Romney tax loophole plan will generate $40 bln; his tax cuts will cost $400 bln

[yllus]

Not that anyone needed further proof that nobody running for President of the United States is serious about cutting the federal deficit.

It's also probably a bit unfair of me to say this is his "tax loophole plan" as it's based on overheard information, but that's all I could really fit to summarize the subject in the space provided.

New York Times - Romney’s Plan to Close Loopholes

Over the weekend, Mitt Romney waded into the tax-reform debate, inadvertently, when reporters overheard him telling Republican donors which tax breaks he would consider eliminating as president. The three he named were the deduction for mortgage interest on vacation homes and the deductions for state and local taxes. Although his remarks were a bit vague, he seemed to suggest that he would eliminate them only for high-income households.

How much revenue would those steps produce? Maybe about $40 billion a year, using generous assumptions. That is hardly nothing; $40 billion is more than half the annual cost of the Bush tax cuts on income above $200,000 a year, for instance.

Yet $40 billion still pales compared with the size of future deficits or, for that matter, the additional tax cuts that Mr. Romney has proposed. Those cuts would cost the government more than $400 billion a year relative to current policy, according to the Tax Policy Center. Relative to current law – which includes a series of tax increases that take effect on Jan. 1 – the Romney tax cuts would cost close to $900 billion a year.

To put it another way, if Mr. Romney eliminated the deductions he mentioned, he would need to come up with at least 10 times as much loophole-closing — and maybe 20 or 30 times as much — to keep his tax plan from adding to the deficit.

 

[fskimospy]

lol. That reminds me of this one from 2007:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2007-09-21-4123987353_x.htm

 

[rudder]

It is funny how people always refer to tax cuts as "costing" the government money. My wages that I earn, belong to me, not the Federal government. If my taxes get cut... that means I can keep more of MY money.

Maybe Romney will realize that cutting spending also reduces the deficit.

 

[nageov3t]

this is not a "plan," it was some off-the-cuff comments.

 

[thraashman]

It is funny how people always refer to tax cuts as "costing" the government money. My wages that I earn, belong to me, not the Federal government. If my taxes get cut... that means I can keep more of MY money.

Maybe Romney will realize that cutting spending also reduces the deficit.

So if your employer decided to start paying you less then you'd agree that it wasn't costing you anything that it's the companies money that it earns and if they cut your pay it lets your company keep more if its own money?

 

[fskimospy]

So if your employer decided to start paying you less then you'd agree that it wasn't costing you anything that it's the companies money that it earns and if they cut your pay it lets your company keep more if its own money?

Absolutely. He doesn't have a salary problem, he now has a spending problem.

 

[Mxylplyx]

So if your employer decided to start paying you less then you'd agree that it wasn't costing you anything that it's the companies money that it earns and if they cut your pay it lets your company keep more if its own money?

Pwned.

 

[BansheeX]

So if your employer decided to start paying you less then you'd agree that it wasn't costing you anything that it's the companies money that it earns and if they cut your pay it lets your company keep more if its own money?

Employers don't dictate wages. They are bid up to that level based on your skills and how many employers are competing for them. Then you decide who to go with.

Government takes money by force, most of which is wasted on nonsense and doesn't come back to you in the form of services. If you don't pay taxes, you are arrested and confined. If a thief only takes half of what's in your wallet, he didn't make a charitable contribution to you. He took half your shit.

 

[fskimospy]

Employers don't dictate wages. They are bid up to that level based on your skills and how many employers are competing for them. Then you decide who to go with.

Government takes money by force, most of which is wasted on nonsense and doesn't come back to you in the form of services. If you don't pay taxes, you are arrested and confined. If a thief only takes half of what's in your wallet, he didn't make a charitable contribution to you. He took half your shit.

The government is stealing exactly nothing from you. By participating in our society you have given implicit consent to live by the rules of this society, which includes taxation. There are large areas on earth where you can go and live the rest of your life without seeing a tax man. If you don't like them, too bad.

No one is forcing you to live in an area subject to taxation, so as long as you CHOOSE to accept this contract, we expect you to abide by it.

 

[xBiffx]

So if your employer decided to start paying you less then you'd agree that it wasn't costing you anything that it's the companies money that it earns and if they cut your pay it lets your company keep more if its own money?

That analogy might work if the government (the employee in this case) was being paid for a service based on a value we (the employer in this case) choose. As it is, they mandate a collection amount whether or not they provide anything or not. If you really want to make it a correct analogy then I would just bill my employer what I deemed reasonable every month even if I didn't work for them that month. It wouldn't be up to them to choose my salary but up to me to choose what to bill.

Basically, your analogy sucks.

 

[Darwin333]

It is funny how people always refer to tax cuts as "costing" the government money. My wages that I earn, belong to me, not the Federal government. If my taxes get cut... that means I can keep more of MY money.

Maybe Romney will realize that cutting spending also reduces the deficit.

I assume that you said exactly that to the IRS yesterday and refused to mail in your check?

 

[werepossum]

It is funny how people always refer to tax cuts as "costing" the government money. My wages that I earn, belong to me, not the Federal government. If my taxes get cut... that means I can keep more of MY money.

Maybe Romney will realize that cutting spending also reduces the deficit.

This, a million times.

So if your employer decided to start paying you less then you'd agree that it wasn't costing you anything that it's the companies money that it earns and if they cut your pay it lets your company keep more if its own money?

I started to type something serious before I recognized the sheer uselessness of trying to explain the concept of earning a wage to a lefty. So I'll just say

"BURMA!"

 

[fskimospy]

I started to type something serious before I recognized the sheer uselessness of trying to explain the concept of earning a wage to a lefty. So I'll just say

"BURMA!"

Are you trying to say that leftists don't earn their wages? What is this based on?

 

[yllus]

It is funny how people always refer to tax cuts as "costing" the government money. My wages that I earn, belong to me, not the Federal government. If my taxes get cut... that means I can keep more of MY money.

I think the use of the term is more along the lines of, "A decision to take in less revenue while keeping spending at the same level will cost the government money."

I don't think anyone is under the illusion that this is the government's money and not the taxpayer's (though I would argue that the government and the taxpayer are one and the same, so this argument about semantics has always seemed silly).

 

[Lemon law]

Its the wonders of being a Politicians, it does not cost them a cent to claim they will cut the deficit and do it by only by cutting out the unneeded fat.

But when they get elected on that platform, they struggle to find any fat to cut at all. As they claim they will cuts trillions and seldom come up with even 50 billion.

The American people's fantasy Tattoo, after being lied to time after time, we still want to believe the claims of our politicians. After all a savory vision gets us all drooling for a longer time than the shorter period of time when we finally realize the savory meal is not coming. So like a Chicago cubs fan, if we don't win this year, its certain to materialize next year. And no no no, don't cut a dime from our military. We are addicted to quagmires instead.

And we will have fun fun fun, utill the foreigners stop lending us money.

 

[theeedude]

Romney is used to 10:1 leverage with other people's money, from his private equity days, so he thinks $40B is enough to pay for $400B in tax cuts.

 

[Jhhnn]

Romney is used to 10:1 leverage with other people's money, from his private equity days, so he thinks $40B is enough to pay for $400B in tax cuts.

Gave me a chuckle. All Republican tax plans are flimflams, designed for one purpose only, which is to cut taxes for the true Repub constituency, the ultra rich, even further.

 

[Thump553]

this is not a "plan," it was some off-the-cuff comments.

Romney was conducting a town hall type meeting at a $50,000 a plate Palm Beach fundraiser that was closed to the press. Unbeknownst to Romney press were outside on a public sidewalk when he made those statements.

The correct characterization is that they were statements designed to be secret and cynically intended to be heard by his 1%'r audience.

Of course the alternative is that Romney just doesn't have a plan, because he has publically only stated one in the most vague terms. Which interpretation do you prefer?

 

[Ausm]

Not that anyone needed further proof that nobody running for President of the United States is serious about cutting the federal deficit.

It's also probably a bit unfair of me to say this is his "tax loophole plan" as it's based on overheard information, but that's all I could really fit to summarize the subject in the space provided.

New York Times - Romney’s Plan to Close Loopholes

If you think that's funny checkout the latest Ryan plan which blows a hole in the deficit the size of the Titanic.