Mitt Romney: ‘I’m not concerned about the very poor’

We prospered MORE under the Bush tax cuts than we did during the Clinton administration with its higher marginal tax rate? REALLY??? What alternate universe are YOU living in?

 

So if jacking up taxing bring economic prsperity why are NY, and CA going bankrupt?

 

you make the erroneous assumption that there is a direct and causitive correlation between the conditions in those two states and their state income tax rates. Their situation is much more complex than that.

THe fact remains... we prospered under CLinton's tax rates and floundered badly under Bush's tax rates. We had a surplus with Clinton and enormous deficits with Bush.

 

You just said jacking up taxes is a good thing, so why are the 2 lib run states with the highest taxes in the nation struggling?

 

I said that returning to CLinton era tax rates would not spell doom and gloom for the economy. I also said that attempting to state that the problems of NY and CA are primarily the result of state tax policy is ridiculous....both of those statements are true.

 

Ok so one set of taxes jacked up does not work - OK lets try this

Now please tell me why you want to take taxes back up to the Clinton era

Also, does that apply to ALL income levels?

 

Because I believe, and many others do as well, Nobel laureates included, that by raising the marginal tax rate for very wealthy, we would help close the budget deficit and would bring more fairness to the situation. When Mitt pays less than I do, something is wrong. ANd No... I would only raise taxes on the wealthy. which includes myself.

 

Ok so it is to close the budget deficit

The annual defcit is about $1.4 TRILLION

If you raise the tax rate on the top 1% to the Clinton levels you would have to collect that added tax for TEN YEARS to pay for ONE YEAR of Obama's deficit

Mitt did not pay less in taxes then you did

Unless you paid over $3 million in federal income taxes

BTW, Mitt's income was from capital gains. that was money he earned, paid taxes on, and reinvested. So it is NOT taxed at the top rate as earned income is taxes at

Do you also want to raise taxes on all other income levels as well?

 

Mitt paid less as a percentage of his income than most americans, myself included. you included as well, I would imagine. And no... I would not raise taxes on anyone other than the wealthiest.

 

OK so you ducked the fact about colecting th higher tax for 10 years to cover one year of Obama's debt

Why is that if you are so concerned about the deficit?

Mitt paid the capital gains tax on his captial gains

So raising taxes back to Clinton level would NOT change that fact

 

raising taxes on the wealthy is the moral thing to do, imo. and raising the marginal tax rate would, in fact, marginally raise the taxes that all wealthy pay, unless they are truly useless trust fund babies who live off the interest income from their grandparents hard work and don't actually do any work themselves.

 

Again, how will that solve the deficit problem when (assuming it is a zero sum game and not discourage economic growth) it would take 10 YEARS to pay for ONE YEAR of debt?

Or is it more of a liberal thing to punish the rich and in the name of "fairness" so the actual goal of paying the deficit goes out the window?

 

restoring fairness is not punishment. My tax rates would go up if the wealthy were taxed at the rate they were under Clinton. I personally find that perfectly fair and not punishment in the least.

And I never said that repealing the Bush tax breaks for millionaires would solve the deficit problem, but there can be no doubt that it would contribute positively to the solution.

 

So now it is offical

Another liberal who does not care about the deficit -as first stated

It is about "fairness"

So lest punish acievement. Lets take more money from those who work hard, and accumlate wealth

And for what?

So libs can take that money and give to people they deem worthy of it. More worthy then the people who EARNED it

Thank you for admitting you don't care about the defciit and debt. You only want to steal more moeny from people and feed the massive bloated pig of government

You are the perfect Obama drone - you have all his talking points down pat

 

I do care about the deficit AND the debt. Please show me one time where I said I did not care about them.

 

You ducked the fact taking taxes back to the Clinton levels will do NOTHING for the debt

It will take 10 YEARS of the added taxes on the top 1% to cover ONE YEAR of Obama's debt

Yet you ignored that and went on the "fairness" talking points

 

your statement was, "Thank you for admitting you don't care about the defciit and debt."

now...either show a post from me where I ADMITTED any such thing, or please have the decency to retract that lie. thank you.

 

The fact you do not seem to care raising taxes to the level you want would only pay 10% a year of one year of Obama's annual deficit

It is clear you are more interested in "fairness" then actually solving the spending problem we have in DC

 

I have never gotten the whole "Gotcha" moments. I could care less if he is or is not concerned for the poor. You would have to do alot to prove to me that ANY politician really cares about the poor (except Sen. Bernie Sanders, His actions has shown he does care).

 

So... you were lying. That was my contention. Thanks for proving it.

 

and you wopuld rather worry more about "fairness" then actually solving a problem

Much like Obama admitted during the ABC debate when Obamawas busted with proof that raising the capital gains tax LOWERS revenue

He fell back on the fairness garbage like you are


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54jr3Ceu894"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54jr3Ceu894[/ame]

 

I care about the deficit AND I care about fairness.

And, unlike you, I am NOT a liar.

You have proven yourself to be one here. Why should anyone believe ANYTHING that a liar has to say here or anywhere else?

 

We prospered more during the Clinton administration after he was forced to sign the Gingrich/Kaisch tax rate cuts, his tax increase slowed down the recovery he inherited. He even admitted it he raised taxes too much. What fallacious history were you taught? Revenues increase 44% from the bottom of the recession after the Bush tax rate cuts, almost 30% more than before he was elected. We had 52 months of full employment and three years of declining deficits. So who taught you different?

 

They slowed the rate of growth of revenues in the recovery that we were already two years into when he was elected from 9% down to 7% costing a huge sum of money and economic growth. The economy finally hit it's stride after he was forced to sign tax cuts and welfare reform. Raising tax rates is the LAST thing we need to be doing now, we need to get people back to work and paying taxes.

 

Why do you believe that when cutting taxes rates has PROVEN that the wealthy not only pay more in actual revenue but a higher share of taxes.

The top 1% pay almost 40% of all federal taxes, the bottom 50% pays about 2%, what is not fair about that?

I think Mitt paid about $20,000,000 in taxes, how much did you pay?