What republicans claim this? If they do, they are wrong. I've not heard any big time republican leader say any such thing.
His math is sound. Your pie charts are irrelevant, the republicans are talking about income taxes. So list them and offer some numbers that counter his.
yes, I am not disagreeing with the the pie chart. I am telling you that the 20% number that I used was inclusive of 82% of the pie chart. I didn't include corporate, excise or death taxes which account for the remaining 18%, but as I stated previously those figures do not move the needle very much because those taxes are imposed regardless of what the unemployment rate is. the numbers are verifiable any where you would like to look, Pride. It is no secret that we currently have around 13 million unemployed people in this country. I went ahead and used 15 million unemployed just so I wouldn't get accused of slighting Republicans. If you take those 15 million people and give all of them full time jobs tomorrow. Good paying jobs that pay them all $50,000 per year. Currently the average household income in this country is actually around 48 grand and some change so, once more, I was being gracious in an attempt to give the Republicans the benefit of the doubt. Lastly, between federal taxes, social security and medicare each of those individuals is going to pay an average of 20%. Simple math tells us that 20% of $50,000 is ten grand. If 15 million people went back to work tomorrow, each paying an average of ten grand per year in taxes; the total revenue increase would be about 150 billion dollars. All of my variables are easy to verify and past that, it is simply math. to be fair, I even took things a step further and looked at how that increase in employment and cash in the market place would "multiply" in the community. In essence: how many times are each of those dollars re-used in the community? The answer to that varies but, again by very conservative estimates, I used 3. this is the number that most conservative economists espouse as a realistic multiplier. So, if you take that 150 billion in increased revenue to the government and triple it (multiplier) you end up with 450 billion in increased revenue by achieving full employment. The Republicans have said repeatedly, in fact one of the basic premises of their tax and unemployment argument, is that lowering taxes creates jobs and those jobs increase federal revenues enough to more than make up the deficit created by cutting taxes. Our current budget deficit is upwards of a trillion dollars per year. By the Republicans economic, tax and unemployment reasoning if we simply cut taxes and increase the base of tax payers, we can erase our budget deficit. Above I have shown that their reasoning falls short by a half a trillion dollars and!, and this is the real kicker......The figures I used above are using our current tax rates. they actually want to cut taxes from their current rates so it makes their math even that much more unachievable. this isn't partisanship, this is math....plain old simple math.
pick one, any one. this is the republican plan in a nut shell mobius: reduce taxes, the reduced taxes create so many jobs that it increases the base of taxpayers enough so that federal revenues actually increase. it is fuzzy math at it's best.
That's not the way it works as you have pointed out to me many times. His numbers are backed by nothing.. Furthermore, it: A: isn't a republican policy -- he offered no proof of this -- which budget uses his numbers? Oh that's right, not a single fucking one. B: his numbers are made up -- the math might work, but what "republican budget" did he get this from? C: once TigerNC actually uses a republican budget -- like the Ryan one -- there is this thing called the CBO that will confirm or deny with far better results than this shit -- WAIT THEY DID THAT ALREADY -- http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-20-Ryan_Specified_Paths_2.pdf D: bottom line, he uses the income tax system as his "republican" idea to balance the budget when we all know it is far more than a review of the tax code.
So now you're saying that republicans claim revenues will increase with lower taxes. This is what you said before...... and then I still don't believe any republican, or any other politician for that matter, has said that if we lower taxes, we can eliminate the deficit. If they have, please point them out to me so I can join you in mocking them.
just a bit of info on Romney quote Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney's now infamous commentsabout half of America made at a May fundraiser are not only offensive, but also inaccurate. In a video taken at the fundraiser and leaked on Monday, Romney claimed that 47 percent of Americans are Obama voters that "pay no income tax," "are dependent upon government" and "believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it." Romney's 47 percent figure lumped together separate groups that have little relation to one another. Most Americans do pay taxes: The poorest fifth of Americans paid an effective tax rate of 17 percent last year, and the second-poorest fifth paid an effective tax rate of 21 percent, when factoring in payroll taxes, sales taxes and property taxes, among others, according to Citizens for Tax Justice. It is true that 46 percent of American households did not pay federal income taxes last year, according to the Tax Policy Center. But that number is unusually high, in part because of the recession -- and a majority of that 46 percent still paid payroll taxes. Only 18 percent of American households paid no income taxes and no payroll taxes last year. It is largely low-income seniors and very poor people that legally don't pay federal income taxes or payroll taxes, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and the Tax Policy Center. It was also inaccurate for Romney to claim that those who don't pay federal income taxes would vote for President Obama "no matter what." Nearly all states with a high percentage of Americans that don't pay federal income taxes vote Republican in presidential elections, according to the Washington Post. Moreover, Republican policy -- on the part of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush -- has pushed to move poorer people off of the federal income tax rolls, as noted by theWashington Post's Ezra Klein and Newsweek's Matt Zeitlin. As for entitlements, contrary to Romney's portrayal, more than 90 percent of entitlement benefits go to the elderly, seriously disabled or members of working households, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Romney stood by his comments on Monday, telling reporters that though his comments were "not elegantly stated," Obama's approach is "attractive to people who are not paying taxes."
Well I don't agree with a lot of what Romney says or does but I would be shocked if he said that all we needed to do was lower taxes which would create more employment, which would balance the budget.
maybe im wrong, but i think he said something to the effect of lowering taxes creates more employment, which would raise revenues to lower the debt.
