Politics Obama - Actually doing a good job?

Neither Romney nor you have yet to provide any data to support his tax proposal..there than a handful of blogs and charts with no supporting data.

On the other hand, the Joint Tax Committee, in a recent report, suggested that cutting all deductions and loopholes for all wage earners (ie hurting middle class taxpayers) would only allow for a four percent cut in nominal rates.

No where near Romney's 20% cut across the board.
--- merged: Oct 29, 2012 at 3:57 PM ---
ace..evidently you're the smart guy and we're the liberal idiots who dont understand the arithmetic.

So prove it, please...with data for a change, not just the same old rhetoric.

 

OK, so you actually meant that he would INCREASE (not "maintain") the effective tax rate by removing loopholes and deductions. That's fine. I think everuyone understands that.

Two questions. What is the benefit of extending cuts to the people he is trying to increase his revenue from (by taking away their loopholes and deductions)? How does the amount he will he be able to make back by removing loopholes and deductions cover the costs of his "budget", including 20% cuts across the board and increased investment in just about everything he has been asked about?

Edit: Just seen that Redux is asking much the same question

 

The tax code is tens of thousands of pages including the rules, regulations, interpretations, and rulings both administrative and judicial. the details of real tax reform will take time and require negotiation. Saying anything other than what Romeny has said is simply foolish or unrealistic.

What are the assumptions in their study? Depending on the assumptions we can produce a study to do whatever we want within reason, can't we?

when you write 20% cut across the board what does that mean to you? what does it mean to Romeny? Is there a difference? Have you even thought about it?
--- merged: Oct 29, 2012 at 4:58 PM ---

Using Warren Buffet as an example, he has become one of the wealthiest men on the planet. His company does not pay dividends. Does not pay interest. does not sell capital assets. Mr. Buffet pays himself a relatively small annual income compared to his wealth. Mr. Buffet has transferred some of his wealth to his children in way that is not taxed. When Mr. Buffet dies, his wealth will go to charity and not be taxed. His motivation for these acts are, relatively speaking, high marginal income tax rates. Between federal, FICA, state if he realized regular income over the course of his business career he would have paid over 50% of his wealth in taxes. Loopholes and deductions have saved him billions and billions of dollars. a flatter tax code would result in more income being realized rather than wealth being held in the form of unrealized capital gains. when capital gains are realized, or turned over in the market, that wealth is no longer imbedded in the hands of a few, but gets spread. One positive of lower marginal income tax rates and lower capital gains tax rates is to give people more of an incentive to realize capital gains.

 

So, like Romney, you have no data to support his plan.

And yet, you still have produced no study at all, as opposed to the non-partisan Joint Economic Committee.

Or the recent non-partisan Congressional Research Service report that looked at data from WW II to present and concluded that tax cuts for the top bracket do not stimulate growth or create jobs, but do contribute to growing income inequality.

It means a 20% permanent cut in marginal rates.

And the arithmetic hasnt change and you still are unable to support it with data.

 

I think you know I look at more than just GDP. And my original point was related to corporate earning being released and how many are shoing top line results below expectations. This has meaning. I think we both agree on this.

Effective tax rates have been relatively flat over time.



Our tax code is broken, adjusting rates is empty without real reform of the tax code.

Carried interest should be taxed as income.
Private jets usage is a personal benefit not a real business expense in my opinion.
Tax treatment of qualified retirement plans need to be adjusted in my opinion.
How about having the same depreciation treatment for SUV as with regular cars when used for business purposes.

If I sat down and actually gave it some thought and study I could come up with a long list of loop holes and deductions that can be adjusted or eliminated for some high net worth people. I am not an expert and can come up with a long list. I am just sitting here thinking as I am typing and can come up with some stuff for a start.

 

But you cannot come up with enough loop holes and deductions on the top rate only to offset a 20 percent cut of marginal rates across the board. There are simply not enough loop hole/deduction savings on such a small pool of wage earners.

 

Right if you say so. But I am thinking Romney actually understands these things better than you, I or President Obama because he has actually amassed millions navigating the tax code in ways we may never even know.

 

Right. Romney and his gaggle of accountants and tax lawyers know how to game the system to benefit himself and other 1 percenters. The impact on the federal budget was not part of their equation.

