Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
He campaigned on removing the Bush tax cuts for singles making over 200k and married couples making over 250k. I don't know how he could have gotten more specific.
You must be pretty mad at him for not keeping that promise.
The Republicans would not allow it. Fuck you're dumb.
Which loopholes, deductions, credits, and exemptions will he eliminate?
The same ones the liberals always complain about the rich taking advantage of.
Which specific ones are you talking about? Can you name them or are you ignorant of such information?
He campaigned on removing the Bush tax cuts for singles making over 200k and married couples making over 250k. I don't know how he could have gotten more specific.
You must be pretty mad at him for not keeping that promise.
The Republicans would not allow it. Fuck you're dumb.
You must be pretty mad at him for not keeping that promise.
The Republicans would not allow it. Fuck you're dumb.
If Obama were a leader instead of being a diva, the Republicans wouldn't have been able to stop him. Reagan, Bush and Clinton all had to deal with hostile Congresses dominated by the other party, just as Governor Romney had to do in Mass., yet all of them managed to get their important agenda items passed, but all Obama can do in whine about how mean the Republicans have been to him.
Oh please.You must be pretty mad at him for not keeping that promise.
The Republicans would not allow it. Fuck you're dumb.
If Obama were a leader instead of being a diva, the Republicans wouldn't have been able to stop him. Reagan, Bush and Clinton all had to deal with hostile Congresses dominated by the other party, just as Governor Romney had to do in Mass., yet all of them managed to get their important agenda items passed, but all Obama can do in whine about how mean the Republicans have been to him.
The same ones the liberals always complain about the rich taking advantage of.
Which specific ones are you talking about? Can you name them or are you ignorant of such information?
You should know them already. They're the ones that the liberals always complain about the rich taking advantage. Bastards like Romney use them to avoid paying their fair share. Why else would Romney want to get rid of them? He's a cruel, heartless con, you know.
Oh please.The Republicans would not allow it. Fuck you're dumb.
If Obama were a leader instead of being a diva, the Republicans wouldn't have been able to stop him. Reagan, Bush and Clinton all had to deal with hostile Congresses dominated by the other party, just as Governor Romney had to do in Mass., yet all of them managed to get their important agenda items passed, but all Obama can do in whine about how mean the Republicans have been to him.
In none of those cases did the hostile party make it their goal to have the President fail. You're such a drama queen.
Such as? Can you name even a single one of them ?
How does it stimulate the economy to cut taxes and then raise them the same amount? Romney's plan is to cut tax rates and then get rid of deductions, credits, and loopholes to make up the difference. How is that a tax cut? The federal government still extracts the same amount of money from the economy.
Why hasn't he been more specific about which deductions, loopholes, and credits he's going to ax? Do we not have a right to know or is that a secret?
Before asking that question, you first have to remember how the US government works. The President cannot lower tax rates or end deductions without first negotiating with Congress about his proposals, so at this point all Romney can tell us is the outline of what he will propose to Congress and the details will emerge from negotiations between the WH and Congress.
Tax deductions for the most part are government incentives intended to direct spending or investment in certain directions instead of allowing free markets to guide consumers and investors. Vigorous free markets induce price competition and direct capital to its most productive (highest valued) use, so lowering tax rates will put more money into the hands of consumers and investors and ending the government's attempts to micromanage the economy through deductions will allow free market competition to stimulate the economy.
I'm aware of all that.
Which deductions, credits, exemptions, and loopholes would Romney like to get rid off?
I already know how to calculate what my taxes would be under Obama re-elected if his plan is enacted. I also know what my taxes are if nothing changes in the tax code. What I don't know is what I would pay under Mitt Romney.
You must be pretty mad at him for not keeping that promise.
The Republicans would not allow it. Fuck you're dumb.
Oh yea, the republicans had a super majority in congress when Obama took office, i forgot. My bad. You're right.
The Republicans would not allow it. Fuck you're dumb.
Oh yea, the republicans had a super majority in congress when Obama took office, i forgot. My bad. You're right.
The Republicans all voted agains Obama. Its their fucking fault it didn't pass moron. Do you honestly believe your own bullshit? The Democrats only even had a super-majority for 5 frickin months, almost half of which was during summer recess. You're full of fucking crap.
Oh please.The Republicans would not allow it. Fuck you're dumb.
If Obama were a leader instead of being a diva, the Republicans wouldn't have been able to stop him. Reagan, Bush and Clinton all had to deal with hostile Congresses dominated by the other party, just as Governor Romney had to do in Mass., yet all of them managed to get their important agenda items passed, but all Obama can do in whine about how mean the Republicans have been to him.
In none of those cases did the hostile party make it their goal to have the President fail. You're such a drama queen.
