Study: Romney Plan Would Raise Taxes On 95% Of Americans

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

 

Unfortunately, the reason is that you have never engaged in one. You have avoided them, run away from them, and beat your chest screaming (figuratively) in order to try and keep others from engaging in them.

 

Actually, there is no reason because "his" post is simply untrue. "He" was "bested" by all objective measure, many times, but would simply disappear, move goalposts, type in all caps to declare victory as if Saddam's minister of information... same old moonshine.

What's odd is that he now put "never banned" in a list of clear untruths, so... for the first time... I'm actually wondering if "he" was indeed banned. But how would the mods ban their own work of fiction? Very strange sort of thing, but ultimately, like the fake persona itself... not that interesting. Meh

 

Just when you think the D&D couldn't get worse, it does. Starts off with five posts pertaining to the topic and then you get this gem by TJ and the **** hits the fan...

 

are you ready for the great war I was born ready did my work in Fallujah also did some things for black water.

 

Hello Dogpiler. Perhaps you missed mc mark's post with a man in a tin foil hat, which was intended to mock me? Apparently neither he, nor you, appreciated the devastating counterpunch. Trying to fight a skunk with stink usually isn't a great idea -- but it worked for The_Conquistador this time.


GOOD DAY

 

Simple question.

Do you consider this proposed tax plan as a good idea?

 

Whereas personally I am not opposed to increasing taxes as long as we cut spending, IMO nothing Romney could do could match the tax increases everyone will get if Obama is re-elected. Again, IMO, we desperately need to update and streamline the tax code so that virtually all Americans, including corporations, pay federal income tax. I think the best method is a graduated flat tax with few, if any, subsidies, deductions or shelters, but I am open to other solutions so long as they are fair and apply to everyone.

 

Well, it shouldn't fly, but it'll probably provide enough plausible deniability to allow Romney supporters to discount the information and go on believing that Romney as president would be good for them.

 

Neither Obama nor Romney nor Paul will be good for the country. However, Romney is the lesser of the other two evils ... far, far lesser than the horror of another four years of Obama.

 

suggestion - work in a story arc through 2016 in which navigating Obamacare causes the thumbs characters demise.

 

If Obamacare is fully implemented, you probably will have your wish fulfilled.

 

As long as you give me a co-creator credit I am down. Already thinking about the final scene and am thinking Turandotesque

 

Let's get back on topic. I understand politicians have an interest in being vague. The more details Romney offers about his plan to revise the tax structure, the more everyone will be able to nitpick and criticisize. So, I understand why he's only given a broad stroke picture.

But, I'd like to think these politicians have had people get down to brass tacks and figure out with pretty good specificity what they would do if they got the chance. That way their candidate doesn't end up promising something impossible. But, that seems to be what has happened here. Romney has made some promises regarding how he'd change taxation and how it would benefit the country and most of its citizenry. So, we've had a group get down to brass tacks and try to figure out what would have to be done to fulfill those promises. Unless they are telling bald-faced lies (which would be easy to debunk, if they were), what Romney is promising is not possible.

What's the implication? It could be Romney's group didn't do enough homework and figured they'd sort it out later and don't have anything more than the broad framework they published, not knowing it wouldn't be possible. It could be just empty campaign rhetoric, and it isn't fleshed out because they didn't have any genuine intention to really try to push any reform through. It could be an intentional deception, hoping to deliver tax breaks to the upper class in order to -- to be charitable -- empower them to restart the economic engine by encouraging their increased participation (or else luxuriate in the excesses of their wealth, or maybe both), while obfuscating enough to make sure the nonwealthy don't know who is really footing the bill. The final and only favorable scenario I see is that this study is seriously flawed or an outright fabrication, in which case Romney's people can respond with more detail to destroy its credibility. If they don't make a substantial rebuttal though, and simply resort to calling the Tax Policy Center a "liberal organization" in Obama's pocket, I don't see how anyone can honestly conclude that Romney is either lying or doesn't even know enough to be lying. Neither option is very attractive.

 

Rare when a campaign ad that biting is actually rated by Politifact as "mostly true."

Facts can hurt, sometimes. Yet, most folks who like Romney are either benefiting from the plan by being filthy rich, or don't care about facts.

 

From the outside looking in, what's sick about the Romney plan is that it is clearly unnecessarily complicated in order to confuse certain voters and convince others.