his tax cuts. Economic growth, he said, would be generated by his tax plan and make up the difference. He hasn?t specified how much.

Congressional budget-scoring rules are conservative about anticipated growth from tax cuts because economists disagree over how much they spur the economy. If Romney?s plan goes to Congress, where those rules apply, it wouldn?t add up.

I don't care about the GOP. I'm looking at two people onstage last night.

You know Tony, every Democrat doesn't think exactly alike and act like robots. Neither do Republicans. Romney made perfect economic sense last night and Obama was totally befuddled and couldn't even follow what Romney was saying.

Now if you want to talk military...I'm of a mind that it needs to be cut to the damn bone. That's one of the reasons that neither of these men are getting my vote.

FYI if a true progressive ran against Obama or moderate like Bloomberg . Either would of had my vote.

Read that one sentence Tony. It says it all. If you don't take into account that as the unemployment rate drops that more revenue will come in...then that entire thing you just posted is flawed 100%

This is economics 101. It's worked EVERY time. Federal revenue goes UP with employment and drops like a stone with unemployment.

What is your definition of a "progressive"

If it's true he told 27 lies in 38 minutes, it's not surprising that anyone would have trouble trying to follow what he was saying. :1orglaugh

He is hoping for increased rev and if u think they lower taxes the employment flood gates will open with good paying jobs. It ain't going to happen. Trust they always spend like mad men and they will again.

A progressive to me is a teddy or a Franklin. One who puts the country first and knows trickle down doesn't work and isn't bought and paid for.

Lowering taxes on business is just one part of it Tony.

And the Roosevelt's didn't even know that "trickle down" existed, and we don't know if they were bought and paid for or not. But I'd say they were not...they were filthy rich like Romney is and were a lot harder to buy off.
But that isn't the definition of progressive:
"Progressives' main objective is to change the status quo. If the country is isolationist, they are expansionists; if the country's economy is industrial, they favor a return to agrarianism. They favor small government in a time of big government programs and government intervention in big money-markets. They are not revolutionaries because they believe in American democracy and the responsibility of government to address the needs of its citizens."

Sounds to me like you need to be thinking about voting for Gary Johnson. Otherwise you aren't being "progressive" at all. Just hard left liberal.

EDIT: By the way...I did love Romney's "Trickle Down Govt." line. That is exactly how Obama sees the world.