Rmoney's nomination may put the GOP into third party status

If this Bain thing brings Romney down as the Democrats intend, Ron Paul has the delegates to become the Republican nominee.

The best thing Romney has going for him is he is not Barry Soetoro. Can Amerika withstand four more years with Barry Soetoro and Neal Kinnock at the helm?

lsayre wrote:If this Bain thing brings Romney down as the Democrats intend, Ron Paul has the delegates to become the Republican nominee.

Interesting, a bunch of political op's (including the messiah himself) who know Absolutely nothing about business, how they operate, how FEC filings are done are calling Romney a Felon.

It's called Desperation. Polls show the bump Bam Bam got out of the Negative AD Blitz in the swing state push last week is already gone, they ain't buy what the Dolt in the WH is selling.

Wsherrick, your post proves my point exactly, anyone that doesn't agree becomes an arrogant, childish, underprivileged, hate monger. Why don't you proof read your own replies & talk about doing the same thing over & expecting a different result (think about it). It's me that wants to go back to monarchy, sure Long Live the King because soon Jeb will be running a Bush in the W.H. as ether P. or V.P. did the country good Long Live King Bush the Third. The economy is fundamentally sound, those boys know how to go to war without paying for it, can put in drug plans as well. Just do it long & hard enough & even a black man could get elected, how about you con's taking some responsibility.

Sam you give yourself away by congratulating the writer of a post that is nothing but mindless twaddle.

A lot of what you have written that is critical of Bush is true and deserved. His greatest mistake was to try and appease Teddy and Dodd and Frank by going along with their idiocy which led to the collapse.

Soaking the rich will somehow make everything just dandy even though unemployment is at depression levels. There just does not seem to be any logic behind the belief that government can legislate prosperity, though it can certainly hinder it. Before you slice up the pie differently there first has to be a pie to slice. All the fairness doctrine and all the goodwill in the world mean nothing if there is nothing to divvy up.

We have a Gross Domestic Product. What is governments fair share. More than half?

Franco, not only that, the twaddle that the OP wrote was as I said a talking points memo from the "Obama campaign" ( ie: Daily Kos DU etc) which goes to show he doesn't have an original thought to convey.

On the other hand Sam and a few other leftists here, read, figure out what fit's their narrative, re-write it and put it out. Makes for interesting back and forth but in the end, it's their mindless zoombie like following of the Che' wannabe that get's exposed.

Franco, show me where anybody ever said they want to soak the rich or take their riches for distribution. Just like under the law( which they make) for themselves they pay no where near what they claim to. So by closing self made loopholes & upholding the original law as intended before the loopholes that is somehow soaking them, don't forget they would pay the same % from bracket to bracket as those in that bracket & get no farther. To me income is income no matter where it comes from & a tax should be the tax period no exceptions or loopholes, the only ones getting soaked are the ones that have to pay what they owe because there are no Special Laws for them.

samhill wrote: To me income is income no matter where it comes from & a tax should be the tax period no exceptions or loopholes, the only ones getting soaked are the ones that have to pay what they owe because there are no Special Laws for them.

I agree with that.

It is just not our most pressing problem though. Expanding the economy is. Then tax reform makes sense.

Eliminating the income tax for everyone would expand the economy.

Unfortunately how do you even start to expand the economy & still run the country without funds? Easy for a fool that's living off the Gov. to say to eliminate taxes & then wonder where his money & training went, just like any household you need X amount of $ to stay afloat. Cut all business tax, some don't pay any while getting subsidies, others pay very little of what they should & just like everything the little one gets screwed. If you cut taxes much more on big business (which gets the breaks) we will be paying all of them & they still won't hire in this country, that idea of the job creators is BS after 12 years we should need more people to feel all those jobs.

samhill wrote:Unfortunately how do you even start to expand the economy & still run the country without funds? Easy for a fool that's living off the Gov. to say to eliminate taxes & then wonder where his money & training went, just like any household you need X amount of $ to stay afloat. Cut all business tax, some don't pay any while getting subsidies, others pay very little of what they should & just like everything the little one gets screwed. If you cut taxes much more on big business (which gets the breaks) we will be paying all of them & they still won't hire in this country, that idea of the job creators is BS after 12 years we should need more people to feel all those jobs.

Sam, we borrow most of what we use to run the country. You could easily cut it to zero and not affect much.

If business aren't job creators, maybe you'd prefer we all work for the government?

I hear it works great in Cuba!

Small business Jpete, small business, many create many jobs, if successful they are either bought out or run out of business by big business. What happened to your employer were they large or small? Besides being able to get rid of you , why did they head South at a time when many others are starting to come back. I was just at any open house tour of a local mid range business that is doing real well for itself, not bad for a molded fibreglass plant, going strong for 60 years.

jpete wrote:...we borrow most of what we use to run the country. You could easily cut [the income tax] to zero and not affect much.

Never thought of it that way before. I'd say you are pretty close to right.

samhill wrote:Small business Jpete, small business, many create many jobs, if successful they are either bought out or run out of business by big business. What happened to your employer were they large or small? Besides being able to get rid of you , why did they head South at a time when many others are starting to come back. I was just at any open house tour of a local mid range business that is doing real well for itself, not bad for a molded fibreglass plant, going strong for 60 years.

Ah, cheap shots. Keep 'em coming bartender!

It wasn't me the company was trying to get rid of, it was the union that kept pushing penny ante crap until the company got fed up.

It was easy to see coming. Corporate like to have manufacturing near it's customers and last I checked, there weren't many oil refineries in RI.

Simple really. Kill several birds with one stone. Give the union the high hard one, save on shipping, and onerous taxes in RI plus high utility costs.

Whatever it cost to hire the riggers to move the machines will be made up in the first year. And they had the property sold before they even finished moving out.

Truth be told, I don't think the work ever made it to Mexico City. Last I heard, my machine was stuck at the border because Homeland Security deemed it capable of making a weapon of mass destruction.

I don't know about that but I made it go BOOM once or twice!

rberq wrote:

jpete wrote:...we borrow most of what we use to run the country. You could easily cut [the income tax] to zero and not affect much.

Never thought of it that way before. I'd say you are pretty close to right.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2008/03/31 ... y-2007.htm

How much does the federal government take in through income tax? During fiscal year 2007 (Oct. 1, 2006, to Sept. 30, 2007) the IRS reported collecting a total of almost $2.4 trillion after refunds, with $248.6 billion of that coming from individual taxpayers.

As in recent years, about $350 billion in taxes due went uncollected, representing an annual phenomenon the IRS calls the "tax gap."

The budget for 2012, if I can use Wikipedia for a source(all the .gov sites were mumbo jumbo), was

The enacted budget contained $2.469 trillion in receipts and $3.796 trillion in outlays, for a deficit of $1.327 trillion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Unit ... d_spending

So individual taxes amount to about 6.5% of the total budget.

I'm sure we could easily eliminate individual income taxes and roll spending all the way back to the second Bush administration. I don't believe anyone was saying were weren't spending enough in 2004.