If Romney gets the nod

[Headholio]

You can raise rates on the "wealthy" all you want but it doesn't change the trend line for fiscal collapse. As a matter of fact, allowing the Obama tax cuts on those making less than 250k a year will raise more revenue than allowing them to only expire on those making more than 250k a year.

You are right, of course it will. you can get revenue from the middle class, but Dems don't want to do that, because they think (correctly) that it will hurt the economy. Republicans pretend that they don't want to do it either, but then come up with a revenue generating suggestion to eliminate the mortgage interest deduction, which would be a huge tax on the middle class. Can't touch one buck of the historically undertaxed multimillionaires though!

I enjoy the "wealth disparity" argument used by the progressives. You can reference my previous article about the benefits provided by employers accounting for almost an additional six dollars per hour for the average employee that isn't considered when they make arguments.

It's really hard to figure out where you are coming from. 6 bucks an hour What's the point? CEOs make 20 thousand or 50 thousand bucks AN HOUR. You think throwing your 6 bucks into the equation changes the balance?

[/quote]The feds historically get about 19% of GDP in income taxes no matter the rates...Hell, most people don't itemize because they don't have enough deductions to make a difference. If you want the rich to pay their "fair share" then you should support a flat tax, eliminate the double corporate tax (no capital gains) and modify the 16th Amendment to preclude deductions.[/quote]

A tax based on consumption instead of income might work ok. Flat tax, eh maybe. Elimination of some deductions, sure. There are lots of ways to improve the tax system, but we might not agree on how to best do it
Capital gains is the primary way that many millionaires make money. Capital gains should be treated like other income and taxed progressively IMO. A middle class guy could have some incentive to invest with lower capital gains tax, but multi millionaires who push buttons, makes trades and racks up millions should be taxed at the top rate for regular income. It is a myth that that kind of wealth generation is productive or helpful to the American economy. What would be helpful is to tax it appropriately.

 

[binö]

Bino, republican efforts to suppress votes is not controversial, its a fact. It's not even surprising. Politicians try to win. Republicans have better chance if they suppress minority, young and elderly votes.
ID requirements seem reasonable but the facts are this:

A survey by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law found that 11 percent of citizens, 21 million people, do not have a current photo ID. That fraction increases to 15 percent of low-income voting-age citizens, 18 percent of young eligible voters and 25 percent of black eligible voters.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/opinion/27wed1.html

You think evil geniuses like Carl Rove don't know this and won't try to capitalize on it?
No biggie Bino, Republicans are trying to suppress the vote. Get a grip on that.
The Deprtment of Justice already recognized South CArolia GOP voter laws at a vote suppression effort:

In its first decision on the laws, Justice’s Civil Rights Division said South Carolina’s statute is discriminatory because its registered minority voters are nearly 20 percent more likely than whites to lack a state-issued photo ID. Under the 1965 Voting Rights Act, South Carolina is one of a number of states that are required to receive federal “pre-clearance” on voting changes to ensure that they don’t hurt minorities’ political power.

Political Animal - Justice Dept. targets SC voter-ID law

The justification for the GOP efforts is voter fraud, and when I say it is a non-issue, you should know by now that I would never BS you. It is a non issue.

Five years after the Bush administration began a crackdown on voter fraud, the Justice Department has turned up virtually no evidence of any organized effort to skew federal elections, according to court records and interviews.

In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud - New York Times

of course the NYT is not gonna find instances of voter fraud, the are a DNC mouthpiece!
So you believe ID requirements are unreasonable because of the intentions of the requirements (racism, suppression,etc)...well i believe otherwise and thankfully a large portion of mature adults do as well, notice all the laws springing up to belie this.
IMO the 21 million who supposedly do not have ID (not sure how this is possible i'm suspect...you can't do much without an ID I bet the really do have one but for the sake of the poll they don't) do not deserve to vote...if you lack the intelligence to apply for a ID then you lack the intelligence to make a sound vote.
no wonder the DNC is fighting so desperatly for this sorta voter, it is their bread and butter base (dumb as fuck and completely needy and mindless).
lol again at quoting the nyt, while a few posts later taking digs at rush limbaugh.

