Posted on 04/18/2012 7:15:00 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
“Conservatives believe in the classical American definition of fairness – that every American be treated equally under the law…
“Governor Romney’s tax proposal violates that principle by giving politicians the power to carve out exceptions in the law for people of certain incomes. Furthermore, it sets the stage for future tax increases, as politicians will continually try to decrease the income threshold where citizens will no longer be able to avail themselves of the deductions.”
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.ajc.com ...
They want that money considered "capital" right down to the last lube job on their Cadillacs, or the rugs on the floors of their multi-million dollar mansions.
“Shut up, Newt...this race is over, we have DECLARED IT!”
signed/Boehner and McConnell
To go with that he is also going to get rid of the state tax and property tax deduction.
THAT would screw many in the middle class.
Rental property would technically be classified as a 2nd home.
But that’s beside the point.
The point is ... conservatives don’t try to pander to the class warfare peeps, real conservatives don’t try and stick it to the rich “who are not paying their fair share” (when they are actually paying for nearly everything already)
Take away those two and all the rest of deductions might just as well be gone, because it would force many to have to go short form.
Mortgage deduction is the only tax shelter/write-off that the middle class has. Figures he wants to do away with it.
It will crash the housing market.
As far as I am concerned, state and property taxes should not be considered deductions. Removing them from income is merely removing taxes paid on taxes. Double taxation!
You have all the DNC talking points down to a fine line. I'm sure they are watching this forum closely to learn how the best angle for attack should be approached.
Since the filthy and “evil” rich employ millions of people who build those mansions, work for those rotten rich people and earn a living maintaining that lifestyle, as well as, their support for the free enterprise system in which every one of us could have that same potential.
Oh, by the way, most people in the “Middle Class” owe their income and status to those people you so jealously hate.
The sad thing is, you are clueless, and believe that you are right in what you are doing, that the enemy is all around you and cheering you on as if you were one of them. And in reality, you have joined their cause, thinking the opposite.
WTF are you ranting about?
Kick mitt to the curb, Newt. Despite all the Mitt maggots who are determined to get this evil blood sucker in power.
The neighbors on 3 sides of me all own second homes and none of them are what I would call rich.
Huh?
Right, we certainly don't want an “evil bloodsucker” in power now, do we?
Thank God, that if things go your way, you will still have another 4 years of Obama to set things right............/s
It appears P-F took umbrage at your first sentence, in which it was your opinion that Mitt’s proposal on the mortgage interest deduction wouldn’t hurt the middle class nearly as much as would eliminating deductions for state and local taxes.
Others have chimed in with their opinions on that aspect.
But you’ve been tagged as a liberal, it would appear, thus his “rant” to you.
That’s what I think happened.
Go sell Romney some place else. We’re all booked up here.
If you would be so kind as to EXCUSE us for not wanting either of them in power.
We stand with Jim on that.
Knowing we often don’t get what we want, which is a true conservative, still, at this point, we do have freedom to speak about issues and to give Newt an attaboy when he speaks truth, and to express our disdain for both Obama and Obama-lite.
That is what I see Jim still doing.
Would you grant us that, rather than attacking so profusely when we don’t follow the exact speech you want at every turn in the road?
” ... it would force many to have to go short form.”
I think that’s the idea.
A reasonable flat tax gets rid of all deductions and would gain more support.
Government needs to shrink by at least 1/3. As long as they are sucking in the amount of $$ they currentky are; they will keep playing with and controlling us.
We need to say to the government; no thanks, get off my lawn.
PSYCHO-FREEP meant to that response for post #2 but somehow managed to respond to (your) post #4.
I suspect you will shortly get an apology.
I think he is a moron, too freaking stupid and out of touch to run for anything.
I’m against just about all things Mitt.
The plan is bad, which Newt outlines in his comments.
Once again Romney doesn’t have the right answer. If he wins the nomination I will have to vote for him but Newt is the only one for me. Newt has the best answers and the guts to make them happen.
If it's Mitt vs. Obama, there will be no conservative running, and most of us won't be taking sides. So who cares if the Democans attack the Republicrats successfully or not? We'll be sticking to speaking the truth and not spinning things to favor one of the liberals.
Ok, now I’m starting to get it.
There I was searching desperately for something in Beagle’s post that could’ve set off P-F, when in fact he was ranting at a different post but sent it to Beagle.
Sheesh!
However, I’m still annoyed that he keeps attacking us for not wanting Mitt by saying we’re helping Obama.
He needs to say that directly to JR’s face, then.
And I won’t give up my free speech nor my Newt preference to kowtow to his rants.
Eliminate all deductions install a flat tax and then everybody will be treated “the same”. As it is now the tax code is strictly designed to buy votes.
Many state governors are not happy with Romney’s plan. Do NOTE he announced this at a “behind closed doors” fund raiser and word leaked out. Romney is a fool..we can’t trust this man to lead our country. God help us but we are so screwed.
Thank YOU Fox News, the NRC, Rove, Coulter, Drudge, gop E for selling us down the river. You do know they will do some quick damage control to hush this up and/or cover it up.
GO NEWT!
Sorry, I was babbling. When you deduct your taxes from your income, (which happens when you itemize), you are eliminating paying taxes on money that you have already used to pay taxes. In effect, that deduction removes taxes on taxes. The term “deduction” seems to imply some sort of privilege.....like not paying taxes on the money you used for mortgage income, or, even the money you choose to donate to charity, or your home office, etc. Removing your state and property taxes is not really a perk. Does that make sense? Removing those deductions should never be on the table. I live in Mayland, where the income tax is already stratospheric, and set to go higher. Having to pay taxes on that amount is just adding insult to injury.
that RV is a second home.
that boat over a certain size is a second home.
that time share is a second home.
it is in fact a poorly thought out plan and is a romney advisor stunt to appeal to class warefare.
Romeny needs to think for himself and less be spoonfed by overpaid DC insider advisors.
:::looking both ways before crossing street::: I’m fairly new posting here and so will probably get blasted. BUT...I just don’t get where you’re coming from w/ this post.
I have many issues w/ Romney and this tax proposal is just one area. In my little opinion...I do think that the tax rules are fairly complicated and have been used to pick ‘winners and losers’. For example...why would one person get to take a deduction on a second home and not another person? What are the parameters and who get’s to decide the parameters? I live in a state that has no state income tax but we do have an onerous sales tax. Until recently, state sales tax was NOT allowed as a deduction but state income tax WAS allowed. Again, who set’s the parameters?
So no, I don’t cast aspersions on the rich. I cast my aspersions on the corrupt pol’s who are bought and paid for by ‘special’ interst groups...special interst groups that are NOT concerned about me or mine.
Get rid of the complicated and unfair tax laws, and perhaps, perhaps we will see less corrupted pols.
Nah, there will always be something to bribe the crooked with.
One last thing, I personally do not owe my lively hood (income) to any ‘rich’ person nor does my spouse. But if a rich person wants to adopt me, I would be fine w/ that.
That pushes all the pork spending taxes to the local level where it is easier to fight them.
The liberal $hitholes can wallow in their own misery.
If things go my way, NEWT will be President. HE IS THE ONLY ONE that WANTS TO, ABLE TO, restore our country according to the Constitution.
That statement '4 more years of Obama' is meant for the WEAK for them to succumb/bow down to evil through fear.
Nice of you to show how weak you are. You have no idea what is up ahead but are frightened of the prospect of it.
PATRIOTS ARE NEVER WEAK. If they were, there would never have been a great America. You enjoy what they accomplished but don't have the guts to keep it! Sweat off their brow, not yours. Sissy!
This country got along just fine for 140 years with no income tax.
Since we ushered it in, we have been on a steady course of steady decline into socialism and an ever growing federal government complete with a dictatorial and incestual bureaucracy.
Get rid of the income tax and get your liberty back.
If you will read post #2, you’ll see what apparently set him off, but he posted to you rather than the trigger post.
That’s lancey howard’s theory and it does make sense.
But I will resist the former number one Newt supporter’s current efforts to intimidate us into silence out of fear of Obama.
I’m terrified of Obama.
I will still express my opinion on issues even if it’s that Mitt’s tax plan is awful.
I will still support anybody but Romney in our primaries regardless if every Boehner and McConnell type says it’s over and I must rally for Mitt.
ping to my last comment, #39, in re: your comments
Me Too!! What you said.
To go with that he is also going to get rid of the state tax and property tax deduction.
THAT would screw many in the middle class.””’
One of the local channels said that since high income earners buy more expensive homes and have a higher amount of interest to deduct, that scenario just isn’t FAIR!
I was stunned.
When you compare the interest $$$ paid on a home loan—whether middle class or ‘rich’, it is about the same PERCENTAGE of their gross income.
When you are more wealthy, you can afford a higher cost home. You often also get a lower rate of interest because you are a better risk to the mortgage holder.
BUT the PERCENTAGE application is about the same.
The bigger problem facing the middle class is that they tend to OVERBUY because they think they deserve it, and then when there is any kind of bump in their road’s economy, they cannot pay the mortgage.
They also tend to have to pay a HIGHER rate of interest because they are a poorer risk to the mortgage holder.
Rental property would technically be classified as a 2nd home.”””
NOT necessarily-— there is also commercial property labels for apartments, duplexes, etc, that a person can own.
A 2nd home is a 2nd home. Many people have such & NEVER rent it out for any amount of time, any amount of money or to anyone.
Taking away such deductions will also un=qualify most people from getting a mortgage in the first place.
That sounds backward. Can you clarify?
Let’s Bump Plans: A Comparison of Gingrich and Romney’s Tax Plans
http://www.newt.org/2011/10/30/lets-bump-plans-a-comparison-of-gingrich-and-romneys-tax-plans/
I am afraid my clarification will result in more obfuscation.
I think that deductions of state income tax and property taxes should be sacrosanct, and untouchable. What you are deducting, when you itemize, is amounts of money from the income that deserves to be taxed. Pretend that I pay the state of Maryland $9000 in income tax (I wish!), well, if I cannot take away that amount from my federal return, and I am paying the 30% rate ( for simplicity’s sake, tho it isn’t far off), well then, I am paying an additional $3000 on money that was never mine to begin with since the People’s Republic of Mayland had it earmarked as theirs all along.
Where I have confused the issue in my replies is that when people speak of “deductions”, it has sort of come to mean somewhat discretionary things, like mortgage interest, and even medical expenses.
I do not classify tax payments (mentally, to myself) in that same vein. Did I do any better, or just muddy my water further?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.