Mitt Romney, the GOP, Libertarian Philosophy all equal tooth fairy Economics

I'm a business person with small businesses. For all our businesses we start out thinking about how to make a profit. We focus on getting good people, training them up, rewarding them for good work, giving better customer service. If we do all those things we make profits. Most of our businesses are winners.

Having stated that, and also having a fairly extensive business background that included finance, corporate america, and working as a commercial real estate broker for about 2 decades, which is totally Market oriented I can assert based on years of experience that virtually all of the economic chatter from the Right Wing is.....

mindless tooth fairy economics.

Some examples that sound good to little kids, and full of feel good promises but are simply pure economic bull shit.

1. Giving lots more money to wealthy people and "job providers" will spur the economy.

I ran numbers in this forum, showing the tax advantage of dropping tax rates by 20% on various levels of income at the wealthiest people in the nation...from income levels of above $400,000/year--that is slightly above the lowest income level for the highest federal income tax bracket (35%) and ranging up to the relatively tiny few people with the highest incomes greater than $10 million/year.

Its bogus economics on a grand scale. If every one of those people spent EVERY dollar on hiring a new employee because their federal taxes were lower....(that in itself is an incredible fantasy)--total new hires might be a couple of hundred thousand people at most....A DROP IN THE BUCKET...based on maximizing every such dollar into NEW HIRES without a single such wealthy person keeping a single dollar for their own usage.

Its a fantasy concept.

Advanced correlation data shows that periods when more money was pumped into vast numbers of people...ie the 99% or even the lower income brackets, both hiring and economic activity picked up more quickly. The reasoning and analysis shows that the money moving into the lower income population was immediately spent, spurring retail activity, spurring demand and increasing the all important business investment sector. All of that spurs job growth.

Look the job hirers that Romney and Ryan like to promote were the job firers during the height of the recession. Look. 8.6 million jobs were lost in 2008 and 2009. Those people were fired by the "job hirers".

2. There is a $5 trillion hole in the Romney/Ryan budget. Romney and Ryan's response to the best possible heavyweight analysis using sophisticated tax analyses models and large volumes of anonymous tax records, provided by a totally nonpartisan group of tax experts made up of experts from both Republican and Democratic administrations and orientations, was

and get this substantive response to the experts.....

"trust us"...."it will take too long to explain"....we have 5 or 6 reports to back our analyses.

Do you realize the 5 or 6 reports have changed over time and they include newspaper articles and an analysis by Romney's staff expert.

The Romney/Ryan plan would blow a hole in the US budget 10 miles wide and has ZERO specific ways to cover that hole. It's a simple plan to pass on enormous additional low taxes primarily to the upper income brackets...and it has no mechanisms in place to mitigate that disaster on long term federal financial health. It's a plan to put your kids and yourself into financial bondage unless you are extremely wealthy.

Tooth fairy economics and feel good promises without substance.

Frankly I could go on and on about an amazing array of "economic" sounding promises from the Far Right Wing. Its scary stuff when you actually live and work in markets or run a business. None of it plays out...except for one little itty bitty item that has appeal. That little bitty item does work for me and for others if you are earning good money. You will pay lower taxes. Everyone else gets f*cked.

 

"Give us 4 more years".... hahahahahahahaha

Earl, stop repeating yourself over and over again.. We know you own small businesses (not the only one on the Forums that does), but that doesn't solidify your argument.


Use your "business brain" to explain why exactly you think a guy like Romney couldn't school a little boy like Obama any day of the week when it comes to "business"?

 

I am not a US citizen. However in today's World you don't have to be a citizen of xyz country if you are rich. If you are rich enough, you become a World Citizen with a full freedom to select where you want to belong.

anyways, the voters in the US or anywhere else, should vote based on their interests.

Rich persons may like republicans and the rest that is 99% must choose democrats. (I refer to the slogan: We ARE 99%).

 

I agree, voters should vote their interests. Unlike your part of the world, we have a fairly large middle class, most of whom vote Republican. Democrats are the party of the poor, and the mega wealthy, and they most definitely do not make up 99%. Its closer to 30%, though if Obama has his way, America will be 99% poor people, and I have no doubt they will vote Democrat. Peddle poverty some place else.

@Earl: 1 .Giving lots more money to wealthy people and "job providers" will spur the economy. ? Is this really what you think Republicans believe, because it sounds a lot like the crap being peddled by Rachel Maddow. I don't want to get in your way, so hack away at that straw man.

