How Do Republicans Reconcile This?

[oreo]

So Romney says that 47% are dependent on government and don't want to take responsibility for their lives and the parrots on this site say they want the 47% to have more "skin in the game" because they pay no taxes.

Yet, Romney says if he becomes president he will push through a 20% across the board tax cut.

Wouldn't a 20% across the board tax cut result in a greater % of people "not paying taxes"? Isn't that the very opposite of what republicans have been looking for? Wouldn't that mean more people who are "mooching" because they "don't pay taxes"?

Where is the objection to Romneys proposal? How do you support this sort of plan while at the same time criticizing people who you consider to be "moochers"?

First of all you're twisting Romney's words around. What Romney stated is that 47% of the population fall below the bar of paying Federal Taxes & they wouldn't be interested in his plan to lower taxes--on middle class Americans who do pay taxes--so there's no need worrying about them--they wouldn't be interested anyway. Now it came out wrong and the left twisted it into a different meaning--that Romney doesn't care about 47% of the population.

Now every administration--but this one--has noticed that if you let Americans keep more of the money they earn--they tend to spread it around through-out the economy thereby growing the economy--along with the tax base.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54jr3Ceu894]Barack Obama will raise Capital Gains Taxes...even if it means less tax revenue!! - YouTube[/ame]

Another person who can't address what I asked. A tax cut for the people who do pay taxes will lead to some of them no longer having to pay anymore. Thus the 47% total increases. How are you ok with that?

No I did answer it. You grow the tax base through economic JOB growth. You just heard it in the above video. Lowering taxes on people who do pay income taxes will create job growth because they have additional expendable income in their pockets. The first President to realize this was John F. Kennedy--as he did it--and each and every time it worked.

 

[RDD_1210]

I think you should check your facts, he said he would reduce tax rates by 20%. So you start with a false premis it kind of shoots down the whole thing.

Sorry I got my facts from this obviously biased source.

Tax | Mitt Romney for President

How does a "across-the-board 20 percent cut in marginal rates" reconcile with the crying of the GOP that too many people don't have skin in the game?

If you are already paying Nothing you will still pay nothing. If you pay something you will pay 20% less but still something. So your premise that more people will be paying Nothing is totally flawed.

Really? How can you say that? Everyone is not paying the same amount now so there has to be some people who are very close to that 47% line that would become "non-payers" if their taxes decreased. Do you not see this possibility?

 

[RDD_1210]

First of all you're twisting Romney's words around. What Romney stated is that 47% of the population fall below the bar of paying Federal Taxes & they wouldn't be interested in his plan to lower taxes--on middle class Americans who do pay taxes--so there's no need worrying about them--they wouldn't be interested anyway. Now it came out wrong and the left twisted it into a different meaning--that Romney doesn't care about 47% of the population.

Now every administration--but this one--has noticed that if you let Americans keep more of the money they earn--they tend to spread it around through-out the economy thereby growing the economy--along with the tax base.

Another person who can't address what I asked. A tax cut for the people who do pay taxes will lead to some of them no longer having to pay anymore. Thus the 47% total increases. How are you ok with that?

No I did answer it. You grow the tax base through economic JOB growth. You just heard it in the above video. Lowering taxes on people who do pay income taxes will create job growth because they have additional expendable income in their pockets. The first President to realize this was John F. Kennedy--as he did it--and each and every time it worked.

Zzzzzzzz, you resorted to your Fox news talking points. You heard taxes and did your best parrot impersonation and did not answer what I asked. Don't bother responding again.

Charles_Main may not agree with what I am saying but at least he addressed my actual question.

 

[Mr. H.]

So why are you ok with increasing that 47%?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_DV54ddNHE]Billy Preston - Nothing from nothing 1975 - YouTube[/ame]

The "marginal rate" is the amount of tax paid on an additional dollar of income.

Romney's proposal won't necessarily create more 47%'ers, but it does have the potential to free up funds to create more investment which in turn would create more economic activity which in turn would create more jobs.

