Romney's Economic Plan: Cut Jobs, Cut Taxes

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/romney-to-unveil-plan-for-jobs-economy/2011/09/06/gIQAMUWl6J_story.html?hpid=z1

Pretty standard boring proposal.

[Likely Voter]

Here is the full plan

http://www.mittromney.com/jobs

looks a lot like Huntsman's plan in the details except with the added anti-China rhetoric (Trump would be so proud).

With Romney, Huntsman and Obama all rolling out detailed plans it puts pressure on Perry to get more detailed.

[Sbane]

Now, I do support a 25% corporate tax rate, but while getting rid of deductions. Does Romney's plan do that? I think not. Excellent way to bankrupt the country, mittens!!

[Simfan34]

Huntsman's plan ends corporate welfare AND closes loopholes.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

The GOP will likely die for a couple cycles, not coming back until the rise of a Republican Leadership Council, maybe with a moderate like Huntsman or Hoeven replacing Clinton and the New Democrats.

[Simfan34]

It seems that Romney's plan is basically the same as Huntsman's, with retaillatory tariffs against the Chinese rather than improving actual competiveness, and tax cuts without loophole closings, leading to a LARGER deficit.

So, it's worse overall. But 160 pages. Wow. Guess he's no Herman Cain.

[TheGlobalizer]

Huntsman's plan ends corporate welfare AND closes loopholes.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I think the China stuff is mostly cover for him to push for passage of the trade agreements while still being able to use Obama's lack of action against him in the Midwest.


He could also significantly beef up the spending cuts and as said, explicitly close the loopholes. It would work well if he plans to argue against the cronyism of Perry and the sweetheart deals in TX. But he probably wants to ensure a larger supply of campaign cash from certain donors. In the PDF he does say this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The bold seems to indicate support for ending those loopholes.

Overall I think he is right to push for protection of intellectual property and create a bargaining position with China over this issue and over currency manipulation. He makes the case for leveraging requirements for both individuals and investment banks as part of a reasonable alternative to Dodd Frank that is clearer, simpler and likely more effective at addressing the root problems. I like the reforms to the worker retraining programs, the current system is a joke. Also the committment to energy research is somethign that rarely get's mentioned by many Republicans claiming to be for all of the above.  

[NVGonzalez]

Looks like Romney's plan is the same failed experiment that we have been trying for around 30 years. I expected some creativity, instead we got the same old insane idea that has been rolling around for that period of time.

Either way he is not going to get nominated so I want to see Perry's plan.

[Likely Voter]

Well the Romney plan calls for making the Bush tax cuts permanent, whereas the Huntsman plan  called for lower rates and getting rid of loopholes. Huntsman says his plan was revenue neutral, but it isn't clear if it was based on a 2011/2 baseline (with Bush tax cuts) or 2013 baseline (without Bush tax cuts). I suspect it was 2013, but he probably doesn't want anyone to notice.

[Sam Spade]

59-point plan?  I've already lost interest.

In the school of American political debate, it is practically an unwritten rule that if your plan is more than 10 points, it is not a plan because no one will understand it.

Who are the idiots running the Mitt Romney campaign, btw?  He still has time to fix it, though, since no one is locked in yet.

[The_Texas_Libertarian]

The corporate tax rate could go up by 20% or down by 20% yet those loopholes remain so it might as well be 0% like it effectively is now for many companies.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If these companies pay as little as 0% to as much as 1.1% (lol) or even have a negative tax rate why does the rate matter?   So I don't understand why people are advocating changing the rate when it clearly doesn't even matter.  Closing the loopholes first is absolutely necessary, however under any tax rate higher than a few points that would cost Mitt Romney's people money.  Remember corporations are people according to Romney.

[Link]

The corporate tax rate could go up by 20% or down by 20% yet those loopholes remain so it might as well be 0% like it effectively is now for many companies.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If these companies pay as little as 0% to as much as 1.1% (lol) or even have a negative tax rate.  So I don't understand why people are advocating changing the rate when it clearly doesn't even matter.  Closing the loopholes first is absolutely necessary, however under any tax rate higher than a few points that would cost Mitt Romney's people money.  Remember corporations are people according to Romney.

Its because the corporate tax rate debate is what we refer to in the vernacular as a red herring.  Romney's "plan" is just the usual Republican ideas reheated and served to us.  NONE of this stuff is going to improve the jobs picture and some of it will hurt.  Let me ask you this.  I the economy was in a robust recovery what would Romney's plan look like?  Answer, the exact same.  Think about it.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

59?!
What, was he trying to outdo Martin Luther?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Well, the voters never seem to get a choice that isn't for "free trade".

[Misoir]

Well, the voters never seem to get a choice that isn't for "free trade".

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

59?!
What, was he trying to outdo Martin Luther?

Trying and failing, apparently.

59<95

[Politico]

Well, the voters never seem to get a choice that isn't for "free trade".

Nobody in America is forced to buy any imported products. Everybody is free to choose what to buy. Perhaps just as importantly, one of the few things almost every school of economic thought agrees upon is the notion that free trade is far preferable to protectionism.

The best and most remarkable part of the Romney plan is the proposal for establishment of a free trade zone. Led by America and known as the "Reagan Economic Zone," it could potentially replace the WTO if implemented correctly with the right leadership (i.e., nobody is going to sign-up if Perry becomes POTUS and therefore makes America the laughingstock of the world again, just like Perry's predecessor Dubya).

[Bull Moose Base]

Well, the voters never seem to get a choice that isn't for "free trade".

Nobody in America is forced to buy any imported products. Everybody is free to choose what to buy. Perhaps just as importantly, one of the few things almost every school of economic thought agrees upon is the notion that free trade is far preferable to protectionism.

The best and most remarkable part of the Romney plan is the proposal for establishment of a free trade zone. Led by America and known as the "Reagan Economic Zone," it could potentially replace the WTO if implemented correctly with the right leadership (i.e., nobody is going to sign-up if Perry becomes POTUS and therefore makes America the laughingstock of the world again, just like Perry's predecessor Dubya).

Bush couldn't get free trade deals?

I wish Romney had called it the Al Gore Economic Zone.

[WillK]

Well, the voters never seem to get a choice that isn't for "free trade".

Nobody in America is forced to buy any imported products. Everybody is free to choose what to buy. Perhaps just as importantly, one of the few things almost every school of economic thought agrees upon is the notion that free trade is far preferable to protectionism.

The best and most remarkable part of the Romney plan is the proposal for establishment of a free trade zone. Led by America and known as the "Reagan Economic Zone," it could potentially replace the WTO if implemented correctly with the right leadership (i.e., nobody is going to sign-up if Perry becomes POTUS and therefore makes America the laughingstock of the world again, just like Perry's predecessor Dubya).

Bush couldn't get free trade deals?

I wish Romney had called it the Al Gore Economic Zone.

Suddenly I am hearing the sound of Ross Perot's voice saying something about a giant sucking sound.

[Politico]

Well, the voters never seem to get a choice that isn't for "free trade".

Nobody in America is forced to buy any imported products. Everybody is free to choose what to buy. Perhaps just as importantly, one of the few things almost every school of economic thought agrees upon is the notion that free trade is far preferable to protectionism.

The best and most remarkable part of the Romney plan is the proposal for establishment of a free trade zone. Led by America and known as the "Reagan Economic Zone," it could potentially replace the WTO if implemented correctly with the right leadership (i.e., nobody is going to sign-up if Perry becomes POTUS and therefore makes America the laughingstock of the world again, just like Perry's predecessor Dubya).

Bush couldn't get free trade deals?

There is a difference between making free trade agreements, and the type of proposal Romney is putting out there. And, no, there is no way Bush would have been able to accomplish this sort of thing.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Apparently that is what Perry is calling his own proposal? A very confusing guy that Perry...

[Politico]

Well, the voters never seem to get a choice that isn't for "free trade".

Nobody in America is forced to buy any imported products. Everybody is free to choose what to buy. Perhaps just as importantly, one of the few things almost every school of economic thought agrees upon is the notion that free trade is far preferable to protectionism.

The best and most remarkable part of the Romney plan is the proposal for establishment of a free trade zone. Led by America and known as the "Reagan Economic Zone," it could potentially replace the WTO if implemented correctly with the right leadership (i.e., nobody is going to sign-up if Perry becomes POTUS and therefore makes America the laughingstock of the world again, just like Perry's predecessor Dubya).

Bush couldn't get free trade deals?

I wish Romney had called it the Al Gore Economic Zone.

Suddenly I am hearing the sound of Ross Perot's voice saying something about a giant sucking sound.

Right, because the economy went into a nosedive in the mid and late 1990s after NAFTA was implemented...just like Perot predicted *rolls eyes*

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

 I don't think Romney will be getting the WSJ primary endorsement.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904537404576554692126810066.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

[Likely Voter]

No surprise that the WSJ is no fan of the anti-China stuff, but I supsect that Romney isn't either. They threw that in there to add a dollup of populism. They saw how it worked with Trump and China is a great scapegoat (along with Obama). "Things will be great once we get China to play fair" sounds good. Of course it is total BS but so is "if we just cut corporate taxes and got rid of the EPA unemployment would be 5%

[Simfan34]

I don't think Romney will be getting the WSJ primary endorsement.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904537404576554692126810066.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Huzzah! One down, seven more to go! Someone mentioned in Hoeven. Had the obligatory Wikipedia look, says he's an enunch!?