Except that you tossed in things like "deficits don't matter", which nobody in this thread claimed.That came after the context of me thinking you thought it was senseless to try to understand Romney's numbers, which would be as senseless as Cheney's comment that deficits don't matter. That's the connection.That's as may be, but where does it say that Mitt will raise my taxes?You took that too literally. I was thinking you thought it was senseless to look at the numbers, so I suggested the possibility of Romney raising your taxes as a way of making the point that reviewing the numbers might be a reasonable exercise. Please see it in the context in which it was said.No, I'm shooting at left wingers who want to argue about Romney's tax treatment of security X while ignoring Obama's plans altogether.A voter can reasonably want to understand the policy position of one candidate, and that has no bearing on what that voter feels towards the other main candidate. You're not going to vote for Obama, but it's reasonable for you to accurately understand his positions, if you're interested in doing so. Who knows, some opinions might be changed.how does he propose to close the ... budget gap?Good question,Actually I take that back, it's not a good question. But I'm different because I think Republican policies caused most of the deficit, and Romney would continue with the same ideology. I also think Obama would have a much lower budget deficit to be criticized on if he had not given in to Republican demands on things like extension of marginal tax rate cuts, for example.The Buffet Rule is moronic ... Won't matter in the slightest with respect to the deficit.I agree. Thinking wealthier people are going to more fairly pay their share through W2 income misses the boat.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. M