Veep Debate

[Plane]

Yes of course, McCain would have had Mubarak overhauled and had his age run back to 50 years of age.

I concede NOTHING about Ryan's cockamamie plan, you twit.

First he wants to drop the tax rates by 20%. That means more deficits, because there is no way to slash expenditures by 20%. Then you end all deductions (fat chance that would get through Congress). That brings in 5% more, so now you are running deficits 15% higher than before. They you wait and HOPE and PRAY that it will heat up the economy (which you have just crushed by ending home mortgage interest deductions and several other programs).

Ryan's plan is a lead balloon. It will NEVER fly.

You are getting there.
Why do you think that this would increase recipts only 5% more?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Because removing ALL deductions would produce only 5% more revenue. Add them up, and that is all it amounts to.

[Christians4LessGvt]

The point is that Ryan's proposal does not solve the problem, period.

The point of XO's proposal is it does not solve the problem, period!

Will Taxing the Rich Fix the Deficit?

[Xavier_Onassis]

It is not my proposal, it is only a part of a possible proposal. We waste way too much on the military as well. I do not actually have proposal to balance the budget and have never claimed that I did. I only said that the fat cats do not pay their fair share, and that is clearly the case.

What Ryan proposes clearly will not work. Removing deductions would only be a small part of the total. Personally, I favor removing the mortgage interest deduction, because it does not help even than half the middle class. Those who earn less cannot afford a house at all.

The home mortgage interest deduction encourages people to buy more house than the can afford. By doing this, it inflates house prices during boom times and rewards, not the middle class, but mostly the house flippers.

Expensive houses do not benefit this country.

Right now in Miami, a huge number of homes are sold to cash buyers from Venezuela.

I oppose ending a deduction for child care, and deductions related to IRA contributions.

[sirs]

Yes of course, McCain would have had Mubarak overhauled and had his age run back to 50 years of age.

Highly doubtful, espcially considering the alliance we had with Egypt

I concede NOTHING about Ryan's cockamamie plan, you twit.

You just said that if it got watered down, it'd be less effective.  YOUR words, not mine, twittier

 

First he wants to drop the tax rates by 20%. That means more deficits, because there is no way to slash expenditures by 20%.

Except of course that the jobs that the tax cuts would help regernerate, and the stability coming out of DC, would give the private sector the ok to open up their coffers, start exapnding again, significantly improving the unemployment #'s, which in turn increasing tax revenues, at both the income, payroll, and sales levels.  JUST like Reagan, and JUST as likely a roaring back economy vs the one that is completely stagnant, after 4years of this socialist-lite garbage, and a pathetic GDP of 1.3%

Thankfully we don't have to consider threory here, we have history of it working

[Plane]

Because removing ALL deductions would produce only 5% more revenue. Add them up, and that is all it amounts to.

I don't agree , but for the sake of arguement lets say that only 5% is availible in deductions.

The resulting simplifacation would improve effeciency by a few percent also , this shows up as improvement on revenue too.

Since most loopholes , shelters and deductions apply to the wealthy , eliminateing them amounts to a very progressive tax increase, so it is not a 5% taken from across the board , it would be mostly from the top.

On the other hand we have the idea of increaseing the tax rates paid by the top earners by 5% or so , without getting rid of the loopholes .
Why do we think this will cause any increase in tax recipts at all?

The upper echelons already make the most use of loophole, why increase the flow through the seive?

[Xavier_Onassis]

JUST like Reagan, and JUST as likely a roaring back economy vs the one that is completely stagnant, after 4years of this socialist-lite garbage, and a pathetic GDP of 1.3%

=============================================
Yeah, Reagan was elected after Obama and made the economy roar back. Reagan, of course, also left office with a huge surplus.

Make up all the history you want to sirs, no one believes this idiocy.

[sirs]

JUST like Reagan, and JUST as likely a roaring back economy vs the one that is completely stagnant, after 4years of this socialist-lite garbage, and a pathetic GDP of 1.3%

=============================================
Yeah, Reagan was elected after Obama Carter, and made the economy roar back.

Yep.  They even called it the "decade of greed", the economy was doing vastly better

Reagan, of course, also left office with a huge surplus.

Not with a Democrat controlled House.  That didn't happen until Clinton was dragged back into fiscal sanity, by the GOP controlled House.  But by doing so, he got re-elected.  Don't hold your breath for your buddy, Obama 

Make up all the history you want to sirs, no one believes this idiocy.

Not made up in the least.  Everything there, black and white.  Ignore it to your heart's content

[Plane]

JUST like Reagan, and JUST as likely a roaring back economy vs the one that is completely stagnant, after 4years of this socialist-lite garbage, and a pathetic GDP of 1.3%

=============================================
Yeah, Reagan was elected after Obama and made the economy roar back. Reagan, of course, also left office with a huge surplus.

Make up all the history you want to sirs, no one believes this idiocy.

Reagan inheritred a rough economy, which was described with much hyperbole just like the economy now is.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Reagan made things a lot worse before they improved, as I recall. There were panhandlers galore, a lot more than now, and Vietnam vets sleeping under most underpasses in Dade County.

[Plane]

Reagan made things a lot worse before they improved, as I recall. There were panhandlers galore, a lot more than now, and Vietnam vets sleeping under most underpasses in Dade County.

Hahahaha!
This is an example of why you should not depend on the Liberal leaning main press.

     There were no homeless during the Carter administration, and even though there were enough of them to outnumber our workforce during the Reagan administration and the Bush41 term,they all evaporated instantly when Clinton was elected.
     

     Reagan didn't manage to push through every measure he wanted , but what he did manage to do , once he gort a bit of co-operation from Congress , was very productive.

     Clinton had a very rough two years his first two years, but then once he got an unco-operative congress that stopped doing what he wanted , he turned around and started doing the productive parts of the Republican platform then he started seeing some good economy.

   If Obama were a little more humble , he could do as Clinton did and take credit for Republican thinking and actions, then he could get somewhere and likely reelected.

[sirs]

If Obama were a little more humble , he could do as Clinton did and take credit for Republican thinking and actions, then he could get somewhere and likely reelected.

Bingo

[Xavier_Onassis]

There is no Bingo.

As Mitch McConnell said, the main goal of the GOP is to prevent Obama from winning a second term.

Obamacare is mostly identical to Romneycare, by the way, INCLUDING the mandate that everyone buy insurance or pay a fine, tax, fee or whatever. Not one Republican't supported it

There has been no bingo.

The closer the Republican'ts come to utter extinction, the better off our country will be.

[sirs]

There is no Bingo.

BIG TIME, Bingo

As Mitch McConnell said, the main goal of the GOP is to prevent Obama from winning a second term.

Given the policies and direction this President is trying to take us, I sure as hell hope that's the goal.  Then again, Obama said the same thing, that if he didn't turn things around, he'd be a 1 term president.  Quite prophetic.

Obamacare is mostly identical to Romneycare, by the way, INCLUDING the mandate that everyone buy insurance or pay a fine, tax, fee or whatever. Not one Republican't supported it

A) STATE level
B) DID GET REPUBLICAN SUPPORT
C) COULDN'T SURVIVE WITHOUT FEDERAL SUBSIDIES

There has been no bingo.

Always has been.  Had Obama compromised on his positions to work with the GOP rather than cram his socialist-lite agenda down our throats, despite the majority of country that disagreed, and put a stop to it with the 2010 Democrat whipping, he'd have a really good chance at re-election, just like Clinton

The closer the Republican'ts come to utter extinction, the better off our country will be.

So, the closer we get to a dictatorship, the better.  I see

And you really don't want to go there, since its the Senate pretty much blocking any and all legislation to turn this Greece-like sinking ship around.  Last I checked, they're run by the Demawon'ts

[Xavier_Onassis]

I am all for a two party, three party, twelve party system.

But Republican'ts are useless. They should self-reform.