 

[youpissmeoff]

Raising rates at the top is what makes sense and is what has historically worked. "The good old days" (30's, 40's 50's, 60's 70's, take your pick) Taxes for the top bracket were 60-90 percent, the country was stronger, people still had a chance for upward mobility,economy was strong, the middle class was strong, the rich were still rich. Progressive taxation is part of what made America great. This Right wing experiment to pander to the rich is a failure.

You need to go back and study the late 70's early 80's if you think this nation was stronger.

Top tax was 60%
Interest rates were around 15%
Unemployment was aroud 8%
and the Dow Jones was at a whopping 780 pt vs todays 12,000 pt

AND... our national defense was on a terible decline. Is this the strong nation you are referring to??

Now look at our tax revenue as a % of GDP since we started cutting marginal tax rates.

Image - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting

Hmmmm.. they say a picture is worth a 1,000 words. Wonder why our our Revenue as a percent of GDP rose above and stayed above 30% after we started cutting tax rates??

Add to this a much more mobile society today. You raise taxes to 70% and almost every billionaire in this country will move his residence to a sandy beach location with at 25% tax rate or lower.

Ask yourself this, do you really think this is the best for the economy or, like the current administration, do you really just want to fight a class warfare battle??

 

[Headholio]

of course the NYT is not gonna find instances of voter fraud, the are a DNC mouthpiece!
So you believe ID requirements are unreasonable because of the intentions of the requirements (racism, suppression,etc)...well i believe otherwise and thankfully a large portion of mature adults do as well, notice all the laws springing up to belie this.
IMO the 21 million who supposedly do not have ID (not sure how this is possible i'm suspect...you can't do much without an ID I bet the really do have one but for the sake of the poll they don't) do not deserve to vote...if you lack the intelligence to apply for a ID then you lack the intelligence to make a sound vote.
no wonder the DNC is fighting so desperatly for this sorta voter, it is their bread and butter base (dumb as fuck and completely needy and mindless).
lol again at quoting the nyt, while a few posts later taking digs at rush limbaugh.

It is a surprising number of people who don't have photo ID, but facts are facts. If you didn't drive, would you have one?
Lots of people don't drive.
The other fact is that it is illegal to make a law that has a discriminatory effect on voting. If you believe in anything of what America stands for, then you would have to agree with that. If you don't, maybe I should call you Baghdad Bob?

And the NY Times is a reputable newspaper. It's really hard for any fox watcher to have any credibility when criticizing sources, but if anything I post is untrue, just prove it. You should have noticed by now that I only deal in the truth.

 

[Mr. dB]

I have problems with my own analysis, mostly fear that I'm overestimating Santorum. But he had a few good speeches this week, and with Batlady gone and Perry in the dumpster, Santorum and Gingrich well get all the not-Romney votes from the GOP faithful. Paul will continue to draw his fringe element ~20%. Since Gingrich is unelectable, Santorum is left by default as "the best of the rest".

Watching Gingrich getting all bitter and petulent after Iowa has been amusing. When he comes out swinging against Romney it will just seem mean and vindictive.

I think I HAVE overestimated the strength of the anyone-but-Romney faction. I guess there are just enough adults in the party to realize that the Romney inevitability is the only hope the party has.

 

[binö]

It is a surprising number of people who don't have photo ID, but facts are facts. If you didn't drive, would you have one?
Lots of people don't drive.
The other fact is that it is illegal to make a law that has a discriminatory effect on voting. If you believe in anything of what America stands for, then you would have to agree with that. If you don't, maybe I should call you Baghdad Bob?

And the NY Times is a reputable newspaper. It's really hard for any fox watcher to have any credibility when criticizing sources, but if anything I post is untrue, just prove it. You should have noticed by now that I only deal in the truth.

if i didn't drive i would still need a photo ID to:
-open a bank account
-purchase booze or tobacco
-fly on a jet
-book a hotel room
-enter a casino
many reasons why people need a photo ID, those that don't most likely:
-are illegally here and inclined to vote in favor of your entitlement driven politics.
that sir is the facts...and while i freely admit that Fox news has a rightward slant (although i see more left leaning journalists at fox than right leaning ones at the various left wing news sources such as huff po, nyt, msnbc, etc) you and your leftist buddies have a terribly hard time admitting that such media outlets as the NYT are terribly slanted in their favor...my guess is by claiming they are non-biased, but goose stepping perfectly aligned with your politics, you can claim that non-biased media favors your viewpoint.
which leads me to believe, that although you appear to be a good intelligent bro, you deal far more in left wing politics than you do truth.
amazing to me that a supposed petro employee is so in love with the party that demonizes and scorns your industry so...i'm suspicious to be qutie honest

 

[mrplunkey]

Raising rates at the top is what makes sense and is what has historically worked. "The good old days" (30's, 40's 50's, 60's 70's, take your pick) Taxes for the top bracket were 60-90 percent, the country was stronger, people still had a chance for upward mobility,economy was strong, the middle class was strong, the rich were still rich. Progressive taxation is part of what made America great. This Right wing experiment to pander to the rich is a failure.