You can elect Romney, who wishes to actually move our economy forward or you can elect Obama who needs four more years of "flexibility" (read: more of his nonsensical bullshit).

How will decreasing the marginal rate not increase the number of 47%'ers? That's what I'm trying to understand.

47% of our population is not investing money in ventures that create revenue, be it a pizza parlor, an asphalt spreading service, or a device that's 67 tools in one (as seen on TV).

They just kinda get by or sit around doing jack shit all day.

I'll repeat- Romey was correct in his "47%" statement, and should be lauded for it.

His proposal to reduce the marginal tax rate by 20% is an effort to get those pizza makers making and selling more pizzas, those asphalt spreaders spreading more asphalt, and to get the entrepreneur to create a device that's actually 68 tools in one (as soon to be seen on TV).

 

[buckeye45_73]

So Romney says that 47% are dependent on government and don't want to take responsibility for their lives and the parrots on this site say they want the 47% to have more "skin in the game" because they pay no taxes.

Yet, Romney says if he becomes president he will push through a 20% across the board tax cut.

Wouldn't a 20% across the board tax cut result in a greater % of people "not paying taxes"? Isn't that the very opposite of what republicans have been looking for? Wouldn't that mean more people who are "mooching" because they "don't pay taxes"?

Where is the objection to Romneys proposal? How do you support this sort of plan while at the same time criticizing people who you consider to be "moochers"?

Like most sane people, we'd love to have everyone paying taxes....it woudl make it more fun when democrats went to raise them......but he wont....because special interest groups would grill him for that

 

[Mr. H.]

Mayberry RDD, you have an inquisitive mind and that's a good thing.
Your mind just happens to be a little fucked up, which is not such a good thing.

 

[oreo]

Sorry I got my facts from this obviously biased source.

Tax | Mitt Romney for President

How does a "across-the-board 20 percent cut in marginal rates" reconcile with the crying of the GOP that too many people don't have skin in the game?

If you are already paying Nothing you will still pay nothing. If you pay something you will pay 20% less but still something. So your premise that more people will be paying Nothing is totally flawed.

Really? How can you say that? Everyone is not paying the same amount now so there has to be some people who are very close to that 47% line that would become "non-payers" if their taxes decreased. Do you not see this possibility?

Well then what's your solution to grow the JOB base? Raise taxes?--

Obama had a two year full filibuster proof--democrat congress and senate--and he didn't raise taxes on ANYONE--including the wealthy when he had every single opportunity to do so. And here he is on video telling you why he didn't--but I would suggest that you sit down first because there is trickle down economic talk coming out of his mouth.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VXrq3FiYok]2009 Obama: 'You Don't Raise Taxes in a Recession' - YouTube[/ame]

 

[RDD_1210]

Romney was quite correct in that off-camera unauthorized recorded comment. And good for him for saying it.

It sure beats muttering to the leader of Russia "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

We need to be called to the carpet and we need to be told the cold hard facts.

We are fucked. You want a doctor telling you "wait until my employment contract is renewed, then we'll talk"? Our nation is dying on so many levels it's pathetic. And you all want to re-hire a Witch Doctor?

Obama voodoo is a bunch of doo-doo.

So why are you ok with increasing that 47%?

You have a Problem with Math dude. It is impossible for a 20% cut of all the Rates to lead to more people paying no taxes at all. As I said if you are in the 47% now you will still be, But if you are not. You are getting a 20% tax cut, not a 100% tax cut. You will still be paying in.

Do I? He is not saying all those that are paying will just get a 20% break on their taxes, he is proposing a 20% cut to each of the brackets. That would lead to an increased number of people not having to pay federal income taxes.

 

[RDD_1210]

Mayberry RDD, you have an inquisitive mind and that's a good thing.
Your mind just happens to be a little fucked up, which is not such a good thing.

Not sure what is fucked up about it. I am trying to understand how people who are upset with people not paying are ok with a plan that will result in even more people not paying.

 

[buckeye45_73]

So why are you ok with increasing that 47%?

You have a Problem with Math dude. It is impossible for a 20% cut of all the Rates to lead to more people paying no taxes at all. As I said if you are in the 47% now you will still be, But if you are not. You are getting a 20% tax cut, not a 100% tax cut. You will still be paying in.

Do I? He is not saying all those that are paying will just get a 20% break on their taxes, he is proposing a 20% cut to each of the brackets. That would lead to an increased number of people not having to pay federal income taxes.

Ok you need to learn the facts.....it's 20% of what they pay......not 20% overall.....so everyone will drop a few%.....but how can you get zero out of 20% of any number?

 

[Mr. H.]

Mayberry RDD, you have an inquisitive mind and that's a good thing.
Your mind just happens to be a little fucked up, which is not such a good thing.

Not sure what is fucked up about it. I am trying to understand how people who are upset with people not paying are ok with a plan that will result in even more people not paying.

I'm just razzin' ya.

There's some good replies here, not just mine. Read, grasshopper. Contemplate.
Smoke some weed if you have to.

 

[RDD_1210]

Mayberry RDD, you have an inquisitive mind and that's a good thing.
Your mind just happens to be a little fucked up, which is not such a good thing.

Not sure what is fucked up about it. I am trying to understand how people who are upset with people not paying are ok with a plan that will result in even more people not paying.

I'm just razzin' ya.

There's some good replies here, not just mine. Read, grasshopper. Contemplate.
Smoke some weed if you have to.

Ha! Nice idea.

 

[kaaazuo]

So Romney says that 47% are dependent on government and don't want to take responsibility for their lives and the parrots on this site say they want the 47% to have more "skin in the game" because they pay no taxes.

Yet, Romney says if he becomes president he will push through a 20% across the board tax cut.

Wouldn't a 20% across the board tax cut result in a greater % of people "not paying taxes"? Isn't that the very opposite of what republicans have been looking for? Wouldn't that mean more people who are "mooching" because they "don't pay taxes"?

Where is the objection to Romneys proposal? How do you support this sort of plan while at the same time criticizing people who you consider to be "moochers"?

Moochers are not productive and don't work. They have no taxes to cut in the first place and they mooch on the taxes other people pay.

Tax cuts are meant for the other 53% who work.

 

[OKTexas]

I think you should check your facts, he said he would reduce tax rates by 20%. So you start with a false premis it kind of shoots down the whole thing.

Sorry I got my facts from this obviously biased source.

Tax | Mitt Romney for President

How does a "across-the-board 20 percent cut in marginal rates" reconcile with the crying of the GOP that too many people don't have skin in the game?

AMENDMENT XVI

Passed by Congress July 2, 1909. Ratified February 3, 1913.

Note: Article I, section 9, of the Constitution was modified by amendment 16.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Where in this amendmant does it give congress the lattitude to exempt some income while taxing others and how do you square that with the equal protection provisions of the 14 amendment. It's just like Maobama says, everyone should pay their fair share, that would be accomplished by a flat tax without exemptions, exclusions or deductions. Read the communist manefesto, a heavily progressive income tax is the 5th pillar of communism. We certainly got that part.

Romney will continue the communist legacy with the progressive system and exempting some incomes, he just want to tweek the rates and deductions to keep in revenue neutral, the specifics require congress to work out the details. The top 30% of earners will continue to carry 90% of the income tax burden and the rest will be spread around.

 

[Mr. H.]

This notion of "mooching" isn't prevalent among the so-called 47%. Not by a long shot.

So many folks are out there busting ass to make ends meet- by working legit jobs. Hell my kid is one of them. But he never asks me for a dime and he stays out of trouble. What's not to love there?

At the end of the year, he gets back the federal taxes that were deducted from his paycheck because... his paychecks just don't amount to shit.

Yet, the "system" is fraught with no-gooders who are able and capable but choose not to get their asses off the sofa... because they don't have to.

Obama's policy is to create a society of "don't have to's". And I don't think that's such a great idea.

I'd much rather see my son strive to survive rather than couch his ass in front of his X-Box all day long at the expense of the 53%.

