|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
09-24-2012, 04:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said he thinks it is "fair" that he pays a lower tax rate on his investment income of $20 million last year than someone who made $50,000 annually.
"Yeah," Romney said in an interview aired on Sunday on the CBS television show "60 Minutes," when he was asked if he thought his relatively low rate was fair.
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln 
|
|
#2
09-24-2012, 04:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
You don't have to be exceptionally brilliant to buy up companies, leverage the hell out of them, bleed all the cash out of them making you rich, then leaving them in debt and to pick up the pieces you left behind. That's more of an ethical decision than an "intelligent financial" one. Mitt's job in private equity was never to create jobs, or make companies strong - it was to leverage and make himself and his investors profit. The government is not a "bleed it dry and milk profit out of it" concern. So why Romney thinks his business experience is a qualification is beyond me. Unless you are the Republican party, and your goal is, indeed, Paul Ryan's, to take all the money you can via defense contracting, medicare, etc. Now they want to privatize Social Security and Medicare. Anyone who thinks privatizing - which requires a profit to be made for the person that runs the program - is better than non-profit for our own programs is crazy. Medicare proves that - it delivers better health care, at far less cost, than private insurance.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
|
|
#3
09-24-2012, 05:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Things I dont care about in a Presidential election: Views onAbortion Views on Gay rights How much said person makes/worth How much said person pays in taxes What church said person attends/says they attend/ etc. Color of skin Im sure there are others but these seem to dominate the news and I hardly think they matter to qualify a person to run the country. IMO Obama has been a pretty poor president with virtually nothing to run on yet Romney is such a weak candidate it is embarassing that he cant even put up much of a fight.
|
|
#4
09-24-2012, 05:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
but i do think if someone thinks it's common sense to be able to roll down airplane windows, they probably aren't qualified to be president. 
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln
|
|
#5
09-24-2012, 06:30 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
It is pitiful that Obama is running a campaign focused on why his opponent can't do the job and probably even more pitiful that Romney can't take advantage of the fact that Obama has an almost four year track record which proves he can't do the job and Romney isn't using it properly.
|
|
#6
09-24-2012, 07:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
if he was a worthwhile candidate, romney would be ahead in the polls, all things considered. the fact that obama is opening a gap in the polls tells you just how rotten a nominee romney is. as each day goes by, mitt finds new ways to show just how unfit he is for the job. he's been doing so pretty much since his trip overseas to show how 'savvy' he was. yeah, that went well.  and it's been downhill since.has obama done a good job? no, i don't think he has. but i haven't seen anything from mitt that would suggest an improvement. and for some on here, peewee herman could run against obama, and they'd vote for peewee. what has mitt said he will do that makes him a better alternative?
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln
|
|
#7
09-24-2012, 07:46 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Not all the polls are going in the direction that you claim and polls are really not great measures of who will win the election, that has been proven historically. Those who think this election is wrapped up may be in for a big surprise. What I know is that I don't like Obama's policies and they are IMO destroying this country. I am for the guy who wants to get control of the deficit, who wants to cut unneccessary and unaffordable entitlement programs, who won't give in to unions that are destroying this country, who wants less government, who realizes why we need to keep Isreal as a close ally in the Middle East and who wants to actually do something to keep Iran from getting a nuclear bomb instead of trying to deal with them after they obtain it. What I know is that Romney is much closer to that than Obama.
|
|
#8
09-24-2012, 07:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
how will romney get control of the deficit? like i said earlier, economists have said his talk on taxes is mathematically impossible. romney wants to grow defense spending. how will that help the deficit? how does that give less govt.? what entitlement programs do you feel are unnecessary and unaffordable that the fed can cut? what is romneys solution in this area? i don't know of one. how does romney's and ryans positions on womens reproductive rights square with 'less government'? unions aren't destroying the country. banking is doing a good job of it tho. romney wants to remove banking regs. how will that help? our stance on israel hasn't changed in decades. obama's take on them has been no different than previous administrations. do you feel that the current economic sanctions that are harming iran are in fact not working? what will romney do that will keep them from going nuclear that will be better than what we're doing now?
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln
|
|
#9
09-24-2012, 08:02 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Zig...how's is this for specific?
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/spending Set Honest Goals: Cap Spending At 20 Percent Of GDP Any turnaround must begin with clear and realistic goals. Optimistic projections cannot wish a problem away, they can only make it worse. As president, Mitt’s goal will be to bring federal spending below 20 percent of GDP by the end of his first term: Reduced from 24.3 percent last year; in line with the historical trend between 18 and 20 percent Close to the tax revenue generated by the economy when healthy Requires spending cuts of approximately $500 billion per year in 2016 assuming robust economic recovery with 4% annual growth, and reversal of irresponsible Obama-era defense cuts Take Immediate Action: Return Non-Security Discretionary Spending To Below 2008 Levels Any turnaround must also stop the bleeding and reverse the most recent and dramatic damage: Send Congress a bill on Day One that cuts non-security discretionary spending by 5 percent across the board Pass the House Republican Budget proposal, rolling back President Obama’s government expansion by capping non-security discretionary spending below 2008 levels Follow A Clear Roadmap: Build A Simpler, Smaller, Smarter Government Most importantly, any turnaround must have a thoughtful, structured approach to achieving its goals. Mitt will attack the bloated budget from three angles: The Federal Government Should Stop Doing Things The American People Can’t Afford, For Instance: Repeal Obamacare — Savings: $95 Billion. President Obama’s costly takeover of the health care system imposes an enormous and unaffordable obligation on the federal government while intervening in a matter that should be left to the states. Mitt will begin his efforts to repeal this legislation on Day One. Privatize Amtrak — Savings: $1.6 Billion. Despite requirement that Amtrak operate on a for-profit basis, it continues to receive about $1.6 billion in taxpayer funds each year. Forty-one of Amtrak’s 44 routes lost money in 2008 with losses ranging from $5 to $462 per passenger. Reduce Subsidies For The National Endowments For The Arts And Humanities, The Corporation For Public Broadcasting, And The Legal Services Corporation — Savings: $600 Million. NEA, NEH, and CPB provide grants to supplement other sources of funding. LSC funds services mostly duplicative of those already offered by states, localities, bar associations and private organizations. Eliminate Title X Family Planning Funding — Savings: $300 Million. Title X subsidizes family planning programs that benefit abortion groups like Planned Parenthood. Reduce Foreign Aid — Savings: $100 Million. Stop borrowing money from countries that oppose America’s interests in order to give it back to them in the form of foreign aid. If pursued with focus and discipline, Mitt’s approach provides a roadmap to rescue the federal government from its present precipice. But that respite will be short-lived without a plan for the looming long-term threat posed by the unsustainable nature of existing entitlement obligations. Learn more about Mitt’s proposals for entitlement reform: Medicare and Social Security. Empower States To Innovate — Savings: >$100 billion Block grants have huge potential to generate both superior results and cost savings by establishing local control and promoting innovation in areas such as Medicaid and Worker Retraining. Medicaid spending should be capped and increased each year by CPI + 1%. Department of Labor retraining spending should be capped and will increase in future years. These funds should then be given to the states to spend on their own residents. States will be free from Washington micromanagement, allowing them to develop innovative approaches that improve quality and reduce cost. Improve Efficiency And Effectiveness. Where the federal government should act, it must do a better job. For instance: Reduce Waste And Fraud — Savings: $60 Billion. The federal government made $125 billion in improper payments last year. Cutting that amount in half through stricter enforcement and harsher penalties yields returns many times over on the investment. Align Federal Employee Compensation With The Private Sector — Savings: $47 Billion. Federal compensation exceeds private sector levels by as much as 30 to 40 percent when benefits are taken into account. This must be corrected. Repeal The Davis-Bacon Act — Savings: $11 Billion. Davis-Bacon forces the government to pay above-market wages, insulating labor unions from competition and driving up project costs by approximately 10 percent. Reduce The Federal Workforce By 10 Percent Via Attrition — Savings: $4 Billion. Despite widespread layoffs in the private sector, President Obama has continued to grow the federal payrolls. The federal workforce can be reduced by 10 percent through a “1-for-2” system of attrition, thereby reducing the number of federal employees while allowing the introduction of new talent into the federal service. Consolidate agencies and streamline processes to cut costs and improve results in everything from energy permitting to worker retraining to trade negotiation.
__________________
We've Gone Delirious
|
|
#10
09-24-2012, 09:32 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Is it his economic policies which have increased the real unemployment rate to well almost 11% and put more people on public assistance than ever before in our country? Is it Obamacare because it is going to ballon the deficit and because government does ANYTHING better than the private sector? Is it his foreign policy where he is allowing the Iranian's to get closer to getting a nuclear bomb by the day hoping that sanctions will stop them? Is it his lack of additional security on 9/11 which led to the death of an ambassador despite knowledge that terrorists have attacked embassies on 9/11 in the past? You want entitlement programs to cut, then lets start with Acorn and a laundry list of similar programs which should not get taxpayer money. You think our stance has not changed on Israel? Is that why Netanyahu has taken a pretty unprecedented step of involving himself in another country's election by openly campaigning for Romney? So tell us since you seem to know and ask everyone else to answer, what are Obama's policies that are better than the ones that Geek has outlined? I would like to thank Geek for taking the time that I did not have earlier. Sure seems like a lot of policies for someone who has none.
|
|
#11
09-24-2012, 06:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
BTW Tell that 'someone' who made $50K last year to save as much as possible as he will be able to pay a lower rate on investment income than he does on straight income.
|
|
#12
09-24-2012, 06:06 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
"We aren't being Governed, we are being Looted" Unkown
|
|
#13
09-24-2012, 07:06 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Of course this is the hidden plan Obama has publically stated before. Re-distribution of wealth and not just in the U.S. but worldwide.
|
|
#14
09-24-2012, 07:10 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
By the way - if Obama is stating something "publicly" where everyone can read it, it's not a "hidden" plan - just sayin' LOL
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
|
Hybrid Mode
