The 5trillion OBAMA lie: Princeton Economist: Obama Campaign Is Misrepresenting My St

returning the $500 billion stolen from Medicare to pay for Obamacare = one big ass loophole closure....:lol:

It was $716 billion, not $500 billion. But before you get hard, that was $716 billion over a ten year period, not annually.

So you still have $430 billion a year to come up with.

.

i know that....the point is we can cut SPENDING to balance our budget....in addition to closing loopholes and growth....

So you don't know what expenditures Romney would eliminate.

Do you know what spending he would cut, besides the two cents Big Bird gets?

.
 
Right now, federal spending exceeds federal revenues by over a trillion dollars a year.

So if Romney's tax plan is "revenue neutral", that means he is going to have to come up with over a trillion dollars of spending cuts.

What are those trillion dollars of cuts?

And just so you know, all the revenues that come in each year just barely cover the outlays for non-discretionary spending (Medicare, Social Security). There is no money left over for defense. No money left for interstate highways. No money left for anything. We are currently borrowing over a trillion dollars a year to pay for those things.


So there's a real puzzler for you. How's Romney going to balance the budget?

.
 
Last edited:
My questions are serious.

There is no way in hell I will vote for Obama. But if you want me to vote for Romney, I need to know the specifics of his budget plans. What expenditures will he cut? What spending will he cut?

If you can't tell me, it makes me wonder what the fuck is going on inside your head if you don't know and never asked.


.
 
Princeton Economist: Obama Campaign Is Misrepresenting My Study on Romney's Tax Plan | The Weekly Standard



Well well well.. The Liar-N-Chief strikes again!! All of you liberal ZOMBIE herd said:????????? What?? I can't hear you?!

How many times are you going to start a thread on this same thing? Once again, if Romney would simply expalin SPECIFICALLY how his tax plan is supposed to work, he wouldn't have to leave it up to others to explain how it won't work for him...

Obama needs others to explain how his plans will work as well fool.

Grow up.
 
Care to list those expenditures he is going to eliminate? Or are you just taking a politician's promises on sheer faith?

.

His promise is to sit down with Congress and figure it out, Obama's is to do it by magic, which do you think has a better chance of succeeding?

So you are just taking him on sheer faith.

You are going to support someone who won't give specifics?

When a politician won't give specifics, it almost always means he is fudging, and he has something up his sleeve which is going to really piss off a lot of people.

It makes me seriously doubt he will be able to make the numbers work, and that we will continue to see budget deficits in a Romney presidency.



.
We were expected to take ObamaCare on faith..."we'll just have to pass the bill so we can see what's in it!"...Pelosi.

We've done a lot on faith...hope and change was ushered in on faith. It is now being ushered OUT on lack of faith. Obama has proven that he is incapable of anything other than wild spending meant to break the bank and cause chaos. His Marxist ideals are coming through.

Romney's plan for the US is constitutional....Obama's plan for the US is to ignore the Constitution.

The boy showed just how well he can debate facts when he ran up against Romney without his teleprompter and earphones. Obama showed himself to be a real loser. Even the hard core Obamabots are beginning to see through this imposter.
 
Care to list those expenditures he is going to eliminate? Or are you just taking a politician's promises on sheer faith?

.

His promise is to sit down with Congress and figure it out, Obama's is to do it by magic, which do you think has a better chance of succeeding?

So you are just taking him on sheer faith.

You are going to support someone who won't give specifics?

When a politician won't give specifics, it almost always means he is fudging, and he has something up his sleeve which is going to really piss off a lot of people.

It makes me seriously doubt he will be able to make the numbers work, and that we will continue to see budget deficits in a Romney presidency.



.

Why should I hold him to a standard no candidate has ever been held to? Unless, that is, you can show me where any candidate has ever given specifics.
 
Right now, federal spending exceeds federal revenues by over a trillion dollars a year.

So if Romney's tax plan is "revenue neutral", that means he is going to have to come up with over a trillion dollars of spending cuts.

What are those trillion dollars of cuts?

And just so you know, all the revenues that come in each year just barely cover the outlays for non-discretionary spending (Medicare, Social Security). There is no money left over for defense. No money left for interstate highways. No money left for anything. We are currently borrowing over a trillion dollars a year to pay for those things.


So there's a real puzzler for you. How's Romney going to balance the budget?

.

He could eliminate all the new spending Obama instituted, that would account for more than half of it.
 
first.....what makes a 5 trillion dollar tax cut "a burden".....? Romney's plan to cut taxes is GREAT!

secondly.....in order to "pay for" and make his tax cuts revenue neutral Romney is going to "cover" his tax cuts with some loophole closures and with economic growth....

third....why do libruls mispresent this simple plan.....could it be the radicals just hate free market capitalism......?

$500 billion worth of loophole closures? LMAO!!!!!! You do realize that current revenue from federal income taxes is just over $1.2 trillion, and that the loss of $500 billion in revenue amounts to over 40% of federal income tax revenue? We would need to see an increase in GDP of nearly 50% to recover the lost revenue.

I really am starting to believe that the vast majority of conservatives all failed basic math, because this is basic math, and Romney's numbers do not add up no matter which way you try to twist them.

Even Romney's website won't state which loopholes he will close.

