Mitt Romney Opposes the Tax Cut Bill

[Zoom-boing]

Moody's warned Monday that it could move a step closer to cutting the U.S. Aaa rating if President Obama's tax and unemployment benefit package becomes law.

Moody's estimates the tax bill could cost up to $900 billion.
Moody's estimates the tax bill could cost up to $900 billion.

The plan agreed to by President Obama and Republican leaders last week could push up debt levels, increasing the likelihood of a negative outlook on the United States rating in the coming two years, the ratings agency said.

A negative outlook, if adopted, would make a rating cut more likely over the following 12-to-18 months.

For the United States, a loss of the top Aaa rating, reduce the appeal of U.S. Treasuries, which currently rank as among the world's safest investments.

"From a credit perspective, the negative effects on government finance are likely to outweigh the positive effects of higher economic growth," Moody's analyst Steven Hess said in a report sent late on Sunday.

After Obama announced his plan, Treasury prices fell sharply in volatile trade last week and yields have hit a six-month high, in part due to concerns over the effect the package will have on government debt levels.

If the bill becomes law, it will "adversely affect the federal government budget deficit and debt level," Moody's said.

News Headlines

 

[elvis]

welfare programs.

They are such a small portion of the budget it is laughable.

My point exactly... we're a big family that's deeply in debt and sinking like a stone. If we're to balance this budget without additional revenues (yes, that means taxes of one stripe or another), we need to get rid of a few cars... That big stupid boat... quit the shopping sprees... and move into a smaller house...

Conservatives respond with a suggestion to cancel the Sunday paper.

That's not how I'm responding. I don't have the figures in front of me for what gets spent where.

 

[NYcarbineer]

thats true, he will have to defend the Massachusetts mandate as well as the socialized healthcare he passed while governor.

Or he could simply confess it didnt work as he expected and that he wouldnt do it again if he had the chance... If that's his position.

As long as he is honest about who he is. I dont think he will have a problem.

very true, but the problem will be that the tea party and the far right conservatives will smear his face as directly in line with Obamacare and throw so much mud at him, he'll have difficulty getting out of the primaries.

Palin and Huckabee will split the social conservative vote. Romney gets everything else. The early primary wannabees who won't have the votes or money for the long haul, who will drop out one by one,

will all endorse Romney.

 

[Cuyo]

They are such a small portion of the budget it is laughable.

My point exactly... we're a big family that's deeply in debt and sinking like a stone. If we're to balance this budget without additional revenues (yes, that means taxes of one stripe or another), we need to get rid of a few cars... That big stupid boat... quit the shopping sprees... and move into a smaller house...

Conservatives respond with a suggestion to cancel the Sunday paper.

That's not how I'm responding. I don't have the figures in front of me for what gets spent where.

Like I said, the _ENTIRE_ non-military discretionary budget is less than half of the deficit. Anything you can suggest would not come close to the magnitude of our problem.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Mitt Romney Opposes Tax Deal as Republicans Pick Sides - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

Excerpt:

"Given the unambiguous message that the American people sent to Washington in November, it is difficult to understand how our political leaders could have reached such a disappointing agreement," Romney writes. "Of course, delay now is better than an immediate tax hike. But because the extension is only temporary, a large portion of the investment and job growth that characteristically accompanies low taxes will be lost."


Romney also criticized the cost of the deal, which is estimated at nearly $900 billion over two years. The package is not paid for. "What some are calling a grand compromise is not grand at all, except in its price tag," he wrote.

Very savvy political positioning. Oppose Stimulus II, then run against the 'Obama deficit' in 2012.

Quit calling it a tax cut bill -it is a vote to continue EXISTING TAX RATES which means a vote against it is voting to RAISE TAXES. ]

The Bush tax cuts were tax cuts. They end this month. Passing a new tax cut bill to replace the expiring one is a tax cut.

Not to mention the payroll tax cut.

 

[elvis]

My point exactly... we're a big family that's deeply in debt and sinking like a stone. If we're to balance this budget without additional revenues (yes, that means taxes of one stripe or another), we need to get rid of a few cars... That big stupid boat... quit the shopping sprees... and move into a smaller house...

Conservatives respond with a suggestion to cancel the Sunday paper.

That's not how I'm responding. I don't have the figures in front of me for what gets spent where.

Like I said, the _ENTIRE_ non-military discretionary budget is less than half of the deficit. Anything you can suggest would not come close to the magnitude of our problem.

and if we cut military...
they continue the war half-assed. is that correct?

 

[NYcarbineer]

These arent tax cuts any more. They are maintaining the Status quo.

And its amazing how we cant afford cutting taxes, but we can funnel Trillions of dollars into entitlement programs we already know wont work.

Not an argument worth having. Bottom line revenues decreased; Can we afford it? That's the question. Call it a cut, or lack of an increase. Results identical.

Revenues dont decrease by keeping the tax rate the same. They stay the same.

Why werent you worrying about whether the stimulus or the health care bill were affordable? Both of them have empowered government and made our economy worse. But you have no problem with those.

Lowering taxes empowers individuals and you have a problem with that. And we aren't even lowering taxes!

It's mind boggling.

We to empower people. Not government.

Why are you asking him what's affordable when you're supporting adding a trillion dollars to the deficit with this Stimulus Bill?

 

[Cuyo]

That's not how I'm responding. I don't have the figures in front of me for what gets spent where.