Because.....the arithmetic doesnt work!

 

First the federal government needs to demonstrate that they can control spending.
Second, we need to redo the entire tax code - I prefer a consumption tax system, it won't happen.
Third, we need to adust rates to accomodate governemtn spending and debt reduction. For some effective tax rates will go up.

The key to tax reform is that there should not be a big differences between nominal and effective tax rates.

Understand that if people like Romney are paying effective tax rates in the area of 15%, that means that if in the top category the effective rate is about 30% that means for ever one Romney paying below the average for the category there has to be several paying above average for the category. This is a problem.
--- merged: Oct 30, 2012 at 6:08 PM ---

Person X gets a call from his accountant on 12/1/2012, the accountant says Mr. X your company is going to net $1 million this year. Mr. X says can you get my 2012 taxable income from my company below $250,000 before the end of the year?

My question to you - Can Mr. X's accountant or tax lawyer accomplish this task under the current tax code in 30 days?

Now tell me again how it is not possible to eliminate deductions and loopholes to pay for Romney's tax plan?

If you say so. Or, if your flawed studies say so.

 

Ace...they arent my studies, but studies of the non-partisan Joint Taxation Committee and non-partisan Congressional Research Service.

Where are Romney's studies? Four blogs with no data and a "study" paid for by his campaign.

 

I asked a simple question - what assumptions did they use as the basis of the study?

A study is not appropriate because there is not a detailed plan, duh! Romney laid out a general out line, the details need to be negotiated and hammered out - why don't you get this?

 

Are you saying that it is wrong to say that the arithmetic doesn't work because no arithmetic has been done by the Romney/Ryan team? OK. That's worse. It's all being promised on a wing and a prayer. Yeah, I trust that.

And further, that the arithmetic that others have done must be flawed? On what basis?

The Joint Taxation Committee methodology is here if it helps. Revenue Estimating Methodology

 

Bush's FEMA director, Mike "Brownie" Brown expanded on his earlier criticism, now suggesting that Obama could have taken more political advantage from the hurricane to squeeze “more mileage out of” the tragedy:

The President should have just—he could have just made a comment while he was in Florida that says, “you know my FEMA director is on top of this and we’re gonna do everything we can when the states ask us to come in and help.”​

He would have been better served politically to let everybody else—Bloomberg, Christie, Cuomo, O’Donnell [sic] – all of them make whatever statements they were going to make. Call for their evacuations. And then he could have stepped up, very presidentially, and said “And by the way, I have instructed my FEMA director to give the states whatever they need as the storm approaches.” I think he would have gotten more mileage out of it. In other words, he peaked too soon.​

Sirota Grills Brown on Sandy - TalkRadio 630 K-HOW​

​

Perhaps this will help Ace understand the difference between a professional and a political hack.

​

​

 

I think it is o.k. to have a framework - the Romney tax proposal is within a framework that I support. The details need to be worked out. Similarly, President Obama had a framework for healthcare reform. The President Obama healthcare proposal was within a framework that I did not support. The details were worked out and none of the original projections are accurate - most reasonable people get that. Original plans regardless of detail and actual results rarely match.

Perhaps I am more a big picture guy and you folks are not.
--- merged: Oct 31, 2012 at 4:47 PM ---

I have never defended Brown. I thought FEMA was a mess in 1994 and every year since. I think we can do better, if you don't - we don't see the issues the same way.

What our exchange on this topic illustrates is the difficulty of discussing an issue with liberals. I have legitimate questions, concerns and thoughts on this topic, but it is not possible to have an open and honest discussion. It goes like this, I have concerns about FEMA and to you that means I do not support helping people in need?!? And so it goes, and goes...in the mean time FEMA (or whatever I would call it and do with it) never gets improved. I wrote previousely, it will be nice to have some "adults" (people who actually can have mature discussion) in D.C.

 

Ace, you are always a source of amusement....sort of like our own in-house Limbaugh!
--- merged: Oct 31, 2012 at 5:23 PM ---
The latest wingnut twist on Libya -- something to the effect of Obama authorized arming militant terrorists in Benghazi.

From the Islamaphobe Frank Gafney (of "Obama has allowed the Muslim Brotherhood to infiltrate the federal government" fame)

​

These folks have no shame.