Yeah, an "historically" we were much less regulated and riddled with litigation too.

You sure are talented to be able to regress 80 years of American history and attribute our ridiculous tax code as "part of what made America great". We became a world superpower despite our confiscatory taxation system -- not due to it.

 

[binö]

I think I HAVE overestimated the strength of the anyone-but-Romney faction. I guess there are just enough adults in the party to realize that the Romney inevitability is the only hope the party has.

the sooner the support for romney consolidates behind him the better, a ron paul 3rd party run is what i fear.
without that, i predict a solid romney win, meager improvement in the next 4 yrs, followed by a hard hill clinton run in 2016.

 

[mrplunkey]

if i didn't drive i would still need a photo ID to:
-open a bank account
-purchase booze or tobacco
-fly on a jet
-book a hotel room
-enter a casino
many reasons why people need a photo ID, those that don't most likely:
-are illegally here and inclined to vote in favor of your entitlement driven politics.
that sir is the facts...and while i freely admit that Fox news has a rightward slant (although i see more left leaning journalists at fox than right leaning ones at the various left wing news sources such as huff po, nyt, msnbc, etc) you and your leftist buddies have a terribly hard time admitting that such media outlets as the NYT are terribly slanted in their favor...my guess is by claiming they are non-biased, but goose stepping perfectly aligned with your politics, you can claim that non-biased media favors your viewpoint.
which leads me to believe, that although you appear to be a good intelligent bro, you deal far more in left wing politics than you do truth.
amazing to me that a supposed petro employee is so in love with the party that demonizes and scorns your industry so...i'm suspicious to be qutie honest

I have often wondered if there was a Lestat = Headholio = Round Brown connection.

Similarly, I've wondered if Ledhead = Redsam too, but that's more of a stretch.

 

[Headholio]

You need to go back and study the late 70's early 80's if you think this nation was stronger.

Top tax was 60%
Interest rates were around 15%
Unemployment was aroud 8%
and the Dow Jones was at a whopping 780 pt vs todays 12,000 pt

AND... our national defense was on a terible decline. Is this the strong nation you are referring to??

You are referencing the recession of that time, but to answer your question, yes the country was stronger during that recession than it is currently during the second great republican depression.

Now look at our tax revenue as a % of GDP since we started cutting marginal tax rates.

Image - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting

Hmmmm.. they say a picture is worth a 1,000 words. Wonder why our our Revenue as a percent of GDP rose above and stayed above 30% after we started cutting tax rates??

You republicans crack me up. you're so hung up on your beliefs you can look at a graph that completely contradicts your beliefs and see exactly what you want to see. The graph shows steady increases in percentage all the back through 1900. It didn't even dip during the great depression. It rose through super high taxation oafter the depression and through world war 2. It seems the only thing that could make that graph dip was GW Bush in 2000!! Whatever point you want that graph to make, it fails to make it.

Add to this a much more mobile society today. You raise taxes to 70% and almost every billionaire in this country will move his residence to a sandy beach location with at 25% tax rate or lower.

They didn't move before and they won't move now. The whole point you need to understand is that worrying about pleasing the rich is exactly what we don't need to be doing.

Ask yourself this, do you really think this is the best for the economy or, like the current administration, do you really just want to fight a class warfare battle??

It amazes me that you are serious. The class warfare is being fought by the right wing millionaires and they are winning. Since Reagan's trickle down fiasco, the wealth gap has grown exponentially, and middle class wages have remained flat. Republicans love two word slogans but you need to come up with something more substantive than "class warfare". It doesn't even make sense. If you think Obama is fighting class warfare, then obviously, every other President with higher tax rates was also fighting class warfare, which includes every Republican and Democratic president since the first republican great depression of the 30's, except Reagan. Reagan chose debt creation instead of taxation.