You do understand he can do nothing on his own, he has to work with congress to work out the specifics, and he stated as much in the debate. But why let facts get in the way of a good piece of propaganda.
 
My questions are serious.

There is no way in hell I will vote for Obama. But if you want me to vote for Romney, I need to know the specifics of his budget plans. What expenditures will he cut? What spending will he cut?

If you can't tell me, it makes me wonder what the fuck is going on inside your head if you don't know and never asked.


.

If Romney is going to balance the budget it is going to take some deep and unpopular cuts.....however it is not exactly smart to mention them before election.....at least we know he is headed in the right direction....less government and more freedom....

we know Obama is just going to tax and spend us into oblivion....with more government and less freedom....
 
Right now, federal spending exceeds federal revenues by over a trillion dollars a year.

So if Romney's tax plan is "revenue neutral", that means he is going to have to come up with over a trillion dollars of spending cuts.

What are those trillion dollars of cuts?

And just so you know, all the revenues that come in each year just barely cover the outlays for non-discretionary spending (Medicare, Social Security). There is no money left over for defense. No money left for interstate highways. No money left for anything. We are currently borrowing over a trillion dollars a year to pay for those things.


So there's a real puzzler for you. How's Romney going to balance the budget?

.[/QUOTE

]
Well the debt is different from the tax plan. Romney said the tax plan is revenue neutral. The debt he plans on slowing the growth of spending (I would like him to take a hatchet to it). He is also looking a tv reforming entitlements ( much easier said than done, but he does have a plan). And yves he wants growth, which would help a ton
 
This Princeton guy assumes that Romney would get rid of the mortgage interest deduction, the charitable contribution deduction, and the state/local tax deduction.

Not happening in the political world as we know it. If you don't think so, ask your current Congressman, up for re-election, Democrat or Republican,

if he'll do that. See what he says.
 
So are all you conservatives on board the new Romney idea that

1. higher income Americans don't need any more tax cuts. These so-called 'job creators' ought to be to create jobs from right where they are?

Okay with that?

and

2. Our tax system isn't progressive enough as it is, so Romney wants to make it more progressive by giving lower income Americans a tax cut, without giving higher income Americans a tax cut?

Okay with that?

and

3. We don't have enough Americans paying NO income tax, so we need to lower the marginal rates, including those at the bottom, so even more Americans will pay no income tax?

Okay with that?

Are all you conservatives on board the new liberal Republican Romney bandwagon?
 
Princeton Economist: Romney Tax Plan Mathematically Sound

Bill Clinton, President Barack Obama, and liberal think tanks have claimed Mitt Romney's plan to cut tax rates across the board by 20 percent is bad arithmetic, but a Princeton economics professor, Harvey Rosen, examined Romney's proposals in a paper and concluded Romney's plan would work. The economy would have to grow by 3 percentage points more over the term of his plan than it would have without his plan.

Liberals, who often do not understand how the economy works let alone how to expand the economic pie, failed to work in their assumptions that the purpose of Romney's tax cuts is to actually grow the economy, which would make people more prosperous. And as the economy grows and more people get jobs, the government would get more tax dollars.

The Tax Policy Center, which is affiliated with the center-left Brookings Institution and Urban Institute, analyzed Romney's tax plan assuming there would be zero economic growth. The lead analyst in the Tax Policy Center's study was a former Obama administration official.

"At the same time, the TPC model assumes that regardless of the tax rate, people work the
same amount, save the same amount, and invest the same amount," Rosen wrote in his paper. "Thus, changes in the tax code have no effect on the amount of before-tax income."

And, as The Weekly Standard pointed out, there are "at least three critical flaws" with the the TPC study:

(1) it assumes pro-growth tax reform can't actually produce economic growth, (2) it assumes two tax expenditures worth $45 billion per year are not 'on the table', and (3) it assumes tax reform must pay for repealing Obamacare's tax hikes, rather than assuming that the repeal of Obamacare's spending will pay for repealing the tax hikes.

If these assumptions are taken away, Romney's plan becomes more feasible.

Rosen also wrote that "it seems odd to assume away possible increases in incomes associated with a
given tax reform proposal when its explicit goal is to enhance growth."

"Rather, a more sensible approach is to consider alternative assumptions about how tax reform might affect the size of the economy, and see how they affect the substantive conclusions," Rosen wrote.

Rosen concluded that if the economy grew, Romney's numbers would add up and that growth rate needed to make Romney's numbers add up was "not impossible."

From Princeton Economist: Romney Tax Plan Mathematically Sound

Amazing that this comes from a left wing university with professors to the left of Lenin.
 
So, pretend for entertainment purposes that his tax plan is revenue neutral - aka break even -

now tell us how Romney pays for his massive defense spending increase, in other words,

how does he make that 'spending neutral'.

And then while you're at it, tell us where he gets the revenue or cuts to bring down the deficit.

Keep in mind, he's used up all his increased revenues stimulated by his tax plan, FOR his tax cuts.

any takers of this challenge?
 
The Tax Policy Center, which is affiliated with the center-left Brookings Institution and Urban Institute, analyzed Romney's tax plan assuming there would be zero economic growth. The lead analyst in the Tax Policy Center's study was a former Obama administration official.

So let's be clear. You're saying the TPC is not a reliable analytical source because it's had partisan affiliations??
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top