Republican Candidates

[Hurlshort]

Tax rates are already at historically low levels, btw. I'm all for lowering government spending, but the solution needs to be a mix of cutting costs and taxing effectively.

[Monte Carlo]

The point of lower tax rates is to increase economic growth, which also benefits the "poor", while welfare only make them poorer and dependent on government. Lower tax rates in exchange for elimination of deductions were also recommended by the bipartisan deficit reduction commission which Obama himself created. Government revenues would not decrease if everyone shares the tax burden in a more fair way. Government spending has exploded tremendously over the past few years, and any attempt to rein it in is always met with the charge of "hurting the most vulnerable" by those who are trying to protect their own special interests. And really you should make $250 million and run the Olympics before you call Romney " ignorant and dim witted".

 

It's not an either / or call is it? And Romney's a rich boy. If he'd made the money himself I concede the point, but pa wasn't sort of a nickel or two, was he?

[Pidesco]

Ryan wants to raise taxes for everyone except the top 1%, I think. There's an article somewhere that points out that Romney would pay no taxes under Ryan's budget plan.

 

@Monte: Ayn Rand is Ryan's idol. Like literally.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Of course, judging by the ads in my area, Obama is also trying to point out that Romney's realistic tax rate is significantly less than what the government is taking because of tax havens like the Bahamas and Monte Carlo.

You're using Obama's slanderous propaganda as your evidence? Romney's tax rate is low because his income is mostly capital gains, which is taxed at 15%. Explain to me please how Romney manages to use Bahamas and Monte Carlo to lower his taxes.

 

Tax rates are already at historically low levels, btw. I'm all for lowering government spending, but the solution needs to be a mix of cutting costs and taxing effectively.

No true, the top rate was 28% under Reagan. Federal tax revenue as a percentage of GDP may be at a historical low (if your history starts afer WW2 or so, remember there used to be no income tax at all). Also a lot of that is because of stupid giveaways like the payroll tax cut. But I agree with you otherwise.

 

It's not an either / or call is it? And Romney's a rich boy. If he'd made the money himself I concede the point, but pa wasn't sort of a nickel or two, was he?

Yes, he did make his entire fortune himself. The money he inherited from his father he donated to charity. To be fair he did have a privileged upbringing, so he didn't exactly start on a level playing field.

 

Ryan wants to raise taxes for everyone except the top 1%, I think. There's an article somewhere that points out that Romney would pay no taxes under Ryan's budget plan.

Some Republicans believe in the idiotic idea of making the capital gains rate 0%, Ryan may be one of them. I completely disagree, all income should be taxed equally. The purpose of taxes is to raise revenue, not to punish and reward. But Ryan doesn't want to raise taxes on anyone, he wants to eliminate deductions, which supposedly enable the rich not to pay their fair share. Edited August 15, 2012 by Wrath of Dagon

[Nepenthe]

Some Republicans believe in the idiotic idea of making the capital gains rate 0%, Ryan may be one of them. I completely disagree, all income should be taxed equally.

See, I knew we had to agree on something eventually. Unless you mean a flat tax rate, which I haven't quite been able to rationalise just yet. But all sources of income, definitely.

 

(edit: well, rationalise was a bad choice of words, I can of course rationalise it, but not really accept it. Yet. Let's see how long I have to stay in the high end of the progression for it to start seeming like a really good idea)

Edited August 15, 2012 by Nepenthe

[Calax]

Of course, judging by the ads in my area, Obama is also trying to point out that Romney's realistic tax rate is significantly less than what the government is taking because of tax havens like the Bahamas and Monte Carlo.

You're using Obama's slanderous propaganda as your evidence? Romney's tax rate is low because his income is mostly capital gains, which is taxed at 15%. Explain to me please how Romney manages to use Bahamas and Monte Carlo to lower his taxes.

Simple, they're tax havens. So he puts his money there, earns interest and a few other goodies on it, but doesn't get taxed by the USA because it's technically not a domestic earning, and is taxed at MUCH lower rates (single digit percentiles) by the country that the money currently is located in.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_haven

 

And, for the record, the plan his new vp candidate buddy Ryan is cheering about, Romney's effective tax rate would drop to a single % (or a fraction of a percent, depending on your source).

 

Personally, Romney and the Republicans are just doing the same thing that the Hoover administration did back in the early 30's and are trying to let the economy fix itself. It's just that, for an economy to work, you need the actual currency to be used, rather than sit in some guys bank account. And if you keep giving tax rates to the top percent, but the actual consumer (the lower and middle classes) aren't able to purchase the goods or services that that top percentile offers, why on earth would that top percentile create more jobs for a non-existent demand?

[Wrath of Dagon]

Of course, judging by the ads in my area, Obama is also trying to point out that Romney's realistic tax rate is significantly less than what the government is taking because of tax havens like the Bahamas and Monte Carlo.

You're using Obama's slanderous propaganda as your evidence? Romney's tax rate is low because his income is mostly capital gains, which is taxed at 15%. Explain to me please how Romney manages to use Bahamas and Monte Carlo to lower his taxes.

