Romney in the news

[Berserker]

Quote:
"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it -- that that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. ... These are people who pay no income tax. ... [M]y job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."

I think the last sentence is probably the most damaging for him. In one sentence he said that 47% of US citizens are not personally responsible and that they don't care for their lives. And of course, that he won't worry about them. Ouch.

[MorGrendel]

Anyone think it is strange that Jimmy Carter's grandson "found" the video? I wonder if the Dems are trying to mend fences with Carter, I think he is the oldest living president? I wonder if the Bush Ghost is now excising the Carter Ghost? Interesting.

As for Romney, his fact about 47% of people not paying income tax is correct, but man, what a dick. He could frame his arguement so much better, like, "My message about lowering taxes doesn't apply to 47% of Americans, because they don't pay income tax. If they are inclinded to vote for Obama, then my message won't change their mind." But, as I've said all along, he's a corporate America shill, heartless, real-life-experienceless, sociopath, who is having a had time because the majority of us are not his employees.

[Thomas Fitzcharles]

Good Day, All.

Although I agree with some of what he was trying to say, he said it so poorly. I don't think that 47% are depend/recieving money on the fed gov. I beleive it is more like 38%. But 49% do not pay fed income tax. I don't think he has much of a chance at getting that 38% of the vote. I for one do not believe it is the fed gov. responsibilty to provide everything to everybody. I understand there must be a safety net, but when the precentages are up too the numbers they are now, and increasing how long before the whole system collapes. just look at Europe. The class war fair has to end taxing. I am all for increasing the tax on the 1% but the numbers don't come close to closing our deficet. We need less gov spending now. If they don't renew the bush tax cuts the average Md family pays and extra 3 grand that is serious money. Now I am willing to pay down the debt, but not just to redistrute to someone else.

Sincerely

Thomas

[Berserker]

Romney based his 47% comment off of a study by the TaxPolicyCenter.org (a non-partisan organization).

The problem Romney is facing is not that the 47% number is wrong, but that he's misrepresenting what that actually means (e.g. he's implying that half of the american citizens are paying no taxes and are irresponsible mooches). That is what backfired so badly for him.

There have been tons of articles out talking about who these 47% really are so I'm not going to go into that. If you want to read, here's the article from the Tax Policy Center that explains their study and here's the white paper.

[Berserker]

As for deficits, a policy that would have a large impact on the deficit is the sequestration at the end of the year. That is a full trillion dollar cut (half defense, half domestic). You can debade the effect on the economy, but that is very meaningful cut. Of course, even though this was agreed to by both parties, now they are battling over how to stop it, and I wouldn't be surprised if they do stop it.

Even the private defense industry is all crying fire about how this will destroy jobs and hurt the economy (I read an article where some of these companies were going to send out notices to all their employees to let them know that their job is at risk -- fear is a powerful ally). Thus they reason, the defense sequesteration has to be stopped. So, on one hand we want to cut deficit, but on the other hand, we cry when we do get close to cutting any deficits. Oh and cutting funding to NPR is not a deficit reduction policy ;)

Bad situation! Bad Congress!

On a separate note, it seems to me that we got to a point where compromise no longer exists in Congress. Consequently, whatever one party does is automatically the wrong thing for the other party, regardless of what it is, simply because the other party likes it. As such, i doubt anything will actually get done this year, or if congress is split after elections, for the next 4 years.

Hehehe, I was just thinking that this deadlock might not be so bad afterall. If they can't get together on anything, then the tax cuts will expire and the sequetration will come into effect. Both are technically deficit reducing. Talk about the axe approach. ;)

[Fritz]

The "don't pay taxes" is a misnomer. 47% of the population does not pay federal income tax. They still pay state taxes, medicare, social security, and any other payroll taxes I'm not thinking of. So they still pay some federal taxes, just not necessarily income tax. Most of that has to do with the earned income credit, an Republican idea. Only about 13% of the population pays no federal taxes at all. Of that, about 7% are retirees. So in actuality, only about 6% pay zero federal taxes.

[Berserker]

That's correct. That's why I linked the article and the white paper ofthe actual study, as it says just that. =)

[MorGrendel]

... These are people who pay no income tax. ...

I think he specified "income" tax. He did not say all taxes.

What is so damning is he seem to miss the fact that the monies that people recieve were paid for by these same people in the past. Well, that and the elderly are more likely to vote republican.

[Thomas Fitzcharles]

Good Day, All.

As far as what Rommey said and how he said it, it was not a very good politcal statement. Ok, I understand that most of us pay socail security and medicare to the fed gov. But until now most people recieve more back from the fed gov in the form of social security and medicare then they put in when they retire. In the future this may not be true. My point being that there is and increasing number of people not paying fed income tax which goes to pay for all the other benefits of government, military, roads, welfare and such and an increasing amount of people recieving benifits from the fed gov. So less people paying in more taking out. It is only going to get worse as the boomer retire, they as a group pay the highest amount of taxes. given that 40% of every dollar the fed gov spends in borrowed we are setting up for a nightmare. We have to get ahold of our spending by cutting the military or social programs, we can't keep taxing an ever shrinking middle class.

Sincerely

Thomas

[Fritz]

You have to keep in mind why 47% don't pay federal income tax. First the stimulus tax cuts cut rates pretty damned low. It wasn't come Democratic conspiracy to make people dependent on government. Both sides agreed, and have continued to agree, to extend those cuts because of the struggling economy. Second, there was the recession itself. People moved down tax brackets, plain and simple. The lower income brackets continue to grow because people are slipping down the scale. Most people don't want to be dependent on government. Hell, I'll bet a good portion of this group is part of that 47%. I know I am. It's not like I want to make so little money I don't pay federal taxes. It's just rough out there. It took me a year and a half to land on my feet after college. It took Steph almost 2 years to find a full time job after college. Someone who thinks that we don't want to do better and depend on government is an idiot that should be laughed out of the presidential race. I'm officially just as pissed as I was during the '08 race. Last time it was Palin telling me I'm not from "real America." This time it's Romney telling me I want to be dependent on government. Fuck his spoiled trust fund ass.

Frankly, though, it's irrelevant as far as deficit reduction. If that 47% were taxed at pre-stimulus levels it would be miniscule amount of money. While I agree the stimulus tax cuts need to eventually be reverted, which no party has been willing to do as of yet, we're talking about a very small amount of money. Even if you rolled back the Bush era tax cuts on everyone under 200k, it still won't even come close to rolling back the Bush era tax cuts for those over 200k. To equal the revenue generated by the expiration of the Bush era tax cuts on those making 200k or more, everyone making under 200k would have to have an effective tax rate of 50%. Any serious deficit reduction plan has to include increasing revenue. While letting the Bush era tax cuts would help, I would prefer the whole scale reform we have been promised time and again by both parties. Reduce tax credits to a sane level that everyone can understand and end the ridiculous corporate hand outs that we give. Small businesses have comparable tax rates, but don't get the absurd tax breaks that corporations often do. If you want to help small businesses, even the playing field.

[Thomas Fitzcharles]

Good Day, All.

I am once again in complete agreement, I think most people don't want to be in the 47% and are trying as hard as they can to get out of it. The only way to do that is through a good rate of growth, which we have not had for the past five or so years. Again stupid statements are going to be said in a campain no need to take offence. I was not partivualy happy with the clinging to my guns and bible stament, but in the end it is the policies that matters.

Sincerely

Thomas

[MorGrendel]

(I think we are all basicly agreeing. Also, be careful with the use of "you", it puts people on the defensive.)

Actually I oppose the idea of an Income tax and Payroll taxes. The income tax was started to pay off the Great War, it was not supposed to be permenant and fund more wars. Both sides like to spend money, and they hate giving it back. Drastic cuts need to happen, and we need to do it before the global float collapses, see the effect on China's ecomomy every New Years. You might think they are a powerhouse, but in reality they just hold a bunch of worthless IOUs. What is the largest growing industry in China, precious metal mining? Why? Because the Chinese Gov't is looking for resourses to back their money.

On the flip-side we really have lost sight of what a govenment is. It should be simple, obvious, and effecient. It should embody our Preamble; and our politicians would do well to remember "insure domestic traquility" and "promote the general welfare". Following the Depression, people used the words Prosperity and Paradise interchangibly. The thought was once there were some jobs, once their was some cash flow, that America would return to a rational and happy state. I see and feel much of that sentiment now.

Finally, I'd pay taxes. I'd pay 50% if I knew it was being used right. Take Medellín Columbia, less than a decade ago the home of Escobar drug cartel, and averaged 500 murders a month. A college Professor was elected mayor and he moved 40% of the budget to education, and paved the way for children to recieve 5 years of schooling. In 7 years the murder rate dropped to 30 a year. A drastic change.

What does any of this this have to do with Romney? I do not think he wants or desires change. I don't think he realizes that he needs to be that catalyst. I think they keep mentioning race and ethnicity to promote a radical white vote. I think what his stratigist don't realize is there are no races in America, just the poor and the about to be poor. We need to change that.