The Right Scoop
How about when McCain would come out with a idea, Obama would come out the next day saying almost the same idea, and the news meida would run with it for Obama
Mr Ryan, give me some examples of how "cutting loopholes" would work. For example tax loophole A, results in an $X loss of revenue to the govt. how many billions of revenue could be generated to offset the loss from lower tax rates. you're spinning al lthe time.. I'm on your side , and i don't believe you
cutting a tax loop hole does not create a loss of revenue to the gov't. It means more taxes paid. No wonder you don't believe him. You don't sound like you know what he is talking about.
of course i had it "bass akward". my point is that the congress will not EVER cut loopholes. they are congress' "raison d'etre". they thrive on the complex tax code.
i'm a big Ryan fan, but i think he has been reined in
Straight Talk, now just walk the talk.
I like Ryan, I think that he was a really great pick from Romney. Probably the best he could have made.
I trust Romney as long as I still have one eye open.
And I think this will circumvent lobbyist buying off Congressmen for their votes. If they don't know what's coming, there will be no reason for special interest groups to stampede Congressmen.
Correct...you work to find which ones you can do and which ones are the most effective. His answer is SPOT ON! because we all know you name one and it will be BROADCAST AS UNFAIR not RIGHT....CANNOT BE DONE and SABOTAGED!! Great answer Paul...you wait and you work....that was nothing but a trip question...Smart Move!
I think Reagan realized we'll never get to a flat tax in this country without a Constitutional Amendment. So he got a great compromise which worked very well for many years. It was brilliant.
Because so many Republicans are like the Bush family, and still think some weak-sauce form of progressivism is a "good idea," we'll always be stuck with a multi-tiered tax code. I believe Ryan understands this, and is working within a mental structure the left can understand in some small way. Of course, math is something they struggle with.
Sure, a flat tax would be the obvious fix, but getting there requires major upheaval in the banking systems (a parlous endeavor), elimination of a major industry (tax accounting/tax lawyering—perhaps the biggest lobby of all), and overcoming the blind insistence by nearly half of the public that the poor should be taxed less, never mind the math of percentages that ALREADY DOES THIS).
The only way I can see getting to a flat tax is to make the Tea Party much more powerful, elect a President who is not flat-out against it, and get the Constitution Amended so that the Federal power to tax has a major, peacetime upper limit, and a built in sunset on war-based tax changes.
So let's not beat up Ryan over this now. It's a total waste of time, and gives the left more room to feel like they are winning.
It's time to play hardball, and cram Romney/Ryan down their throats.
Because they are adults! That's why they are doing it this way.........
Was the "press" interested in specifics when BO was gonna "heal the Earth and lower the oceans"? HE!! NO!
Most voters don't care nor understand specifics. Per your remark above, you think cutting tax loopholes for the wealthy will cut revenue for the gov't.
obviously, you are correct. my point is , however, that there are many thinking Americans, probably mostly in the "independents", who Would be interested in specifics as to how eliminating tax loopholes would favorably counter any possible ill effect of lower tax rates.
i personally believe that EVERYONE who receives the benefits of government should pay income taxes, and NO ONE should ever be allowed to pay NO income (or corporate gains, etc ) tax
Strongly disagree. Reagan and every good leader in fact has articulated the policy positions in considerable detail in advance to persuade the electorate. The Romney/Ryan approach is a cop out and it is why they cannot get traction in an electio which should be a blow out. The answer is just too cute for me.
A policy position is not a bill. Tip O'Neill got it done with Reagan by wheeling and dealing on who got which cuts, what the splits would be, and when. He didn't just read some policy and say, "Yeah, that'll be fine."
No matter what plan they lay out, BO and the msm will double down on class warfare and distort. Why give them ammo? I would wait until the debates and when BO or the moderator bring it up, I would spring it there. To which BO will say, uh, uh, uh, well, uh, etc.
How critical it is that Senator Harry Reid gets ousted as Senate majority leader so that the ideas of reform, like Congressman Ryan's plans, can finally be taken seriously!
