Obama to Romney: Release 5 years of tax returns, and we’ll shut up

[toguy5252]

There were 5 of 18 paragraphs that describe the potential motivation behind the Romney tax plan and one that says someone says it doesn't add up (hard to know that given the lack of specifics but again, another debate), the other 13 paragraphs were a tutorial for the math challanged NYT readers.



Three things, first your "good policy" comment is an opinion not a fact.

Second, the US has a VERY progressive tax policy where the very few PAY most of the tax.

Third, Obama has not made a proposal to change any of your complaints above, his tax increase on the upper middle class will have no effect on the 1% - it will hit me but not my rich buddy who's living off of investment income. Shouldn't you be taking after the POTUS for not even trying to address this in the last 4 years, or the Senate for not even attempting to pass a budget in the last 3 years?

OTB

The last paragraph of an article is often referred to as the conclusion. That is the author has concluded that the plan does not add up.

Obama has proposed changes, however, the GOP and in particular the Teabaggers have said loudly and repeatedly that no tax increase is on the table. That is no as in zero. Obama has proposed an alternative minimum tax which makes at least to me eminent good sense. You are correct that the TX Code is progressive but again you are referring to posted rates not the actual rates paid by the 1%. any member of the 1% who actually pays at the posted rate should be looking for a new accountant and/or lawyer. This is just subterfuge.

In point of fact Romney has refused to set out any of the loopholes or deductions he would eliminate.

"In a wide-ranging interview with Time Magazine, Mitt Romney declined to say which deductions he would eliminate from the tax code in order to make his plan to cut tax rates across the board revenue-neutral."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...deductions_n_1824410.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

 

[onthebottom]

The last paragraph of an article is often referred to as the conclusion. That is the author has concluded that the plan does not add up.

Obama has proposed changes, however, the GOP and in particular the Teabaggers have said loudly and repeatedly that no tax increase is on the table. That is no as in zero. Obama has proposed an alternative minimum tax which makes at least to me eminent good sense. You are correct that the TX Code is progressive but again you are referring to posted rates not the actual rates paid by the 1%. any member of the 1% who actually pays at the posted rate should be looking for a new accountant and/or lawyer. This is just subterfuge.

I'm not talking about the rates at all, I'm talking about taxes paid... the data is out there - several years ago I pulled down the IRS report on income tax paid by income segment - 25% of taxes was paid by fewer than 800 returns - in a country of 300M... that's pretty progressive.

If you are familiar with the tax code, and I seem to recall you saying you were (at last in Canada), then you know the proposals made by the POTUS would have little/no effect on the point your railing on...

In point of fact Romney has refused to set out any of the loopholes or deductions he would eliminate.

"In a wide-ranging interview with Time Magazine, Mitt Romney declined to say which deductions he would eliminate from the tax code in order to make his plan to cut tax rates across the board revenue-neutral."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...deductions_n_1824410.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

Again, devil in the details and yes, neither he nor the POTUS who's had the job for nearly 4 years have laid out a comprehensive tax reform plan - I'm betting there is a better chance for the Romney to do it than Obama.

OTB

 

[toguy5252]

I'm not talking about the rates at all, I'm talking about taxes paid... the data is out there - several years ago I pulled down the IRS report on income tax paid by income segment - 25% of taxes was paid by fewer than 800 returns - in a country of 300M... that's pretty progressive.

If you are familiar with the tax code, and I seem to recall you saying you were (at last in Canada), then you know the proposals made by the POTUS would have little/no effect on the point your railing on...



Again, devil in the details and yes, neither he nor the POTUS who's had the job for nearly 4 years have laid out a comprehensive tax reform plan - I'm betting there is a better chance for the Romney to do it than Obama.

OTB

LOL. You re not talking about the rates paid I am and you assiduously avoid them. Progressivity has nothing to with absolute dollars it has to do with rates paid. The fact that a small number of taxpayers paid a lot of taxes simply means that those taxpayers made a lot of money.

While the devil may be in the detail Romneys approach seems to be trust me I can close all these loopholes but I wont or cant tell you which one. Inspires confidence doesn't it.

The proposals made by the POTUS would collect billions. Where I come from that is money.

 

[onthebottom]

LOL. You re not talking about the rates paid I am and you assiduously avoid them. Progressivity has nothing to with absolute dollars it has to do with rates paid. The fact that a small number of taxpayers paid a lot of taxes simply means that those taxpayers made a lot of money.

While the devil may be in the detail Romneys approach seems to be trust me I can close all these loopholes but I wont or cant tell you which one. Inspires confidence doesn`t it.

The proposals made by the POTUS would collect billions. Where I come from that is money.

Yes, but where you come from is not very large - the US is running a 4B/day deficit and the POTUS proposals would raise:

Buffet Rule (defeated in Congress): about 5B a YEAR - covers just over a day of the deficit... not real money where I come from.

Increasing Taxes on those who make more than 250K/year: brings in 60B a year - about 15 days of deficit spending.. again, not real money where I come from.

This would do very little to effect the 1% your very worried about but will have a large effect on small business and upper middle class families.... but in neither case does the POTUS tax proposals represent "real money". Now, if he/Congress let`s all the Bush tax cuts expire the US government would rake in an additional 250B/year - or 62 days of deficit spending... that would be real money - but then you have this to consider: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-Congress-doesn%92t-act-to-avoid-fiscal-cliff

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...price-tag-on-obamas-tax-proposal-150-billion/

 

[toguy5252]

Yes, but where you come from is not very large - the US is running a 4B/day deficit and the POTUS proposals would raise:

Buffet Rule (defeated in Congress): about 5B a YEAR - covers just over a day of the deficit... not real money where I come from.

Increasing Taxes on those who make more than 250K/year: brings in 60B a year - about 15 days of deficit spending.. again, not real money where I come from.

This would do very little to effect the 1% your very worried about but will have a large effect on small business and upper middle class families.... but in neither case does the POTUS tax proposals represent "real money". Now, if he/Congress let`s all the Bush tax cuts expire the US government would rake in an additional 250B/year - or 62 days of deficit spending... that would be real money - but then you have this to consider: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-Congress-doesn%92t-act-to-avoid-fiscal-cliff

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...price-tag-on-obamas-tax-proposal-150-billion/

You always make it sound like that is the only thing he is proposing. It is not. He has proposed 10/1 cuts to taxes. The GOP proposals simply do not add up. You cannot balance a budget based only on savings when the military is not on the table. That is simply math. The GOP depend on growth which has never been achieved.

 

[Insidious Von]

Higher taxes are inevitable. Its either that or Communist subjugation.

Proclaiming that the USA won the war against communism in 1991 is turning into a sick joke. And Paul Ryan's deficit reduction plan is flawed, he intends to cut everything but the military. The worked out swimmingly for the Ancient City State of Sparta. By the time the Romans arrived, Sparta had been reduced to an enfeebled hamlet. Ignored and insignificant.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-bouman/chairman-ryans-deficit-re_b_846204.html

 

[fuji]

That's a good point. Long run military spending is a byproduct of the economy. The military should be the first thing cut, and cut deepest, to free up funds for economic development.

 

[WoodPeckr]

The worked out swimmingly for the Ancient City State of Sparta. By the time the Romans arrived, Sparta had been reduced to an enfeebled hamlet. Ignored and insignificant.

Same thing is happening to the USA.

Chairman Mao is smiling in his grave at how he beat the USA at their own game with lots of help from Pinko Corporate pals in the USA!....