JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,756
- 2,220
Romney’s tax troubles … with conservatives « The Enterprise Blog
Romney and taxes « Fully Myelinated
This is just one more case of where Romnuts 'conservatism' is more illusion, spin and advertising than reality.
If the GOP nominates Romnuts, we need a new party, no doubt. What is the difference on tax policy? What is the difference on social issues that Romney hasnt flip-flopped on? What is the difference on health-care, so called 'Obamney' health care?
All Romnuts amounts to is a desperate slavish GOP attempt to win no matter what issue they have to bury, and the reality is that with Rmnuts they are undercutting their own eforts.
Mitt Romney has an income tax problem. No, not the Tim Geithner, Charlie Rangel kind.
Many economic conservatives, including influentials such as CNBCs Larry Kudlow and The Wall Street Journals Steve Moore, find Romneys tax reform plan points one through seven of 59, to be specific stale and unimaginative, especially when compared to those of his rivals. Newt Gingrich is pushing a 15 percent flat tax, while Jon Huntsman wants a 23 percent top marginal rate with a code wiped clean of inefficient deductions and credits. And dont forget Herman Cains mothballed 9-9-9 proposal.
And Romney? He would keep the Bush tax cuts, eliminate investment taxes but only for those making under $200,000 kill the death tax, and cut the corporate tax rate to 25 percent. Solid but kinda meh. The Tax Foundation just graded the tax plans of the various Republican candidates, giving Romney an uninspiring C-. It said Romneys plan really takes no steps toward fundamental reform [and] would do practically nothing to incent investment.
The U.S. economy needs comprehensive, pro-growth tax reform. Taxes are also the ur-issue of the Reagan Republican Party. (As the late Robert Novak put it, God put the Republican Party on earth to cut taxes.) What Romney has offered, so far at least, falls short.
And its not just the details, its the delivery. During his Fox News interview Sunday, Romney again spoke about providing tax relief to the struggling middle-class. The wealthy, he added, are doing just fine. This pinch of populism is bad enough anytime, but especially with President Barack Obama is preaching a far more toxic version on the campaign trail.
Romney and taxes « Fully Myelinated
Nice piece from Chait taking a look at Romneys position on taxes. Its stuff like this that makes many liberals think he knows better and is just pandering to the conservative base (and I think they are right about this)
Romney proposes only to eliminate capital gains taxes on income under $200,000 a year. That would cover just a tiny portion of capital gains, making it essentially a symbolic measure. A few months ago, The Wall Street Journaleditorial page railed against Romneys plan. The problem, the editorial noted, was not just that Romney wasnt offering any new tax breaks for the rich. It was that the retreat suggests that hes afraid of Mr. Obamas class warfare rhetoric that, in general, he will shrink from the task of advocating for policies that increase income inequality.
Any conservatives liable to worry about this would be positively alarmed after hearing Romney defend his position on Saturday night. During one portion of the debate, Romney mentioned that he, unlike Newt Gingrich, would restrict his capital gains tax cut to those under the $200,000 annual threshold. Gingrich replied, accurately, that households under that ceiling have barely any capital gains. Romney replied:
And and in my view, the place that we could spend our precious tax dollars for a tax cut is on the middle class, thats been most hurt by the Obama economy. Thats where I wanna eliminate taxes on interest dividends and capital gains.
Spend our precious tax dollars that is a phrase to strike terror in right-wing hearts. For twenty years, the basis for Republican budgeting has been to refuse to acknowledge any tradeoff between cutting taxes for the rich and other governmental priorities. The Democratic position is to insist that tax cuts for the rich be measured against other possible choices lower taxes for the rich mean higher taxes for the middle class, or lower social spending, or higher deficits. Here, Romney is actually employing the Democratic formulation.
This is just one more case of where Romnuts 'conservatism' is more illusion, spin and advertising than reality.
If the GOP nominates Romnuts, we need a new party, no doubt. What is the difference on tax policy? What is the difference on social issues that Romney hasnt flip-flopped on? What is the difference on health-care, so called 'Obamney' health care?
All Romnuts amounts to is a desperate slavish GOP attempt to win no matter what issue they have to bury, and the reality is that with Rmnuts they are undercutting their own eforts.