Ryan the "math" guy, ROFL

[RandomGuy]

This guy is supposed to be the one who will tell you the specifics.

Shockingly, when pressed to explain exactly how he gets to the nirvana of balanced budgets using nothing but tax cuts and magic ponies, he demurs.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBeL4f-KuF8

When given a chance to flesh it out later by a sympathetic radio show host... "I didn't want people turning the channel". Bullshit.

He didn't want to name the gimmies and loopholes he would eliminate to be able to lower the overall tax rate, because if he did, he KNOWS how people would react.

"revenue neutral" he says. Cutting tax rates to 20% for the highest earners will be "revenue neutral" he says.

Pressed on that later on, he specifies the most popular deductions, i.e. mortgage interest, etc. will be kept. You can't keep all the popular deductions and still cut tax rates to have it revenue neutral. It is mathematically impossible.

For a guy who is supposed to be the "math" guy, he just isn't, not any more than Obama's fantasy budgets.

[Winehole23]

Red team vaporware versus Blue team vaporware. How to decide?

[RandomGuy]

Red team vaporware versus Blue team vaporware. How to decide?

Pick the side that generally believes the earth is older than 6,000 years, and evolutionary theory isn't a "Satanic plot".

Easy. :)

[RandomGuy]

Red team vaporware versus Blue team vaporware. How to decide?

Seriously though, I would be all for the side that would be a bit more honest. We are all going to have to give up something we won't like.

I wish we had the guts to collectively admit that. CC will have to vote to raise taxes, and I will have to vote to reduce the safety net.

[boutons_deux]

Romney’s New Tax Deduction Idea Still Doesn’t Make His Plan Add Up (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/10/03/947411/romney-new-deduction/)“As an option you could say everybody’s going to get up to a $17,000 deduction; and you could use your charitable deduction, your home mortgage deduction, or others – your healthcare deduction. And you can fill that bucket, if you will, that $17,000 bucket that way,” he said during a visit with Denver’s FOX31. “And higher income people might have a lower number.”

Romney has laid out three criteria for his tax plan: it will cut income tax rates by 20 percent, not add to the deficit, and not raise taxes on the middle class. However, as an analysis by the Tax Policy Center shows, Romney can’t achieve all of those goals (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/08/01/620561/tpc-romney-study-taxes/). Without ceding to a smaller rate reduction, Romney must either add to the deficit or raise taxes on the middle class (http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/08/01/620561/tpc-romney-study-taxes/).

Romney’s new idea doesn’t change that basic equation. The Tax Policy Center analysis, after all, assumed that Romney eliminated all tax deductions for the wealthy. Capping deductions at $17,000 obviously preserves $17,000 (or whatever number Romney settles upon) worth of deductions for the rich, meaning he will either have to expand the deficit or raise taxes elsewhere to make his tax plan reality.


“It goes back to the same problem that we’ve raised (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/mitt-romney-floats-17000-limit-on-tax-deductions.php),” TPC’s Howard Gleckman told Talking Points Memo. “He’s promised all these things and he can’t do them all.


http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/10/03/947411/romney-new-deduction/

[ploto]

It is not too hard to figure out-- he lowers the tax rate but eliminates deductions to raise your taxable income. Your tax rate goes down but your taxes do not.

I think they want to get rid of the standard deduction so that people without mortgage payments, charity donations ... get no deduction.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Red team vaporware versus Blue team vaporware. How to decide?

http://www.modernwhig.org/candidates

I think I am going to vote for these guys this election. I actually agree with 75% or more of their policy positions. They want to change several paradigms like election financing, election districting, tying medical coverage to employment etc. All very important to me.

The dual party system is a false choice.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It is not too hard to figure out-- he lowers the tax rate but eliminates deductions to raise your taxable income. Your tax rate goes down but your taxes do not.

I think they want to get rid of the standard deduction so that people without mortgage payments, charity donations ... get no deduction.

The problem is that when the CBO examines his proposals like HERE (http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12128/04-05-ryan_letter.pdf) it turns out that his claims do not bear out or tend to be inordinately myopic.

Specifically in this case:


To summarize, a typical beneficiary would spend more for health care under the proposal than under CBO’s long-term scenarios for several reasons. First, private plans would cost more than traditional Medicare because of the net effect of differences in payment rates for providers, administrative costs, and utilization of health care services, as described above. Second, the government’s contribution would grow more
slowly than health care costs, leaving more for beneficiaries to pay.

Ryan's proposal is the typical supply side nonsense that we have been hearing for 30 years. Cut taxes but some mythical mechanism will make it all better. Romney talks about how the resulting economic boom will create a windfall in tax revenues that will more than make up the difference. that is the same line Bush gave us when he proposed his tax cuts. Why is our revenue shit now?

How about we raise taxes and pay for our shit? Novel concept?

[RandomGuy]

The problem is that when the CBO examines his proposals like HERE (http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12128/04-05-ryan_letter.pdf) it turns out that his claims do not bear out or tend to be inordinately myopic.

Specifically in this case:



Ryan's proposal is the typical supply side nonsense that we have been hearing for 30 years. Cut taxes but some mythical mechanism will make it all better. Romney talks about how the resulting economic boom will create a windfall in tax revenues that will more than make up the difference. that is the same line Bush gave us when he proposed his tax cuts. Why is our revenue shit now?

How about we raise taxes and pay for our shit? Novel concept?

Nah. never happen.

Funny thing about the "math" guy. Ask him to name one exemption or gimmie that he would eliminate to make his math works... and he bolts.

He damn well knows he will have to piss a lot of people off. Fuck, I understand what it will take to make it revenue neutral, I just wish that these jackwads would be honest with me/us about it.

[jack sommerset]

Maybe if Ryan promises to put the budget discussion on CSPAN for the world to see that will do the trick. God bless

[baseline bum]

LOL, it's not math if you don't show your work.

[DMC]

It doesn't matter what they claim to believe, but what they have historically done about it. Neither side is going to get blood from this turnip of an economy but they both pretend to have that ability. At some point Americans are going to be forced to get off their asses and make things happen for themselves. We are becoming the Wall-E version of a society, preferring the lazy way of electing the wealthy, powerful men to bilk our systems for all the low level rewards we can get. Fuck the future. We're all tired, we worked 3 hours last week.