posted October 17, 2012 11:23 AM            

Romney's more verbally facile, something you might expect from a Pisces with Gemini rising. Obama did stumble sometimes.

They both mangled some facts, and neither seems to have any real impressive ideas about the future. Romney changes positions as he goes, and Obama's camp doesn't really think Romney's got a shot, so they're phoning it in.

posted October 17, 2012 12:43 PM            

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted October 17, 2012 12:49 PM            

Romney’s tax plan adds up to a middle class tax hike
October 7, 2012

Mitt Romney has detailed a specific tax plan that provides tax cuts weighted towards millionaires and billionaires. Altogether, these tax cuts will cost about $5 trillion including interest. Here’s the math:

•Lower tax rates by 20% = $2.5 trillion

•Eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax = $700 billion

•Repeal of high-income payroll tax = $300 billion

•Repeal the estate tax = $150 billion

•Tax cut for corporations = $1.1 trillion

TOTAL: $5 trillion in tax cuts including interest

That math is clear. But when it comes to paying for these tax cuts, Romney hasn’t specified a single loophole he’d close and he’s said that taking steps that would require the wealthy to pay more—like raising their taxes on capital gains—are off the table. But even if he eliminated all other tax benefits for high-income taxpayers and enough corporate tax loopholes to pay for his plan, he’d still need to increase middle class taxes by $1 trillion to pay for his plan.

•Ending all tax benefits for the wealthy = $1.7 trillion

•Eliminate corporate tax benefits to offset corporate tax cut = $1.1 trillion

•Eliminate enough middle class tax benefits to pay for middle class tax cut = $1 trillion

That leaves $1 trillion that Romney must find either by increasing middle class taxes or increasing the deficit.

Even the studies that Romney has cited to claim his plan adds up still show he would need to raise middle class taxes. In fact, Harvard economist Martin Feldstein and Princeton economist Harvey Rosen both concede that paying for Romney’s tax cuts would require large tax increases on families making between $100,000 and $200,000.

Here’s the denominator: Romney indeed has a problem. No matter how Romney sets up his tax equation, it always adds up to a tax hike on the middle class.

__________________________________

posted October 17, 2012 01:16 PM            

personally i think it is too much to expect these debates to be anything much more than theatre...being on tv kinda defines it as such.

posted October 17, 2012 02:39 PM            

Further study into the issue reveals that Senate candidate Romney seemed to have an issue with Ted Kennedy's blind trust, but now he's using one, too.

(NPR) Just How Blind Are Blind Trusts, Anyway?
by ROBERT SMITH
July 20, 2012 3:00 PM

As Mitt Romney has faced questions about his investments and tax returns, the likely Republican presidential nominee has responded with two words of explanation: blind trust.

Romney keeps most of his wealth in a blind trust designed to prevent him from knowing exactly where his money is and what it's doing. It's a long tradition for presidents and candidates, though anyone can set one up if he wants to.

But it turns out that not all blind trusts are equally blind. Some are cast into complete and utter darkness. Others are more nearsighted.

Ken Gross, an ethics lawyer with the law firm Skadden Arps in Washington, D.C., has helped presidential candidates set up blind trusts. He says blind trusts are complicated, expensive and generally a pain.

"Most people who have any kind of wealth are interested in how it's managed," Gross says. "And blind trusts, because they are blind, you don't know what's going on with your money."

But a blind trust does have one crucial advantage for a politician: It becomes an easy answer to any conflict-of-interest question. Mitt Romney used it in the Republican primary debates earlier this year.

"My investments are not made by me," he said at the time. "My investments for the last 10 years have been in a blind trust, managed by a trustee."

Of course, there's an easy response from a less wealthy opponent. In fact, there's a video going around of Mitt Romney from 1994, when he was challenging another very rich candidate with a blind trust: Ted Kennedy.

"The blind trust is an age-old ruse, if you will," Romney said. "Which is to say, you can always tell a blind trust what it can and cannot do."

So which one is it? Blind or not blind? Well, all trusts are not created equal.

Federal election rules require fairly tight ones. State rules, not so much.

I called up a trust lawyer, Colby Wallace, with Bernstein Shur in Portland, Maine. I asked him how you can tell how blind a trust really is.

His advice: First look at the person who runs the trust, the person who's supposed to keep all the investments secret. If the person is a friend or relative, it looks bad.

Second, look at what went into the trust at the very beginning. Rich people get rich in specific fields or by starting specific companies, Gross says. "And just because it becomes part of a blind trust doesn't erase it from your memory."

The third way to evaluate a trust is to look at what kind of reporting the trust makes back to the politician. If the candidate gets fairly detailed reports about how much he has made in capital gains, dividends or interest, he may be able to figure out what's going on inside the trust.

But Wallace says that once you get up to the presidential level, with federal laws, this can't happen easily.

So what does it all mean for Mitt Romney?

His blind trust is run by a longtime financial adviser, who might know his likes and dislikes. If Romney were elected president, the campaign has already conceded that he would need to have a stricter blind trust with an outside firm running the money, instead of a close adviser.

The many rules mean a lot of work for people like Gross, who consults on blind trusts. But he still tells his clients he doesn't like blind trusts much.

He recommends that politicians without a ton of investments simply put their money into plain-vanilla index funds and bonds. Then tell everyone where the money is.

That's the route President Obama has taken, judging from his 2011 financial disclosure form (PDF): His investments are primarily in index funds from Vanguard and U.S. Treasury bills and notes. http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/07/20/157119003/just-how-blind-are-blind-trusts-anyway

posted October 17, 2012 03:01 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by katatonic:
oh, and as an afterthought, a friend who spends quite a lot of time in colorado explained to me the other day that she NEVER plans anything much for the first day she is there...the altitude thing is real, despite the source (algore) who brought it up after the denver debate.

this is also borne out by the fact that sports teams flying in to play at altitude ALWAYS schedule some acclimatization time, as do many business folk and entertainers.

---

You guys will never stop. I have had it. If the country goes down, you deserve it!

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted October 17, 2012 03:04 PM            

Someone manages your investments for you and you have no control over the day-to-day decisions.

For me, it's because of my profession.

posted October 17, 2012 05:35 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by AcousticGod:
If you read what I posted, you understand that "blind" isn't always blind or uninfluenced by the investor.

---

posted October 17, 2012 05:38 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:
I have several blind trusts myself.

Someone manages your investments for you and you have no control over the day-to-day decisions.

For me, it's because of my profession.

What is the big deal?

---

I know. It is a normal thing for politicians and others who cannot be biased. DUH

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted October 17, 2012 06:12 PM            

His blind trust is run by a longtime financial adviser, who might know his likes and dislikes. If Romney were elected president, the campaign has already conceded that he would need to have a stricter blind trust with an outside firm running the money, instead of a close adviser.

posted October 17, 2012 07:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by AcousticGod:

His blind trust is run by a longtime financial adviser, who might know his likes and dislikes. [b]If Romney were elected president, the campaign has already conceded that he would need to have a stricter blind trust with an outside firm running the money, instead of a close adviser.

[/B]

---

posted October 17, 2012 07:43 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by juniperb:

@teasel

---

posted October 17, 2012 07:46 PM            

quote:

---

I couldnt stomach much of it.

---

posted October 18, 2012 09:07 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
Can we please get an impartial Mod for the next debate?

---

I KNOW!
They will never get an impartial one *Sigh*

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted October 18, 2012 10:04 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
hahahaha

When even Albore, Chris..tingle up my leg Matthews, Andrew Sullivan, Michael Moore and Jim.."The Mouth" Carville says O'Bomber lost the debate then, O'Bomber lost the debate!

There just isn't any way you can spin your way out of it. Let's call it a tailspin from which you can't recover.

Yeah, when O'Bomber nosed over and went into that tailspin, the best the ususal suspects can do is talk about the pretty hole he made when he hit the ground.

---

Great one. *Slaps self*

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal