Confused republican


#1

Hey everyone,

The reason why I registered here is because I’ve been doing some independent research on Romney’s plans, and lately the specifics he’s offered in terms of his tax plan. His tax perposal doesn’t work at all, and has a very dangerous loophole based on the research I’ve came up with. I’m going to post specfics of my findings in the money forum(since it obviously doesn’t belong in my intro :P). I can’t bring my self to vote for Obama, but based on the information I’ve gathered I can’t vote for Romney, I’m actually thinking for the first time ever NOT voting for president. I’m hoping you guys can prove me wrong and put away my doubts on Mitt.

About me I work in the game industry as the lead technical programmer at Blackenmace Studios LLC, but lately I have got a strong interest in politics because this time around I really don’t like either candidate. I always watch fox news during my down time(as anyone that works in the game industry can tell you, you wait a lot for various things to complete :P), and CNN. The sad part is I always end up screaming at the TV because of things that just don’t make sense.

I used to think people that avoided voting for president were essentially the uneducated whinny folk and I really don’t want to put my self in my own stearotype :P.

-Justin


#2

Hi and welcome! I don’t know that we can put away your doubts about Romney. As far as I’m concerned, he’s the lesser evil, but still unacceptable to me; I plan on doing a write-in.


#3

Since I apparently have to wait a week to start new topics, here is basically what I would have posted on how I actually really think obama is the less of two evils and I saw that with a cringe.

In 2010 the U.S. government received 2.2 trillion dollars in taxes, and U.S. tax payers claimed 1 trillion dollars in deductions. Romney wants to cut 20% of taxes across the board, which adds up to $440 billion dollars in lost revenue. He claims he is going to make up for that lost revenue by limiting the amount of deductions people can claim to $25,000, $50,000 whatever. The percentage of the 1 trillion dollars people claim in deductions 1 / 3 of that is from people claiming above the cut off Romney wants to set. This obviously comes out to $333 billion dollars, so if we subtract $440 billion from $333 billion were left with $107 billion dollars that has to be made up somehow.

The only way he can make up for that deficit is to get people to jump to a higher tax bracket. He’s hoping that his plan like in the Regan years will create job growth, but if it doesn’t his plan could EXPONENTIALLY cost the U.S. government billions of dollars if say people in the middle class or even the rich drop to a LOWER tax bracket. Remember to start off with hes SHORT $107 billion dollars.

Second problem lets say his plan does go through, and I’m limited to only claiming $25,000 worth of deductions on my taxes, but I want to claim $100,000. I could open up 5 dummy s-type corporations and claim $25,000 worth of deductions on those dummy corporations and I would get my $100,000 worth of deductions. Why didn’t Romney catch this show stopper loop hole? He’s either incompitent or hes playing into someones pocket which is the feeling I get.

The problem with doing all of this stimulus is its not going to work without innovation backing it. During the cold war and even WW2 stimulus programs worked very well because of innovation. During the cold war we wanted to automate things like our nuclear weapons in the event Russia nuked us, this drove the innovation of the Microprocessor. In WW2 unlike in wars nowadays our guys were dieing a huge rate we needed to pump out more armored vehicles, so the government spending a ton of money in the defense sector created a lot of jobs. Even in the 90’s, early 21st century we were innovating in the Aerospace industry with the F-22, but now the best were doing is the F-35 which is NOT a huge jump compared to the F-16 to the F-22.

Innovation is what drives our economy. If I came out with Teleporter everybody around the world would want one, and I would hire more and more people to make this teleporter. That would drive the economy until everyone in the world has a teleporter. Than what? To continue to have the surge in our encomy that would come from me developing a teleporter, I would need to come up with something else.

What incentive would I have at that point to invest in something else? If I was taxed based on NOT hiring more employees I would at least have think about hiring new employees each time I do my taxes. I might consider expanding my company to do R&D research into warp travel for example, and to do that I would have to hire a lot of different people.

We can change the type of economy we have all day from top down to middle out and it won’t change anything as long as there isn’t innovation. Obama’s plan runs into the same problems as it doesn’t DRIVE innovation but it won’t bankrupt the government.


#4

I can care less what the potential cost of the US Government is. IT’S NOT THEIR MONEY IT’S OURS. Here is a simple little rule that everyone should follow. IF you only have $16.00 you only spend $16.00. Simple concept that so many people fail to get.


#5

RIGHT ON Bro
In engineering we refer to that as an ‘NFC’ (Novel Friggin Concept)


#6

#7

*I can care less what the potential cost of the US Government is.

*I can care less what the potential cost of the US Government is. IT’S NOT THEIR MONEY IT’S OURS. Here is a simple little rule that everyone should follow. IF you only have $16.00 you only spend $16.00. Simple concept that so many people fail to get.

