Vidi
CDZ prohibited
If they are both evil as everyone seems to claim, then isnt the lesser of the two evils preferable?
Isnt the one who actually pretends to be for the working man, better than the one who outright tells you hes going to tax you more and tax those who have more less?
We keep giving the so called job creators tax cuts... where are those jobs?
maybe doing the exact same thing and expecting different results isnt the way to go anymore?
Isnt the one who actually pretends to be for the working man, better than the one who outright tells you hes going to tax you more and tax those who have more less?
According to the Tax Policy Center, a joint project of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, “Believe in America,” Romney’s economic blueprint, would impose fresh burdens on the poor, cutting anti-poverty programs while simultaneously depriving lawmakers of the money to repair the holes. As for the middle class, it is hard to argue that it is a primary “focus,” at least if you follow the money in the candidate’s plan.
A few examples. Romney would end tax credits for higher education, the expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit and other provisions enacted in 2009 to counter the recession. While taxes for many poor people would rise, taxes on the middle class would generally decline somewhat and taxes on the wealthiest would decline substantially. Romney would repeal health insurance for the working poor, repeal the estate tax and permanently extend the Bush tax cuts. The Tax Policy Center calculates that in 2015 Romney’s plan would generate an average break of $865,637 to the top 0.1 percent of taxpayers.
Cheap Shots at Romney
One omission from Romney’s plan would raise taxes compared with what people pay this year: not extending the remaining tax cuts created by the 2009 stimulus bill and scheduled to expire at the end of 2012. Because those cuts were initially intended to be temporary, the Romney campaign argues that not extending them wouldn’t be a tax increase. The same logic could apply to the 2001-2003 tax cuts but I don’t hear anyone claiming that letting them lapse wouldn’t count as boosting taxes. In any case, not extending the 2009 tax cuts still in effect in 2012 means that Romney’s plan would, on average, raise taxes for households in the bottom two quintiles, relative to what they’re paying this year.
Mitt Romney’s tax plan would cut taxes, by about $180 billion in 2015 alone, relative to current tax policy. And, despite all arguments to the contrary, a disproportionate share of the savings would go to households with the highest incomes.
Romney's tax plan really does favor the rich - CSMonitor.com
Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 would get small tax cuts, averaging 2.2 percent, or about $250, the study said. People making more than $1 million would get tax cuts averaging 15 percent, or about $146,000.
Study: Romney plan raises taxes on poor families - Yahoo! News
We keep giving the so called job creators tax cuts... where are those jobs?
maybe doing the exact same thing and expecting different results isnt the way to go anymore?