Like I said, the _ENTIRE_ non-military discretionary budget is less than half of the deficit. Anything you can suggest would not come close to the magnitude of our problem.

and if we cut military...
they continue the war half-assed. is that correct?

We aren't in a war. They would probably have to end the occupations, and with dire consequences for the locals in their respective countries, yes.

 

[elvis]

Like I said, the _ENTIRE_ non-military discretionary budget is less than half of the deficit. Anything you can suggest would not come close to the magnitude of our problem.

and if we cut military...
they continue the war half-assed. is that correct?

We aren't in a war. They would probably have to end the occupations, and with dire consequences for the locals in their respective countries, yes.

ok. technically, we haven't been in a war since 1945. What are we calling these two? police actions?

 

[Cuyo]

and if we cut military...
they continue the war half-assed. is that correct?

We aren't in a war. They would probably have to end the occupations, and with dire consequences for the locals in their respective countries, yes.

ok. technically, we haven't been in a war since 1945. What are we calling these two? police actions?

Well, let's not get sidetracked now, but I suppose I'd describe them as "Armed occupations in furtherance of police actions against criminal networks, with partial co-operation from the occupied nations."

Nevertheless, even if you ended them, a balanced budget would not result.

 

[Common Sense]

and if we cut military...
they continue the war half-assed. is that correct?

We aren't in a war. They would probably have to end the occupations, and with dire consequences for the locals in their respective countries, yes.

ok. technically, we haven't been in a war since 1945. What are we calling these two? police actions?

we arent technically at war, but the military action was authorized by congress in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

 

[Intense]

That's not how I'm responding. I don't have the figures in front of me for what gets spent where.

Like I said, the _ENTIRE_ non-military discretionary budget is less than half of the deficit. Anything you can suggest would not come close to the magnitude of our problem.

and if we cut military...
they continue the war half-assed. is that correct?

No, cut the Pentagon, DOD, spend the Lottery winnings there, on our Soldiers, on the deficit, spend the windfall leftovers on us. Do the same with EPA, restructure it., let's work our way through the whole system, step by step.

 

[Cuyo]

Like I said, the _ENTIRE_ non-military discretionary budget is less than half of the deficit. Anything you can suggest would not come close to the magnitude of our problem.

and if we cut military...
they continue the war half-assed. is that correct?

No, cut the Pentagon, DOD, spend the Lottery winnings there, on our Soldiers, on the deficit, spend the windfall leftovers on us. Do the same with EPA, restructure it., let's work our way through the whole system, step by step.

Eliminating the entire military would not absorb the deficit. It would also result in about 2.4 million additional unemployed.

Are you starting to understand the predicament here?

 

[AquaAthena]

Mitt Romney Opposes Tax Deal as Republicans Pick Sides - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

Excerpt:

"Given the unambiguous message that the American people sent to Washington in November, it is difficult to understand how our political leaders could have reached such a disappointing agreement," Romney writes. "Of course, delay now is better than an immediate tax hike. But because the extension is only temporary, a large portion of the investment and job growth that characteristically accompanies low taxes will be lost."


Romney also criticized the cost of the deal, which is estimated at nearly $900 billion over two years. The package is not paid for. "What some are calling a grand compromise is not grand at all, except in its price tag," he wrote.

Very savvy political positioning. Oppose Stimulus II, then run against the 'Obama deficit' in 2012.

Good for him. So do I. Romney for prez in `12!

 

[Zander]

I agree with Romney. The bill is now a pile of crap. All that was needed was the extension of the tax rates - instead they've turned into a grab bag of giveaways and pork.

 

[AquaAthena]

I agree with Romney. The bill is now a pile of crap. All that was needed was the extension of the tax rates - instead they've turned into a grab bag of giveaways and pork.

Exactly! Walk away and let the chips fall where they may. Fiscal responsible leaders will take our country back in `12 and lift it up. The voters are ready.

 

[The T]

I agree as well. This compromise needs to be deep-sixed as does the spending bill that just came out. it's nothing more than more cloaked pork and the dying cry of a petulant Congress on their way out willing to do as much damage as they can upon their exodus.

We cannot afford it. Let's take it up in January when more adults are in charge.

And whom gives a tinker's damn if Government comes to a screeching halt? It will be a respit to this economy and the people of this nation.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I agree with Romney. The bill is now a pile of crap. All that was needed was the extension of the tax rates - instead they've turned into a grab bag of giveaways and pork.

Almost there wannabee Republican. The extension was not needed at all, but, yes, Romney is the right choice. I told you with some practice you would help that brain injury of yours. Good going!

 

[The T]

I agree with Romney. The bill is now a pile of crap. All that was needed was the extension of the tax rates - instead they've turned into a grab bag of giveaways and pork.

Exactly! Walk away and let the chips fall where they may. Fiscal responsible leaders will take our country back in `12 and lift it up. The voters are ready.

Yep. It needs to whither and die on the vine.

 

[The Infidel]

I agree as well. This compromise needs to be deep-sixed as does the spending bill that just came out. it's nothing more than more cloaked pork and the dying cry of a petulant Congress on their way out willing to do as much damage as they can upon their exodus.

We cannot afford it. Let's take it up in January when more adults are in charge.

And whom gives a tinker's damn if Government comes to a screeching halt? It will be a respit to this economy and the people of this nation.

I would love the gov't to come to a screeching halt.

It would give us time to catch our collective breath.


These bills are a travesty, and Congress should be ashamed of themselves, and that goes for any GOP's that go along with it.