Posted on 04/16/2012 8:16:32 AM PDT by bestintxas
Spending increases and declining private GDP as a result of those spending increases account for 100% of the deficit.
When Obamacare adds a couple trillion more to the deficit, you will still be blaming low tax rates.
You should familiarize yourself with the Laffer Curve. Tax cuts at the margins increase revenue. Debt and spending are irrelevant to that fact.
There are some idiots who now claim that revenue would have increased even more without tax cuts. These idiots base their findings on theoretical models.
Unlike the “Laffer Curve”, which is born out by the facts. Revenues increased significantly after all such tax cuts.
This fact is actually what makes Romney’s, and likely also Ryan’s, proposal to cut some deductions and give everyone a 20% across the board cut a worthwhile idea.
Do some more math ...
Medicare/Medicade, Social Security, Welfare, Pensions [the so called "entitlements"] and interest on the debt total 2.3 Trillion: add Defense (600 Billion) and you have 2.9 Trillion. So even if we eliminate ENTIRELY every other expense except for those above, we still have a 600 Billion+ deficit.
What gets axed before the above?
Department of Education [no tears]
Veterans Affairs
HUD
State
Homeland Security
Energy
Justice
Agriculture
NASA
Transportation
Treasury
Interior
Labor
Commerce
Corp of Engineers
EPA
National Science Foundation
Corporation for National and Community Service
Each of these are GONE. IOW, essential government functions must be eliminated if we don't touch the sacred entitlements and/or defense.
Okay, technically, we could have a pure welfare state if we also eliminated defense as well - then we are "balanced" and keep current tax levels & entitlements.
Better is immediate 1/3 across the board cuts. Taxes stay where they are now. THEN have a real debate on the merits of each and every program and how much the people are willing to pay for those programs from TODAYS money.
“You can believe whatever you want about Romney, but if you seriously believe his administration would not be orders of magnitude better than the current one, you’re out of your mind.
Just be honest. It’s not that hard.”
Thank you! With ALL the people on here willing to vote for Obama I’m really starting to wonder what’s happening here. We have to get rid of the immidiate threat and then hold the next threat to the fire. What is so hard for people to get?! We must stop this bickering about why not to vote for Mitt...he is, regardless what we think, the one. We have to defeat Obama...those who get this will and will work hard for the vote, and those who don’t can simply go ahead and quit. Your negativity and bashing at this point is meaningless to the process. Except if you are meaning to convince others to allow Obama to stay in. If you don’t like it then do us all a favor and at least stop cheerleading for obama!
As any conservative will tell you, the Department of Education, being unconstitutional, should receive a 100 percent budget cut.
You are totally correct. Romney would have never been my first, second or even third choice for president out of the possible candidates we had. But to compare him to Obama is much like comparing someone with a traffic ticket to a serial killer. I can’t even imagine that some people, especially folks here, think that Romney is no better for the country than Obama.
I live in Texas, and we have no state income tax, but if the tax cuts are enough to offset all/most of my property tax, then I can lose that deduction. I’d prefer a national sales tax, but that is just me. Get rid of the tax code and the IRS.
Can you provide a list of legislation that Romney enacted during his term as Governor that is even remotely conservative?
I am not looking for his current "talking points" where he talks conservative, I am talking about real programs or legislation.
I don’t think he can be trusted to do anything that is not in his own interest.
**
That’s the understatement of the year.
This guy would literally sell his own soul to be president. This whole EXERCISE is all about HIM, not for anything that seems to be “good for the country.”
If he was FOR the country, he’d drop the hell out of the race altogether.
“There are plenty of criticisms of Romney. However, when you add a subtitle stating “(RINO already talking up more taxes rather than tax cuts)” when the first line of the linked article mentions across-the-board tax cuts, you do not come off as credible. It’s just dishonest.
Flattening the tax code necessarily entails removing deductions. It’s not hard to understand.”
Listen, what you are missing is the big picture.
A conservative paper like the WSJ threw out that headline, not me.
We are in the political fight for our lives. And what does RINO Romney say but throwing out ideas to raise taxes. That is what is being heard. You know it and I know it is not the main point but John Q public believes it to be what they read on a headline.
Why is Romney worried about “offsets” anyway? Does he not know that our economy is bleeding from govt expenditures already?
Do you know what an offset is? It presupposes that one cannot get something from nothing, so it must be made up somewhere.
This RINO does not know or care that we have no obligation to offset anything for the govt purse. Period.
It presupposes it is the govt’s money and must be made up.
That is the problem with Romny. He is a RINO believing the drivel foisted by the libs over the years that govt must be kept whole.
Please read post 71 to you and stop thinking you know everything about Romney.
He is giving talking points for Obama to use that will hurt chances of beating zero in the fall.
“Mr. Romney has pledged a 20% cut to income tax rates for taxpayers in all income brackets but has offered few details for how he would pay for the proposal.”
WTF? Ever conservative knows that tax cuts pay for themselves and GROW the economy. Just another example of how the Wall Street Journal has gone downhill since it was purchased by Rupert Murdoch.
That’s a graph of debt!
that has ZERO to do with it.
Tax cuts increase revenue! If you then spend all that extra revenue you end up with that graph. BUT that extra revenue didn’t have to be spent, it could of been used to pay down the debt!
So to argue that Tax Cuts increased the debt to flat out wrong.
Look at it this way... If you make $100,000 a year at your job.. and you get a raise of $20,000... then proceed to spend $200,000 did your pay raise make you go $80,000 in debt?
NO.
Your SPENDING put you in debt.
Tax cuts again and again and again have RAISED the amount of revenue the federal government collects. This is a fact.
I don’t trust him.
It's just corporate welfare for the builders and realtors.
Flat tax, no deductions, no loopholes, period.
No, I can’t. All I have to evaluate Romney with is what he says now. And, as I said, he would have never been my pick on that basis and what I have heard here and other places. But I can’t imagine him hating this country like the muslim Obama, and I can’t see him intentionally trying to stir race hatred, or appointing people such as Obama has to the supreme court. I still hope for a miracle and the nominee will not be Romney,but if it is, I believe at this point we could survive 4 years of him. I am pretty sure we cannot survive 4 more of Zero, JMHO....
Well first of all - we are not talking about this deduction within the context of a full over haul. I would be in favor of that. But that’s apples and oranges, so you’re missing the point completely.
Second of all, airplanes themselves are 100% tax deductible as business expenses, so there’s no need to deduct the interest. Same for many cars and I would suspect for a good number of guns.
The coin collection is ridiculous. How many people take out a loan on a coin collection? Gimme a break.
Next?
...and for that matter, how many folks take loans out on guns? Straw argument.
“Eliminating deductions is part of what’s necessary to move towards a flat tax. Interesting proposal.”
No, it is just a way to tax us more. Don’t be so naive to think there is ever going to be a flat tax. Ain’t gonna happen. Ergo, I get taxed doubly when I can no longer deduct property tax and state income tax. Not a good idea.
IF eliminating tax deductions could be completely linked to implementation upon a flat tax, then it “might” be worth considering. However, to eliminate deductions before, just means I pay more. PLUS, remember....the POTUS has NO POWER TO RAISE OR LOWER TAXES. That resides WITH THE CONGRESS. So, any candidate can pipe dream all he/she wants...they cannot deliver without congressional initiation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.