You should care because if his plan COSTS the government money, its going to end up adding to the dificit, if you think were going to get bipartisan vote on reduction government spending your crazy. I’m all for reducing the amount of money the government takes in but a tax plan that can exponentionally add to our nations deficit is irresponsible. I’m not for Obama so I’m asking no one say “well Obama didn’t do xyz in his four years blah blah”, I’m asking people to understand what Mitt is purposing and why it could end up adding the deficit which is something none of us want.

IF you only have $16.00 you only spend $16.00. Simple concept that so many people fail to get.

Romney isn’t following that philosphe hes spending $16.00 when he only has $12 and he wants to make up the difference in quanity(i.e. the amount of people jumping to a higher tax bracket). If that DOESN’T happen hes pulling a Obama.


#8

I don’t think you quite understand. Tax cuts NEVER cost. That is a lie. The money does not belong to the Government so they can not spend what is not theirs. If people like you would understand that and demand that those you elect adhere to sound fiscal principles with regards to OUR money there would not be a deficit.

You should care because if his plan COSTS the government money
Again I say to you. IT"S NOT GOVERNMENT MONEY it can not cost them ANYTHING.


#9

You been drinking the Kool Aid way to long and way to hard so let me help here:

The feds indeed have an income, its roughly 3% of the money they take in. This comes from fees, traffic tickets on federal lands, fines, passports fees etc etc.

The OTHER 97% of revenue is from the taxpayers,its belongs to the taxpayers, NOT the feds.

I see you are from Kailfornia, so even a basic understanding of the US Constitution (yes the US has one, I know its not taught in Kali schools, but we got one). Our US Constitution lays out what the federal govt can and cannot do. But there is clause in the USC that has been abused more than Lindsay Lohan’s underwear…its called the ‘general welfare’ and there is one more, the ‘interstate commerce’ clause. Congress has used these 2 clauses to claim unbridled power over America and Americans when in fact it was never meant to be that way.

The feds have 2 KEY jobs:

  1. Protect the shores of these United States (of which they are doing pizzpoor job)

  2. Leave me and my family the HELL ALONE!

Kind of simple huh?

So in reality the feds are so poor they can’t buy enough gas to power a pizz ants motorcycle around an ant hill, so what they do is steal from US the taxpayer by running up bills, like the $16 trillion we owe and in fact YOU personally owe about $55,000 along with every swing Richard and every bouncing Betty in America.

I hope the hell the feds hurt


#10

You been drinking the Kool Aid way to long and way to hard so let me help here
Tax cuts NEVER cost.

You guys need to remember I am a republican and I’m looking for any reason to vote for the guy, for the first time ever I’m considering NOT voting for president because I don’t like Obama but I don’t like Romney either. So lets look at this a different way. The government wastes money, we all know this, look at how much were spending on pensions for unions. Lets put everything aside but Romney’s tax plan. This is really my only issue with the guy, so here is the facts based on my own research.

In 2010 the government received 2.2 trillion dollars in tax revenue.
In 2010 the the total amount of tax deductions claimed added up to 1 trillion dollars.
In 2010 1/3 of those deductions would be eradicated under Romney’s tax deduction cap.

1/3 of 1 trillion dollars = $333 billion
Romney wants to cut taxes by 20% across the board, 20% of 2.2 trillion is $440 billion dollars.

So right off the bat his claim that his tax plan is revenue neutral is false. The only way his plan CAN work is if we see more people going to higher tax brackets. If this DOESN’T happen his plan is going to cost the government money, which will unforuntely just be added on to the nations debt.

Second problem with his plan: To get around the tax deduction cap I can open up a ton of dummy s-type corperations and claim tax deductions on each of the dummy corporations I’ve opened.

So his plan won’t limit the amount of tax deductions, which will in the end add to our nations deficit which will effect our credit rating more than it is now.

Looking at the facts I presented, are any of them false? Can someone give me facts to prove I’m wrong. Yes his tax plan might not go in as he stated as in the debate, he might not even be able to pass it through congress I’m only considered with his tax plan as he presented it at the debate, so as I just said are there any facts to my critiques of Romney’s tax plan that are factually inacurrate.


#11

[quote=“liveandfight, post:10, topic:36449”]
You guys need to remember I am a republican and I’m looking for any reason to vote for the guy, for the first time ever I’m considering NOT voting for president because I don’t like Obama but I don’t like Romney either. So lets look at this a different way. The government wastes money, we all know this, look at how much were spending on pensions for unions. Lets put everything aside but Romney’s tax plan. This is really my only issue with the guy, so here is the facts based on my own research.

In 2010 the government received 2.2 trillion dollars in tax revenue.
In 2010 the the total amount of tax deductions claimed added up to 1 trillion dollars.
In 2010 1/3 of those deductions would be eradicated under Romney’s tax deduction cap.

1/3 of 1 trillion dollars = $333 trillion.
Romney wants to cut taxes by 20% across the board, 20% of 2.2 trillion is $440 trillion dollars.

So right off the bat his claim that his tax plan is revenue neutral is false. The only way his plan CAN work is if we see more people going to higher tax brackets. If this DOESN’T happen his plan is going to cost the government money, which will unforuntely just be added on to the nations debt.

Second problem with his plan: To get around the tax deduction cap I can open up a ton of dummy s-type corperations and claim tax deductions on each of the dummy corporations I’ve opened.

So his plan won’t limit the amount of tax deductions, which will in the end add to our nations deficit which will effect our credit rating more than it is now.

Looking at the facts I presented, are any of them false? Can someone give me facts to prove I’m wrong.
[/quote]1/3 trillion is 333 billion. 20% of 2.2 trillion is 440 billion


#12

1/3 trillion is 333 billion. 20% of 2.2 trillion is 440 billion

I said it correctly in my first post :), aside from that typo is anything else that’s factually wrong with what I said.


#13

Your problem is that you are dealing with a STATIC ANALYSIS. Look at the tax revenue for 2008. Was it higher or lower than 2010? Hint: Higher!
Why was that since the RATES did not change??
Answer…people weren’t working and companies weren’t making things.
As a result: Tax Revenues DROPPED (and entitlement outflows increased)

The Romney plan will reduce rates…incentivize investments and INCREASE revenues through job and economic growth and your analysis does not account for that.
Deductions can be handled with a cap OR one by one withing the law.

As to the S corporation sham…let’s stay out of the weeds on the actual lawmaking. Such things can be accounted for, and prevented if you aren’t tying to pass a 2800 page law in 3 days with no bipartisan support. :smiley:


#14

Do or don’t vote for Romney, that has to be your choice and yours alone. I am not. I am going to vote fro a 3rd party candidate, I am just unsure of which one so far.

The ONLY way any tax cut or even a tax increase is going to work is if the US Government cuts spending. The US Tax payer can not afford another 16Trillion in taxes so there isnt any way possible to balance this budget unless we cut waste and spending. Its that simple.


#15

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1696[/ATTACH]

Its not false what you are saying, its the way you are seeing it>

Dummy corps cost about $600 per LLC, you can do it a bit less, but you want to cross t’s and dot i’s ESPECIALLY if they are dummy. After the first year you better show some revenue, you CANNOT just keep writing down, its does not work that way. Then you have an issue with the STATE, even here in Texas I have pay taxes on my LLC, I have to show revenue (its not a dummy) in order to keep certain tax exemptions, then revenue = SALES tax you got to pay. Trust me I set up my first company in '69 so its not my first rodeo. I have set them up in Nevada, Montana and Texas. DO NOT BE A DUMMY you can find yourself in a case of FRAUD both state and Federal…that can send you to jail, screwing up your taxes is not generally a fraud offense and they can tell the diff.

Lowering the effective tax rate frees up money. ALL recoveries are consumer led + heavy investment by the ‘rich’. Investment and less taxes puts more money back into the economy, generates more job, thus more folks working thus more revenue generated.

'Bammy boy think you can raise taxes and generate more revenue. For the short term VERY short term sure, then it collapses…You cannot take money out of peoples pockets and expect consumer demand to rise.

Instead this idiot thinks he can overcome low employment thru GOVT hiring. Does not work that. Like there is no such thing as a perpetual motion machine in spite of some guy coming up with one ever few years and scamming millions of investors. A battery cannot charge itself. Govt could hire 100% of the people and the economy would collapse, ask the Ruskys, they tried it. Bama said the other nite in his debacle that Medicare run by the govt is MORE efficient than the private sector. BS, I have seen study after study and we cannot find a single thing the govt can do better, faster, cheaper than capitalism. I spent 26 years in the govt, saw a lot of studies and saw the same answer over and over, contract it out…

Not sure what you are reseasrching, but suggest you look at Medicare, AMTRAK, US Post Office, HUD, PICK anything. Govt is union shop, 8-5, work past 5 then you must need help so you hire someone else and you keep on till you have what we have now. Govt employees make more than civy folks do.

You need to look a lot deeper than to level numbers.

You have the choice to vote for a capitalist or a socialist, Christian or Muslim, American or an Anti-American…STRONGLY suggest you vote wisely or the life you have know will be gone, to never return…


#16

Oh…BTW…I seriously question your numbers anyway. Romney’s INCOME tax cuts don’t affect all tax revenues and deductions. total INCOME tax receipts are less than 1 trillion dollars. Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data | Tax Foundation (see table 4 2nd column) . At a trillion dollars in collections…that would produce a cut of $200billion in individuals taxes…but MIGHT produce NO loss in revenue as more individuals would be working. (Actually…I don’t think that…some deductions will need to be eliminated…but it will be the combination that makes it revenue neutral.) I’ll let Mr. Ryan and the CBO work to figure that out perhaps with a little help from Art Laffer.


