Romney-Ryan More-Actually-Bizzare-Taxation-Unclear Approach(?)

[mascale]

It should not be needed for a liberal Democrat to link a Romney-Ryan campaign site. Still no one seems to want to bring up the lack of any kind of marketplace friendly "Lubricate, Then Stimulate" the economy kind of tax plan!

50% of income tax filers get nothing from Mitt or Ryan! MA-B-TU, "More Actually Bizzare Taxation Unclear," is what is proposed. Et Tu(?) is what would only come from an extension of the payroll tax holiday, which is already in place. More tax holidays do not fix Social Security. 2% is still 2% that is needed.

What is unclear is what the lower 50% of the income tax filers get? They currently have no federal income tax liability--at this time. What is the tax cut supposed to do?

From Mitt:
____________________________________
Individual Taxes

America’s individual tax code applies relatively high marginal tax rates on a narrow tax base. Those high rates discourage work and entrepreneurship, as well as savings and investment. With 54 percent of private sector workers employed outside of corporations, individual rates also define the incentives for job-creating businesses. Lower marginal tax rates secure for all Americans the economic gains from tax reform.
•Make permanent, across-the-board 20 percent cut in marginal rates
•Maintain current tax rates on interest, dividends, and capital gains
•Eliminate taxes for taxpayers with AGI below $200,000 on interest, dividends, and capital gains
•Eliminate the Death Tax
•Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)

Corporate Taxes

The U.S. economy’s 35 percent corporate tax rate is among the highest in the industrial world, reducing the ability of our nation’s businesses to compete in the global economy and to invest and create jobs at home. By limiting investment and growth, the high rate of corporate tax also hurts U.S. wages.
•Cut the corporate rate to 25 percent
•Strengthen and make permanent the R&D tax credit
•Switch to a territorial tax system
•Repeal the corporate Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)
___________________________________

There is no simple sociology anywhere in this plan!

Business will not invest if no one can buy what businesses make or offer for sale.

Romney-Ryan approach: At least they Get More To Hoard, Just like Reagan-Bush, and Bush-Cheney! Mostly the marketplace would fail, just like after Reagan-Bush, Just like during Bush-Cheney!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!
(Young Brave shoot arrow into air: Cost-effective White Eyes set Anti-Missile Defense System into action, and activate NORAD too--Then put NATO on alert!)

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

It's only unclear to those who do not understand free market economics. Within one to two years under Romney's leadership, the economy will be well on its way toward a real recovery.

So just vote for Obama since you think his idiocy makes sense, i.e., vote for the guy who promised to make things better, but under whom things are now worse than ever . . . as if he would do anything different.

M'kay?

 

[mascale]

For serious discussions about economics, liberals know that anyone needs a business model--And Hollywood has these(?)!

Obama-Biden failed when the states, post the TARP Lubrication, kept the Obama-Biden Stimulation money all to themselves. The Tax Base was slipping away really fast. That was those "shovel-ready" construction and public works projects. The states and local governments didn't do any of those kinds of projects.

Bush-Cheney had done Romney-Ryan already. The Housing Market Holocaust started in 2005, when construction spending started to decline.

The Disappearing Customers from the stores further became the disappearing buyers from the housing market.

One of the more famous Ivy League federal projects actually became: Roofing on some public toilets in a meadow near Mammoth Lakes in California--and done by an out-of-state contractor from the Pacific Northwest!

High-Tech gone mad doesn't work!

Romney-Ryan will rely on the Pentagon funding high-tech as usual--40% increase of final costs over original budget estimates. Mammoth Lakes Skiers are about the only people who get any of the money, over in Silicon Valley!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Young Brave notices that White Eyes systems--frequently miss at that altitude!)

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

For serious discussions about economics, liberals know that anyone needs a business model--And Hollywood has these(?)!

Obama-Biden failed when the states, post the TARP Lubrication, kept the Obama-Biden Stimulation money all to themselves. The Tax Base was slipping away really fast. That was those "shovel-ready" construction and public works projects. The states and local governments didn't do any of those kinds of projects.

Bush-Cheney had done Romney-Ryan already. The Housing Market Holocaust started in 2005, when construction spending started to decline.

The Disappearing Customers from the stores further became the disappearing buyers from the housing market.

One of the more famous Ivy League federal projects actually became: Roofing on some public toilets in a meadow near Mammoth Lakes in California--and done by an out-of-state contractor from the Pacific Northwest!

High-Tech gone mad doesn't work!

Romney-Ryan will rely on the Pentagon funding high-tech as usual--40% increase of final costs over original budget estimates. Mammoth Lakes Skiers are about the only people who get any of the money, over in Silicon Valley!

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Young Brave notices that White Eyes systems--frequently miss at that altitude!)

Keynesianism does not work to stimulate economies generally, and Obama-Democratic Congress failed to target and control the monies of the so-called stimulus anyway, so of course state and local governments mostly used the funds to hire government employees or increase the salaries and benefits of the same and/or pay off debt on goods and services that had already been consumed by government.

As for the "sociology", apparently, the lower 50% that allegedly won't be able to buy the goods and services provided by those businesses that won't be investing to expand the means of production anyway. . . .

There was no failure in the marketplace, especially under Reagan-Bush. That's absurd. Reagan's tax reformation spurred the largest economic expansion in the history of this country, an era of growth lasting, roughly, from 1983 to 2000, with only one relatively shallow and short-lived cyclical recession.

