Click image to enlarge |
I've noted previously that the math behind the Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan tax plan simply does not add up. Therefore, one can only assume that Romney and Ryan view the American electorate as so stupid that we cannot figure out that we are being sold a bunch oh snake oil or worse. As for what they would actually elected, it is simple impossible to know whether they would back away on the tax reduction promise or move forward and make the nation's budget deficit explode even more. A column on Bloomberg.com takes apart the "studies" that Ryan and Romney claim support their smoke and mirrors tax proposal. As you will note, some of these "studies" are in fact merely blog posts or opinion pieces. True studies, these pieces are not. Here are some column excerpts:
Mitt Romney's campaign says I'm full of it. I said Romney's tax plan is mathematically impossible: he can't simultaneously keep his pledges to cut tax rates 20 percent and repeal the estate tax and alternative minimum tax; broaden the tax base enough to avoid growing the deficit; and not raise taxes on the middle class. They say they have six independent studies -- six! -- that "have confirmed the soundness of the Governor’s tax plan," and so I should stop whining. Let's take a tour of those studies and see how they measure up.The Romney campaign sent over a list of the studies, but they are perhaps more accurately described as "analyses," since four of them are blog posts or op-eds. I'm not hating -- I blog for a living -- but I don't generally describe my posts as "studies."None of the analyses do what Romney's campaign says: show that his tax plan is sound. I'm going to walk through them individually, but first I want to make a broad point.The Tax Policy Center paper that sparked this discussion found that Romney's plan couldn't work because his tax rate cuts would provide $86 billion more in tax relief to people making over $200,000 than Romney could recoup by eliminating tax expenditures for that group. That means his plan is necessarily a tax cut for the rich, so if Romney keeps his promise not to grow the deficit, he'll have to raise taxes on the middle class.
The piece then goes on to debunk each of the "studies" cited by Romney/Ryan. In closing, the piece makes the following points:
Finally, I would note one item that the Romney campaign does not cite in support of its tax plan: Any analysis actually prepared for the campaign in preparation for announcing the plan in February. You would expect that, in advance of announcing a tax plan, the campaign would commission an analysis to make sure that all of its planks can coexist. Releasing that analysis now would be to the campaign's advantage, helping them put down claims like mine that their math doesn't add up.
Why don't they release that analysis? My guess is because the analysis doesn't exist, and the 20 percent rate cut figure was plucked out of thin air for political reasons without regard to whether it was feasible.
What's so troubling is the fact that I know people who are planning to vote for Romney simply because they want to reduce what they pay in taxes. Most of them, unfortunately, have no idea that the Romney/Ryan tax plan is a sham and that if the GOP ticket wins, either the tax cut proposals will not be implemented or, if they are, the budget deficit - which these people claim to be worried about - will explode. The math simply does NOT add up. What does that make Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan? Liars. Deliberate liars.
No comments:
Post a Comment