Simple, they're tax havens. So he puts his money there, earns interest and a few other goodies on it, but doesn't get taxed by the USA because it's technically not a domestic earning, and is taxed at MUCH lower rates (single digit percentiles) by the country that the money currently is located in.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_haven

 

What you don't realize is that US citizen has to pay Federal taxes on all his income, whether it's earned domestically or abroad. The only way he can avoid US taxes is to give up his citizenship (like that Facebook guy) or to hide his foreign accounts, which is what Democrats are trying to imply without any evidence. Of course if he was trying to hide his accounts, he wouldn't have declared them on his tax return, which is how people who made those ads you trust so much found out about them.

 

@Nepenthe : Yes I did mean all sources of income, not an entirely flat tax rate, although a "flatter" tax rate is very desirable IMO.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Wrath of Dagon

[Calax]

I think the idea is that he set them up under either an LLC or another person to avoid fees... An LLC that's headquartered in the Bahamas or Monte Carlo or wherever. Right now my dad is thinking about setting up an LLC under my name to avoid the ridiculous fees of starting an LLC in California, and instead pay the fees in Iowa, this would be similar, but avoid the federal fees and taxes because it wasn't earned by an american in america, it was earned by a Bahama/Jamacian/Cayman Islands corporation.

[Morgoth]

A bit OT:

 

Obama set to assure Israel that, if all else fails, US will attack Iran by June 2013

 

Oh boy.

 

 

From

 

 

to

 

 

 

There hasn't really changed much, hasn't it?

Edited August 16, 2012 by Morgoth

[Morgoth]

[HoonDing]

Well, his presidency was an utter failure, he has to make his mark on history somehow.

[Humodour]

Well, his presidency was an utter failure, he has to make his mark on history somehow.

 

Considering the huge mess that Bush moron and his Republican cronies left Obama with, it's not terribly surprising.

 

Still, he certainly hasn't been anything more than mediocre even in light of the Republican party imploding in a mess of infighting, fanatic religious extremism and corruption.

[Malcador]

Always wonder more a President can do, especially if a Congress is unfriendly and somewhat immovable.

[Hurlshort]

I would say mediocre is a good way to sum up Obama at this point, although I prefer ineffective.

 

There are positive things happening in the US. The housing market has stabilized and is on a slow recovery in many areas. The job rate has slowly improved. The economy is very slowly moving forward. None of these things are happening fast, and it looks like natural growth rather than anything the President has done.

 

Foreign policy seemed to start off strong, but has really stalled over the last couple years.

 

The budget is a mess, and it has been a mess for awhile. My problem is congress shares responsibility here, and Romney is in congress, so if he can't solve the problem form congress, why would he be better as President? It's a lose lose situation.

 

People flip out about Obamacare, but that is stalled out too.

[Meshugger]

Considering Obama's stance on Iran, i would like to tip my hat to The Who's song "Won't get fooled again". Meet the new boss, same boss as the old boss, indeed.

 

Thanks for the answers about Ryan everyone, but i think that i have found the most incriminating one:

 

 

 

So unless the guy has had the same experience of self-discovery and true nature of himself as the nameless one in Planescape: Torment, i can already bet that he is an oppurtunist of the higher order that doesn't really, deep down, believe in anything.

 

 

 

...Meet the new boss......

Edited August 17, 2012 by Meshugger

[Monte Carlo]

Srsly, someone has to attack Iran and I think that should be the United States.

[Gfted1]

I think it should be someone else. Ive got a friggin TRILLION dollar UHC to pay for. Let Israel finally earn their keep.

[Morgoth]

has to attack

 

Oh well, old habits die hard.

[Morgoth]

But be sure Junior partner will partake in the adventure!

[Monte Carlo]

But be sure Junior partner will partake in the adventure!

 

I know your country still has certain... issues with us Jeuden and our prospects for survival, so I'll let that go.

[Humodour]

People flip out about Obamacare, but that is stalled out too.

 

Is that seriously what yanks call it? I guess "attempt at introducing universal health care to bring the US healthcare system up to the same standards as other Western nations and provide coverage to the poorest and most vulnerable" is just too darn complex a sentence for US political discourse to cope with.

[Calax]

People flip out about Obamacare, but that is stalled out too.

 

Is that seriously what yanks call it? I guess "attempt at introducing universal health care to bring the US healthcare system up to the same standards as other Western nations and provide coverage to the poorest and most vulnerable" is just too darn complex a sentence for US political discourse to cope with.

Our political discourse is based on making everything the other party does look like trash, so "Obamacare" is the bastardized name attached so that they can easily make fun of it, and confuse people about it.

[Hurlshort]

The funny thing is if 20 years down the road, this health care plan has helped fix some of the glaring issues, the name Obamacare will be a positive thing. I mean it does have merit, giving oversight to insurance companies, making sure almost everyone has coverage, etc. The concern is whether we want the government being in charge of oversight and selling insurance, and forcing all business owners to have coverage.

 

It's complicated

[Morgoth]

But be sure Junior partner will partake in the adventure!

 

I know your country still has certain... issues with us Jeuden and our prospects for survival, so I'll let that go.

 

Really? Show me the prove.

 

Jews are actually having a pretty good time here. Can't say the same about other countries, like Britain, Sweden and Hungary, where they're fleeing left and right due to bigotry and other pressures.

 

But just keep making distractions from the actual topic. So, tell us again: Why do you think the US "has to attack" Iran? For the same unfounded reason as attacking Iraq? ("No WMDs there, Mr. President. Oops.")

Edited August 18, 2012 by Morgoth

[Humodour]

Srsly, someone has to attack Iran

 

Why?