Mitt's tax plan: Cut taxes for the rich, raise them on everyone else (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 02, 2024, 11:28:37 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  Mitt's tax plan: Cut taxes for the rich, raise them on everyone else (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Mitt's tax plan: Cut taxes for the rich, raise them on everyone else  (Read 13464 times)
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,879


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« on: August 01, 2012, 09:22:38 PM »
« edited: August 01, 2012, 09:25:54 PM by ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ »

The House voted today to raise taxes on the non-rich.  They voted 256-171 to end the Obama tax cuts on the non-rich but keep the Bush tax cuts. They voted 170-255 against extending the existing tax cuts on the non-rich.

This seems like it should be a winning issue for the Democrats to stand firm on, but they will no doubt capitulate as usual.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,879


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« Reply #1 on: August 01, 2012, 09:31:31 PM »

From what I've read it seems like Romney's arguing that the study doesn't fully account for the increased revenues that will come from private sector growth.

I don't know enough about it to really argue, but I see what he means.

Romney is full of sh**t, as usual.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,879


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2012, 12:17:58 AM »
« Edited: August 03, 2012, 12:21:47 AM by ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ »

A flat tax would be the fair way to go, I say.

[link=https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=156857.0]The Overall Tax Burden is already pretty much flat.[/link]

Well, Romney paid 14% federal income taxes, and in his schedule A reports 4% state income and sales taxes, so the 18% ha paid is a lower percentage than all but the poorest 20% paid according to that table.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,879


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« Reply #3 on: August 08, 2012, 10:45:26 PM »
« Edited: August 08, 2012, 10:48:24 PM by ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ »

Beet, to pick at one of your points at random, unfortunately rank is a pyramid, so there are far more "overpaid" folks at the low end, than underpaid folks at the high end. And if the higher end folks are underpaid, why don't they quit, and get a job commensurate with the market for their skill set?  Maybe there are reasons they choose to work for less than they are worth, as it were. In which event, they don't need to be paid more, no?

Granted, state and local government employees is where the real abuse is, more than the Feds with the GS system, which does keep things from spinning totally out of control.  Plus federal employees in my experience do tend to be of higher quality in my experience than the state and local government all too often slugs - particularly at the higher end, where some of them are excellent. That

And aside from pensions, not that much money really is involved relatively speaking. Which gets back to entitlements. Sigh. Sad

No one earns the $50,000+ a day that people like Mitt Romney make for not working. I'll agree that some government workers have some pretty nice pensions, but compared to Mitt Romney, they are nothing. Even that $500,000 a year from that corrupt guy from Vernon, CA.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 12 queries.