Second, would everyone not agree that deductions, credits and loopholes benefit the rich far more than the middle or lower class?
Which deductions, credit, and loopholes?
So Romney wants to raise the net tax liability of the rich? Or lower it?If we lower rates but manage to cap deductions at say $10,000 per household which prevents billionaires from being able to save millions on deductions and loopholes, would that not prevent billionaires from circumventing paying their "fair share?"
Which deductions, credit, and loopholes?
Which ones is he proposing the elimination of?When did he do that?If Obama proposed the exact same thing and didn't give specifics, be honest, would you be upset about it?
Obama's tax plan was actually very specific. Did you pay attention at all in 2008? He campaigned on removing the Bush tax cuts for singles making over 200k and married couples making over 250k. I don't know how he could have gotten more specific. Did you pay attention at all? I can't believe you missed that!Candidates don't win elections by giving the specifics. The less specifics you can keep from people, the better, because the less there is to nitpick and possibly lose you votes because of it. We had a candidate in 2008 who did little more than say "Hope", "Change" and ride the anti-Bush wave and he got elected. Did you have a problem with lack of specifics back then? I'm guessing you didn't.
Oh please.If Obama were a leader instead of being a diva, the Republicans wouldn't have been able to stop him. Reagan, Bush and Clinton all had to deal with hostile Congresses dominated by the other party, just as Governor Romney had to do in Mass., yet all of them managed to get their important agenda items passed, but all Obama can do in whine about how mean the Republicans have been to him.
In none of those cases did the hostile party make it their goal to have the President fail. You're such a drama queen.
In all of these cases the hostile legislatures opposed the administration's proposals, but Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Romney managed to prevail nonetheless. The difference today is not that the Congress in more hostile than those were in the past but that Obama is less competent than those leaders.
Oh please.
In none of those cases did the hostile party make it their goal to have the President fail. You're such a drama queen.
In all of these cases the hostile legislatures opposed the administration's proposals, but Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Romney managed to prevail nonetheless. The difference today is not that the Congress in more hostile than those were in the past but that Obama is less competent than those leaders.
Oh baloney. Never before has the opposing party set out with their only goal being to make the President fail and stating ahead of time they would all vote against him - no matter what. In all of the above cases the opposing party did not act in lockstep to obstrcut legislation.The entire Republican plan for the past 4 years has been to obstruct plain and simple, they have stated essentially that and their voting record reflects it. Not a single one of them voted for ObamaCare even though it was a fucking REPUBLICAN idea to begin with!
Oh please.
In none of those cases did the hostile party make it their goal to have the President fail. You're such a drama queen.
In all of these cases the hostile legislatures opposed the administration's proposals, but Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Romney managed to prevail nonetheless. The difference today is not that the Congress in more hostile than those were in the past but that Obama is less competent than those leaders.
Oh baloney. Never before has the opposing party set out with their only goal being to make the President fail and stating ahead of time they would all vote against him - no matter what. In all of the above cases the opposing party did not act in lockstep to obstrcut legislation.The entire Republican plan for the past 4 years has been to obstruct plain and simple, they have stated essentially that and their voting record reflects it. Not a single one of them voted for ObamaCare even though it was a fucking REPUBLICAN idea to begin with! What fuckin' more do you need to know?
How does it stimulate the economy to cut taxes and then raise them the same amount? Romney's plan is to cut tax rates and then get rid of deductions, credits, and loopholes to make up the difference. How is that a tax cut? The federal government still extracts the same amount of money from the economy.
Why hasn't he been more specific about which deductions, loopholes, and credits he's going to ax? Do we not have a right to know or is that a secret?
In all of these cases the hostile legislatures opposed the administration's proposals, but Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Romney managed to prevail nonetheless. The difference today is not that the Congress in more hostile than those were in the past but that Obama is less competent than those leaders.
Oh baloney. Never before has the opposing party set out with their only goal being to make the President fail and stating ahead of time they would all vote against him - no matter what. In all of the above cases the opposing party did not act in lockstep to obstrcut legislation.The entire Republican plan for the past 4 years has been to obstruct plain and simple, they have stated essentially that and their voting record reflects it. Not a single one of them voted for ObamaCare even though it was a fucking REPUBLICAN idea to begin with! What fuckin' more do you need to know?
When did that happen?
How does it stimulate the economy to cut taxes and then raise them the same amount? Romney's plan is to cut tax rates and then get rid of deductions, credits, and loopholes to make up the difference. How is that a tax cut? The federal government still extracts the same amount of money from the economy.
Why hasn't he been more specific about which deductions, loopholes, and credits he's going to ax? Do we not have a right to know or is that a secret?
I believe he said it would stimulate the economy to encourage growth. Growth in itself brings in more revenue. I made that in two sentences so you could understand it. Hope that helps.
