• 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.

The more I think about it, the less it makes sense. Romney's tax plan.

S

shiang

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
937
Reaction score
159
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
So Romney wants to lower corporate tax rates while eliminating deductions/loopholes, he emphasized this in both debates so I can only assume it's his stance. He says the goal is to lower taxes on small business without lowering tax revenue. Ignoring the fact that the numbers don't add up and there's no way there's enough revenue from closing loopholes to compensate for the tax cuts, it still doesn't make sense.

I think there's a general consensus that we want to tax the money that's being squandered or banked, and not tax the money that could be used by the private sector to produce goods, new ideas, and created jobs. The reason we have deductions in the first place is to encourage spending and investment. Sure, many of these deductions are silly and/or could be abused, but most if it is to put the money back in the hands of investors

Why not just make corporate gains tax progressive like the income tax? Instead of this roundabout way of cutting taxes then compensating by closing loopholes, which are there to encourage investment, spending, and donations in the first place. I agree it's a good idea to put more money in the hands of small business owners to level the playing field, as big companies do have an advantage in resources and make it harder for small business with good ideas to compete.

Those of you that have read my posts know that my stance is to raise corporate gains taxes significantly and to give back the money to those who invest and donate the money though deductions. Romney's plan is completely the opposite, if anyone has a good explanation for why and how Romney's play would work, please reply to the thread or send me a message.

I might not be the brightest, but this sure sounds like Romney's ploy to stuff the pockets of himself and his friends. People who reap huge sums for themselves while investing and donating little back to the community, while raising taxes on companies that do invest and grow by closing their loopholes.
 
that seems to be the consensus only of people who don't pay much taxes and are envious of those who do
 
TurtleDude said:
that seems to be the consensus only of people who don't pay much taxes and are envious of those who do
Click to expand...

Not everyone envies the rich you know, if someone thinks the rich should pay more in taxes it doesn't automatically mean its because they are envious of their success.
 
TurtleDude said:
that seems to be the consensus only of people who don't pay much taxes and are envious of those who do
Click to expand...

???

"I have no idea what your talking about" this is not the topic of my OP.

Since you can't read here's the short version.

Instead of lowering corporate gains tax and then closing loopholes in the name of making small business pay less and big business pay more. Why not use a progressive tax system for corporate gain like income tax instead of a flat 15%? Also deductions are used to encourage investments, why would you want to get rid of them wholesale (if he wants to come remotely close to making up for Romney's proposed tax cuts A LOT of deductions will have to go, and it doesn't apply only to big business).

If you stop and think about it what he's really doing is lowering taxes for corporations, especially to the executives who don't invest the money back in their company/community, and raising taxes on middle class workers. He sugar coats it and makes it all sweet to fool idiots who can't think for themselves.

Turtle I heard you make a 7 figure salary, I can see why you like this plan. In the short run you might benefit; in the long run, when the country/world is ruined you'll have nowhere to go either. Look at what happened in the French Revolution. We need policies that are good for the whole, not the 53%.

Tax plan favors the most:

Greedy corporation executives who are more concerned with money than their company and do not invest their earnings in growing business from the ground up.


Tax plan benefits the least:

Middle class, companies that plant and grow instead of reap and run.
 
Last edited:
Wiseone said:
Not everyone envies the rich you know, if someone thinks the rich should pay more in taxes it doesn't automatically mean its because they are envious of their success.
Click to expand...

true, they might be like Buffett and trying to pander to those who are those who are envious of the rich

or they support the dems on issues like say abortion, gay rights or judges and they spew the rest of the talking points to try to create less contradictions in their own psyche
 
shiang said:
???

"I have no idea what your talking about" this is not the topic of my OP.
Click to expand...

You claimed a consensus that I am calling BS on
 
TurtleDude said:
that seems to be the consensus only of people who don't pay much taxes and are envious of those who do
Click to expand...

That summed it up nicely... : )
 
TurtleDude said:
true, they might be like Buffett and trying to pander to those who are those who are envious of the rich

or they support the dems on issues like say abortion, gay rights or judges and they spew the rest of the talking points to try to create less contradictions in their own psyche
Click to expand...

Tax policy and gay rights or abortion can contradict each other? If I'm all for gay rights, what kind of tax policy would make me a hypocrite on that issue? I'm confused man, all I'm trying to say is that you play up the "envy" like its the primary motivation behind the Dem's tax polices.
 
Wiseone said:
Tax policy and gay rights or abortion can contradict each other? If I'm all for gay rights, what kind of tax policy would make me a hypocrite on that issue? I'm confused man, all I'm trying to say is that you play up the "envy" like its the primary motivation behind the Dem's tax polices.
Click to expand...

you missed a simple point,some of those who publicly support the democrat tax schemes might do so mainly because they are democratic party supporters for other reasons. In private they might not really be fans of the tax the rich nonsense
 
Wiseone said:
Tax policy and gay rights or abortion can contradict each other? If I'm all for gay rights, what kind of tax policy would make me a hypocrite on that issue? I'm confused man, all I'm trying to say is that you play up the "envy" like its the primary motivation behind the Dem's tax polices.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more, while it can be easy to place everyone apposed to republican tax polices under the term envious its simply not a fair way of thinking. I really do love the amount of comments i am starting to see here basically referring to people a cookie cutters on a topic at hand because they view something different then another. A key rule in debating i think anyway is to be confident in your stance but respectful of the oppositions at the same time. Constructive comments are better then critical ones every time.
 
shiang said:
So Romney wants to lower corporate tax rates while eliminating deductions/loopholes, he emphasized this in both debates so I can only assume it's his stance. He says the goal is to lower taxes on small business without lowering tax revenue. Ignoring the fact that the numbers don't add up and there's no way there's enough revenue from closing loopholes to compensate for the tax cuts, it still doesn't make sense.

I think there's a general consensus that we want to tax the money that's being squandered or banked, and not tax the money that could be used by the private sector to produce goods, new ideas, and created jobs. The reason we have deductions in the first place is to encourage spending and investment. Sure, many of these deductions are silly and/or could be abused, but most if it is to put the money back in the hands of investors

Why not just make corporate gains tax progressive like the income tax? Instead of this roundabout way of cutting taxes then compensating by closing loopholes, which are there to encourage investment, spending, and donations in the first place. I agree it's a good idea to put more money in the hands of small business owners to level the playing field, as big companies do have an advantage in resources and make it harder for small business with good ideas to compete.

Those of you that have read my posts know that my stance is to raise corporate gains taxes significantly and to give back the money to those who invest and donate the money though deductions. Romney's plan is completely the opposite, if anyone has a good explanation for why and how Romney's play would work, please reply to the thread or send me a message.

I might not be the brightest, but this sure sounds like Romney's ploy to stuff the pockets of himself and his friends. People who reap huge sums for themselves while investing and donating little back to the community, while raising taxes on companies that do invest and grow by closing their loopholes.
Click to expand...

The goal is to eliminate the difference in income tax that two individuals/corporations with the exact same income can have.
Eliminate loopholes and deductions, reduce the rate for everyone else equivalently to the amount of loopholes/deductions you can find. Makes sense to me.
 
TurtleDude said:
you missed a simple point,some of those who publicly support the democrat tax schemes might do so mainly because they are democratic party supporters for other reasons. In private they might not really be fans of the tax the rich nonsense
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not.
 
Hairytic said:
Can you explain the Romney Tax plan?
Click to expand...

more people paying tax means more tax revenues.

I think the one thing that is BS is his claim that the wealthiest 5% should bear the same percentage of the tax burden

that doesn't make sense based on his plan. The idea is to get many in that 47% to get more revenue and pay some FIT

cutting corporate taxes will help that

Now can you explain how taxing only the rich more will increase jobs or make the middle class more productive
 
Wiseone said:
Not everyone envies the rich you know, if someone thinks the rich should pay more in taxes it doesn't automatically mean its because they are envious of their success.
Click to expand...

I agree. I sure have no rich envy. I have very wealthy peope in my family and they are miserable. I usually give away any winfalls I get to help those in more need than I am in. Money is needed, but the love of money is never something I have been guilty of. Knowing that I can be happy in a shack is much more freeing than the fear of not being able to adjust if all wealth is lost. The rich people I know are so afraid of losing it all that they live in fear.
 
Hairytic said:
I agree. I sure have no rich envy. I have very wealthy peope in my family and they are miserable. I usually give away any winfalls I get to help those in more need than I am in. Money is needed, but the love of money is never something I have been guilty of. Knowing that I can be happy in a shack is much more freeing than the fear of not being able to adjust if all wealth is lost. The rich people I know are so afraid of losing it all that they live in fear.
Click to expand...


i hear this a lot from people who spend a lot of time justifying why the government should take wealth from others
 
shiang said:
???

"I have no idea what your talking about" this is not the topic of my OP.

Since you can't read here's the short version.

Instead of lowering corporate gains tax and then closing loopholes in the name of making small business pay less and big business pay more. Why not use a progressive tax system for corporate gain like income tax instead of a flat 15%? Also deductions are used to encourage investments, why would you want to get rid of them wholesale (if he wants to come remotely close to making up for Romney's proposed tax cuts A LOT of deductions will have to go, and it doesn't apply only to big business).

If you stop and think about it what he's really doing is lowering taxes for corporations, especially to the executives who don't invest the money back in their company/community, and raising taxes on middle class workers. He sugar coats it and makes it all sweet to fool idiots who can't think for themselves.

Turtle I heard you make a 7 figure salary, I can see why you like this plan. In the short run you might benefit; in the long run, when the country/world is ruined you'll have nowhere to go either. Look at what happened in the French Revolution. We need policies that are good for the whole, not the 53%.

Tax plan favors the most:

Greedy corporation executives who are more concerned with money than their company and do not invest their earnings in growing business from the ground up.


Tax plan benefits the least:

Middle class, companies that plant and grow instead of reap and run.
Click to expand...

"Envy" is TD's stock answer to any subject that even remotely connects to income distribution. If you search this forum for "envy" and TurtleDude you get 1000 hits. He only makes a 7 figures if you include decimal places. :lol:
 
TurtleDude said:
more people paying tax means more tax revenues.

I think the one thing that is BS is his claim that the wealthiest 5% should bear the same percentage of the tax burden

that doesn't make sense based on his plan. The idea is to get many in that 47% to get more revenue and pay some FIT

cutting corporate taxes will help that

Now can you explain how taxing only the rich more will increase jobs or make the middle class more productive
Click to expand...

I would say that someone who is making less money is in a worse stance to pay more out. Now that doesn't mean the rich should just cover for them. If i were even remotely near what is considered rich i wouldn't mind paying more then someone who barely made a living wage.
 
shiang said:
So Romney wants to lower corporate tax rates while eliminating deductions/loopholes, he emphasized this in both debates so I can only assume it's his stance. He says the goal is to lower taxes on small business without lowering tax revenue. Ignoring the fact that the numbers don't add up and there's no way there's enough revenue from closing loopholes to compensate for the tax cuts, it still doesn't make sense.

I think there's a general consensus that we want to tax the money that's being squandered or banked, and not tax the money that could be used by the private sector to produce goods, new ideas, and created jobs. The reason we have deductions in the first place is to encourage spending and investment. Sure, many of these deductions are silly and/or could be abused, but most if it is to put the money back in the hands of investors

Why not just make corporate gains tax progressive like the income tax? Instead of this roundabout way of cutting taxes then compensating by closing loopholes, which are there to encourage investment, spending, and donations in the first place. I agree it's a good idea to put more money in the hands of small business owners to level the playing field, as big companies do have an advantage in resources and make it harder for small business with good ideas to compete.

Those of you that have read my posts know that my stance is to raise corporate gains taxes significantly and to give back the money to those who invest and donate the money though deductions. Romney's plan is completely the opposite, if anyone has a good explanation for why and how Romney's play would work, please reply to the thread or send me a message.

I might not be the brightest, but this sure sounds like Romney's ploy to stuff the pockets of himself and his friends. People who reap huge sums for themselves while investing and donating little back to the community, while raising taxes on companies that do invest and grow by closing their loopholes.
Click to expand...

well quite simply put,deductions combined with high rates cause business to not improve or expand.

ive watched it happen many times,in order for a business to makemoney,they had to lose money or lose even more to the irs,this leaves big corps with loopholes through deductions to lose money,layoff employees,yet make record profit by claiming losses.in our current setup the only way to avoid steep taxes is to not run a profitable business,which then creates profit.

therefor lowering corp taxes which are among the highest in the civilized world,and eliminating deductions,business would therefore be able to succeed without having to fail in order to avoid penalties on success.
 
beerftw said:
well quite simply put,deductions combined with high rates cause business to not improve or expand.

ive watched it happen many times,in order for a business to makemoney,they had to lose money or lose even more to the irs,this leaves big corps with loopholes through deductions to lose money,layoff employees,yet make record profit by claiming losses.in our current setup the only way to avoid steep taxes is to not run a profitable business,which then creates profit.

therefor lowering corp taxes which are among the highest in the civilized world,and eliminating deductions,business would therefore be able to succeed without having to fail in order to avoid penalties on success.
Click to expand...

Um ... WHAT? That is total gibberish.
 
Ryan25 said:
I would say that someone who is making less money is in a worse stance to pay more out. Now that doesn't mean the rich should just cover for them. If i were even remotely near what is considered rich i wouldn't mind paying more then someone who barely made a living wage.
Click to expand...

the rich will always pay more taxes, but it should not be at higher rates because that merely encourages the pimps in office to pander to the many in lower brackets
 
TurtleDude said:
more people paying tax means more tax revenues.

I think the one thing that is BS is his claim that the wealthiest 5% should bear the same percentage of the tax burden

that doesn't make sense based on his plan. The idea is to get many in that 47% to get more revenue and pay some FIT

cutting corporate taxes will help that

Now can you explain how taxing only the rich more will increase jobs or make the middle class more productive
Click to expand...

A slight increase in taxing income over 250K will not break the wealthy and it will take the burden off the middle class so that the middle class can spend more in the economy creating more demand that would push job growth higher. It's a basic economics 101 plan.
 
TurtleDude said:
i hear this a lot from people who spend a lot of time justifying why the government should take wealth from others
Click to expand...

Taking a small amount more from the wealthy is a proven method of closing the deficit, along with spending cuts. Romney is out of his mind because he wants to increase military spending to the highest level ever but he doesn't want to generate more tax revenue from people that can afford it to pay for this increase in spending.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom