Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam who wrote (197122)	8/15/2012 9:56:15 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542004

Agreed. But when she says it, it's seems quite clear to me that it's a very dug in campaign position statement. At least for the moment. It will take a great deal more heat to shake anything loose. In short, the Romney campaign will have to come to believe they suffer less from releasing them than withholding them. And they clearly don't think that now. Another test of the skill level of the Obama campaign. They've done well so far. But who knows about the future.

To: Sam who wrote (197122)	8/15/2012 10:00:34 AM
From: Dale Baker	Respond to of 542004

Another episode in the if-I-had-a-super-PAC game - I would put up an ad so fast quoting Ann Romney on that night and day and asking what they really are hiding and why Mitt can't do what his own father did as a candidate? This is really dumb politics from the Romney camp. They are going to get sliced up on the tax returns every day until the election. If there is nothing to hide, then stop hiding it, morons.

To: Sam who wrote (197122)	8/15/2012 10:13:10 AM
From: No Mo Mo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542004

Romney/Ryan have to keep the fantasy going. If voters have any chance to see the reality of their vision, they'd be laughed right out of the race. ------------------------------- By Greg Sargent It’s official: Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have both confirmed in interviews that they will not be revealing the specifics of their tax plan before the election. Which is another way of saying that these two self-styled deficit hawks have no intention of revealing how their plan would actually pay for itself, rather than explode the deficit, until they’re in the White House. Voters — and, presumably, the news media — are expected to take this on faith. How will the press respond? Romney made this explicit in his new interview with Fortune magazine, when asked for specifics about how he’d make his tax plan — which cuts taxes across the board in ways that disproportionately benefit the wealthy — pay for itself: QUESTION: Specifically what tax loopholes would you close and what exemptions would you eliminate to make the revenue-neutral equation work? ROMNEY: Simpson-Bowles laid out a formula that shows that you can do just as I described. That you can bring down the rates, limit deductions and exemptions for people at the high end, and with additional growth that comes by virtue of the stimulative action you can reach a balanced budget. I will follow a model similar to Simpson-Bowles and work with Congress to identify which of the alternative methods we should apply to reduce deductions, benefits, and exemptions. Those reductions will occur for people at the high end. I have noted before my commitment to preserve tax preferences for middle-income taxpayers such as homeownership, charitable giving and health care. The actual work of making the plan revenue neutral will be done “with Congress,” i.e., it won’t come until Romney is in the White House. Meanwhile, on Fox News, Ryan was asked to answer the charge that the Romney/Ryan plan would inevitably lead to a higher tax burden for the middle class: BRIT HUME: Will we soon see a plan that’s specific about which loopholes to close? RYAN: That is something we think we should do in the light of day, through Congress, unlike how Obamacare was passed. Ryan’s anwer to this perfectly valid question is to shout “Obamacare” and hope no one notices that he didn’t actually answer it. But the Tax Policy Center study found that the only way to make Romney’s plan revenue neutral is to close loopholes that would end up raising the middle class’s tax burden. Romney, in the Fortune inteview, attacked the study for making “garbage assumptions.” But in addition to the fact that those assumptions are as generous as possible to his plan, the assumptions were made necessary by Romney’s own refusal to specify what loopholes and deductions he’d eliminate to make his plan revenue neutral. Now Romney and Ryan have both confirmed that they see no need to do this until after the election. Ryan is widely accorded the designation of being fiscally “courageous” and “serious,” on the strength of his repeated warning that the country faces fiscal apocalypse. He repeatedly vows that the Romney-Ryan ticket won’t duck “tough choices” in getting the country’s fiscal house in order. But both are explicitly confirming that they see no need to tell us what those “tough choices” will be until after the election. Needless to say, this is by definition neither courageous nor serious. Could this be made any clearer?