Can the US afford that $5tr?

[WillowTree]

Big Reb -

I think you may have acidentally posted that on the wrong thread.

THIS thread is about the US$5 trillion that Romney's tax plan is expected to cost.

Why do you have a thread about something the man denied at least three times during the debate? Are you a moron?

 

[Saigon]

Romney isn't proposing to add $5 trillion to the debt.

No he isn't proposing it.

But that may very well be the effect.

Even if we assume the net effect is a 3.5 or 4 trillion shortfall in revenue - how is this a good idea?

 

[WillowTree]

The answer is yes because he isn't going to do it. Moron.

 

[Saigon]

Big Reb -

I think you may have acidentally posted that on the wrong thread.

THIS thread is about the US$5 trillion that Romney's tax plan is expected to cost.

Why do you have a thread about something the man denied at least three times during the debate? Are you a moron?

No, I'm just better informed than you are - probably because I do not simply parrot whatever either candidate says as you do here.

Again - please check the Business Week rundown on this earlier in the thread.

 

[bripat9643]

Big Reb -

I think you may have acidentally posted that on the wrong thread.

THIS thread is about the US$5 trillion that Romney's tax plan is expected to cost.

Why do you have a thread about something the man denied at least three times during the debate? Are you a moron?

He also denies that he's a liberal. That goes straight to the question of his honesty.

 

[WillowTree]

Big Reb -

I think you may have acidentally posted that on the wrong thread.

THIS thread is about the US$5 trillion that Romney's tax plan is expected to cost.

Why do you have a thread about something the man denied at least three times during the debate? Are you a moron?

He also denies that he's a liberal. That goes straight to the question of his honesty.

He thinks he knows more about money, finance, and the economy than Mitt Romney!

 

[bripat9643]

Big Reb -

I think you may have acidentally posted that on the wrong thread.

THIS thread is about the US$5 trillion that Romney's tax plan is expected to cost.

Why do you have a thread about something the man denied at least three times during the debate? Are you a moron?

No, I'm just better informed than you are - probably because I do not simply parrot whatever either candidate says as you do here.

Again - please check the Business Week rundown on this earlier in the thread.

You're parroting exactly what the Obama campaign is saying, dolt. Businessweek has always been a left-wing propaganda rag.

 

[bripat9643]

Why do you have a thread about something the man denied at least three times during the debate? Are you a moron?

He also denies that he's a liberal. That goes straight to the question of his honesty.

He thinks he knows more about money, finance, and the economy than Mitt Romney!

Perhaps he does. The problem is that everything he knows is wrong. He filters everything through his Marxist spectacles.

 

[buckeye45_73]

The op lives in a vaccum or he really thinks obamas 1% growth rates are awesome......so yes hes dumb

 

[Saigon]

He thinks he knows more about money, finance, and the economy than Mitt Romney!

No - I think sources like the BBC are more honest than Mitt Romney.

Which makes a change from blindly parroting anything Your Master says, of course.

 

[Saigon]

The op lives in a vaccum or he really thinks obamas 1% growth rates are awesome......so yes hes dumb

It is always lovely to be called 'dumb' by someone who can't spell 'vacuum' or write "he's" correctly.

The lack of education from some posters alway shines through!

 

[bripat9643]

Romney isn't proposing to add $5 trillion to the debt.

No he isn't proposing it.

But that may very well be the effect.

Even if we assume the net effect is a 3.5 or 4 trillion shortfall in revenue - how is this a good idea?

Why don't we just assume that Obama is proposing to add $10 trillion in spending to the debt? The sky is the limit when you're inventing stuff out of thin air.

 

[WillowTree]

He thinks he knows more about money, finance, and the economy than Mitt Romney!

No - I think sources like the BBC are more honest than Mitt Romney.

Which makes a change from blindly parroting anything Your Master says, of course.

Well, you'll excuse me if I think Romney is more capable in the world of finance and money than the BBC..

 

[edthecynic]

.

Good grief, here we go again. This is like the phony Big Bird hysteria.

A) It's not a five trillion dollar tax cut, even Wasserman-Schultz or one of those other whackos have already admitted this. It was a number made up entirely by guesses. It's not a five trillion dollar fucking tax cut, that was debunked long ago. God damn this board is nuts.

B) The Democrats are simply mystified by dynamic scoring. It's like a genetic thing with them, they just don't see it. They've convinced themselves that a tax cut somehow takes that money out of the economy. The idea of a tax cut is that the saved funds (which don't "belong" to the government in the first fucking place) stimulate spending and growth, thereby making the resulting economic activity larger than the tax cut on a macro level.

I'm not even freaking voting for Romney. I'm not even a big fan of his tax plan. But fer chrissake, one of the these days my head is gonna freakin' explode from the simplistic, intellectually dishonest, obtuse crap I read here.

.

It was Stephanie Cutter...

[youtube]Q0g8COdYcU0[/youtube]



They can't even smuggle that shit past Obama's own campaign mouthpiece. THAT's how sad it is.

She said no such thing. She said that the loopholes and deductions will not equal the $5 trillion tax cut. She only admitted they would partially offset the $5 trillion tax cut, she never said there was not a $5 trillion tax cut.

BURNETT: You can’t prove either side is all I’m saying. One thing that’s not true is the $5 trillion tax cut.

CUTTER: I disagree with you. You can prove it. They’re counting entirely on economic growth to pay for a tax cut, which is an interesting theory. That’s what George Bush did. Let’s look how that turned out.

 

[bripat9643]

He thinks he knows more about money, finance, and the economy than Mitt Romney!

No - I think sources like the BBC are more honest than Mitt Romney.

Which makes a change from blindly parroting anything Your Master says, of course.

I find it difficult to believe that some reporter working for the BBC has an in-depth knowledge of the U.S. tax system. More than likely they are simply parroting what the read in some pro-Obama propaganda rag.

 

[Oddball]

 

[Saigon]

Well, you'll excuse me if I think Romney is more capable in the world of finance and money than the BBC..

Well apparently he isn't that capable, is he?

Or wouldn't his plan do a little better than rely on borrowed money and increased deficits?

btw, Any one of a hundred international media sources confirm the basic facts behind the $5 trillion statistic. And a lot of those are in no way left wing. you're kidding yourself if you believe otherwise.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Big Reb -

I think you may have acidentally posted that on the wrong thread.

THIS thread is about the US$5 trillion that Romney's tax plan is expected to cost.

This thread is about a mistake

Where will the $5 trillion to find Romney's tax plan come from?

Fairly obviously it isn't all going to come from closing the odd loophole....

Can the US really afford to borrow another $5 trillion?

America made a terrible mistake in 2008 in fact it can be spelled out as

One
Big
Ass
Mistake
America
Now is the time to fix the mistake

 

[Saigon]

Here it is again from the Washingon Post, which decribes the plan as "ruinous".

The danger is that Mr. Romney and Congress would enact the popular part of his plan, the tax cut, and then rely on the kind of wishful thinking he hinted at last night (“we keep taking in the same money when you also account for growth&#8221. We’ve seen, under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, where such wishful thinking gets you. This time, as the population ages and demands on government grow, the ending could be a lot scarier.

And here’s the really scary part: Mr. Romney’s plan is irresponsible, even if he could pay for it. The bipartisan Simpson-Bowles commission, which he chastised Mr. Obama for not endorsing, concluded that the country cannot solve its fiscal problem without raising revenue and cutting spending. Given the political challenge of raising taxes, it also concluded that the only way to raise revenue would be with tax reform: doing some of the base-broadening that Mr. Romney favors and using some of the proceeds to reduce the debt. By devoting the proceeds of whatever loophole-closing he could manage instead to additional tax cuts, Mr. Romney would just feed the nation’s addiction to debt.

Romney’s ruinous tax plan - The Washington Post

Oddball -

Plese do not spam the thread.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Romney talked so much bullshit on that debate. And very few Americans will check the facts. He is for that and Obama said overall 5 trillion