Quote Originally Posted by Hooahguy View Post
Hes a fiscal conservative. I like that. Less regulation means more company growth. Which in turn creates jobs. Taxing the rich even more doesnt do anything because they can still afford to take advantage of loopholes. Plus what kind of message does that send? That success is punished? We should not be vilifying the rich just for being rich. Taxing them will not solve the debt problem as Obama seems to think.
Certainly. But on the other hand, reducing taxes on the rich won't help the economy either and will only eat into the already low revenue stream. As for what message it sends, that might be important from a symbolic perspective but irrelevant from the practical one.

To solve the debt problem we need to take in more than we spend.
Absolutely. The question is, how is Romney gonna go about doing that.

The fact that Obama increased the debt by trillions in one term,...
He has no money and an uncooperative House. What do you expect him to do, default?


and yet still thinks that the solution to the debt problem is more taxation is foolish and incredibly naive. I have to wonder who is giving economic advice to him.
Taxation today is at its lowest level in the past ...umm... 30 years or so.

So lets say Obama wins, and increases the tax rates on the rich even more. What happens when their money dries up?
Their money won't dry up.

Im fairly certain that the rich people in this country do not have $16 trillion to solve the debt problem.
Raising taxes on the rich won't help much, I agree there. Romney wants to *lower* their taxes. How's that supposed to help?

And about Romney's comment about the poor- so what? There are charities and other programs in place that assist them. Welfare is a massive sinkhole for federal spending. Ive seen many people who are on welfare using iPods and other fancy electronics. For a while I volunteered regularly at a soup kitchen. I would often see people who we served on smartphones after they took their food. If they were really that poor, why do they have those things? Granted, poverty is still an issue and Im not saying that we should ignore the poor, but it cannot be a concern of the Feds.
Here's the thing...the poor like to spend, which in many cases accounts for their poverty. Poor will spend close to 100% of what they make. The rich won't. That means that pumping money into the poor == boosting the economy, as almost 100% of that money will be spent. And that's what our economy needs right now: spending. Giving a tax break to the rich will just mean that they have more money to play with on the stock market. How does it help the economy? It doesn't. The poor and their spending drives this economy far more than the rich and their spending. By further crippling the poor, we'll be crippling ourselves. Is it fair to give money to the poor? Hell no. The question is: do you want the economy to recover? If you do, then spending on the poor is a good strategy.