Quotations and some notes on Mitt Romney's budget proposal

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
a777pilot

a777pilot

Diamond Member
Apr 26, 2011
4,261
21
81
No, even Democrats agree, this current Fool, is an amateur.

6 NOV 2012
Time to take the trash out.
 
a777pilot

a777pilot

Diamond Member
Apr 26, 2011
4,261
21
81
zsdersw said:
Nope.. GWB was an amateur, just like Obama, who had smart people working around him... just like Obama.
Click to expand...

Bush(43) was a successful businessman with a MBA from Harvard, was a successful twice elected governor of Texas. Obama had two years of doing nothing in the Senate.
 
zsdersw

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
a777pilot said:
There are no smart people around obama. If there were, we would not be in the mess we find ourselves today after 3 1/2 years of this Fool.
Click to expand...

Actually, there are. There are policy wonks in every administration, and the proposals they make are entirely in the realm of "good public policy"... but then it has to pass congress, which is where every good proposals gets turned to shit.
 
PJABBER

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
a777pilot said:
No, even Democrats agree, this current Fool, is an amateur.

6 NOV 2012
Time to take the trash out.
Click to expand...

I already have a book thread in play here, but for a deep dive into what makes Obama tick, you can't beat NYT best-selling The Amateur by Edward Klein. "A necessary antidote to Obama worship."

BOOK-popup.jpg
 
Last edited:
zsdersw

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
a777pilot said:
I agree. Bush(43) is an amateur fisherman. Obama is an amateur at governing.
Click to expand...

Don't kid yourself, GWB was an amateur at governing a nation, just like Obama is.

You might want to wipe that brown stuff off your nose.
 
Fern

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
yllus said:
I think that it's pretty telling that the content (or lack thereof in this case) of Mr. Romney's platform is such that most of the conversation around it is in regards to "can we really trust the experts".
Click to expand...

You seem a pretty bright fellow, why you fall for the Dem's talking points is perplexing.

I know Dems constantly claim Romney hasn't released any info, but seriously, all you have to do is pay attention or just google.

Here's a link to his 59 point plan and 160 pages of info:

http://www.mittromney.com/sites/def...America-PlanForJobsAndEconomicGrowth-Full.pdf

It may not be a plan you like, but to keep repeating it doesn't exist is absurd.

Fern
 
C

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,018
37
91
a777pilot said:
That's true. It's just an opinion but obama's record is that of a total fuck up.
Click to expand...

You know, personally I think Bush(43) got, and still gets, a lot of sh1t for things that were far beyond his control, simply BDS delusions, and/or not something he, or any other POTUS, would have been able to foresee/handle. So I give him a good bit of slack, or, at least, don't heap on delusional BS where it's not due.

However...

...Bush(43) was simply a bad manager. The job as POTUS isn't to make every little decision, figure out every little nuance, etc. etc. Bush's bad rap for 'The Decider' comment was very undeserved IMO because he had to remind us that he makes decisions, he doesn't for the most part figure this sh1t out.

But what he also should have been doing, and, what he really failed to do in some major ways, was properly manage his "managers". His dad had far more experience at this and was thus much more successful. Clinton had a Rep Congress that reigned him in, but was for the most part also successful.

Bush(43) was not successful at this task, and, it is a crucial task he needed to be performing as POTUS. For that he does deserve a lot of flak...

Chuck
 
yllus

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Fern said:
As a tax professional I find this opinion highly questionable. Every time we've had different rates for corp's and people we've seen a lot of 'tax planing' aimed at exploiting that difference. There is no reason to believe that won't happen again.

Another point I think important: Here in the USA the majority of corporations are pass-through entities (e.g., S-corps) that don't pay income tax. So, their business income will be taxed at the (much) higher personal tax rate. If economists believe, for whatever reasons, that business income should be taxed at low rates I don't see how it makes any sense for all the S-corps etc to pay the higher rate via personal taxes.

The benefit of the lower corp rates will primarily accrue to large international businesses that are set-up as C-corps; I don't see why they should receive an advantage over smaller domestic business.