Under a Romney administration of tax reform, the elimination of unnecessary regulations and the repeal of Obama Care—the new demand for goods and services will be fueled by an expanding economy that will be creating new businesses and growth in existing businesses: new jobs, new sources of income purchasing those goods and services. Revenues will also increase.

That's the sociology of real-world marketplace economics, which are dynamic, not the sociology of tax-and-redistribute economics, which are informed by the fanciful zero-sum-gain mentality and instill despair and stagnation, not hope and change beyond the minds of gullible sheep.

 

[mascale]

So M.D. Rawlings poster got this far:

"As for the "sociology", apparently, the lower 50% that allegedly won't be able to buy the goods and services provided by those businesses that won't be investing to expand the means of production anyway. . . ."

Half the market-place barely keeping pace does not generally lead to robust consumption, even of new technologies. Suppose just an oil price hike,for example.

For this year's shocks, there is the Payroll Tax Holiday. That expires in less than four months. With Romney-Ryan, nothing is scheduled to replace that, and no new tax relief is proposed. The Republicans already took away The Refundable Make Work Pay Tax Credit when they took back the House in 2010.

So nothing is left for half the market-place, about to experience the oil shocks after the fact, and even if there are none remaining--only an annual inflation rate hit.

The third term of Reagan-Bush, for example: Was a major economic downturn. One black that the Republicans will never nominate for President cut the war off short, after getting most of it done too quickly for the GOP! Many understand about "The Schvartz little war!"

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Many with high-tech incomes, however, able to take advantage of new-high-tech funding in meadows of park near Mammoth Lakes, CA--in high sierra east of Silicon Valley! What do high-tekkies want if not loose shoes and a warm place to. . . .well!)

 

[BillyV]

It should not be needed for a liberal Democrat to link a Romney-Ryan campaign site. Still no one seems to want to bring up the lack of any kind of marketplace friendly "Lubricate, Then Stimulate" the economy kind of tax plan!

50% of income tax filers get nothing from Mitt or Ryan! MA-B-TU, "More Actually Bizzare Taxation Unclear," is what is proposed. Et Tu(?) is what would only come from an extension of the payroll tax holiday, which is already in place. More tax holidays do not fix Social Security. 2% is still 2% that is needed.

What is unclear is what the lower 50% of the income tax filers get? They currently have no federal income tax liability--at this time. What is the tax cut supposed to do?

So.....just so I understand exactly what you are saying....your complaint about this tax plan is that those who are paying nothing now will continue to pay nothing while others that pay a lot may or may not pay a little less? Is that really what you meant, because to me THAT seems bizarre!

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

So M.D. Rawlings poster got this far:

"As for the "sociology", apparently, the lower 50% that allegedly won't be able to buy the goods and services provided by those businesses that won't be investing to expand the means of production anyway. . . ."

Half the market-place barely keeping pace does not generally lead to robust consumption, even of new technologies. Suppose just an oil price hike,for example.

For this year's shocks, there is the Payroll Tax Holiday. That expires in less than four months. With Romney-Ryan, nothing is scheduled to replace that, and no new tax relief is proposed. The Republicans already took away The Refundable Make Work Pay Tax Credit when they took back the House in 2010.

So nothing is left for half the market-place, about to experience the oil shocks after the fact, and even if there are none remaining--only an annual inflation rate hit.

Got that far and beyond, but you're still operating under the mythical zero-sum-gain mentality. First, let's get something straight, under Obama the poverty rate has grown dramatically, and the number of Americans on food stamps has doubled, just for starters. The reported unemployment rate has not only not come down to the level Obama promised, it is still higher than it was when he took office, and the actual unemployment rate, hovering about 20%, is almost twice what it was when he took office. This president babbles about the 4.5 million new jobs created in the last 3.75 years, but of course what he doesn't brag about is that the economy is significantly smaller than it was when he took office and that America has experienced a net loss of 10 million jobs! We are not only in a hole, but deeper in that hole than before.

Obama's Keynesianism did that, and all he's proposing is more of the same. Romney's policies will get us out. And make no mistake about it, the poverty rate and the unemployment rates, both measured and actual, will drop. New businesses and jobs will be created at a much faster pace, consumption will increase and so will revenues.

The third term of Reagan-Bush, for example: Was a major economic downturn. One black that the Republicans will never nominate for President cut the war off short, after getting most of it done too quickly for the GOP! Many understand about "The Schvartz little war!"

Indeed, I alluded to that recession, which began near the end of Bush's term. So? Cyclical corrections occur. This does not change the fact that as a result of Reagan's dramatic restructuring of the tax code, namely reducing that top and bottom tax brackets from more than 70%-40% to, roughly, 33%-20% the biggest and most enduring period of economic growth in American history (1983-2000) ensued. The poverty rate dropped dramatically during this period. Indeed, within two years, Reagan's policies took this nation out of what was in fact a worse economy (the 1970s' stagflation of crippling interest rates, entrenched 8% to 9% unemployment, on-going recession coupled with staggering inflation) than the latest, so-called worst economy since the Depression. Hogwash!

Bush-Cheney got the economy going in the face of a recession and 9/11 within about 2 years as well.

And what is this president's record?

Things are worse.

He's a failure. His policies are failures.

The man's an idiot.

But ultimately all you're really saying is that (1) free markets are zero-sum-gain propositions, which is false, and that (2) persons who are not paying taxes will still not be paying taxes, which is also false, as many of these will move up out of poverty while the middleclass is revived. In other words, both claims are essentially one and the same, premised on the same false assumption.

The short answer to why Obama's policies haven't worked: they are based on the very same fallacious premise.