plan on taking away? I admit he sounded good in the debate but he did not give details. Of course Obama did not press him for any. Does any of Mitts supporters know what deductions he plans on taking away from us....while not raising taxes.:shrug:
What Deductions Does Mitt
- Thread starter StevieD
- Start date
Not like this.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/hV-05TLiiLU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Stevie - he would be crazy for listing them at this point.
My hunch is, it would be things like 2nd home mortgage interest, and the carried interest deduction the wall street guys use all the time (to reclassify income as investment income, thereby lowering the taxes on it).
I would like to think he'd limit these deductions only above a certain level of income.
But, very likely, there is not going to be enough money that way to get the 20% tax cut he proposes. What he did say is, he would lower the tax cut to make the change in deductions and change in exemptions equal. Where that makes it end up, who knows?
The CLUE was in the debate, he said he would work with democrats, knowing there has to be Give and Take.
Don't you think it is important that he tells us what they are. How can we make an informed decision on this guy if we don't know what he has planned? Personally, it scares the crap out of me.
I hate it when they say they have a plan but will not tell us what it is. Nixon had a secret plant to end Viet Nam. Turns out to be the same thing Johnson was doing and we threw him out! Obama and Iraq, all he did was follow the disastours Bush plan. If I knew all he was going to do concerning those two stupid wars was follow Bush's plan I would not have voted for him.
Anyway, it is nice to get an answer from a thinking person.
Stevie - I guess I don't see this much different than when Obama ran on healthcare reform. We all knew that this would be a massive wealth reallocation, as there was tremendous cost to it.
If I remember right, Obama said "I'll make sure everyone has healthcare", without the financial details made public. IF he'd have said, I will implement a program that costs over $1 trillion dollars, ensure that premiums increase significantly to individuals, take $700B out of Medicare, increase capital gains taxes by 3.8%, etc, it would have significantly hurt his electability.
Some people loved the idea of having everyone covered under a government run program, but as usual, nobody loves paying for it (unless it is OPM - other people's money). So, of course, Obama was not going to discuss the possible details - as they would have been picked apart and used against him. Realistically, he had no clue anyway what the details would be until someone wrote up the Democratic plan and gave it to him.
Same thing with Romney. Yes, I do think his plan could work. But he certainly isn't going to lay out the details (if he even knows them yet) of his plan, just like Obama (or any politician wouldn't), so his opponent can pick them apart and use them against him.
That's why I give Ryan so much credit. He actually put a detailed plan out there to lower Medicare costs. Now, some people might not like it, but he did it before running as VP, so he is being transparent in his thinking. And he gets picked apart by doing so on this issue.
Yes, I'd love to see more transparency by politicians, but in the 24/7 news world we live in today, and the quickness of making every policy proposal into a attack add (look how quick the Big Bird ads came out - of course, it was one of the stupidest things I've ever seen to put an add out like that).
All politicians must speak in generalities before an election, as every decision they make that benefits someone, hurts someone else. Financials, tax policy, and healthcare policy is a 0 sum game. If some benefit, others don't.
Yes that's what bugs me about Romney and the supporters. They cut down Obama and his plans and say "what has he done?" But have no answer when I ask, "What is Romney going to do?" I would really like to know. Too many lies from both sides.
Mags- I know everyone is pist about Obamacare and it's a tax, but from what I read it seems like Obama care is going to level out over a 3 year period. More or less derailing the escalation in price. Health care keeps rising at a great rate and Obamacare is going to straighten that out. It's like pay a little more now but control it in the end.
How does Romney suppose to cut taxes by 20% and yet take care of the debt at the same time? I just think he is slimy. This country deserves better, I wish we could break down all parties and all the bullshit spending on these elections.
Mags- I know everyone is pist about Obamacare and it's a tax, but from what I read it seems like Obama care is going to level out over a 3 year period. More or less derailing the escalation in price. Health care keeps rising at a great rate and Obamacare is going to straighten that out. It's like pay a little more now but control it in the end.
How does Romney suppose to cut taxes by 20% and yet take care of the debt at the same time? I just think he is slimy. This country deserves better, I wish we could break down all parties and all the bullshit spending on these elections.
BP - you are wrong on prices leveling out. And, a lot of people are going to pay much more for health insurance than they used to.
Let me give you an example: Let's take a 40 year old, husband and wife. They live in NY, and make $300,000 per year, $50,000 via capital gains. They have an individual insurance policy - they run their own business.
Their premium now is, for 2 people, is $4,000 per year, as they have a high deductible health plan - which serves them well, and they are very happy with it.
Now, with Obamacare, these plans will not be allowed. They will have to move to a $1000 deductible plan. The change in price to move to that plan is another 35% in premium.
But, because of Ocare, premiums are expected to increase in the individual market by 10-15% SOLELY due to the new entrants that are getting health care for the first time. These folks have pent up demand, as they have not have coverage for a long time - and for many, the coverage will be free, so they will utilize the heck out of it. So, the 10-15% may be too low, but we'll use that for now.
So, to get coverage for Ocare, premiums for this couple will increase between 45% and 50% (this has been backed by numerous Milliman studies (actuarial consulting group). So, their premium jumps from $4000 to $5800 (using the 45% number to be conservative). SO FAR, a $1800 change.
But, that's not all. There is also an additional 0.9% tax on Medicare earnings on each of them, up to $108K a year. BUT, they run their own business, so they must pay the employer share AND the employee share, so it is an additional 1.8% for each of them, up to $108K in earnings. So, we need to add another $1,944 per person, or $3,888 for the family that are costs associated with Obamacare that they are now paying for their insurance.
Is that all? Oh no! We forgot about the additional 3.8% they will pay on the $50K of capital gains they made. So, let's add another $1,900 to their insurance bill - because under the current system, they wouldn't have to pay that additional tax to get health insurance.
So, let's see, their total new cost would be: $5800 + $3,888 + $1,900 = $11,588 to get their insurance under Obamacare.
Yet they were paying $4,000 total, for a HDHP, that worked for them and were very happy about. Yes, the benefits under the new Ocare mandated plan are richer, but they are healthy and aren't interested in getting a taxpayer abortion or having the government pay for their birth control. They own insurance to pay for the big stuff, not the "oil changes" and other preventative care that insurance should not be paying for.
So, they could be paying $4,000, but due to Obamacare, they are now paying $11,588.
Yea, that is a great deal. People easily forget about the taxes in Obamacare that allow many people to get free health insurance. It just results in a lot of people paying a heck of a lot more for their insurance than they used to - in this case 190% more.
And before you say, well $300K is frickin' rich, I would dispute that. In NY or Cali, that isn't much. Heck, in Madison WI we have bus drivers making over $100K.
I do not wish to get into the Obama Care battle here. I have not heard an alternative, except for Romney saying he would keep the good stuff and get rid of the bad, again without any clues as to what is good and what is bad.
As I understand this tax thing he wants to lower taxes but cut deductions so the out of pocket remains the same but it will bring the tax down for the small business owner who is taxed at the indivisual rate, which is the whole reason for this smoke screen Mitt has devised.
One more thing: there is nothing in Obamacare to decrease prices. Nothing.
They had a chance - there was a bill on the floor to allow reimportantion of prescription drugs from other countries. If you didn't know, most of the world pays signficantly less for prescriptions than US citizens do. Why? Because we allow US drug companies to charge much more here, to pay for basically all the R&D they do. Why did the bill fail? Because Obama made a backroom deal with Pharma, to not go after them in the deal, in exchange for $80M in advertisting supporting the bill to try to get public attitudes changed (it didn't work, but they tried). All the Democratic senators were told to vote against the bill, even though it would cut costs significantly.
Why do you think costs will go down? There is nothing in the bill to limit doctors or hospital costs. Yes, they did screw insurers with the loss ratio regulation, and that helped minutely. But insurance is a small part of the overall costs - 15% to 20%. The rest of it is doctors, hospitals, prescriptions - and none of those are being forced down (Obama couldn't take that on and have a chance to pass the bill - it was easy to villify insurers, but nobody wants their doctors called names).
Now, we will have millions coming into the system, with significant health conditions (which is why they couldn't get insurance before). Surely, they will drive up the average cost. And even those who are healthy who didn't have coverage, those folks will also drive up costs, as they have pent up demand, i.e. wanting health services, since they didn't have coverage before. How many people that you know with health insurance coverage, over the age of 40, aren't on some type of prescription? Lipitor, etc.
And the mandated wellness coverage and birth control - what a joke. The president kept saying "this will save us money" - even though every actuary knows that is not true. He finally relented when he was told he was lying - and then stopped saying that. Preventative care, while I'll admit is good public policy, does not save money in the long run. The costs of administering all the tests dwarfs the cost savings of finding things early, since the "hit" rate is very low on finding bad things.
Finally, I am still disgusted at Obama lying when trying to get this passed. He kept saying one of the driving factors for him was watching his mom die, while arguing with her insurance company about getting her health claims paid. Biggest lie ever - it was reported that ALL her health claims were paid. The dispute was in regards to her disability policy - and it was a legitimate dispute. But Obama clearly said "the health insurance companies screwed her and didn't pay her claims". But our liberal media didn't call him on this (a few articles, but he should have been crucified for this).
It will not decrease costs, short run or long run, in my opinion, and will further hurt our job market. Many companies are already reducing hours for their employees (Olive Garden is an example), to ensure that they do not get hit with more additional taxes from Obamacare.