Using the word "loopholes" always makes me listen more carefully. "Loopholes" just conjures up a bunch of mistakes and secret trap doors. But they are there by design. Layers upon layers of intertwined deductions and credits intentionally designed, worded and passed by Congress and the lobbyists who nourish them.
I think I heard Ryan say he is not going to get trapped by the media and he intends to just wipe the table clean. Maybe I am being optimistic.
Now......"work on the loopholes that are "enjoyed" by the higher income earners, take away their tax shelters so more of their income is subject to taxation. That lowers everybody's tax rates."
Is that just moving air around in the balloon? or how that is is not increasing taxes on the "rich" - which Romney/Ryan say will stifle economic growth?
Speaking as one of the ones who was actually screwed by the Reagan tax cuts, I definitely see how cutting loopholes lowers overall taxes, when you also lower the top rates.
(I was a young computer programmer earning median income at the time for the job. Reagan's tax realignment pushed me into a higher tax bracket. Boy was I p*$$ed off. And the one "shelter" I had was eliminated. However, as I kept working, my taxes stayed the same for many long years, while my salary went up. That low-rate stability is exactly what's missing from the extremely volatile SCOAMtaxF.)
It's not "that lowers everybody's tax rates", but rather "then we can lower everybody's tax rates". So the rich don't see a tax hike. They stay about the same while everyone else gets a tax break.
He should have said that Vorlath!
What he did say could be easily be interpreted as "tax the rich".
Don't show the other card players your hand. At the same time, this is as bipartisan as it can be...
Leaders start with ideas and then engage the team to debate and refine those ideas. They provide direction and then help guide the outcome - like a compass. As a result of everyone's inputs, everyone has some skin in the game and ownership of the solution(s). They will all be more inclined to support "their" legislation, when it's partly theirs too. This is good business and is as fair and equitable as it can be.
I don't see or hear a single speck of this coming from the infexible and insane Obama camp or from Pelosi or Reid. They are the road block. The GOP freshmen were the stop gap that slowed the bleeding.
If the LSM would crawl out of bed with Obama for just 1 week and report honestly, America would wake up and see the light... and the Democrats would lose their power.
Too right.
It's been 1,237 days (give or take a couple of days) AND STILL NO FREAKING BUDGET.
And they expect specifics?
(EDIT: for those interested in how I came up with that number, I started with this article and added the days since it was published)
Ryan is THE MAN! Go figure, he actually wants to get things DONE in Washington, rather than just take up space and make more empty promises. If you want more empty promises, vote for Obama. His record of delivering on his 2008 promises speaks for itself, which is just terrible, like cutting the Federal deficit in half in four years. What ever happened to that one? Anyway, if you want to get things done, Ryan is the man. And he means what he says because he already HAS passed a budget, whereas the Senate hasn't passed anything. Ryan WILL get things done.
Republicans may be finally wising up to the game of Empathy and Narrative Trolling. If they want their party to continue to exist after this election, they better start learning fast.
Now if only supposed "intelligent and respected conservative bloggers" like Eric Erickson would get a clue
"Take away their tax shelters so more of their money is subject to taxation"
Blame the rich. Tax the top 1%.
How is that the least bit conservative?
This is why Romney is losing. His policy is about the same as Obamas. Tax the top 1%. Work with Democrats like Tip Oneil back during Reagan. Reagan had no choice. Democrats ran the House and Senate. Mitt could well have both for budget items.
When you make up words as if the other guy said it, and then follow that with a question about those made up words, you aren't really doing anything but playing with your keyboard.
The idea is to not simply "tax the rich," which is what all the leftists want to do (so they can continue to be disgruntled layabouts). The idea is to restore some basic sanity to taxation so all the special deals and giveaways are removed, just like Reagan did, in return for simply lowering the overall rates for ALL taxpayers.
Of course, the lefties always miss the "ALL Taxpayers" bit of crucial data.