Fern
Click to expand...

Here's the papers I've read on the subject; the summation to all of them is "the optimal tax mix is heavy on consumption taxes, light on corporate taxes, and somewhere in between on personal income taxes."

I'm not married to said theory - not really my expertise. Love to hear what you have to say about the above.

Fern said:
You seem a pretty bright fellow, why you fall for the Dem's talking points is perplexing.

I know Dems constantly claim Romney hasn't released any info, but seriously, all you have to do is pay attention or just google.

Here's a link to his 59 point plan and 160 pages of info:

http://www.mittromney.com/sites/def...America-PlanForJobsAndEconomicGrowth-Full.pdf

It may not be a plan you like, but to keep repeating it doesn't exist is absurd.

Fern
Click to expand...

That's the same document I linked to in the original post and pulled quotes from. :) I read it in full - it's not much of a document. There is no explanation of what Mr. Romney would enact, other than him stating, "I won't do what the other guy is doing." About half of those 160 pages are spent explaining what President Obama is doing, incidentally.

If I've missed something in that document that outlines his plans for health care or finance regulation by all means I'd love to see it.
 
Last edited:
werepossum

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
yllus said:
Here's the papers I've read on the subject; the summation to all of them is "the optimal tax mix is heavy on consumption taxes, light on corporate taxes, and somewhere in between on personal income taxes."

I'm not married to said theory - not really my expertise. Love to hear what you have to say about the above.



That's the same document I linked to in the original post and pulled quotes from. :) I read it in full - it's not much of a document. There is no explanation of what Mr. Romney would enact, other than him stating, "I won't do what the other guy is doing." About half of those 160 pages are spent explaining what President Obama is doing, incidentally.

If I've missed something in that document that outlines his plans for health care or finance regulation by all means I'd love to see it.
Click to expand...
It's crystal clear what Romney would do about health care - Romneycare for every state individually. As far as the other, it's much smarter in politics to be light on your own details - every conceivable change is going to piss off some voters - while smalling the unpopular things the incumbent is doing. Which is why listening to what a politician says during an election is worse than useless since everything he says is geared toward getting him into power. If you want to know what a politician will do if elected, look at what he's already done when in power.
 
First

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
Fern said:
You seem a pretty bright fellow, why you fall for the Dem's talking points is perplexing.

I know Dems constantly claim Romney hasn't released any info, but seriously, all you have to do is pay attention or just google.

Here's a link to his 59 point plan and 160 pages of info:

http://www.mittromney.com/sites/def...America-PlanForJobsAndEconomicGrowth-Full.pdf

It may not be a plan you like, but to keep repeating it doesn't exist is absurd.

Fern
Click to expand...

Oh good lord, read the fucking document. There's nothing in there about which tax deductions he'd remove.

His tax plan is totally disingenuous red meat he feeds to his base. There's no way he can possibly cut taxes the way he wants to without adding to the deficit.
 
werepossum

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
First said:
Oh good lord, read the fucking document. There's nothing in there about which tax deductions he'd remove.

His tax plan is totally disingenuous red meat he feeds to his base. There's no way he can possibly cut taxes the way he wants to without adding to the deficit.
Click to expand...
Wait, I thought you guys believed adding to the deficit was no big deal? Or is spending only good when government confiscates money and distributes it "properly"?

Is it the IRS that adds the magic smoke, or is that Congress?
 
First

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
werepossum said:
Wait, I thought you guys believed adding to the deficit was no big deal? Or is spending only good when government confiscates money and distributes it "properly"?

Is it the IRS that adds the magic smoke, or is that Congress?
Click to expand...

I feel like there's a question in there, but I have a feeling you're going to rant so I'll refrain from inquiring.
 
C

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,018
37
91
Wait, I thought the deficit wasn't something to worry about. Now we're supposed to worry? F...please get the talking points straight please, the "logic" is making even less sense than usual...

(unless this is an entertainment post ((I never can tell)), then it's like a 3/10, at best)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom