The Romney Plan

They lowered taxes for 8 years under Bush... He created 3 million jobs and the worst recession since the Great Depression... There's nothing wrong with the "model"...It's been tried and proven to be an abject failure.

Obama has already created more private-sector jobs in 3-1/2 years than Bush did in 8 years...

FredHayek wrote: And has been demonstrated by the last three years of the Obama-recession, anyone can do better with this economy than BHO.

Really? You really have sucked down the :Koolaid:

Romney could, and probably would, make Obama's economy look really good after a few years of his revenue cuts. misguided spending cuts, and disregard for those who really drive the US economy, the middle class. If you ever decide to take off your conservative glasses, the reality of what the Republicans, pushed by the Tea Party, want to do will be seen as an unmitigated disaster.

archer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: And has been demonstrated by the last three years of the Obama-recession, anyone can do better with this economy than BHO.

Really? You really have sucked down the :Koolaid:

Romney could, and probably would, make Obama's economy look really good after a few years of his revenue cuts. misguided spending cuts, and disregard for those who really drive the US economy, the middle class. If you ever decide to take off your conservative glasses, the reality of what the Republicans, pushed by the Tea Party, want to do will be seen as an unmitigated disaster.

What Obama has done?
1) Real wealth for the middle class has gone down.
2) Real wealth for the 1% has increased.
3) Healthcare costs have risen.
4) Unemployment has risen.
5) Energy prices and goverment debt has risen.

Sure, BHO talks a good game, but you have to look at results. And Democrat'sForSales silly stats about increased employment, do you really believe it? If jobs were increasing, why are real wages continuing to decrease?
Why is the American Happiness Factor the lowest since the Carter years?

FredHayek wrote:

archer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: And has been demonstrated by the last three years of the Obama-recession, anyone can do better with this economy than BHO.

Really? You really have sucked down the :Koolaid:

Romney could, and probably would, make Obama's economy look really good after a few years of his revenue cuts. misguided spending cuts, and disregard for those who really drive the US economy, the middle class. If you ever decide to take off your conservative glasses, the reality of what the Republicans, pushed by the Tea Party, want to do will be seen as an unmitigated disaster.

What Obama has done?
1) Real wealth for the middle class has gone down.
2) Real wealth for the 1% has increased.
3) Healthcare costs have risen.
4) Unemployment has risen.
5) Energy prices and goverment debt has risen.

Sure, BHO talks a good game, but you have to look at results. And Democrat'sForSales silly stats about increased employment, do you really believe it? If jobs were increasing, why are real wages continuing to decrease?
Why is the American Happiness Factor the lowest since the Carter years?

I know fred......everything bad that has happened to the US economy in the last 6 years is Obama's fault. The man is amazing don't ya think? When he was only a senator he must have set the course for the world economic meltdown.....he caused the banks to fail, the auto company execs to make crappy decisions, the economies of Europe to crash, the housing market to decline, the mortgage lenders to make bad loan after bad loan. Yeah, if we just defeat Obama the world will come up roses.

What's not to love about the conservative pollyannas? Just elect a Republican, even one with no plan, or a bad plan, and everything will miraculously turn around.

archer wrote:

FredHayek wrote:

archer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: And has been demonstrated by the last three years of the Obama-recession, anyone can do better with this economy than BHO.

Really? You really have sucked down the :Koolaid:

Romney could, and probably would, make Obama's economy look really good after a few years of his revenue cuts. misguided spending cuts, and disregard for those who really drive the US economy, the middle class. If you ever decide to take off your conservative glasses, the reality of what the Republicans, pushed by the Tea Party, want to do will be seen as an unmitigated disaster.

What Obama has done?
1) Real wealth for the middle class has gone down.
2) Real wealth for the 1% has increased.
3) Healthcare costs have risen.
4) Unemployment has risen.
5) Energy prices and goverment debt has risen.

Sure, BHO talks a good game, but you have to look at results. And Democrat'sForSales silly stats about increased employment, do you really believe it? If jobs were increasing, why are real wages continuing to decrease?
Why is the American Happiness Factor the lowest since the Carter years?

I know fred......everything bad that has happened to the US economy in the last 6 years is Obama's fault. The man is amazing don't ya think? When he was only a senator he must have set the course for the world economic meltdown.....he caused the banks to fail, the auto company execs to make crappy decisions, the economies of Europe to crash, the housing market to decline, the mortgage lenders to make bad loan after bad loan. Yeah, if we just defeat Obama the world will come up roses.

What's not to love about the conservative pollyannas? Just elect a Republican, even one with no plan, or a bad plan, and everything will miraculously turn around.

I didn't read into Fred's comments that Obama caused all those problems, but Obama did promise to fix most of them. There are different ways to approach and fix the problems, we just have to look at the end result and decide if Obama's fixes are the most effective and efficient.

If anyone was looking for a quick fix for the economy, then yes they were disappointed. You don't fix decades of government mistakes and mismanagement in a few years. I am OK with a slow steady stop to the bleeding and signs of slow and steady growth. I believe a measured approach is more beneficial to the country in the long run than a quick fix that is not sustainable and may cause irreparable harm to our economy. Ryan's budget seemed to be just that.

As we all know plans are something to talk about but really never seem to work regardless of who tis.

archer wrote: If anyone was looking for a quick fix for the economy, then yes they were disappointed. You don't fix decades of government mistakes and mismanagement in a few years. I am OK with a slow steady stop to the bleeding and signs of slow and steady growth. I believe a measured approach is more beneficial to the country in the long run than a quick fix that is not sustainable and may cause irreparable harm to our economy. Ryan's budget seemed to be just that.

I don't believe it was Obama's fault but he hasn't done anything to fix it. In fact he doesn't have a clue how to fix it.

No, it's not OK. Federal spending should be below the tax capacity of the union (average of 18% of GDP over the last 80 years), not in excess of it.

Here I was going to take an exception to PS's assertion that we should return to a tax capacity of 18%- the average over the last 80 years- but again I see that you correctly state what should be done- the key word being BELOW the tax capacity. The lower the better- and the faster the recovery.

And no- Romney will not do this - we know this- but we would rather have something instead of nothing, or worse with Obama. Over the last 80 years- tax rates have gone up and down, and with the exception of the depression- the ability of the country to grow is handicapped further when rates are higher, and relief appears when rates are lowered.

We have NO capacity to grow- none. Tax rates are now higher than the capacity of the USA to grow, in affect if you raise taxes at this point, the economy dives into recession. The proof is that over the last 4 years, we are barely able to keep our heads above water. Even president Clinton came out and said so much just a few weeks ago- why don't the liberals even stop for a second and listen?

The tax rate- and the size of government has gobbled up all the capacity for growth, and the ONLY way out is to cut government well below the 18% level, so that the economy really does get a boost to get going again. This is what Libertarians have been saying for years- Romney won't do it, and Obama sure as hell won't do it.

Mitt's doesn't think it will take the GDP from 3.1% to 5%. He believes the economy will expand once Obama is fired by America, and the expanded economy will actual lower debt as a percentage of GDP.

The quote above has it correct- cut spending and cut taxes- and the economy will expand - and this is the only sane approach to correct this mess. And for those who think it won't happen fast- your wrong, it will happen with lightning speed - America is the best economic engine in the world, and our workers and businesses will respond the second conditions improve.

Our entrepreneur's and corporations are the best in the world, get out of our way and watch us go. Clean out the air filter- which is clogged with massive regulations and taxes, and pull out that potato in our tailpipe we call a president, and this hot rod will be winning races again!

Taxing our best performers in an attempt to "raise revenue" - or promoting an attitude of class warfare is a sure formula for disaster- it only works for a short while when the capacity to tax exists, and those days are behind us for the forseeable future.

archer wrote: If anyone was looking for a quick fix for the economy, then yes they were disappointed. You don't fix decades of government mistakes and mismanagement in a few years. I am OK with a slow steady stop to the bleeding and signs of slow and steady growth. I believe a measured approach is more beneficial to the country in the long run than a quick fix that is not sustainable and may cause irreparable harm to our economy. Ryan's budget seemed to be just that.

Yes... disappointed by the empty promises...

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Barack Obama pledged Monday to cut the nation's $1.3 trillion deficit in half by the end of his first term.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/23/news/ec ... /index.htm

And his lack of understanding the economic engine that runs this country...

In an interview with Atlanta's local Fox affiliate WAGA-TV President Obama explains why he was unable to cut the deficit in half in his first term, a promise he made as a candidate. Obama was lobbed the question by a sympathetic reporter who said he is getting "pelted in the media" for making a campaign promise he did not keep. "Well we're not there because this recession turned out to be a lot deeper than any of us realized," Obama said about his inability to cut the deficit in half.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... eeper.html

You are so right Archer. And that disappointment was fueled by a candidate and then president who doesn't know his ass from a balance sheet.