Besides, who cares what the 47% who don't pay taxes think about the plan?
Maybe I just do not understand what Ryan is talking about - I am expecting a new Obama ad any day now quoting Ryan....
"We need to work on the loopholes that are "enjoyed" by the higher income earners, take away their tax shelters so more of their income is subject to taxation.
Followed by...
Romney and Ryan agree with President Obama's tax plan: millionaires and billionaires need to pay more in taxes.
What am I missing here?
They want to lower everyone's tax rate on top of that. So they want the net effect to be ZERO for high income earners, but a lower tax rate for everyone else.
Besides, I don't think we should have to pay ANY taxes at all if congress refuses to pass a budget.
I'm under the impression that congress has put forth budget(s), its the Senate that refuses to put them up for a vote. Don't they die on Harry Reids desk? I thought he refused to forward any budgets knowing that the dems ranks would break. Am I wrong?
That's quite plausible.
And yes, Harry Reid has blocked nearly everything. HE should be fired and jailed for what he's pulled.
Reid says that the sequester law supersedes the requirement for a statutory budget. It doesn't, of course, but the drones just don't care.
Specific plans will only be used to demagogue the very idea of "tax reform". I am happy that these guys understand who their real opponents are; the Democrat party AND their media wing (commonly referred to as the MSM).
Ryan is one of the few politicians to actually put out a very specific plan (which passed in the House) and look at how the same people, who whine about specifics now, treated him then. The DNC made a video of him pushing an old woman in a wheelchair off of a cliff!
I am of the opinion that they should just come right out and say it: "We are not providing specifics because we know how our opponents operate. By the way, what "specifics" have you heard from Obama?"
The right would rebel if they let out the real policies.
Listen to Ryan here he wants to work with the Democrats not the Tea Party.
We could have the House and Senate. All we need for Budget items yet Ryan wants to work with the Democrats instead.
Is this the Democrat Party? We are not in the 70's.
Any of the huge changes that must be made will only be accepted by a majority if they are actually passed by large majorities. Take Obamacare as an example and remember the 2010 backlash. It just barely squeaked through on a party-line vote with Bi-Partisan opposition!
Reforms of our major entitlement programs will be slow, stupid, and chock-full of "compromise". That is simple political reality. Prepare to see sausage making at it's most grotesque.
If Mitt won. The Democrats would not work with him what so ever. They would make sure Mitt failed because that would give them total power in 2016. They will GW Bush Mitt. Make Mitt just as toxic as GW Bush is.
Though I doubt Mitt will win. He seems to think he can win without any kind of an actual plan to fix things. He seems to think slogans are enough. For a Democrat they are but not for Republicans who like to sink their teeth into things.
A great observation Steve. It is amazing how much the Right is taken for granted by the GOP. Why not, what have we done to cause them to be a bit more nervous?
I agree R&R has not been very vocal in their support of the Tea Party movement... which is a HUGE mistake. This is the group of people who are king-makers and who will be primarily responsible for an enlightened and emboldened conservative voting block turning out to vote. These guys better wise up and realize who butters their bread - quick! Regardless, the Tea Party will not let R&R screw this up.
Regarding working with the Democrats... I believe an honest attempt will be made... but those loons will prove to be intractable and America will have to push past their stubborn ignorance and git 'er done without them.
I think your observations are correct. But I also think the tea party is deliriously happy with Ryan, since there simply IS nobody better, whereas both the tea party and Ryan know that the very words "tea party" is a liberal dog whistle, and there is no need to get them riled up by using it.
And yes, the Democrats provide many perfect-loon examples, but in fact they are human beings, and Ryan is speaking plain, non-partisan truth which the non-loon human beings among them can respond to. And if not - well, as you say, Sober_Thinking, we will just have to push past their stubborn ignorance and git 'er done anyway. Yet, if Ryan can get bi-partisan cooperation, we stand a much better chance of actually doing the hard work of turning the ocean liner around.
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.