He has led fruitful efforts to bring jobs back Books.... http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...ent-obama-says-master-lock-has-brought-back-/
People are not spending anywhere the levels of 2007. We are a long way away from that. Daily US consumer spending in 2007 was around $160 and today it is half of that...around $80 per day.
No, look at the Bush economy from 2000-2007. The problem happened when the financial and housing crisis hit and people lost their jobs and homes. Spending levels dropped dramatically. If you have a low tax rate when a crisis occurs, then you get big gains in the deficit. Romney gets all of his income from long term capital gains. That means he invested in a company and made a return. If his investments fail...guess how much he makes? Zero!! What Romney is proposing is great for the middle class. He's lowering marginal taxes by 20%. So if you're in the 15% tax bracket, you will now pay 12%. If you're in the 25% bracket, you will pay 20%. Also, he is eliminating capital gains taxes for low and middle income people. Most people forget that capital gains also happens on the sale of your home. So right now, if you made $100K on the sale of your home you would have to give the government between $15-25K depending on how long you owned the home. Under Romney, you wouldn't owe anything.
Most people stay in their homes long enough to not have to pay capital gains. And if you don't you rarely make any profit in this market. Pretty much irrelevant therefore, to real life joes.
Granted, the IRS rules state that you must have occupied the residence for at least two of the last five years. If you buy a home and a dramatic rise in value causes you to sell it a year later, you would be required to pay capital gains tax on the gain. But you are correct that many people stay in their homes longer than 5 years. But my point with Romney, is that no matter when you sell it you don't have to pay capital gains. If you sell your home or if sell stocks you own...you get to keep it all.
Link please because companies like Apple are still making record profits as well as corporations overall so if we aren't spending half of what we use to where are the profits coming from?
The Bush tax cuts were meant to be TEMPORARY. So why are Conservatives fighting so hard to make them a permanent back door tax cut in the federal tax code??? If the Bush tax cuts aren't allowed to sunset, you're blowing a $5 trillion dollar hole in the deficit over the next decade.:smt101
Can't wait to watch Romney slap around Obama some more. It was fun to watch. Oh & I see jameswilson is doing work AGAIN. Just owning mofos left & right. keep up the good work homie, I'd rep you if I could.
It's good that Romney supporters sense hope for their candidate after his strong debate performance last night. Rallying the troops and all that jazz. To the unseasoned eye, he has a pathway to victory with similar performances but the smart money is on the balance in the Senate. Akin appears to be toast in Missouri but pay special attention to the Senate races in CT and MA.
Here's a link to the Consumer Expenditure Report. Some companies like Apple are doing well, but that doesn't mean every company is doing well. Apple also laid off retail workers in the US, UK, and Canada. They also produce the majority of their devices overseas where costs are low. So that is how they have record profits.
Obama re-instated the Bush tax cuts. He knew raising taxes right now would have been catastrophic. Romney is proposing his own unique tax system though. The Romney proposal would lower the 15% tax bracket to 12%...it would lower the 25% bracket to 20%.
Like I said a profit in this market is unlikely. So you can promise me things that I can't use and I still have nothing from it at the end of the day. But thanks for the uhhh.........non gift. :smt042 A lot of average people don't own stocks. And many don't own homes and it all means nothing except to Romney's cronnies.
The problem with this is that we have been doing this since Clinton left office and where are we? The tax rates are lower than ever in the Clinton era and it has gotten worse. Unemployment was over 9% during the bush era. Capitalist, like myself who pays even lower in taxes percentage than Romney, will not go out and buy American products when I can get it cheaper from china. We will all buy foreign items as most people have done in here. It is cheaper. This idea does not fit the real world. A place where Americans can buy cheap products from other countries and American companies can higher cheaper employees in other countries. The money will flow out. If it is American company, then the money will be held by the company or it's owners. They will find every loophole to avoid paying taxes. This will, in the end, get a lower amount to pay of the debt. The truth of the matter is services have to be paid for. Not paying them off is why we are where we are. How do you pay for them? The American people have only one way to do it. taxes. You got to do it over a long run to make it less painful(will cost more) but it has to be done. Obama's plan,which sort of follows Clinton who lowered the debt as oppose any republican president(at the end of their term) in history, is a good one. You have to pay for the services or the debt will continue to climb. Lets get this straight. The government doesn't give squat. It is us, the American people, that give to our other fellow americans. Again, you have to pay for services. I was taxed away for the military, teachers and firefighters. I am fine with that. The military, I would pay voluntary if asked at the same rate I pay now. I don't want some other country rolling up on my property with a tank to take my stuff. Finally, someone has to pay for it. You can't sit and complain about the debt and then say let's not pay it. That's not how responsibility works. The American people choose to place the debt ,guess what the American people have to pay it. 99% or 1% We can agree on the idea that we should have higher paying jobs.However, Romney's idea has been used by bush. It didn't work. We are where we are today partly do to it.
Obama only reinstated those tax cuts for political reasons. It would look ugly if you taxed the middle class and the election is coming. If those tax cuts had not affected the middle class, they would not have been reinstated.
A politician did something for political reasons? Shocking. Ideally, I'm sure Obama (good intentions and all) would have done the right thing if not for politics.
