It's time for some jujitsu on Mitt Romney's tax plan voodoo

Posted in the Minneapolis Forum

Comments
1 - 9 of 9 Comments Last updated Oct 8, 2012
Capt Crunch

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

After watching Wednesday's debate, it's obvious that the time has come to move to the next phase of the debate over Mitt Romney's tax cut. His tax cut plan remains a massive liability, but it's time to dismantle it using political jujitsu by turning the force of Romney's own words and arguments against him. And it can be done with a simple two-part plan.
First, focus primarily on the fact that Romney is proposing to cut taxes by 20 percent on everybody—including the top one percent. When Mitt Romney talks about his tax plan, he calls it an across the board 20 percent tax cut for everybody, including the top one percent. When Democrats and the Obama campaign talk about it, they generally call it a $5 trillion tax cut. Because the total cost of Romney's tax cut adds up to $5 trillion, that's an accurate line of attack, but Mitt Romney never uses the $5 trillion figure. As we saw on Wednesday, that allows him to muddy the waters.

Meanwhile, there's tons of video of Mitt Romney talking about it as a 20 percent tax cut. It's easier to make that attack stick because it's using his own words against him. Plus, it's easier for people to visualize why it's crazy to cut taxes on the top one percent by 20 percent than it is to talk about $5 trillion.

Second, acknowledge that he has offered one scenario in which his numbers add up: the voodoo trickle-down scenario under which cutting taxes on the wealthy magically creates so much economic growth that it doesn't add to the deficit. Every independent analyst who has looked at Mitt Romney's tax plan says that his numbers don't add up—and that to pay for it, he'd have to raises taxes on the middle class or add to the deficit. That's a good and accurate argument, but as we saw on Wednesday, Romney can answer it by simply saying that he would never raise taxes on middle class or add to the deficit. Unfortunately, simply citing independent analysts isn't a slam dunk way of rebutting such an assertion—even though it's right.

A better approach is to use Mitt Romney's own arguments against him. Here's what he said during the debate: "I also lower deductions and credits and exemptions, so that we keep taking in the same money when you also account for growth." On Thursday, his campaign has endorsed an AEI analysis making exactly the same case.

On the one hand, acknowledging that Romney is making this argument concedes that he has in fact outlined one scenario in which he is able to achieve his stated principles without raising taxes on the middle class or raising the deficit. But in exchange for acknowledging that fact, you get to hang the entire Bush economic philosophy around Mitt Romney—in his own words.

Bush's economic theory was that if you cut taxes across the board, the economy would boom, making up any lost revenue. His ideas failed spectacularly, and everybody outside the Republican bubble knows it. And Mitt Romney is now defending his tax plan using the exact same economic philosophy.

In short, Mitt Romney is proposing a 20 percent tax cut on everybody, including the wealthiest Americans. He says he'll pay for that in part by eliminating deductions and in part by economic growth. In other words, he's claiming to have discovered a new kind of math where if you cut taxes, revenue booms. But he's hardly the first to make this claim, and turning that argument around on him is as easy as pointing out how miserably it failed under George W. Bush.
Consistent

Grantsburg, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Capt Crunch wrote:
After watching Wednesday's debate, it's obvious that the time has come to move to the next phase of the debate over Mitt Romney's tax cut. His tax cut plan remains a massive liability, but it's time to dismantle it using political jujitsu by turning the force of Romney's own words and arguments against him. And it can be done with a simple two-part plan.
First, focus primarily on the fact that Romney is proposing to cut taxes by 20 percent on everybody—including the top one percent. When Mitt Romney talks about his tax plan, he calls it an across the board 20 percent tax cut for everybody, including the top one percent. When Democrats and the Obama campaign talk about it, they generally call it a $5 trillion tax cut. Because the total cost of Romney's tax cut adds up to $5 trillion, that's an accurate line of attack, but Mitt Romney never uses the $5 trillion figure. As we saw on Wednesday, that allows him to muddy the waters.
Meanwhile, there's tons of video of Mitt Romney talking about it as a 20 percent tax cut. It's easier to make that attack stick because it's using his own words against him. Plus, it's easier for people to visualize why it's crazy to cut taxes on the top one percent by 20 percent than it is to talk about $5 trillion.
Second, acknowledge that he has offered one scenario in which his numbers add up: the voodoo trickle-down scenario under which cutting taxes on the wealthy magically creates so much economic growth that it doesn't add to the deficit. Every independent analyst who has looked at Mitt Romney's tax plan says that his numbers don't add up—and that to pay for it, he'd have to raises taxes on the middle class or add to the deficit. That's a good and accurate argument, but as we saw on Wednesday, Romney can answer it by simply saying that he would never raise taxes on middle class or add to the deficit. Unfortunately, simply citing independent analysts isn't a slam dunk way of rebutting such an assertion—even though it's right.
A better approach is to use Mitt Romney's own arguments against him. Here's what he said during the debate: "I also lower deductions and credits and exemptions, so that we keep taking in the same money when you also account for growth." On Thursday, his campaign has endorsed an AEI analysis making exactly the same case.
On the one hand, acknowledging that Romney is making this argument concedes that he has in fact outlined one scenario in which he is able to achieve his stated principles without raising taxes on the middle class or raising the deficit. But in exchange for acknowledging that fact, you get to hang the entire Bush economic philosophy around Mitt Romney—in his own words.
Bush's economic theory was that if you cut taxes across the board, the economy would boom, making up any lost revenue. His ideas failed spectacularly, and everybody outside the Republican bubble knows it. And Mitt Romney is now defending his tax plan using the exact same economic philosophy.
In short, Mitt Romney is proposing a 20 percent tax cut on everybody, including the wealthiest Americans. He says he'll pay for that in part by eliminating deductions and in part by economic growth. In other words, he's claiming to have discovered a new kind of math where if you cut taxes, revenue booms. But he's hardly the first to make this claim, and turning that argument around on him is as easy as pointing out how miserably it failed under George W. Bush.
The stench of your Fear is becoming overpowering.

It will be,

Romney 54%
Barry Soreto 46%

Start making alternale plans.

Your Room within your Concrete Tower, in the Urban Core, may soon lose your Section 8 Voucher!
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Section 8 like your food stamps, welfare fool !!!

Since: Jul 12

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Consistent wrote:
<quoted text>
The stench of your Fear is becoming overpowering.
It will be,
Romney 54%
Barry Soreto 46%
Start making alternale plans.
Your Room within your Concrete Tower, in the Urban Core, may soon lose your Section 8 Voucher!
You don't seem capable of arguing a point - are you admitting defeat?
Consistent

Grantsburg, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Toidi Slayer wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't seem capable of arguing a point - are you admitting defeat?
Do you have a "point" somewhere, I missed it.
Please repost your "point".
Consistent

Grantsburg, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Toidi Slayer wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't seem capable of arguing a point - are you admitting defeat?
I missed the "points" in the Cut/Paste you created this Thread with.
Gimme your source for this, your typical "Unattributed" Cut/Paste, and I will go to the Propaganda Site and destroy all of thier Talking Points as you post thier words on Topix.

Since: Jul 12

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Oct 8, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Certainly.

You posted

The stench of your Fear is becoming overpowering.
It will be,
Romney 54%
Barry Soreto 46%
Start making alternale plans.
Your Room within your Concrete Tower, in the Urban Core, may soon lose your Section 8 Voucher!

Then I said

"You don't seem capable of arguing a point - are you admitting defeat?"
Smart Liberal

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Oct 8, 2012
 
After watching Wednesday's debate, it's obvious that the time has come to move to the next phase of the debate over Mitt Romney's tax cut. His tax cut plan remains a massive liability, but it's time to dismantle it using political jujitsu by turning the force of Romney's own words and arguments against him. And it can be done with a simpletwo-part plan.
First, focus primarily on the fact that Romney is proposing to cut taxes by 20 percent on everybody—including the top one percent. When Mitt Romney talks about his tax plan, he calls it an across the board 20 percent tax cut for everybody, including the top one percent. When Democrats and the Obama campaign talk about it, they generally call it a $5 trillion tax cut. Because the total cost of Romney's tax cut adds up to $5 trillion, that's an accurate line of attack, but Mitt Romney never uses the $5 trillion figure. As we saw on Wednesday, that allows him to muddy the waters.

Meanwhile, there's tons of video of Mitt Romney talking about it as a 20 percent tax cut. It's easier to make that attack stick because it's using his own words against him. Plus, it's easier for people to visualize why it's crazy to cut taxes on the top one percent by 20 percent than it is to talk about $5 trillion.

Second, acknowledge that he has offered one scenario in which his numbers add up: the voodoo trickle-down scenario under which cutting taxes on the wealthy magically creates so much economic growth that it doesn't add to the deficit. Every independent analyst who has looked at Mitt Romney's tax plan says that his numbers don't add up—and that to pay for it, he'd have to raises taxes on the middle class or add to the deficit. That's a good and accurate argument, but as we saw on Wednesday, Romney can answer it by simply saying that he would never raise taxes on middle class or add to the deficit. Unfortunately, simply citing independent analysts isn't a slam dunk way of rebutting such an assertion—even though it's right.

A better approach is to use Mitt Romney's own arguments against him. Here's what he said during the debate: "I also lower deductions and credits and exemptions, so that we keep taking in the same money when you also account for growth." On Thursday, his campaign has endorsed an AEI analysis making exactly the same case.

On the one hand, acknowledging that Romney is making this argument concedes that he has in fact outlined one scenario in which he is able to achieve his stated principles without raising taxes on the middle class or raising the deficit. But in exchange for acknowledging that fact, you get to hang the entire Bush economic philosophy around Mitt Romney—in his own words.

Since: Apr 08

Twin Cities

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Oct 8, 2012
 
Jujitsu and spending hours on the internet. Two things that have nothing to do with one another.

So 'fess up, Slew, you took a community self-defense course at the Y or some other place and now you're trying to convince the folks here that between your job and the many hours you spend here, you're a martial artist.

Okay, I could be way wrong; it's known to happen from time to time. Maybe so, but I'm still not buying any of it.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

21 Users are viewing the Minneapolis Forum right now

Search the Minneapolis Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Police Shoot Dog During Chase 3 min just wondering 3
Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 47 min ritedownthemiddle 32,014
Militants order female genital mutilation in Iraq 2 hr Bellweather 10
executive order, bypassing Congress entirely 2 hr Space ace 11
Michele Bachmann 2016 first woman President ( Y... 3 hr Space ace 19
police shooting pitbulls 3 hr cantmakeitup 10
Can't manage the gov & NOT honest or trustworthy (Nov '13) 3 hr Bellweather 200
•••
•••
•••
Minneapolis Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Minneapolis Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Minneapolis People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Minneapolis News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Minneapolis
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••