Ryan fell apart under criticism of tax plan

During the debate, Ryan had the opportunity to declare the glorious details of the Romney/Ryan tax plan. Except he did not. He could not. Instead he hummed and hawed, stammered and drank water. The only defense he tried was to claim that six studies backed up him and Romney on their claims that their plan was not a $5 trillion tax cut that largely benefited the wealthiest. However, let's take a look at those "studies. Three were blog posts. One was a Romney campaign issue paper. One was an op-ed piece. One 15 page paper that glossed over the plan and used completely different parameters from the Romney/Ryan plan. That's it, the total sum of the "studies" that back up the Romney Ryan tax plan. Here are a few critiques of those "studies":


Romney's tax plan is a three-legged stool that doesn't stand. Here's how it works -- or doesn't. Romney wants to 1) cut tax rates across the board by 20 percent, 2) cut tax expenditures to pay for these tax cuts, and 3) maintain progressivity. The problem, as the Tax Policy Center pointed out, is there aren't enough tax expenditures for the rich to pay for all the tax cuts for the rich. Romney's plan only works if he cuts out the tax cuts for the rich, raises taxes on the middle class, or explodes the deficit. In other words, Romney can pick two, and only two, of his tax goals -- what Matt Yglesias of Slate calls the "Romney Trilemma".

That sound you hear is the three-legged stool falling down.

All this hasn't stopped a fight against the tyranny of arithmetic. The defenses of the Romney tax plan generally fall into three broad categories. The first assumes the plan will set off magic growth of the monster variety; the second assumes Romney defines "middle-class" differently than he does; and the third assumes Romney would eliminate tax expenditures he has indicated he would not eliminate
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... le/263541/

Their plan simply is not mathmatically possible, as has been shown time and time again. No wonder Ryan could not answer the question by the debator.


Now comes the "obama does it too", "your drunk", "koolaid drinker" responses instead of any attempt at honest debate on what the hell is the Romney Ryan tax plan. Can anyone, anyone at all present an honest response on what is their plan and provide links or documentation to back up your and their claims? Or will this simply devolve yet again in deflect, deflect, deflect until the thread is "consolidated" into other threads to make it go away.

We shall see.

So what? We know that Obama as President doesn't work. We know that America doesn't work when Obama is president. Even Colorado has 40000 more people unemployed now than in 2008. Face it America needs a change for the better.

I didn't think he could address the truth or the points of the OP... Since he has nothing else, it's feed-the-carp time: "Obama hasn't...doesn't...won't..."

Let us know how that works out for ya...

Facts are peaky things aren't they.

Yes...They are...You should try addressing the REAL ones sometime...

FredHayek wrote: So what? We know that Obama as President doesn't work. We know that America doesn't work when Obama is president. Even Colorado has 40000 more people unemployed now than in 2008. Face it America needs a change for the better.

So this response falls generally within the Obama did it too category.

Still waiting for a response that directly goes to the Romney Ryan tax plan and it's glorious details.

Anyone?

Hurry people, otherwise this thread will be submerged.

FredHayek wrote: So what? We know that Obama as President doesn't work. We know that America doesn't work when Obama is president. Even Colorado has 40000 more people unemployed now than in 2008. Face it America needs a change for the better.

Maybe so....but I don't see anything in Romney/Ryan's plans and proposals that would be a change for the better, quite the opposite. I see them causing 4 years of tough times for the mi ddle class, I see a future supreme court that leans so far right it will no longer reflect the demographics and preferences of the American citizens. I see our debt rising while essential services are cut and people suffer. Yet, I can almost guarantee that the rich will get richer, more jobs will go overseas, American manufacturing will suffer, and regulations that protect consumers, our environment, small businesses, and our health will be decimated. Nope, not a change for the better

Americans aren't concerned with your DNC talking points they are concerned with stagnant wages high unemployment and having a President who doesn't know how to fix any of it. That is what voters vote on. Are you better off than you were four years ago? For most Americans that is a hearty no.

FredHayek wrote: Americans aren't concerned with your DNC talking points they are concerned with stagnant wages high unemployment and having a President who doesn't know how to fix any of it. That is what voters vote on. Are you better off than you were four years ago? For most Americans that is a hearty no.

So now we have moved on to the deflection category and even drifting into the insult the poster category. My query was to the details of the Romney/Ryan tax plan. That is the topic that I have posed. If you have a response that answers my query, that will be greatly appreciated. If you do not have an answer that directly relates to the query posed, then simply say so, no reason to fall back on the tried and true catagories of Obama did it too, deflect, deflect, and insult the poster. Although I appreciate your keeping the thread from being submerged a bit longer so that maybe someone will be able to formulate an appropriate response.

Do you not think that since this is one of the major, if not the major campaign issue that Romney/Ryan are campaigning on, that the American public should at least hear the details and analysis of it?

Ok, next round of Obama did it too, deflect, deflect, deflect and insult the poster. Or is there someone out there with the intelligence and convictions to address the response head on?