Link to original article. (http://www.democrats.org/news/press/dnc_chair_debbie_wasserman_schultzs_statement_on_new_nonpartisan_report_det)

"DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz released the following statement today on a new report released by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, which concluded that the $5 trillion in budget-busting tax cuts skewed to millionaires and billionaires contained in Mitt Romney’s tax plan would have to be paid for by hiking taxes on the middle class:

“Today, nonpartisan tax experts confirmed what Mitt Romney’s tax plan is really all about: raising taxes on the middle class – to the tune of a $2,000 hike on the average middle-class family with children – to pay for another tax cut for the wealthiest few in this country. Rather than actually asking millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share – as the President has done – so that we can reduce our deficit in a balanced way, Romney would prefer that we just force millions of hardworking families to pick up the tab for the budget-busting tax breaks contained in his plan. We’ve tried that same failed formula for the past decade, and it brought our economy to its knees while punishing the middle class.

“President Obama understands that. That’s why he has already cut taxes for the typical American family by $3,600 since taking office. And it’s why he has called on Congress to take immediate action by passing his plan to prevent a tax hike on the middle class.

That same plan would responsibly cut our deficit by more than $4 trillion through spending cuts and reforms that ensure everyone is paying their fair share, while still making critical investments that grow our economy and strengthen our nation’s middle class.

“Clearly, the contrast in this election could not possibly be greater. Mitt Romney believes in an economic vision that would drag our country backward – one that works only for the wealthiest Americans while asking the rest of us to foot the bill.

[ “President Obama understands that. That’s why he has already cut taxes for the typical American family by $3,600 since taking office. .

$3600??....say...WHAT???. WTF are you..or the shark-toothed hag..talking about boy? Link(s)? TIA.

:lmao: Ask him out already, Gilligan!! Damn!

$3600??....say...WHAT???. WTF are you..or the shark-toothed hag..talking about boy? Link(s)? TIA.



They want us to drink the Kool-Aid !

:lmao: Ask him out already, Gilligan!! Damn!

Go away kid..the adults are asking real questions here. But if you know the answer to where that mystery $3600 came from....feel free to chime in.

Otherwise just return to being a generally despised drive-by ass..it suits you well.:yay:

Go away kid..the adults are asking real questions here.

uhhh... You rarely have anything of substance to say, sir...

uhhh... You rarely have anything of substance to say, sir...

ahhhh..irony alert!..irony alert!!

ahhhh..irony alert!..irony alert!!

point proven

point proven

...that you know absolutely nothing about the topic and therfore cannot answer my question?..I suppose that point was proven, yes...but I'm surprised you would acknowledge that.

...that you know absolutely nothing about the topic and therfore cannot answer my question?..I suppose that point was proven, yes...but I'm surprised you would acknowledge that.

Carry on with your trolling of NHBoy... Doing a good job, little buddy!

Carry on with your trolling of NHBoy... Doing a good job, little buddy!

So..in your itty bitty mind, questioning the premise or facts contained in a post that is specifically placed in a political discussion form section and intended to elicit responses, question and discussion...is trolling.

Back to 5th grade for you, Hank. You fail. :razz:

Go away kid..the adults are asking real questions here. But if you know the answer to where that mystery $3600 came from....feel free to chime in.

Otherwise just return to being a generally despised drive-by ass..it suits you well.:yay:


Anyone who has a job should be aware that the payroll tax (aka Social Security) was cut by 2% 3 years ago. The average savings was purported to be about $1200 per year. 3 x $1200 is $3600.

The payroll tax cut was a stupid idea...and continues to be.

Mitt's plan includes cuts to the tax rates across the board:

Current Rate 10% 15% 25% 28% 33% 35%
New Rate 8% 12% 20% 22.4% 26.4% 28%


Rather than actually asking millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share.What exactly is considered a "fair share"? When millionaires and billionaires pay thousands of dollars in tax and thousands of other pay none, how is that considered "fair"?
When half the people pay 97% of the taxes, how is that considered fair?

Anyone who has a job should be aware that the payroll tax (aka Social Security) was cut by 2% 3 years ago. The average savings was purported to be about $1200 per year. 3 x $1200 is $3600.The payroll tax cut took place in 2011 and extended for 2012. So its only been in effect for two tax years.

The payroll tax cut was a stupid idea...and continues to be.
Agreed. The one account that is already talking about insolvency in a few years was the last place to tap into. They could have mitigated some of the loss if they would have raised the income cap.

Link to original article. (http://www.democrats.org/news/press/dnc_chair_debbie_wasserman_schultzs_statement_on_new_nonpartisan_report_det)

"DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz released the following statement today on a new report released by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, which concluded that the $5 trillion in budget-busting tax cuts skewed to millionaires and billionaires contained in Mitt Romney’s tax plan would have to be paid for by hiking taxes on the middle class:

“Today, nonpartisan tax experts confirmed what Mitt Romney’s tax plan is really all about: raising taxes on the middle class – to the tune of a $2,000 hike on the average middle-class family with children – to pay for another tax cut for the wealthiest few in this country. Rather than actually asking millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share – as the President has done – so that we can reduce our deficit in a balanced way, Romney would prefer that we just force millions of hardworking families to pick up the tab for the budget-busting tax breaks contained in his plan. We’ve tried that same failed formula for the past decade, and it brought our economy to its knees while punishing the middle class.

“President Obama understands that. That’s why he has already cut taxes for the typical American family by $3,600 since taking office. And it’s why he has called on Congress to take immediate action by passing his plan to prevent a tax hike on the middle class.

That same plan would responsibly cut our deficit by more than $4 trillion through spending cuts and reforms that ensure everyone is paying their fair share, while still making critical investments that grow our economy and strengthen our nation’s middle class.

“Clearly, the contrast in this election could not possibly be greater. Mitt Romney believes in an economic vision that would drag our country backward – one that works only for the wealthiest Americans while asking the rest of us to foot the bill.


Nice artical.:patriot:

Tax Policy Center - ON THE DISTRIBUTIONAL EFFECTS OF BASE-BROADENING INCOME TAX REFORM (http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/1001628-Base-Broadening-Tax-Reform.pdf)

Here's the link to the actual report. I started reading it and noticed something right off. From the second page (emphasis mine):

This paper examines the tradeoffs among three competing goals that are inherent in a revenueneutral income tax reform—maintaining tax revenues, ensuring a progressive tax system, and lowering marginal tax rates. As a motivating example, we estimate the degree to which individual income tax expenditures would have to be limited to achieve revenue neutrality under the individual income tax rates and other features advanced in presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s tax plan, and how the required reductions in tax breaks could change the distribution of the tax burden across households. (We do not score Governor Romney’s plan directly, as certain components of his plan are not specified in sufficient detail, nor do we make assumptions regarding what those components might be.)

So essentially they're taking what they know of Romney's plan plus what they call 'modeling assumptions' (Don't believe me? Go look. Starts on page 3) for their big analysis. Sorry but if by your OWN words you're not scoring the plan directly cause of insufficient detail PLUS you're using ASSUMPTIONS? THIS is your big home-run a-HA moment?

Tax Policy Center - ON THE DISTRIBUTIONAL EFFECTS OF BASE-BROADENING INCOME TAX REFORM (http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/1001628-Base-Broadening-Tax-Reform.pdf)





So essentially they're taking what they know of Romney's plan plus what they call 'modeling assumptions' (Don't believe me? Go look. Starts on page 3) for their big analysis. Sorry but if by your OWN words you're not scoring the plan directly cause of insufficient detail PLUS you're using ASSUMPTIONS? THIS is your big home-run a-HA moment?

I know your from great Mills try this.......



Read the whole quote and then put it in context....


We do not score Governor Romney’s plan directly, as certain components of his plan are not specified in sufficient detail..........Romneys plan is insufficent.:doh:

I know your from great Mills try this.......



Read the whole quote and then put it in context....


We do not score Governor Romney’s plan directly, as certain components of his plan are not specified in sufficient detail..........Romneys plan is insufficent.:doh:

Dear God. You really ARE that stupid.
Keep ASSuming I'm from Great Mills. I'm from Louisville, KY.
Next, let's look over that line again.
We do not score Governor Romney’s plan directly, as certain components of his plan are not specified in sufficient detail, nor do we make assumptions regarding what those components might be.
But I can't expect you to understand so go back to your childish insults and overuse of smilies, bless your heart....