• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

I think the Republican Party has gone nuts.

Status
Not open for further replies.
MaggieD

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,664
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
So Romney picks Paul Ryan as his running mate. Paul Ryan who has put together a budget that turns Medicare into a voucher system...lowers taxes on the rich...slashes entitlement programs to the bone...and a host of other radical policies that is sure to keep Romney focused on distancing himself from Ryan's plan through the next 3 months.

For God's sake! Why??? What? Is he the only potential running mate who hasn't cheated on his wife? That'd be better than this.

I think the Republican Party has gone bat **** crazy.

Am I missing something??
 
It's been a slick ride downhill since Palin. I barely recognize this GOP.
 
If he'd been nominated as the POTUS candidate I'd vote for him. As VP it's worthless.
 
MaggieD said:
So Romney picks Paul Ryan as his running mate. Paul Ryan who has put together a budget that turns Medicare into a voucher system...lowers taxes on the rich...slashes entitlement programs to the bone...and a host of other radical policies that is sure to keep Romney focused on distancing himself from Ryan's plan through the next 3 months.

For God's sake! Why??? What? Is he the only potential running mate who hasn't cheated on his wife? That'd be better than this.

I think the Republican Party has gone bat **** crazy.

Am I missing something??
Click to expand...

Yes, you are missing the part where he closes the tax write-off loop-holes, thereby broadening the tax base while reducing the tax rate. No more complaining about rich companies or people paying zero taxes.
 
GPS_Flex said:
Yes, you are missing the part where he closes the tax write-off loop-holes, thereby broadening the tax base while reducing the tax rate. No more complaining about rich companies or people paying zero taxes.
Click to expand...

Which loop holes? Has he named any yet?
 
GPS_Flex said:
Yes, you are missing the part where he closes the tax write-off loop-holes, thereby broadening the tax base while reducing the tax rate. No more complaining about rich companies or people paying zero taxes.
Click to expand...

It is more like a flat tax but it isn't forcing the politicians to go cold turkey because it doesn't get rid of all the loop-holes.
 
Paul Ryan would be really good for this country if his Republican counterparts and Democrat babies would get their thumbs out of their asses and do something with it. He has been pretty much the only Congressman making an actual effort at anything.
 
MaggieD said:
So Romney picks Paul Ryan as his running mate. Paul Ryan who has put together a budget that turns Medicare into a voucher system...lowers taxes on the rich...slashes entitlement programs to the bone...and a host of other radical policies that is sure to keep Romney focused on distancing himself from Ryan's plan through the next 3 months.

For God's sake! Why??? What? Is he the only potential running mate who hasn't cheated on his wife? That'd be better than this.

I think the Republican Party has gone bat **** crazy.

Am I missing something??
Click to expand...

Ryan doesn't gain Romney anything new. He secures a base that was already his. He needed to reach to the middle just to try and take some votes away from Obama's reach into the independents. Olympia Snowe would've done that and encroached on Obama's hold on the female demographic.
 
Deuce said:
Which loop holes? Has he named any yet?
Click to expand...

If you need to ask me such questions, you obviously haven't educated yourself Deuce. I'll help MaggieD but I don't bother with homers like you anymore.
 
GPS_Flex said:
Yes, you are missing the part where he closes the tax write-off loop-holes, thereby broadening the tax base while reducing the tax rate. No more complaining about rich companies or people paying zero taxes.
Click to expand...

Romney has already begun distancing himself from Ryan's plan. It's going to put the focus of this election on two things: Romney's income tax forms; Ryan's plan.

Thank you for putting it a bit more into perspective. But here's what's out there, as an example:

From March 2012: Appearing on two Sunday talk shows, the GOP’s top budget guru Rep. Paul Ryan promised to close enough loopholes to pay for the large tax cuts in his budget blueprint unveiled last week — but he repeatedly refused to specify any.

“We’re proposing to keep revenues where they are, but to clear up all the special interest loopholes, which are uniquely enjoyed by higher income earners, in exchange for lower rates for everyone,” Ryan said on CBS’ Face The Nation. “We’re saying get rid of the tax shelters, the interest group loopholes and lower everybody’s tax rates.”
Click to expand...

Lower everybody's tax rates? 47% of filers don't pay any Federal income taxes. They could give a tinker's damn.

Ryan Promises To Close Tax Loopholes, But Won’t Say Which | TPMDC

University of Wisconsin, May 2012:

STUDENT: My question for you would be, would you support closing corporate tax loopholes to pay for [keeping student loan interest rates where they are instead of raising them] as a revenue raiser?

RYAN: Nope. Well, I support closing tax loopholes for tax reform. [...] So that’s what we want to do with all those corporate loopholes is do that, and with the student loan bill let’s cut some spending because that’s more spending, let’s cut spending that is lower-priority spending to address this higher-priority need.
Click to expand...

Paul Ryan Says He Wouldn't Close Corporate Tax Loopholes To Prevent Student Loan Interest Hike | ThinkProgress

Personally? I think the Republicans just hammered the final nail in their coffin. I hope I'm wrong. I actually pray I'm wrong, but . . .
 
Last edited:
TheLastIndependent said:
Paul Ryan would be really good for this country if his Republican counterparts and Democrat babies would get their thumbs out of their asses and do something with it. He has been pretty much the only Congressman making an actual effort at anything.
Click to expand...

I think his plan is fiscal ridiculousness and goes in the entirely wrong direction for this country. That being said, I do give him props for not being a pansy and actually fronting a plan. It's easy to sit back and take pot-shots at other people's plans when you don't front one. Takes some gonads.
 
Last edited:
GPS_Flex said:
If you need to ask me such questions, you obviously haven't educated yourself Deuce. I'll help MaggieD but I don't bother with homers like you anymore.
Click to expand...

Thank you, GPS, but unless I'm mistaken, he has refused to identify which loopholes would go away.,..at least as of March. See my post above.
 
poweRob said:
I think his plan is fiscal ridiculousness and goes in the entirely wrong direction for this country. That being said, I do give him props for not being a pansy and actually fronting a plan. It's easy to sit back and take pot-shots at other people's plans when you don't front one.
Click to expand...

That's what I am saying. I don't like his plan, but it's a plan. Plans change, but it gives a base to work from. It's certainly better than the Tea Party pointing fingers at the Dems who are just pointing fingers back leaving Obama in the middle with two sides of fingers at him. It's pointless. I've seen more mature kintergardeners
 
MaggieD said:
Thank you, GPS, but unless I'm mistaken, he has refused to identify which loopholes would go away.,..at least as of March. See my post above.
Click to expand...

Ryan himself has said that he would like to, when referring to the 1%,"Take away the tax shelter, subject all of their income to taxation, and get more revenue -- and we can lower everybody's tax rate in return,"

It is a flatter, simpler tax code but not a complete “flat tax” like I would prefer. I would think liberals would support such action because they are always moaning & gnashing their teeth about people and companies paying “their fare share”. In fact, they only want Romney’s tax returns so they can whine about how he might have managed the tax loop holes so well as to pay a very low tax rate yet they bristle at the idea of revising the tax code because they know this is where they get their power from. Its called crony capitalism and it is being practiced by the Democratic Party today and despite their efforts to propagandize this issue, they have zero interest in eliminating the tax loopholes they bemoan unless it befalls those they choose such as oil companies or Mitt Romney.

As for specifics on the loopholes Ryan wants to close, it’s pretty clear he would like to close all of them and go to a flat tax but he knows the details of the final tax plan will need the support of politicians on both sides of the aisle who live and die by these tax loop holes via contributions to their campaigns and that special interests will spend like crazy to fight the closure of their beloved loop holes.

Will Romney and Ryan manage to close all of the tax loopholes the rich and big corporations pay? I doubt it but Ryan knows the best way to get companies and individuals who use these loopholes to agree to close them is to offer a lower tax rate. We don’t need specifics about which loopholes will be closed to understand that the tax rate won’t be reduced if the loopholes aren’t closed.

In other words, specifics aren’t as important as ideology, provided we can trust those who espouse that ideology. We got no specifics from Obama when he ran for President and we still don’t have them after four years with Obama at the helm. Shall we ask Obama and Ryan for specifics so we can compare and contrast them/ yes, but neither are likely to give many because they don’t have full control, thank God.
 
Last edited:
GPS_Flex said:
Yes, you are missing the part where he closes the tax write-off loop-holes, thereby broadening the tax base while reducing the tax rate. No more complaining about rich companies or people paying zero taxes.
Click to expand...

So are United and American still serving Fantasyland. Are the flights direct, or do they still require a change in Chicago?

First, no one pays ZERO taxes. Different people pay different types of taxes in different portions. Funny, but all in, it seems we actually have a bit of a flat tax with almost everyone paying between 20 and 30% of their income in taxes.

Taxes paid by income group2.jpg

For example, the poor pay a much, much higher percentage of their income on FICA and sales taxes than anyone else. They don't pay much in the way of income tax, because the income tax system is designed to tax discretionary income (rather than total income, with discretionary income being income after certain essentials are paid for, like room and board) and the poor, by definition, have no discretionary income so they pay no income tax. The middle class, being the higher earning labor force, pay a higher percentage of their income on income tax and property tax. The rich, though they pay the most in aggregate taxes actually pay FICA, sales taxes at a much lower rate than the poor and middle class and property taxes and income taxes at a generally lower rate than the middle class. In general, they pay more in aggregate income taxes than others largely because they have the lion's share of discretionary income in the US. OTH, the total tax burden is surprisingly well distributed

Distribution of tax burden.jpg

Now this whole idea of loopholes is deliberately vague. A loophole in its purest form is using the tax code to your advantage in a way that it was not intended. For example, there are many wealthy people here in Colorado with large land holdings that stick a few cattle on their property to establish themselves as a ranch for the purpose of paying lower property taxes. That is a loophole, as they are not really a ranch, just technically one. On the other hand, many people want to think of anything you deduct as a loophole. That is absurd,as income taxes are about income... and any business must deduct expenses from revenue to calculate income. Its just accounting 101.

Now, individual returns have Schedule A deductions. These are things like home mortgage interest, deduction state income taxes from your federal tax calculation, high medical expenses, job hunting expenses., etc. Are these loopholes? I don't think so. These are things that congress passed to incent home ownership and give the middle class some relief. We also have exemptions for dependents... again, used as a simple means of calculating the room/board, non-discretionary portion of income. You want to eliminate home mortgage interest? Be my guest, but watch the housing market lose 25% of its value immediately (BTW, did you know that is the largest single element of wealth of most of the middle class?). Frankly, I don't think you will find too many loopholes in individual income taxes... though I might suggest the concept of carried interest or capital gains recognition of trading stocks probably apply... but given carried interest is how Romney and his buddies pay only 15% tax, good luck getting that by.

Again this whole idea of loophole plays well to those that have no idea how taxes actually work (like 95% of the electorate), but they are no where near as obvious as the vague term 'loophole" makes it sound. That is probably why Ryan can't actually name a loophole he would close.

Ryan Promises To Close Tax Loopholes, But Won’t Say Which | TPMDC


Let's assume for a wild minute (we can all have our fantasies) that Ryan is actually talking about corporations (which he isn't: Paul Ryan Says He Wouldn't Close Corporate Tax Loopholes To Prevent Student Loan Interest Hike | ThinkProgress). They do have some pretty interesting loopholes, like massive credit carry forwards and carrybacks, accelerated depreciation and expensing of capital equipment, and my favorite, that ability to assign costs and revenues to different countries allowing them to show all of their profit outside the US, so they never pay US tax, even though most profit is actually within the US. The problem with corporations is that they can actually fight back. Actually, fight back is putting it the wrong way: they get to dictate how stuff is done via lobbyists and campaign fund direction (essentially bribes). Don't look for any loopholes to be closed here.

Sorry, but until you starting hearing real specifics. this guy [Ryan] has no more love for you nor is he any more sincere than the average lounge lizard at midnight on a Saturday.
 
Last edited:
There has been a dearth of plans in this entire campaign. An occasional BOMFOG exhorted, with nary a concept. Mostly just mud-slinging by 2 clueless professional Politicians.

It's nice to see a plan if if you don't like some or even a lot of whats in it. Having a starting point would be good.

That being said, I just can't see how Obusha can lose this election. Nobody except internet posters wants financial discipline. They only want it for the other guy. If its true that half of America pays no tax, then how much of America pays very little tax? Quite a few I suppose. So, that's Team Obusha. Now, take your middle and upper class folks. Many of them hate paying taxes but not even all of them. Some of them feel sorry for "the little people" so they vote Democrap to assuage their conscience. Romney gets what's left. Not quite enough.

Now all of the above is pure speculation and I don't know any of it to be factual. I'll be happy to be enlightened if I'm way off base on something.

Let me say something comforting:
We survived Bush despite all the wailing and moaning. We doubled the debt. Obama is racing along to redouble the debt. OMG, OMG I just felt a piece of the sky hit my elbow.

We are still standing. We will finally be out of these 2 ridiculous wars. Everyone loves the dollar and wants to lend us money at .025%. So, we'll probably survive 4 more years of this guy and we can try something else in 2016.
 
MaggieD said:
So Romney picks Paul Ryan as his running mate. Paul Ryan who has put together a budget that turns Medicare into a voucher system...lowers taxes on the rich...slashes entitlement programs to the bone...and a host of other radical policies that is sure to keep Romney focused on distancing himself from Ryan's plan through the next 3 months.

For God's sake! Why??? What? Is he the only potential running mate who hasn't cheated on his wife? That'd be better than this.

I think the Republican Party has gone bat **** crazy.
Click to expand...

If we could only go back to the good old days when everyone pulled their own weight.
 
poweRob said:
Ryan doesn't gain Romney anything new. He secures a base that was already his. He needed to reach to the middle just to try and take some votes away from Obama's reach into the independents. Olympia Snowe would've done that and encroached on Obama's hold on the female demographic.
Click to expand...

Olympia Snowe would've been a HORRENDOUS pick.

You're picking someone the base hates more so than Romney in an election where the base is inches away from being apathetic in terms of turnout and word of mouth support due to their distaste for their parties top choice, someone whose not from a state that has any hope of actually being swung to Romney's favor and even if it did is barely any electoral votes, and who "appeals to females" will be lambasted in similar fashion to 2008 (Hey, she's got ovaries! You'll vote for her!) and whose appeals to independents will be relatively easy to stave off since it's clear she's far off from what you can expect from the party.

Paul is not the bets choice by far, but Snowe would be EASILY as bad if not worse for him politically.
 
Pawlenty or Portman would have been much better picks. This is Romney's Palin moment.
 
upsideguy said:
So are United and American still serving Fantasyland. Are the flights direct, or do they still require a change in Chicago?

First, no one pays ZERO taxes. Different people pay different types of taxes in different portions. Funny, but all in, it seems we actually have a bit of a flat tax with almost everyone paying between 20 and 30% of their income in taxes.

View attachment 67132409

For example, the poor pay a much, much higher percentage of their income on FICA and sales taxes than anyone else. They don't pay much in the way of income tax, because the income tax system is designed to tax discretionary income (rather than total income, with discretionary income being income after certain essentials are paid for, like room and board) and the poor, by definition, have no discretionary income so they pay no income tax. The middle class, being the higher earning labor force, pay a higher percentage of their income on income tax and property tax. The rich, though they pay the most in aggregate taxes actually pay FICA, sales taxes at a much lower rate than the poor and middle class and property taxes and income taxes at a generally lower rate than the middle class. In general, they pay more in aggregate income taxes than others largely because they have the lion's share of discretionary income in the US. OTH, the total tax burden is surprisingly well distributed

View attachment 67132406

Now this whole idea of loopholes is deliberately vague. A loophole in its purest form is using the tax code to your advantage in a way that it was not intended. For example, there are many wealthy people here in Colorado with large land holdings that stick a few cattle on their property to establish themselves as a ranch for the purpose of paying lower property taxes. That is a loophole, as they are not really a ranch, just technically one. On the other hand, many people want to think of anything you deduct as a loophole. That is absurd,as income taxes are about income... and any business must deduct expenses from revenue to calculate income. Its just accounting 101.

Now, individual returns have Schedule A deductions. These are things like home mortgage interest, deduction state income taxes from your federal tax calculation, high medical expenses, job hunting expenses., etc. Are these loopholes? I don't think so. These are things that congress passed to incent home ownership and give the middle class some relief. We also have exemptions for dependents... again, used as a simple means of calculating the room/board, non-discretionary portion of income. You want to eliminate home mortgage interest? Be my guest, but watch the housing market lose 25% of its value immediately (BTW, did you know that is the largest single element of wealth of most of the middle class?). Frankly, I don't think you will find too many loopholes in individual income taxes... though I might suggest the concept of carried interest or capital gains recognition of trading stocks probably apply... but given carried interest is how Romney and his buddies pay only 15% tax, good luck getting that by.

Again this whole idea of loophole plays well to those that have no idea how taxes actually work (like 95% of the electorate), but they are no where near as obvious as the vague term 'loophole" makes it sound. That is probably why Ryan can't actually name a loophole he would close.

Ryan Promises To Close Tax Loopholes, But Won’t Say Which | TPMDC


Let's assume for a wild minute (we can all have our fantasies) that Ryan is actually talking about corporations (which he isn't: Paul Ryan Says He Wouldn't Close Corporate Tax Loopholes To Prevent Student Loan Interest Hike | ThinkProgress). They do have some pretty interesting loopholes, like massive credit carry forwards and carrybacks, accelerated depreciation and expensing of capital equipment, and my favorite, that ability to assign costs and revenues to different countries allowing them to show all of their profit outside the US, so they never pay US tax, even though most profit is actually within the US. The problem with corporations is that they can actually fight back. Actually, fight back is putting it the wrong way: they get to dictate how stuff is done via lobbyists and campaign fund direction (essentially bribes). Don't look for any loopholes to be closed here.

Sorry, but until you starting hearing real specifics. this guy [Ryan] has no more love for you nor is he any more sincere than the average lounge lizard at midnight on a Saturday.
Click to expand...

As someone who thinks he is an expert on taxes, I’m surprised that you have a problem with the elimination of tax shelters and a flat tax. You like to use the word “loopholes” and pervert it for your own ends but the fact is, you interchange the terms ‘loop holes” and “tax shelters” at will and do so dishonestly. Tax deductions, shelters and loopholes will be eliminated and you know that's what was being referd to don't you?

Hate to break it to you but not only are there people who pay zero federal income taxes, many of them get refunds from the federal government when they never paid a dime in income taxes.

Nice charts though. I bet you think they make you look smart.
 
AdamT said:
Pawlenty or Portman would have been much better picks. This is Romney's Palin moment.
Click to expand...

Pawlenty would not have been a better pick. Portman would have been just as good of a pick.

The only mistake made was not picking a running mate from the south.
 
GPS_Flex said:
As someone who thinks he is an expert on taxes, I’m surprised that you have a problem with the elimination of tax shelters and a flat tax. You like to use the word “loopholes” and pervert it for your own ends but the fact is, you interchange the terms ‘loop holes” and “tax shelters” at will and do so dishonestly. Tax deductions, shelters and loopholes will be eliminated and you know that's what was being referd to don't you?

Hate to break it to you but not only are there people who pay zero federal income taxes, many of them get refunds from the federal government when they never paid a dime in income taxes.

Nice charts though. I bet you think they make you look smart.
Click to expand...

I am amazed by the number of people who don't realize that 47% of Americans who file income tax returns pay no Federal income tax. I'm sure that chart refers to "all taxes," including FICA. That's not the same thing. And though I'm not sure of the percentage, many of those 47%** actually get money in excess of what they paid in taxes.

**That's up from 29% in 2003.

2003 Reference: 40 Million Filers Pay No Income Taxes, Many Get Generous Refunds | Tax Foundation

2011 Reference re 47% who pay no Federal income tax: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/business/economy/14leonhardt.html
 
johnny_rebson said:
Pawlenty would not have been a better pick. Portman would have been just as good of a pick.

The only mistake made was not picking a running mate from the south.
Click to expand...

The mistake was picking a ridiculously divisive right winger for whom the Dems have a warehouse of opposition research ... when what he needs to do is win over moderates and keep the discussion focused on the economy. Romney's goose is cooked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom