#### Comment Preferences

• ##### indiscrete math, unreal imaginary numbers /nt(10+ / 0-)

yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

• ##### Dare we say Irrational numbers nt(8+ / 0-)

The 1st Amendment gives you the right to say stupid things, the 1st Amendment doesn't guarantee a paycheck to say stupid things.

[ Parent ]

• ##### Calculus of Dissent, Rational Exuberance /nt(4+ / 0-)

yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

[ Parent ]

• ##### Here is the math:(2+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
JML9999, annieli

"The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." -- Hubert H. Humphrey

[ Parent ]

• ##### Here's some interesting republican math(8+ / 0-)

Supposedly an "unbiased" side-by-side look at the difference between the Obama and Romney tax plans. Check out the comments:

http://www.mint.com/...

A snippet:

When politicians speak about the economy, they almost always talk about how they are going to cut taxes to stimulate “growth.”

In this year’s Presidential election, the Republican nominee Mitt Romney has promised not only to cut Federal income taxes, but to also cut a whole host of other investment taxes.
...

Mint.com was a cool little start-up that has since been bought by Intuit, a corporation with an agenda. Apparently, they've hired blog writers to help promote that agenda.
• ##### The math takes no time to explain(18+ / 0-)

Chris Wallace asked Ryan how much his tax cuts cost in revenue.  Ryan says they're revenue neutral. Wallace says, I mean before you eliminate the deductions and loopholes, how much do they cost.  And Ryan says, "I don't have time to do the math."

How can Ryan not have had time to figure out how much revenue the tax cuts would cost? Wallace wasn't even asking him to add up the value of the various deductions and loopholes he'd close, or even to identify them -- he was just asking, what's the value of the tax cuts? And Ryan couldn't or wouldn't name the number, other than to repeat the mantra, 20%, 20%, 20%.

How is figuring out the cost of the lost revenue from tax cuts too complicated or wonky or time consuming to explain? It's not. Ryan wouldn't name the number because he didn't want people to then try to put together a package of deductions and loopholes to make up for the lost revenue, because it would be clear that you couldn't add up enough of them without including things like the mortgage deduction and state and local taxes.

Unless, of course, you assume that the lost revenue will be made up in magical growth from the magical tax cuts.  Which I don't think anyone is buying, after eight years of Bushonomics, so he won't say that, either.

Here's another question: Romney said in his 60 Minutes interview that he wanted to maintain the progressivity of the tax code, so that more higher income loopholes and deductions would be closed.  If you want to maintain progressivity, why have an across the board 20% tax cut?  Why not have bigger tax cuts for the lower and middle income levels and a much smaller (or not) cut for the higher levels?  Isn't an "across the board" tax cut inherently regressive?

• ##### even the 5(2)% can't understand it: Trust the 1%(6+ / 0-)

when John Elway supports Mitt, we are all the Cal Band

yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

[ Parent ]

• ##### wha? it was the Stanford band that got in the (3+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
annieli, sethtriggs, Eric Blair

way of the famous laterals...
pls 'splain to moi?
when elway was at stanford did the Cal band do something i've forgotten about?

Give me back my democracy. 50% + 1

[ Parent ]

• ##### Elway complained that Cal ruined his last game /nt(2+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
stagemom, sethtriggs

yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

[ Parent ]

• ##### right! now i remember! ;)(1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
annieli

go bears!

Give me back my democracy. 50% + 1

[ Parent ]

• ##### but still, i don't get your "cal band" reference.(0+ / 0-)

what did the band do?
did they get in his face after the game?

Give me back my democracy. 50% + 1

[ Parent ]

• ##### they had the good sense not to charge the field(2+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
stagemom, sethtriggs

unlike Stanford

yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

[ Parent ]

• ##### It's really simple.(1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
annieli

You can't make this stuff up.

[ Parent ]

• ##### Apparently.(1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
annieli

That's why Republicans can't do it.

The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy... the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.

[ Parent ]

• ##### Seems like Jed is trying to compete with Bill (1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
annieli

for the job of Secretary of Explaining Shit.

"Jeder nach seinen Fähigkeiten, jedem nach seinen Bedürfnissen!" oder "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"

[ Parent ]

• ##### Greg Sargent has a blog post up called(6+ / 0-)

Ryan Retreats Further Into Mathematical Fantasy.  According to Sargent, Ryan at a town hall meeting today appeared to take certain middle class tax deductions off the table under the Romney-Ryan tax plan:

“If you subject more of their income to taxation — more of their income is taxed — and that allows us to lower revenues for everybody across the board. That means middle class taxpayers have lower tax rates, and there’s plenty of fiscal room to keep these important preferences for middle class taxpayers — you know, like charitable donations, or buying a home, or health care. Every time we’ve done this, we’ve created economic growth.”
Ryan claims that closing loopholes for the wealthy will yield enough to permit the preservation of middle class deductions. Sargent notes the studies that show that that upper class loopholes won't yield enough to support a 20% across the board tax cut AND preserve middle class deductions:
By seeming to take some middle class deductions off the table, Ryan made the math even more hallucinatory. This might be good politics — Ryan is getting more specific in promising not to raise middle class taxes — but it further confirms that Romney and Ryan have completely jettisoned deficit neutrality as a goal of their plan, and that they are selling people a fiscal bill of goods that doesn’t pass the laugh test.
• ##### any upper class loophole saving is, well, suspect.(0+ / 0-)

consider someone in Mitten's position. If he lost his current variety of loopholes would he suddenly pay all of those extra taxes? Obviously not. His accountants would re-orient his funds to get the next best remaining loopholes. The wealthy will always have sufficient flexibility and advisors to adapt to a new situation; it's the middle class and working poor who dont have the opportunity to make wholesale changes to their tax strategies.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.