• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Okham's Razor

Hardly ...twice the percentage of taxes ...yet most likely a higher percentage if we include the offshore account income!

I knew when I wrote this succinct factual OP it would attract attacks on me! ; )

You don't pay an effective rate of 28% so stop fibbing
 
Hardly ...twice the percentage of taxes ...yet most likely a higher percentage if we include the offshore account income!

I knew when I wrote this succinct factual OP it would attract attacks on me! ; )

They're not attacks, they just don't believe you.
 
You don't pay an effective rate of 28% so stop fibbing

I pay 33% in federal income tax. I have nothing to lie about. Yet, interesting this thread attracted attacks on me and my hygiene or cognitive abilities on Okham's Razor!

Ouch! ; )

I am kidding ... That is okay TD and VE I knew a few facts would bring it on!

she probably thinks because a little bit of her income is in the 28% marginal bracket she is paying at a rate higher than Romney. She isn't. Most of us making between 1-5 million a year are paying effective rates around 24%-the highest of any income cohort.

Congratulations on your 7 figure income! ; )
 
So, you don't have a single deduction? No charity, mortgage interest, etc.
 
Great, so if you think times are good, vote for Obama. If you think things should be better, vote for Romney.

I'll take that trade-off.

I don't see how Romney could make things better. He and Ryan would just put us back where we were 4 years ago.
 
So, you don't have a single deduction? No charity, mortgage interest, etc.

My house is paid for and my charitable was not enough to make a difference. I paid over 22,000 in tuition and so I had to cut back. I helped a few relatives and friends directly and helped to support a kid that attended my sons school that ended up homeless.

I invested the highest amount into my retirement account so it was not taxed. My state has no sales tax so our property and state taxes are higher ... I would prefer a consumption tax.

I deducted my dependents and my health insurance premiums.

Yet this is not about me.

This is about using Okham's Razor to make a decision on POTUS.
 
Last edited:
With those deductions and you still paid 33% tax you have two options: Fire your accountant or fire your accountant.
 
Don't the stats pretty much show how it does effect people? I'm not saying that people are or should be jumping up and down and celebrating economic victory... but clearly the data shows that people are being effected in a positive way.

I don't see it. If you are right, though, then Obama should have an easy path back to the presidency. If things are great, why change horses mid-stream?

What it'll come down to is whether things really are so great.
 
I don't see how Romney could make things better. He and Ryan would just put us back where we were 4 years ago.

Exactly ... I wanted to see the plan that could out perform the OP.
 
The problem is you're making the assumption that the economy is good. It isn't.

My house is paid for and my charitable was not enough to make a difference. I paid over 22,000 in tuition and so I had to cut back. I helped a few relatives and friends directly and helped to support a kid that attended my sons school that ended up homeless.

I invested the highest amount into my retirement account so it was not taxed. My state has no sales tax so our property and state taxes are higher ... I would prefer a consumption tax.

I deducted my dependents and my health insurance premiums.

Yet this is not about me.

This is about using Okham's Razor to make a decision on POTUS.
 
I'm voting for Romney because he understands the way the economy works in a way that Obama never could. Obama is a nice guy, but he's a university professor. Romney is a corporate superstar. Everything he's touched his entire career has turned to gold.

Right now we need someone to come in and help guide this economy to where it needs to be. I trust Romeny with that more than Obama.

I don't see how Romney could make things better. He and Ryan would just put us back where we were 4 years ago.
 
I don't see it. If you are right, though, then Obama should have an easy path back to the presidency. If things are great, why change horses mid-stream?

What it'll come down to is whether things really are so great.

See? THere it is again Nobody said "great". They are saying things are better than they were 4 years ago. Going from incredibly ****ty to a lot less ****ty is not claiming things are great. That's the strawman I'm talking about.

Being president is leading people to a better societ for all as best possible... not leading oneself to bigger wealth regardless of or in spite of those who you are leading.
 
Last edited:
I'm voting for Romney because he understands the way the economy works in a way that Obama never could. Obama is a nice guy, but he's a university professor. Romney is a corporate superstar. Everything he's touched his entire career has turned to gold.

Right now we need someone to come in and help guide this economy to where it needs to be. I trust Romeny with that more than Obama.

Well what he's touched that turned to gold for HIM didn't work out as gold for some of those whose backs that he earned that gold off of.
 
Great, so if you think times are good, vote for Obama. If you think things should be better, vote for Romney.

I'll take that trade-off.

Not exactly. Vote for who you think will bring more improvement. There're no issues using this administration's record to help you make your decision, but your statement is still flawed. ;)

I don't think "things" are good, but I also believe that the improvement will halt/slow with a Romney administration.
 
I'm voting for Romney because he understands the way the economy works in a way that Obama never could. Obama is a nice guy, but he's a university professor. Romney is a corporate superstar. Everything he's touched his entire career has turned to gold.

Right now we need someone to come in and help guide this economy to where it needs to be. I trust Romeny with that more than Obama.

Romney is not an expert on the economy. Romney has an economic adviser who chaired the Council of Economic Advisers under GW Bush. I don’t see that he advised Bush very well on the economy, and why would we want a POTUS who is getting the same advise GW Bush got?
Mitt Romney is good at venture capitalism. That does not mean he is good at creating jobs in an economy that needs jobs.
 
Well what he's touched that turned to gold for HIM didn't work out as gold for some of those whose backs that he earned that gold off of.

Well what he was asked to do at Bain is exactly what he did and he did it well. His job at Bain was to maximize the investors money and that is what he did. You might not like what Bain does, but it is what it is. He did a good job in Mass. and he did a good job at the Olympics.
 
Venture capitalism seems to me to be a microcosm of the economy. He's been involved with all kinds of businesses from all sectors of the economy. Thus, he understands the economy.

Obama taught school. Nothing wrong with that, and I voted for him in 2008, but we really need someone who can get the economy straight.

Romney is not an expert on the economy. Romney has an economic adviser who chaired the Council of Economic Advisers under GW Bush. I don’t see that he advised Bush very well on the economy, and why would we want a POTUS who is getting the same advise GW Bush got?
Mitt Romney is good at venture capitalism. That does not mean he is good at creating jobs in an economy that needs jobs.
 
Venture capitalism seems to me to be a microcosm of the economy. He's been involved with all kinds of businesses from all sectors of the economy. Thus, he understands the economy.

Obama taught school. Nothing wrong with that, and I voted for him in 2008, but we really need someone who can get the economy straight.

What economic indicators would you look for to show you that the economy straight? Or headed in the right direction?
 
Venture capitalism seems to me to be a microcosm of the economy. He's been involved with all kinds of businesses from all sectors of the economy. Thus, he understands the economy.

Romney had nothing to do with the management of the businesses that Bain took over. His only interest was in extracting as much cash from them as he could. If it meant sending them into bankruptcy versus growing them, it made no difference to Bain.
 
Venture capitalism seems to me to be a microcosm of the economy. He's been involved with all kinds of businesses from all sectors of the economy. Thus, he understands the economy.

Obama taught school. Nothing wrong with that, and I voted for him in 2008, but we really need someone who can get the economy straight.

A venture capitalist knows how to make money, not how to effect the economy in a good way. Businessmen don't always make good economist. President Obama and Mitt Romney are not experts in he economy, that is why they have advisers. ROmney's adviser is from the GW Bush administration. I do not want to return to the GW Bush economy.
 
Romney is not an expert on the economy. Romney has an economic adviser who chaired the Council of Economic Advisers under GW Bush. I don’t see that he advised Bush very well on the economy, and why would we want a POTUS who is getting the same advise GW Bush got?
Mitt Romney is good at venture capitalism. That does not mean he is good at creating jobs in an economy that needs jobs.

Romney doesn't need to create jobs. He will create an environment that will spur creation of jobs...unlike Obama who has created an environment that has suppressed the creation of jobs.
 
Me, personally? I look at my own company, at our customers, how business is going and how prospects look for the future. I imagine most people assess the economy the same way.... by how it touches them personally.

Parents might look at if their college-age kids are getting jobs. Average joes might look at their paychecks, at the price of gas and food, etc.

My whole point is that people know whether the economy is working for them. They're not really looking at a bunch of data.

What economic indicators would you look for to show you that the economy straight? Or headed in the right direction?
 
Well what he was asked to do at Bain is exactly what he did and he did it well. His job at Bain was to maximize the investors money and that is what he did. You might not like what Bain does, but it is what it is. He did a good job in Mass. and he did a good job at the Olympics.

Romney was a progressive when he was Governor of MA. He worked with the democrats and democrats are better at lower deficits and debt than republicans are. Now, Romney is a severe conservative. He will not be able to work with the US congress and maintain his conservatism.
 
Romney doesn't need to create jobs. He will create an environment that will spur creation of jobs...unlike Obama who has created an environment that has suppressed the creation of jobs.

How will Romney create an environment tat will spur job creation? Can you give me some details on how he will do this.
 
Back
Top Bottom