Mitt Romney's vague tax plan isn't lacking in ambition. The Republican wants voters to believe he can slash taxes on the wealthy, increase defense spending, increase entitlement spending, and balance the budget, all at the same time.
When David Gregory asked Romney, "The math simply doesn't add up, does it?" Romney insisted the numbers add up just fine and said several "economic studies" back him up.
One of those studies, it turns out, was published by Harvey Rosen, an economics professor at Princeton University, who said yesterday Romney's math might add up -- but the plan comes with a steep price for the middle class.
The Republican presidential candidate has refused to say which tax breaks he would eliminate. Rosen's illustration abolishes those for home mortgage interest payments, employer- provided health insurance, state and local taxes, charitable donations and the unrealized increase in the value of life- insurance policies for households with six-figure incomes. [...]
"What the political system would find feasible, I don't know," Rosen says. "It's mathematically possible."
And here's where Romney runs into real trouble. On the one hand, the Republican intends to approve a massive, multi-trillion-dollar tax cut, while increasing government spending on defense and entitlements. On the other hand, Romney says he can pay for all of this by cutting deductions. Which deductions? That's a secret -- the GOP candidate refuses to tell anyone until after the election -- but Romney cites Harvey Rosen to bolster his case.
But Rosen's analysis says Romney's plan only makes sense if he eliminates popular measures such as the home-mortgage-interest deduction, the health care deduction, and the charitable-contribution deduction. And wouldn't you know it, Romney has specifically said he'll protect the home-mortgage-interest deduction, the health care deduction, and the charitable-contribution deduction.
The man Mitt Romney cites as proof that he's right is the same man who offers proof that Romney is wrong.
For their part, congressional Republicans are urging Romney not to go into any additional details with voters for two obvious reasons: Romney's specifics would either (a) be wildly unpopular; or (b) make clear that his numbers don't come close to adding up. On Capitol Hill, the GOP would prefer that Romney just win first and they'll figure out the facts later.
Leave a Comment:
GOP to Willard - "Dude. The first rule of 'Screw the Public Club' is..."
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-)
.
The man Mitt Romney cites as proof that he's right is the same man who offers proof that Romney is wrong.
Nothing unusual in Romney being on both sides of an argument.
The Middle Class voting for Romney-Ryan would be the Middle Class voting to cut their own throats.
.
I was going to vote for Obama, but then Mitt promised me a pony. . .
#3
... and forgot to mention how much it would cost to take care of the pony - every year ... forever. And you might be allergic to horses.
That pony care is a tax write off, so we pay for alot of it.
Actually, I think you only get the tax deduction if the pony can dance. Which makes you wonder -- would the pony dance the pony?
Yeah Day then when he become's a horse you can take a $77,000 tax deduction for him.Make sure you name him Rafalca Jr.
LMAO
Actually, that would explain why Mitt keeps "digging" - he's sure there's a pony in there somewhere! :D
Vulture/Voucher 2012
Proving Two Rights DO Make a Wrong!
;-)
None of the campaign promises from both sides on taxes/spending will matter if the automatic tax hikes and spending cuts kick in this coming January.
Pretty much any campaign promise from any candidate through the years never really pans out as promised.
@skip
The automatic tax hikes and spending cuts are scheduled to "kick in".
If we don't like them, we are not stuck with them. We can change things - either before they "kick in" or after.
We need to decide what direction to go - what the priorities should be.
That is what the election is about.
You sound like the VERY SERIOUS PEOPLE in Washington,you know "the both sides"caucus.You seem not to have a good grasp of how gov't and budgetary policies work.
-I will give you a pass on this because statement is conditional.However The Bush tax cuts will expire around that same and it matters who will be sitting in W.H. sequester kicking in,isn't the end of governing
-The idea that Romney's fraudulent tax plan could mean the same for the country as Obama's(Because a priori that's what your statement implies) is just ludicrous.
It is sad that someone would be so simplistic and linear in their analysis.
We don't live in a monarchy,or a perfect democracy--if 50+% of what a candidate promises come true,we shouldn't say stuffs like " never really pans out as promised.In a democracy opposing forces exist.
The Perfect can not be the enemy of the good.
The automatic tax hikes and spending cuts are scheduled to "kick in".
If we don't like them, we are not stuck with them. We can change things - either before they "kick in" or after.
We need to decide what direction to go - what the priorities should be.
That is what the election is about.
maphi,
Yes, they are scheduled to kick in and I believe they will kick in. It is only 3 months away. Do you honestly think Congress will figure it all out fiscally in the next few months (with a lot of them campaigning for their jobs at the same time)? I mean wait until the eleventh hour and then try to stop it? We're talking about a dsyfunctional Congress here (and YES I understand it is ALL the Republicans fault that we are $16 Trillion in debt so no history lesson please - I don't care why at this point, just HOW to fix it). At this point I am cynically convinced that nothing will really be done fiscally until the actual s@#t hits the fan big time. They will hem and haw even after the cuts and tax hikes kick in - the one's reelected will have 2 to 6 years to "kick it down the road" (love that term) and the lame ducks will not give a rat's ass.