2. There is a $5 trillion hole in the Romney/Ryan budget. - Obama's budget will have us at 20 Trillion dollars in debt, according to his own numbers and CBO scoring. You want to see some independent evaluation of the two budgets, check out David Walker, a Clinton appointee to the office of US comptroller, talking about your ridiculous talking points.

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-cycle/49665266/#49665266

Most people will laugh, I suspect you will cry.

 

Your video doesn't load for me. It shows a 30 seconds ad video then stops while trying to load the video, probably a news video.

I know the theory of giving more money to the riches will increase investments. But I don't think it's a correct statement. The riches are not stupid. They calculate the risks of selling of a hysical product in a low demand economy + lowering purchasing power. They will most likely to invest more secure areas which can create lowest employement (i.e., real estate, financial instruments or services) If the riches want to create more jobs they already know where to invest: the countries offering cheap labor and/or cheap raw materials

In my opinion, if you allocate the sources of a country in favor of the high class of a given society, the high class will not tend to use the sources for other people. They will always put their own interests first and their interests will conflict the interests of middle class. Politics is a preference of allocating the resources which created by the society altogether. That's why politics is important. After you make a decision on which class will the get most of GNP (gross national product) all the other social classes will remain with a less benefit becoming a part of the society. There is a conflict of interests between the social classes. There is no win-win formula unless the society consist of a very big middle class like 80% or more.

 

@grpaul if your above comments had even a whiff of substance behind them they might be worth considering. Simply repeating your bias which represents a lack of knowledge does nothing to advance a discussion or add anything of value.

@ o-nation: Quite a number of knowledgeable and astute observers of the political and economic landscape have come to that exact conclusion: The current GOP agenda is singularly devoted to extend and expand tax cuts to the wealthy. All other things are secondary. Probably the most articulate and knowledgeable discussions come from the more and more cited Mike Lofgren, a person who was a life long republican, a staffer to GOP house and senate members of congress, and a senior staffer on budget issues for the GOP for more than a decade. He has seen first hand the transformation of the GOP into what he describes as an apocalyptic cult.

He is also someone who has little good to say about the Democratic party. He simply has first hand watched the GOP turn radical before his eyes, abandoning the nation.

Read the articles in the above link. Get educated rather than carry a lot of political bunk without substance.

Meanwhile the Congressional Research Staff, that solely advises Congress, Dems and Republicans, through countless administrations and different periods when one or the other party is in power produced a research piece through its experts that finds that there is absolutely NO relationship between lowering tax rates and taxes for the wealthy with increased economic growth for the country

GOP powers in Congress suppressed publication of the report. The GOP powers in Congress simply acted like any suppressive government in power that does not want the public to have access to vital information, that is critical of the party in question. Those are the actions of a tyrannical government.

Meanwhile the summary of the researched study:

That simply repudiates the very foundation of current and recent GOP politics.

Connect that reality with the Ryan budget from Congress and the current Romney/Ryan tax plans and governance plans and what you have is a program guaranteed to devastate the middle and lower classes and/or blow the budget into smithereens.

Detailed research...not biased opinions. Big difference.

 

Earl, very cute and sensitive posts.. You're opinion isn't biased at all... Laughable.

And your comments hold substance, because you keep saying you own small businesses? LOL!!

The fact that you can't admit that cutting taxes for businesses creates job, is pretty pathetic.

Have fun with the thread though!

 

@grpaul. I used to buy into that argument. Afterll trickle down economics has been around since Reagan. Then I thought about it. We hire to improve operations and make more revenues.

If my taxes are lowered...terrific. It will have nothing to do with hiring more people or not. Its completely irrelevant

Unlike automatic bias I thought about it and looked at our own long experience and then started reading about it. Reading about it confirmed my suspicions.

The "job hirers" promised by the Romney/Ryan team were responsible for firing 8.6 million people in 2008 and 2009. During 2008 a lot of those businesses were losing money and paying no taxes.

In 2009 and in 2010 the job "hirers/firers" started seeing record post tax profits and accumulating record amounts of cash. They weren't hiring. Reality is pretty revealing. Tooth fairy economics led to the great recession.

 

Jesus Earl, you beat the living cr@p out of that strawman! It must all be true! After all, Mike Lofgren says so! What can one say to such logic?

 

I see o-nation, once again, for the thousandth time, if not tens of thousands, you respond with a snarky comment without substance.

 

Well, you did kick the crap out of a straw man. It was a Rodney King style beat down. I was ready to hop in there with you and get a few licks in of my own. In fact, why resist!

Tax breaks for the rich (who pay most of our taxes) do nothing to stimulate the economy! Why is it that those filthy Republicans want to give rich folks such a lower tax rate than everyone else? Damn them! Damn them to hell!

There, you feel better? That straw man is dead!!

 

Yep. Obama: "The rich need to pay their fair share".

As if they don't already.

 

o-nation and grpaul: you two are full of sarcasm but have yet to say anything of substance. When you make a lot of money you do pay more in taxes. At today's rates, you have lots left over for your disposable income, unless you are an idiot and spend like a drunken sailor.

With your above comments you obviously have negated your ability to whine about national debt. I'll be around to remind you.

Meanwhile when you have a lot of disposable income all sorts of things can be done: Just recently when a pro basketball player from Miami played in NYC post the storm he contributed that days pay to relief efforts: $210,000. He could make that decision in a moment without thought. Roughly 4 times what an average American household brings in a year.

Last year, last autumn, St Louis was about to temporarily lay off workers due to budget shortfalls. St Louis baseball team went all the way to win the championship and the city stadium hosted a lot of games, all with a "luxury tax" on ticket sales. Games were sold out.

The extra income from those games kept St. Louis civic workers on the job and on the payroll.

I know you two and the far extreme right wing like to promote the current concept of tax the poor more. "have them put skin in the game". Hell of a premise...people on substance incomes contributing tax revenues while Mitt and the year after year capital gains gang pays a lowly 15% tax on millions of dollars of income and can buy elevators for their cars.

excellent logic, tcotters. Just don't whine about federal deficit levels.

 

Rich people are rich for a reason. They love money! Put a political party in front of them that promises tax cuts they will yell "yahoo, more money!"

No chance they will be sitting there saying "well I'll just go out and hire me some of those "worthless" unemployed."

No chance. Simple human nature.

 

Earl, I think the problem lies in the idea of expecting a response of "substance" to statements of complete nonsense. The idea of getting the rich to "pay their fair share" or tax breaks for the rich is complete nonsense at face value. We already have a very progressive tax code with 50% of Americans paying nothing at all, and the top 1% paying 35% of their income toward the tax system.

The tax rate already jumps a point or two as your income jumps by a few thousand dollars per year. Obama's plan is to have that point or two jump turn into a 6 point jump for the top tax bracket, which is going to do nothing but create an accounting nightmare for small business owners and tax avoidance schemes for the "wealthy" who make 200-250k a year.

Its complete BS. It does nothing to address the deficit. It does nothing to fix the debt. It does nothing to address runaway spending in Washington. It does nothing to fix an entitlement system which is broken. It is political nonsense created specifically for the purpose of creating confusion and more division between Americans, something this president is very good at.

So you just carry on, wailing away on this straw man of "tax breaks for the wealthy". When you come up with an argument of substance to reelect this moron, you will get a reply of substance.

 

more adjectives, no substance. Misdirection with language, o-nation. Here, you and the right wing extremist whiners about deficits have been screaming about this. A lot of proposals were on the board. The ones from the Dems and Simpson-Bowles all envisioned some tax increases. The extremist right wingers won't budge on that. Its not about "fair share" its about cutting the budget with everyone taking a hit. Not only does the Extremist Right Wing want the well off to avoid taking a hit...they want to reduce their tax burden. On top of that well researched studies including one the GOP right wing extremists hid from view...suggest this type of approach is better economics for everyone.

well then I guess you and I agree that Mitt and the every year beneficiaries of a 15% capital gains tax should no longer have that benefit. You know what? I think Mitt could pay 35% and still afford that $45-60,000 elevator for his cars. I'm happy to see you agree that the year after year 15% tax rate Mitt pays is out of whack and inappropriate.

your facts are off again. You need my classes. I take credit cards and paypal. For a married family person the top cut off at the top rate is much higher...around $388,000 this past year. Obama would change the tax rate on that person from 35% to 39.6% where it was before the Bush tax cuts. That is 4.6%.... o-nation...you need either my math class or my honesty class or both. If you sign up for both I'll cut the price a bit...cause despite your stretching the truth your fun to deal with.

Now if you are a business owner passing business income to your own taxable income, after business expenses....you are definitely engaging in one of the greatest strongest, most cost savings tax cuts anyone sees. The business is picking up a lot of your expenses. Spend about $2,000 a year for gas on your car plus another $1500 on maintenance, have the business pay for it and write it off. Need fancy terlet paper for your comfy loo at home and you have a bathroom with your offices? Have the business pay for it, write it off and take a lot home? Mobile phones, internet connection, newspaper delivery? Have the business pay for it and write it off.

Damn good deals. Now the working stiffs of America buy all that stuff with after tax cash. Damn good deal IMHO for the business owner you are whining about. Now if the Obama plan were to go into effect the married business owner making more than $388,000 would pay an extra $19,000 to the feds to try and stave off the deficit you have been whining about. Its not that tough.

there you go again, buddy. misdirecting and confusing the issue. Sure it helps to set off the budget deficit. There are plenty of spending cuts on the board and ready to be agreed to...the only hold up is the insistence of the Right Wing extremists that the already well off get even more tax cuts and don't participate in the hits everyone else will take. I know, you believe everyone else with already less money should take hits on budget cuts and Mitt should get additional tax cuts so he can hire a butler for his elevator for his cars.

The substance are hard studies with heavyweight analysis that show for expanding tax cuts for the wealthy is ultimately crappy and bad economics. I know, the GOP Right Wingers hid one of the hard studies so nobody could read it. Stalin, Mao, and every other dictator would have loved them.

 

Earl - taxes are TAKEN from the person that earns the money. Failing to take as much is not "giving" anyone money. The government does not own everyones income.

To test this theory, ask yourself:
If a guy sticks a gun in your ribs and asks for your wallet, watch and ring, then hands back the ring... did he just GIVE you a ring?

Get over the idea that the government owns everything. They dont.

 

Earl:

You can't honestly think you're going to get serious responses, after saying that you don't think companies can hire with more money in the bank?

You're either making comments to get a reaction out of people, or aren't being honest with yourself.

Does creating jobs help the economy?

 

I have to hand you some credit here Earl. By this point in the conversation you have usually retreated. Instead, you have put some new spin on your strawman and proceeded smacking it about some more! Can I get in a few licks?

I'm glad to see you agree that the tax code is already progressive. Its a good start, and a healthy bit of linguistic jujitsu. Now your argument is that the "wealthy" can afford the tax hit you would apply to them in this already progressive tax code. After all, if they are a dual income family, they have to get above 300k to hit the top marginal rate, and if they are a small business, well, then they can cheat the system by writing off expenses that are not true business expenses (or what most of us call tax evasion).

I guess it really comes down to this. The bottom 25% make $4800 a year on their fully refundable EITC credit from income tax, 25-50% of the population pay nothing. The 50-99% pay 15%-30% of their income in federal taxes, and the top 1% pay 35%. Our dumbass of a president feels that rate is not progressive enough, and wants to raise the rate on the just the top 1% of income earners to help pay for all his new spending, and only raise it by 4% to 39%. Surely that is fair isn't it?

I think you are starting to sell me man. Lets do it! In fact, why single out just 1% of the population. Lets just hit the Billionaires, they can afford it more than anyone! We should be able to tax them at 75% and they will still be taking down way more income than whole cities of Americans see in a year! Surely that is FAIR isn't it?

Nah, changed my mine. If we are going to target a small group of people for outrageously higher taxes than everyone else is paying, I say we single out Unions. If you were on board with discriminating against one percent of the population you should be on board with this, or do you start to get cold feet when it becomes 1% of people you might like or know?

Like I said, come knocking when you have a reasonable argument. I also recommend you read Romney's tax plan. He spelled out the major points in the first debate where he whipped Obama like a rented mule.

 

So taxing 1% of the population will save your economy, bringing it out years of recession brought on by Bush? I say tax the hell out of them, it's likely been stolen anyway! They'll profit a lot more in the end with a good economy.

A country survives on its taxes. Every time something major happens in Australia we are handed some new levy on fuel or rates or whatever. This gets the problem solved and the new taxes are then dropped. Why can't America do the same, taxing its richest members, who over the last few years have seen increasingly greater profits.

I found out today republicans have a 'no new taxes' pledge that incumbent senators must sign. Without new taxes and an ever growing government voting Republican will send you further broke. Only way way to save America, tax the bloody rich! Get your recession over with now so your country can begin to thrive again.