 

[Mr. H.]

Does anyone actually look at the Federal Tax Tables?

You can earn $900 a month and have NO Federal taxes withheld from your paycheck.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p15.pdf

For a single person living in a small town... not bad.

Married? Kids? Big city? Problem.

But... (again, that's a big butt), for those of us who earn substantially more- especially us business owners... we may take our excess earnings and invest them.

Put it in the bank and earn .5% and you'll pay a tax on that earned interest income.

Go out and buy a piece of equipment that is used in your business to ultimately generate more income and VOILA! you don't pay taxes on that incremental dollar of earned income that you spent to buy that piece of equipment which resulted in the generation of additional income.

If someone walked up to me and said "hey buddy- you go out and spend more of that money to buy shit that will help you make yet more money, then I'll let you reduce your taxable income by 20%".

Fuck yes I'm on it.

When I spend money in my business, that money goes to someone. And i spend $250,000 every year just to keep the doors open. Regardless of my unit production or price of product.

So, a 20% reduction in the marginal tax rate looks mighty lovely to me.

 

[Two Thumbs]

So Romney says that 47% are dependent on government and don't want to take responsibility for their lives and the parrots on this site say they want the 47% to have more "skin in the game" because they pay no taxes.

Yet, Romney says if he becomes president he will push through a 20% across the board tax cut.

Wouldn't a 20% across the board tax cut result in a greater % of people "not paying taxes"? Isn't that the very opposite of what republicans have been looking for? Wouldn't that mean more people who are "mooching" because they "don't pay taxes"?

Where is the objection to Romneys proposal? How do you support this sort of plan while at the same time criticizing people who you consider to be "moochers"?

I have a hard time in dealing with partial facts.

but that said

We know from history that tax cuts = increased revenue.

Clinton cut, and Bush cut even more. So cutting elsewhere would generally mean more revenue.

It then feeds the system, [hopefully] decreasing the debt which will = a stronger dollar. A strong dollar means people can pull themselves up.


I work with a man that wants to go to school, but can't afford it b/c he has a job. "If I wasn't working, I could get that money for college."

Turns out the poor bastard wants to pay his own way. What kind of man would do such a thing?

A real man.

You could have just said "I'm a hypocrite" and that would have summed it up.

Besides, what do you care? You're part of the 47% already. I was told that you are a moocher and are the problem with this country.

I didn't call you anything. But a 'spose I can go with over sensitive, now, if you like.

or Susan



But I'm not a mooch, I just get all my taxes back.

The system is bent to get me to want to keep it this way. Why would I want to pay any taxes when I can fuck over the other guy?

answer; I'm not a low life douche bag that only votes for his own concerns.

Shocking I know, you just learned that people care about the whole country and will vote for what they feel is best for the country.

Shirley you can understand

 

[RDD_1210]

You have a Problem with Math dude. It is impossible for a 20% cut of all the Rates to lead to more people paying no taxes at all. As I said if you are in the 47% now you will still be, But if you are not. You are getting a 20% tax cut, not a 100% tax cut. You will still be paying in.

Do I? He is not saying all those that are paying will just get a 20% break on their taxes, he is proposing a 20% cut to each of the brackets. That would lead to an increased number of people not having to pay federal income taxes.

Ok you need to learn the facts.....it's 20% of what they pay......not 20% overall.....so everyone will drop a few%.....but how can you get zero out of 20% of any number?

Here let me simply it for you. Since we don't seem to be understanding each other. I saw this example in another thread.

A simplified example:

1. If your taxable income - before you take your credits - was 20,000, and your tax rate was 10%,

you would owe $2000.

2. If you then found you had $1600 in tax credits, i.e., child tax credit, EIC, etc.,

your final tax bill would then be $200.

3. If your tax rate were cut 20%, however, instead of owing $2000, you would owe $1600.

THEN when you took your $1600 in tax credits, your tax bill would fall to ZERO.


That would add someone else to the group of 47% who doesn't pay. How are Romney supporters who are against mooching ok with adding more people to the group of moochers?