And khayyam, you may call my statment simplistic, but I think it is more reality based than not. Yes, a candidate can get 50+ % of their pledge and you could call it a "success". But in my opinion the act of campaigning is to promise more than you can deliver to get the masses to vote for you. Then once in office you may get some of what you want, but I do not think even the candidate was expecting to get everything they stated on the campaign trail. It was just to get the needed votes....that's all.
If the ultimate goal for republicans is to eliminate Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, then the deficits and debt don't matter. The higher the debt goes then you are closer to the goal to removing these programs.
I'm not so sure which direction the republicans want to go. The stuff they give the public seems to want to control the debt, but I'm not sold on this.
Watch what they do, not what they say. Republicans care about the deficit whenever a Democrat is in the White House because it gives them leverage to block Democratic plans by claiming "we can't afford it." When a Republican is in the White House, in the words of Dick Cheney, "deficits don't matter."
There's a reason why all of their "deficit reduction" plans include cutting spending (only on things they don't like), and cutting taxes even more.
Look back at their history - the best evidence that they dont care about deficit.
Can I ask the Maddow a question about something completely different as they used to say on Monty Python I`m a Brit but fascinated by whats going on in US election as it is ultimately vital to what will happen here. Its been published in the Guardian UK authored by Karen McVeigh. The Global Commission for Elections, Democracy and Security headed by Kofi Annan no less has slated the US election process for the lack of transparancy and political finance have left it struggling for public confidence in the political process as being able to act in their interest. Sorry, I am almost quoting the aarticle word for word. The problem is that the US holds itself as a bastion of democracy and an internationally respected body is questioning that statement. It`s biggest query against the US is the Citizens United ruling and voter identification Yes Rachel you are the money with that one. A slight problem for people to denigrate is that it is made up of former world leaders and Nobel Prize Laurates not your usual suspects. The GOP cannot say it is the Liberal Media they may class Kofi Annan with the usual UN Conspiracy theorists. Another problem for the US is who else the Commission lambasts political violence in Kenya and Nigeria, corruption in Costa Rica and disenfrenchised groups in Europe. If America is really the bastion of democracy it needs to gets its act together quick and everyone in the political world of the US really needs to read this document and act. Otherwise you may not be able to hold up your defence as being a democratic bastion and on the way to some place like the Russian Presidential election which definitely not democratic be warned USA
Mr Bourne, are you familar with the old parenting cliche, "Do as I tell you, not as I've done ? " Unfortunately this seems to be a credo of our ultra conservatives, lately.
Give me the job, and then I will show you how I am the best pick for the job after I have it. Never seen that work in a job interview before, doubt it will work this time. The numbers don't add up, period.
That thinking goes right along with "We won't know what's in the bill, until after we pass it." Which is worse? By far it's the passing of laws which they have no idea of the final effects.
But FactCheck.org said that Democratic claims that Romney's plan will raise taxes on the middle class are "misleading" because he's said he won't do that!
Apparently "fact checking" only means checking individual statements, and the fact that all of them cannot simultaneously be true is too hard to "fact check."
How can Romney balance the budget when he can't even balance his campaign. All of his policies and plans, the ones he has decided to tell us about are geared to the 1%. They want to make a big deal about not mentioning God , Some of us are living in the word and some of us are using it for their own selfish gain (lip service).. Actions speak louder than words. Romney still is refusing to acknowledge the Middle Class , and now you can add veterans to that list. Money can't buy love and it can no longer buy a Country.
Romney's betting that Mencken was right: "nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people." Given the polls, he's at least half right.
Steve has hit the nail on the head, again. Romney's budget is another version of Bush-o-nomics. It is trickle-down. It doesn't work and it will not help the middle class or the economy.
The most amazing thing I have heard mit-wit say yest was that (in stephanopolos interview) he thinks middleclass is anyone who makes $250k and less!! Where is the news cycle on this??? Astounding!
By the numbers: 'Are you better off?' (from CNN.com)
By Caitlin Stark, CNN Library - updated 3:57 PM EDT, Thu September 13, 2012
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/13/politics/btn-are-you-better-off/index.html?hpt=po_t1
9.4 million -- Number of people unemployed in August 2008.
12.6 million -- Number of people unemployed in August 2012.
6.1% - U.S. unemployment rate in August 2008.
8.1% - U.S. unemployment rate in August 2012.
3.4 million -- Number of job openings in the U.S. as of July 31, 2008.
1.6 million -- Number of long-term unemployed (jobless for 27 weeks or more) as of August 2008.
5 million -- Number of long-term unemployed (jobless for 27 weeks or more) as of August 2012.
6.1% - U.S. unemployment rate in August 2008.
8.1% - U.S. unemployment rate in August 2012.
3.4 million -- Number of job openings in the U.S. as of July 31, 2008.
3.7 million -- Number of job openings in the U.S. as of July 31, 2012.
1.6 million -- Number of long-term unemployed (jobless for 27 weeks or more) as of August 2008.
5 million -- Number of long-term unemployed (jobless for 27 weeks or more) as of August 2012.
Federal Reserve plans more stimulus
Another round of Stimulus won't create jobs
Above data came from CNN? It can't be reliable, right? They're not FOX news.
As is usual someone has to follow...republicans around the blogs ironing out "wrinkles". Here are the straightened out implications: