Who is more likely to raise taxes, President Obama or Mitt Romney?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 4:10 PM GMT
    If you look at history, it will be a President Romney who raises taxes.

    Why? Major changes in tax rates happen early in a presidential term. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan and Bush II cut the top marginal tax rate. They did this shortly after taking office. Bush I and Clinton gave us tax hikes, and did so shortly after taking office. Over the past 50 years, the only exception was the Reagan tax reform in 1986, which was more reform than an increase or decrease.

    Obama's window for hiking taxes has passed. Not gonna happen in years 5-6. It would usher in a Republican congress for his last two years, ending any hope he has of doing anything before leaving office. Even less likely to happen in years 7-8, as that will hand the WH and Congress to Republicans 2016.

    So if anybody will increase tax rates, it would be a President Romney. He will have the Clinton/Bush I excuse of, "When I got into the Oval Office, I didn't realize things were so bad!” excuse. This is the only excuse Americans will accept for a tax hike. Romney can twist enough moderate Republican and Democratic arms, whereas a lame duck Democratic would have no such power.

    The smart move for economic conservatives, will be to vote for President Obama this November.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 4:25 PM GMT
    White4DarkerFL saidIf you look at history, it will be a President Romney who raises taxes.

    Why? Major changes in tax rates happen early in a presidential term. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan and Bush II cut the top marginal tax rate. They did this shortly after taking office. Bush I and Clinton gave us tax hikes, and did so shortly after taking office. Over the past 50 years, the only exception was the Reagan tax reform in 1986, which was more reform than an increase or decrease.

    Obama's window for hiking taxes has passed. Not gonna happen in years 5-6. It would usher in a Republican congress for his last two years, ending any hope he has of doing anything before leaving office. Even less likely to happen in years 7-8, as that will hand the WH and Congress to Republicans 2016.

    So if anybody will increase tax rates, it would be a President Romney. He will have the Clinton/Bush I excuse of, "When I got into the Oval Office, I didn't realize things were so bad!” excuse. This is the only excuse Americans will accept for a tax hike. Romney can twist enough moderate Republican and Democratic arms, whereas a lame duck Democratic would have no such power.

    The smart move for economic conservatives, will be to vote for President Obama this November.


    Markets do like gridlock in Washington so there is some truth to this.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 4:35 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    White4DarkerFL saidIf you look at history, it will be a President Romney who raises taxes.

    Why? Major changes in tax rates happen early in a presidential term. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan and Bush II cut the top marginal tax rate. They did this shortly after taking office. Bush I and Clinton gave us tax hikes, and also did so shortly after taking office. Over the past 50 years, the only exception was the Reagan tax reform in 1986, which was more reform than an increase or decrease.

    Obama's window for hiking taxes has passed. Not gonna happen in years 5-6. It would usher in a Republican congress for his last two years, ending any hope he has of doing anything before leaving office. Even less likely to happen in years 7-8, as that will hand the WH and Congress to Republicans 2016.

    So if anybody will increase tax rates, it would be a President Romney. He will have the Clinton/Bush I excuse of, "When I got into the Oval Office, I didn't realize things were so bad!” excuse. He can twist enough moderate Republican and Democratic arms, whereas a lame duck Democratic would have no such power.

    The smart move for economic conservatives, will be to vote for Obama this November.



    January 1, 2013 taxes go up massively on everyone. That's during Obama's watch.


    Funny that you'd mention this. I was probably on the phone with a client while you were posting. I just got asked to do the after tax IIR calculations both ways .... if the tax cuts are extended and to also factor the increase after the tax cut extension expires. Factor in the tax increases and the deal doesn't pencil.

    So no seven space retail center on the unimproved land. So no improvements based property tax increase to the city, no increase in city income tax revenue and no net increase in jobs. On the micro level, this deal is a fail. So after the increase, less net revenue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 4:39 PM GMT
    White4DarkerFL saidIf you look at history, it will be a President Romney who raises taxes.

    Why? Major changes in tax rates happen early in a presidential term. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan and Bush II cut the top marginal tax rate. They did this shortly after taking office. Bush I and Clinton gave us tax hikes, and did so shortly after taking office. Over the past 50 years, the only exception was the Reagan tax reform in 1986, which was more reform than an increase or decrease.

    Obama's window for hiking taxes has passed. Not gonna happen in years 5-6. It would usher in a Republican congress for his last two years, ending any hope he has of doing anything before leaving office. Even less likely to happen in years 7-8, as that will hand the WH and Congress to Republicans 2016.

    So if anybody will increase tax rates, it would be a President Romney. He will have the Clinton/Bush I excuse of, "When I got into the Oval Office, I didn't realize things were so bad!” excuse. This is the only excuse Americans will accept for a tax hike. Romney can twist enough moderate Republican and Democratic arms, whereas a lame duck Democratic would have no such power.

    The smart move for economic conservatives, will be to vote for President Obama this November.


    Not sure how you figure that?

    In the long run the smart move is to reduce or elimiate deficit spending either through spending cuts, tax increases or really both. Enough so to begin paying down our massive and out of control debt.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 4:52 PM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    southbeach1500 said
    White4DarkerFL saidIf you look at history, it will be a President Romney who raises taxes.

    Why? Major changes in tax rates happen early in a presidential term. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan and Bush II cut the top marginal tax rate. They did this shortly after taking office. Bush I and Clinton gave us tax hikes, and also did so shortly after taking office. Over the past 50 years, the only exception was the Reagan tax reform in 1986, which was more reform than an increase or decrease.

    Obama's window for hiking taxes has passed. Not gonna happen in years 5-6. It would usher in a Republican congress for his last two years, ending any hope he has of doing anything before leaving office. Even less likely to happen in years 7-8, as that will hand the WH and Congress to Republicans 2016.

    So if anybody will increase tax rates, it would be a President Romney. He will have the Clinton/Bush I excuse of, "When I got into the Oval Office, I didn't realize things were so bad!” excuse. He can twist enough moderate Republican and Democratic arms, whereas a lame duck Democratic would have no such power.

    The smart move for economic conservatives, will be to vote for Obama this November.



    January 1, 2013 taxes go up massively on everyone. That's during Obama's watch.


    Funny that you'd mention this. I was probably on the phone with a client while you were posting. I just got asked to do the after tax IIR calculations both ways .... if the tax cuts are extended and to also factor the increase after the tax cut extension expires. Factor in the tax increases and the deal doesn't pencil.

    So no seven space retail center on the unimproved land. So no improvements based property tax increase to the city, no increase in city income tax revenue and no net increase in jobs. On the micro level, this deal is a fail. So after the increase, less net revenue.


    Hopefully, your client will conclude that presidents don't increase taxes during their second term.

    A new president is different. He can shield himself by blaming the previous administration. It worked well for Clinton. I think Bush I lost because for a variety of unrelated reasons...Perot and the culture war display at the Republican Convention being a few.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 5:16 PM GMT
    joe_diesel1 said
    White4DarkerFL saidIf you look at history, it will be a President Romney who raises taxes.

    Why? Major changes in tax rates happen early in a presidential term. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan and Bush II cut the top marginal tax rate. They did this shortly after taking office. Bush I and Clinton gave us tax hikes, and did so shortly after taking office. Over the past 50 years, the only exception was the Reagan tax reform in 1986, which was more reform than an increase or decrease.

    Obama's window for hiking taxes has passed. Not gonna happen in years 5-6. It would usher in a Republican congress for his last two years, ending any hope he has of doing anything before leaving office. Even less likely to happen in years 7-8, as that will hand the WH and Congress to Republicans 2016.

    So if anybody will increase tax rates, it would be a President Romney. He will have the Clinton/Bush I excuse of, "When I got into the Oval Office, I didn't realize things were so bad!” excuse. This is the only excuse Americans will accept for a tax hike. Romney can twist enough moderate Republican and Democratic arms, whereas a lame duck Democratic would have no such power.

    The smart move for economic conservatives, will be to vote for President Obama this November.


    Not sure how you figure that?

    In the long run the smart move is to reduce or elimiate deficit spending either through spending cuts, tax increases or really both. Enough so to begin paying down our massive and out of control debt.


    Yes, our debt is huge, but Obama wasn't hired to fix that.

    His job was to get the economy back from the brink and the wars under control. He's steering things back in the right direction and polls reflect that.








  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 5:23 PM GMT
    White4DarkerFL said
    freedomisntfree said
    southbeach1500 said
    White4DarkerFL saidIf you look at history, it will be a President Romney who raises taxes.

    Why? Major changes in tax rates happen early in a presidential term. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan and Bush II cut the top marginal tax rate. They did this shortly after taking office. Bush I and Clinton gave us tax hikes, and also did so shortly after taking office. Over the past 50 years, the only exception was the Reagan tax reform in 1986, which was more reform than an increase or decrease.

    Obama's window for hiking taxes has passed. Not gonna happen in years 5-6. It would usher in a Republican congress for his last two years, ending any hope he has of doing anything before leaving office. Even less likely to happen in years 7-8, as that will hand the WH and Congress to Republicans 2016.

    So if anybody will increase tax rates, it would be a President Romney. He will have the Clinton/Bush I excuse of, "When I got into the Oval Office, I didn't realize things were so bad!” excuse. He can twist enough moderate Republican and Democratic arms, whereas a lame duck Democratic would have no such power.

    The smart move for economic conservatives, will be to vote for Obama this November.



    January 1, 2013 taxes go up massively on everyone. That's during Obama's watch.


    Funny that you'd mention this. I was probably on the phone with a client while you were posting. I just got asked to do the after tax IIR calculations both ways .... if the tax cuts are extended and to also factor the increase after the tax cut extension expires. Factor in the tax increases and the deal doesn't pencil.

    So no seven space retail center on the unimproved land. So no improvements based property tax increase to the city, no increase in city income tax revenue and no net increase in jobs. On the micro level, this deal is a fail. So after the increase, less net revenue.


    Hopefully, your client will conclude that presidents don't increase taxes during their second term.

    A new president is different. He can shield himself by blaming the previous administration. It worked well for Clinton. I think Bush I lost because for a variety of unrelated reasons...Perot and the culture war display at the Republican Convention being a few.


    Regarding 41, we'd been in recovery for six or seven quarters prior to the election. 41’s loss, if I could only name two factors, would be Perot and also Buchanan at the RNC convention in 1992.

    And regarding the deal, the margin is too thin as it is under the current rates so no it’s not going to make it.

    The average age of my clients over the years has been 66 or 67 so if they fail big time on one, they have no time left to recover. I’m going to move him to an absolute net, single tenant, long corporate backed lease, S&P BBB or better, but that’s what everyone wants so returns suck as CAPs fall down into the mid 5s. Plus, due to the lack of available construction financing over the last three -four years, there’s very little new product to sell.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 5:31 PM GMT
    White4DarkerFL said
    joe_diesel1 said
    White4DarkerFL saidIf you look at history, it will be a President Romney who raises taxes.

    Why? Major changes in tax rates happen early in a presidential term. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan and Bush II cut the top marginal tax rate. They did this shortly after taking office. Bush I and Clinton gave us tax hikes, and did so shortly after taking office. Over the past 50 years, the only exception was the Reagan tax reform in 1986, which was more reform than an increase or decrease.

    Obama's window for hiking taxes has passed. Not gonna happen in years 5-6. It would usher in a Republican congress for his last two years, ending any hope he has of doing anything before leaving office. Even less likely to happen in years 7-8, as that will hand the WH and Congress to Republicans 2016.

    So if anybody will increase tax rates, it would be a President Romney. He will have the Clinton/Bush I excuse of, "When I got into the Oval Office, I didn't realize things were so bad!” excuse. This is the only excuse Americans will accept for a tax hike. Romney can twist enough moderate Republican and Democratic arms, whereas a lame duck Democratic would have no such power.

    The smart move for economic conservatives, will be to vote for President Obama this November.


    Not sure how you figure that?

    In the long run the smart move is to reduce or elimiate deficit spending either through spending cuts, tax increases or really both. Enough so to begin paying down our massive and out of control debt.


    Yes, our debt is huge, but Obama wasn't hired to fix that.

    His job was to get the economy back from the brink and the wars under control. He's steering things back in the right direction and polls reflect that.




    The big objection among us ‘righties’ is that the economy has come back far slower than what it could/should have due to his governing philosophy and policies.

    Look at the growth rates immediately after the recession early in the Reagan years and also after the mild recession early in 43’s term versus this time. And even now, I’m seeing some early signs of stagnation as 44’s poll numbers have improved as so the likelihood of his reelection have improved to about 60-40.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 6:13 PM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    White4DarkerFL said
    joe_diesel1 said
    White4DarkerFL saidIf you look at history, it will be a President Romney who raises taxes.

    Why? Major changes in tax rates happen early in a presidential term. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan and Bush II cut the top marginal tax rate. They did this shortly after taking office. Bush I and Clinton gave us tax hikes, and did so shortly after taking office. Over the past 50 years, the only exception was the Reagan tax reform in 1986, which was more reform than an increase or decrease.

    Obama's window for hiking taxes has passed. Not gonna happen in years 5-6. It would usher in a Republican congress for his last two years, ending any hope he has of doing anything before leaving office. Even less likely to happen in years 7-8, as that will hand the WH and Congress to Republicans 2016.

    So if anybody will increase tax rates, it would be a President Romney. He will have the Clinton/Bush I excuse of, "When I got into the Oval Office, I didn't realize things were so bad!” excuse. This is the only excuse Americans will accept for a tax hike. Romney can twist enough moderate Republican and Democratic arms, whereas a lame duck Democratic would have no such power.

    The smart move for economic conservatives, will be to vote for President Obama this November.


    Not sure how you figure that?

    In the long run the smart move is to reduce or elimiate deficit spending either through spending cuts, tax increases or really both. Enough so to begin paying down our massive and out of control debt.


    Yes, our debt is huge, but Obama wasn't hired to fix that.

    His job was to get the economy back from the brink and the wars under control. He's steering things back in the right direction and polls reflect that.




    The big objection among us ‘righties’ is that the economy has come back far slower than what it could/should have due to his governing philosophy and policies.

    Look at the growth rates immediately after the recession early in the Reagan years and also after the mild recession early in 43’s term versus this time. And even now, I’m seeing some early signs of stagnation as 44’s poll numbers have improved as so the likelihood of his reelection have improved to about 60-40.


    Its all the real estate situation. Here in FL, 40% of mortgages are underwater and 1/3 sales are foreclosures. I'm sure you know this story better than me...

    I think bold moves are needed. Clear inventory off the books. Fast track the cases...pay up or evict in 60 days...hold giant fire sale auctions....zero percent financing. Do something to get the problem behind us.

    So, I agree that things are moving too slowly, but I don't see anybody out there with the bold solutions that are needed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 6:32 PM GMT
    White4DarkerFL said
    joe_diesel1 said
    White4DarkerFL saidIf you look at history, it will be a President Romney who raises taxes.

    Why? Major changes in tax rates happen early in a presidential term. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan and Bush II cut the top marginal tax rate. They did this shortly after taking office. Bush I and Clinton gave us tax hikes, and did so shortly after taking office. Over the past 50 years, the only exception was the Reagan tax reform in 1986, which was more reform than an increase or decrease.

    Obama's window for hiking taxes has passed. Not gonna happen in years 5-6. It would usher in a Republican congress for his last two years, ending any hope he has of doing anything before leaving office. Even less likely to happen in years 7-8, as that will hand the WH and Congress to Republicans 2016.

    So if anybody will increase tax rates, it would be a President Romney. He will have the Clinton/Bush I excuse of, "When I got into the Oval Office, I didn't realize things were so bad!” excuse. This is the only excuse Americans will accept for a tax hike. Romney can twist enough moderate Republican and Democratic arms, whereas a lame duck Democratic would have no such power.

    The smart move for economic conservatives, will be to vote for President Obama this November.


    Not sure how you figure that?

    In the long run the smart move is to reduce or elimiate deficit spending either through spending cuts, tax increases or really both. Enough so to begin paying down our massive and out of control debt.


    Yes, our debt is huge, but Obama wasn't hired to fix that.

    His job was to get the economy back from the brink and the wars under control. He's steering things back in the right direction and polls reflect that.


    Keep in mind too that Obama had very little assistance from the Party of no !! their continuous chant and aswer to everything was more tax deductions for the wealthy "job creators' with not a damn thing mentioned about the masses not having money to create demand. Nothing the Repubs suggested or went along with even remotely address this very real answer to our slow economy. The wanted to repeat the same Bush tax cuts that DID NOT CREATE JOBS.

    Further, if we get Romney we will end up with more spending on the military, which in turn creates more enemies which in turn creates more need for defending ourselves against enemies we made by our actions and the damn cycle will continue. Whether Romney would borrow like Bush to pay for their war adventurism or raise taxes remains to be seen, But any way you look at it, Reagan, Bush #1 and Bush #2 put us in this mess by their Military expenses and not a godamn benefit to show the American people for the debt we're strapped with.

    Try as hard as you want to twist the above facts around to blame Obama for our Economic Woes, but the ball got started rolling by the Neo Con War Mongers and there is no way in just 4 years for Obama to have turned it around with all the repub footdragging that took place.





  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Apr 13, 2012 7:26 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said...Obama has done absolutely nothing that has helped this economic recovery - the weakest on record. His constant meddling has actually slowed down the economic recovery.




    Incorrect.


    Explain/defend your "logic" here. (IF you can)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 7:35 PM GMT
    realifedad saidTry as hard as you want to twist the above facts around to blame Obama for our Economic Woes, but the ball got started rolling by the Neo Con War Mongers and there is no way in just 4 years for Obama to have turned it around with all the repub footdragging that took place.

    "Footdragging" is too mild & kind a word. The correct term is obstructionism, for the sole political purpose of making Obama and the Democrats fail, at the expense of the welfare of the country. The Republicans literally announced their goal was to make Obama fail, to make every Democrat initiative fail, in 2009. That is, after all, how they got the title of "The Party of No." The motto that Republicans follow is: "Party First, People Second".

    And now the Republicans, and their spokesmen here on RJ, point to a sluggish economic recovery, THAT THEY ENGINEERED with their remorseless opposition to every pro-economic initiative that came before Congress.

    Instead of behaving like members of the All American Team, Republicans have been playing on the other side. They took the air out of the economic football in an act of sabotage, a classic Nixonian "dirty trick", and now want Quarterback Obama replaced because he hasn't been scoring enough.

    And what did the Republicans focus on instead? Why, Conservative social issues, of course, that have nothing to do with the economy, and may in some cases actually hurt the economy. Hence the War on Women, the War on Gays, the War on Everybody who isn't a right-wing Christian fundamentalist.

    And those who aren't on their side (Remember Bush II's: "You're either with us or against us") are Socialist Communist Fascists. Even if those are mutually exclusive terms, to anyone who knows political science and world history.

    My tax prediction: Obama would lower taxes on the Middle Class (what most of us here are), and raise them on the 1%. Romney would raise taxes on the Middle Class, and lower them even further on the 1%. And that 1% isn't creating jobs as the Republican model predicts, they're keeping it for themselves, and to donate to their Republican partners in elective office. A nice vicious circle the Republicans have got going for themselves.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 8:02 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    realifedad saidTry as hard as you want to twist the above facts around to blame Obama for our Economic Woes, but the ball got started rolling by the Neo Con War Mongers and there is no way in just 4 years for Obama to have turned it around with all the repub footdragging that took place.

    "Footdragging" is too mild & kind a word. The correct term is obstructionism, for the sole political purpose of making Obama and the Democrats fail, at the expense of the welfare of the country. The Republicans literally announced their goal was to make Obama fail, to make every Democrat initiative fail, in 2009. That is, after all, how they got the title of "The Party of No." The motto that Republicans follow is: "Party First, People Second".

    And now the Republicans, and their spokesmen here on RJ, point to a sluggish economic recovery, THAT THEY ENGINEERED with their remorseless opposition to every pro-economic initiative that came before Congress.

    Instead of behaving like members of the All American Team, Republicans have been playing on the other side. They took the air out of the economic football in act of sabotage, a classic Nixonian "dirty trick", and now want Quarterback Obama replaced because he hasn't been scoring enough.

    And what did the Republicans focus on instead? Why, Conservative social issues, of course, that have nothing to do with the economy, and may in some cases actually hurt the economy. Hence the War on Women, the War on Gays, the War on Everybody who isn't a right-wing Christian fundamentalist.

    And those who aren't on their side (Remember Bush II's: "You're either with us or against us") are Socialist Communist Fascists, even if those are mutually exclusive terms, to anyone who knows political science and world history.

    My tax prediction: Obama would lower taxes on the Middle Class (what most of us here are), and raise them on the 1%. Romney would raise taxes on the Middle Class, and lower them even further on the 1%. And that 1% isn't creating jobs as the Republican model predicts, they're keeping it for themselves, and to donate to their Republican partners in elective office. A nice vicious circle the Republicans have got going for themselves.


    Yep, RLD, it’s always those Jew lovin’ GOD DAMN FAR RIGHT TALIBAN FUNDI TEA BAGGER NEO CONS. And yep, we got ya the first 10,000 times you said it. Oh yeah, almost forgot .... 41 of 54. There, I very nicely summarized your last 10,000 posts.

    and as a result, you get the tea bagger theme song

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 8:05 PM GMT
    White4DarkerFL said
    freedomisntfree said
    White4DarkerFL said
    joe_diesel1 said
    White4DarkerFL saidIf you look at history, it will be a President Romney who raises taxes.

    Why? Major changes in tax rates happen early in a presidential term. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan and Bush II cut the top marginal tax rate. They did this shortly after taking office. Bush I and Clinton gave us tax hikes, and did so shortly after taking office. Over the past 50 years, the only exception was the Reagan tax reform in 1986, which was more reform than an increase or decrease.

    Obama's window for hiking taxes has passed. Not gonna happen in years 5-6. It would usher in a Republican congress for his last two years, ending any hope he has of doing anything before leaving office. Even less likely to happen in years 7-8, as that will hand the WH and Congress to Republicans 2016.

    So if anybody will increase tax rates, it would be a President Romney. He will have the Clinton/Bush I excuse of, "When I got into the Oval Office, I didn't realize things were so bad!” excuse. This is the only excuse Americans will accept for a tax hike. Romney can twist enough moderate Republican and Democratic arms, whereas a lame duck Democratic would have no such power.

    The smart move for economic conservatives, will be to vote for President Obama this November.


    Not sure how you figure that?

    In the long run the smart move is to reduce or elimiate deficit spending either through spending cuts, tax increases or really both. Enough so to begin paying down our massive and out of control debt.


    Yes, our debt is huge, but Obama wasn't hired to fix that.

    His job was to get the economy back from the brink and the wars under control. He's steering things back in the right direction and polls reflect that.




    The big objection among us ‘righties’ is that the economy has come back far slower than what it could/should have due to his governing philosophy and policies.

    Look at the growth rates immediately after the recession early in the Reagan years and also after the mild recession early in 43’s term versus this time. And even now, I’m seeing some early signs of stagnation as 44’s poll numbers have improved as so the likelihood of his reelection have improved to about 60-40.


    Its all the real estate situation. Here in FL, 40% of mortgages are underwater and 1/3 sales are foreclosures. I'm sure you know this story better than me...

    I think bold moves are needed. Clear inventory off the books. Fast track the cases...pay up or evict in 60 days...hold giant fire sale auctions....zero percent financing. Do something to get the problem behind us.

    So, I agree that things are moving too slowly, but I don't see anybody out there with the bold solutions that are needed.


    True, can't grow again until we get a bunch of this behind us.

    I’m on the other side of the business, but if we’re not doing infill, a growing number of rooftops is helpful, so yes, I pay some attention to it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 11:00 PM GMT
    White4DarkerFL said
    joe_diesel1 said
    White4DarkerFL saidIf you look at history, it will be a President Romney who raises taxes.

    Why? Major changes in tax rates happen early in a presidential term. Kennedy, Johnson, Reagan and Bush II cut the top marginal tax rate. They did this shortly after taking office. Bush I and Clinton gave us tax hikes, and did so shortly after taking office. Over the past 50 years, the only exception was the Reagan tax reform in 1986, which was more reform than an increase or decrease.

    Obama's window for hiking taxes has passed. Not gonna happen in years 5-6. It would usher in a Republican congress for his last two years, ending any hope he has of doing anything before leaving office. Even less likely to happen in years 7-8, as that will hand the WH and Congress to Republicans 2016.

    So if anybody will increase tax rates, it would be a President Romney. He will have the Clinton/Bush I excuse of, "When I got into the Oval Office, I didn't realize things were so bad!” excuse. This is the only excuse Americans will accept for a tax hike. Romney can twist enough moderate Republican and Democratic arms, whereas a lame duck Democratic would have no such power.

    The smart move for economic conservatives, will be to vote for President Obama this November.


    Not sure how you figure that?

    In the long run the smart move is to reduce or elimiate deficit spending either through spending cuts, tax increases or really both. Enough so to begin paying down our massive and out of control debt.


    Yes, our debt is huge, but Obama wasn't hired to fix that.

    His job was to get the economy back from the brink and the wars under control. He's steering things back in the right direction and polls reflect that.










    WUT? You mean you don't think controlling debt shouldn't part of our elected federal leaders goals...I know you couldn't tell it for more years then most of us have been alive except during a few Clinton years but damn ignoring the problem and making excuses IS part of our problem...and it ain't just Obama...it's all the elected shit heads for the past many years.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 13, 2012 11:47 PM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    Art_Deco said
    realifedad saidTry as hard as you want to twist the above facts around to blame Obama for our Economic Woes, but the ball got started rolling by the Neo Con War Mongers and there is no way in just 4 years for Obama to have turned it around with all the repub footdragging that took place.

    "Footdragging" is too mild & kind a word. The correct term is obstructionism, for the sole political purpose of making Obama and the Democrats fail, at the expense of the welfare of the country. The Republicans literally announced their goal was to make Obama fail, to make every Democrat initiative fail, in 2009. That is, after all, how they got the title of "The Party of No." The motto that Republicans follow is: "Party First, People Second".

    And now the Republicans, and their spokesmen here on RJ, point to a sluggish economic recovery, THAT THEY ENGINEERED with their remorseless opposition to every pro-economic initiative that came before Congress.

    Instead of behaving like members of the All American Team, Republicans have been playing on the other side. They took the air out of the economic football in act of sabotage, a classic Nixonian "dirty trick", and now want Quarterback Obama replaced because he hasn't been scoring enough.

    And what did the Republicans focus on instead? Why, Conservative social issues, of course, that have nothing to do with the economy, and may in some cases actually hurt the economy. Hence the War on Women, the War on Gays, the War on Everybody who isn't a right-wing Christian fundamentalist.

    And those who aren't on their side (Remember Bush II's: "You're either with us or against us") are Socialist Communist Fascists, even if those are mutually exclusive terms, to anyone who knows political science and world history.

    My tax prediction: Obama would lower taxes on the Middle Class (what most of us here are), and raise them on the 1%. Romney would raise taxes on the Middle Class, and lower them even further on the 1%. And that 1% isn't creating jobs as the Republican model predicts, they're keeping it for themselves, and to donate to their Republican partners in elective office. A nice vicious circle the Republicans have got going for themselves.


    Yep, RLD, it’s always those Jew lovin’ GOD DAMN FAR RIGHT TALIBAN FUNDI TEA BAGGER NEO CONS. And yep, we got ya the first 10,000 times you said it. Oh yeah, almost forgot .... 41 of 54. There, I very nicely summarized your last 10,000 posts.

    and as a result, you get the tea bagger theme song






    Art_Deco !!! VERY WELL PUT and in fact it was so well put and unarguably true, that 'nut-sac' OLD GEEZER was left with nothing to say but an attack that was completely off the point.

    Art ----I'm sure you'll agree that if we get Romney as president in this election and the repubs hold the same or more power than they currently do in the Congress and Senate, our country will deffinately be headed for much worse times. Because they didn't learn a godam thing from Bush's Neo Con wars, all the barrowing, deregulating wall street and banks nor from big TAX BREAKS FOR THE RICH THAT DID NOT CREATE JOBS, and all these nutsacks want to do is reapeat the same things over and ad another NEO CON war for the Israeli Lobby which will do nothing but deepen our economic crisis.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Apr 14, 2012 12:07 AM GMT
    rnch said
    southbeach1500 said...Obama has done absolutely nothing that has helped this economic recovery - the weakest on record. His constant meddling has actually slowed down the economic recovery.




    Incorrect.


    Explain/defend your "logic" here. (IF you can)




    waiting, waiting.....for southbeach jane's reply.....




  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2012 11:14 AM GMT
    rnch said
    rnch said
    southbeach1500 said...Obama has done absolutely nothing that has helped this economic recovery - the weakest on record. His constant meddling has actually slowed down the economic recovery.




    Incorrect.


    Explain/defend your "logic" here. (IF you can)




    waiting, waiting.....for southbeach jane's reply.....







    Just as with most Far Right Repubs, TBaggers, Christian Fundi's and status quo apologists, They have no real defence for the stands they take, not for their hate of Obama, not for their Tax breaks for the rich that was supposed to create jobs, not for their goddamn wars, nor for their far right social bigotry or very little else they promote. They've little more to offer as defence, proof or facts, than propaganda and talking points, and the hell of it is that usually they are supporting stands against their own collective interests.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2012 2:44 PM GMT
    realifedad said
    rnch said
    rnch said
    southbeach1500 said...Obama has done absolutely nothing that has helped this economic recovery - the weakest on record. His constant meddling has actually slowed down the economic recovery.




    Incorrect.


    Explain/defend your "logic" here. (IF you can)




    waiting, waiting.....for southbeach jane's reply.....







    Just as with most Far Right Repubs, TBaggers, Christian Fundi's and status quo apologists, They have no real defence for the stands they take, not for their hate of Obama, not for their Tax breaks for the rich that was supposed to create jobs, not for their goddamn wars, nor for their far right social bigotry or very little else they promote. They've little more to offer as defence, proof or facts, than propaganda and talking points, and the hell of it is that usually they are supporting stands against their own collective interests.


    I know several people that have small businesses or are self employed. They're not right wing fundy people or bigots. They probably vote against Democrats more than for Republicans. Calling them "rich" is inaccurate. That congers up images of the Vanderbilts...lol. You may see them as selfish or greedy...but anybody that's owned a business or major investment knows that market conditions always change, often quickly or subtly, and a wrong move can kill off the golden goose or lots of eggs...plus divorce, family illness or theft can wipe out a lifetime of work. Happens all the time.

    So, to have it criticized or chipped away at in the name of 'fairness'...well, I can see their point. Then they see a unionized government worker, like a bus driver, with an $80,000/yr pension and gone back in for the double dip. They know who's paying for that...and who set up the system.

    I'm voting for Obama for his stance on social issues. But I don't see a huge gulf on economic issues in this election. History has shown that tax hikes only occur under a new President.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2012 3:19 PM GMT
    realifedad saidJust as with most Far Right Repubs, TBaggers, Christian Fundi's and status quo apologists, They have no real defence for the stands they take, not for their hate of Obama, not for their Tax breaks for the rich that was supposed to create jobs, not for their goddamn wars, nor for their far right social bigotry or very little else they promote. They've little more to offer as defence, proof or facts, than propaganda and talking points, and the hell of it is that usually they are supporting stands against their own collective interests.

    They come here to this site not to discuss, but to deliver pre-packaged propaganda. Which they will not allow to be disputed or analyzed by the rest of us, merely force-fed and swallowed whole.

    Reminds me of the line from the movie The Blues Brothers: "We're on a mission from God." Unfortunately for them, some of us here still believe in critical thought, provable facts, and debate, rather than blind acceptance of ideological propaganda.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2012 3:25 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    realifedad said
    rnch said
    rnch said
    southbeach1500 said...Obama has done absolutely nothing that has helped this economic recovery - the weakest on record. His constant meddling has actually slowed down the economic recovery.




    Incorrect.


    Explain/defend your "logic" here. (IF you can)




    waiting, waiting.....for southbeach jane's reply.....







    Just as with most Far Right Repubs, TBaggers, Christian Fundi's and status quo apologists, They have no real defence for the stands they take, not for their hate of Obama, not for their Tax breaks for the rich that was supposed to create jobs, not for their goddamn wars, nor for their far right social bigotry or very little else they promote. They've little more to offer as defence, proof or facts, than propaganda and talking points, and the hell of it is that usually they are supporting stands against their own collective interests.



    I think that is quite unfair of you to write about me as I always fully explain my positions. Quite frankly I'm surprised you wrote that.




    Wait a minute !! I meant it in general terms, not about you specifically, so I'll apologize for appearing to direct this at you specifically, I can see where your coming from. But with all due respect, you didn't give reasons for what you wrote about Obama did you.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19133

    Apr 14, 2012 3:26 PM GMT
    Whomever wins in November, I suspect taxes will not be "technically" raised, but many deductions currently taken by the rich (and even middle class) will be eliminated and/or significantly decreased. There is simply no way around it. Our deficit problem simply cannot be a can that we continue to kick down the road.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2012 3:27 PM GMT
    Art_Deco saidThey come here to this site not to discuss, but to deliver pre-packaged propaganda. Which they will not allow to be disputed or analyzed by the rest of us, merely force-fed and swallowed whole.

    Reminds me of the line from the movie The Blues Brothers: "We're on a mission from God." Unfortunately for them, some of us here still believe in critical thought, provable facts, and debate, rather than blind acceptance of ideological propaganda.

    And some of us come here and misrepresent their past.

    Just a general comment. Not thinking of anyone in particular, of course.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 14, 2012 3:28 PM GMT
    only Congress can raise taxes. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19133

    Apr 14, 2012 5:30 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    And some of us come here and misrepresent their past.


    There sure is a kernel of truth to this icon_wink.gif