#17

MIGHT produce NO loss in revenue as more individuals would be working. (Actually…I don’t think that…some deductions will need to be eliminated…but it will be the combination that makes it revenue neutral.) I’ll let Mr. Ryan and the CBO work to figure that out perhaps with a little help from Art Laffer.

That’s actually my point it will only produce no loss in revenue if this round of tax cuts spurs up the economy, which I don’t think it will. The economy is driven by innovation, tax cuts without companies doing innovation won’t generate job growth.

The problem as I see it is, people are becoming responsible and saving their money for a rainy day. What we need to do is get back to the times were people work in same company for 40 to 50 years and retire. This type of job security is what will get the economy going again. As I see it both sides have it wrong, what I would purpose to replace Romney’s plan is if you company is worth more than say a million dollars, and your total revenue is more than it was last year you can only claim deductions if you hire and expand your company.

Let’s say its 1995 and I own a company that makes CRT monitors, people are buying monitors as I’m able to create bigger CRT screens. Now fast forward to 2001, LCD monitors come out but there still more expansive than CRT monitors, but what if a small company comes out of no where that can make LCD monitors at a cheaper price than my CRT monitors. I’m screwed i’ll go out of buisness, because I didn’t invest in R&D. In my oppinion if we only give deductions if people expand their company more companies might invest in R&D and get innovation going again.

Microsoft is a great example of this, look at the Kinect. Now the problem is the Kinect isn’t the next Microprocessor because due to its line of sight limitations and camera resolution it limits its practical use, but we need more stuff like this.

As a couple of you have stated his plan will only work if we see people jumping to higher tax brackets which in the end means we need to get people to save less and spend more, and we can’t do that without innovation and progress.

Investment and less taxes puts more money back into the economy, generates more job, thus more folks working thus more revenue generated.

Exactly right! But how do we get people to horde less of their money and start the investment process again? Giving them more money to horde away isn’t going to get the economy going again. This isn’t the Regan years anymore, where we basically had things like Microprocessor driving economy. We don’t have anything like that anymore.

Not sure what you are reseasrching, but suggest you look at Medicare, AMTRAK, US Post Office, HUD, PICK anything. Govt is union shop, 8-5, work past 5 then you must need help so you hire someone else and you keep on till you have what we have now. Govt employees make more than civy folks do.

Again I 100% agree with you. I don’t want this topic to go off on what Obama is doing wrong because all I will do is agree with you. I want to talk about Romney and how he plans on fixing things, and I can’t see how he will do it.

After the first year you better show some revenue, you CANNOT just keep writing down, its does not work that way.

My point is this loop hole in Mitt’s plan works, and if I’m rich guy I can easily have underlings under me to handle the technicals behind the loop hole.

Your problem is that you are dealing with a STATIC ANALYSIS. Look at the tax revenue for 2008. Was it higher or lower than 2010? Hint: Higher!

You just made my point for me. I did static analysis to show the problem, if we look and see a decent overall growth in people jumping to higher tax deductions say over a 4 to 10 year period than his plan might work. But as Chris Wallace said while interviewing Paul Ryan, what IF the math doesn’t add up, and the math WONT add up if we don’t see job growth and this alone could send us into another depression.

Paul Ryan dodged Chris Wallace when he was hammering on their contingency plans IF we don’t see growth…he doesn’t have one. I see Mitt as incompetent and just blindly taking ideas from Paul Ryan and other republicans and assume they work. This just means Mitt doesn’t have back bone and he’ll just be another Schwarzenegger, who caters to the wrong people. The left does this with Unions all the time.

let’s stay out of the weeds on the actual lawmaking

I don’t want to stay out of the weeds, I don’t want to just assume that everything is going to just be better under Romney when the math just doesn’t work. All I know about Mitt’s plans are what he says about them, who knows if he would even be able to block that loop hole. Who knows if his campaign contributers even want him to close that loop hole.

**Blindly assuming our politicians will just get it right is a absurd notion that has gotten this country to this point in the first place.
**


#18

Don’t do that. If you don’t like Romney or Obama (I don’t), vote for a write-in. If the GOP sees more and more votes going to write-ins and third-partiers and less to establishment Republican candidates, maybe they’ll wake up and smell the ethanol. At any rate, I believe in my mind (and hopefully my heart) that what one should do is vote one’s conscience, results be hanged. Dire circumstances because the country went to pot (I think it will no matter what we do) will be easier to endure if you can look yourself in the mirror.


#19

Sorry…I tried my best. If that is your case…go hide in a hole for no one will ever please you as a candidate… and your suppositions are full of crap anyway.


#20

This.

I can’t stand it when people say “cutting taxes will cost the government this much” as if the government owns that money in the first place!