Mitt Romney | News | Paul Ryan

BigGayDeal.com

Paul Ryan Doesn't Have the Time to Explain How Romney Will Pay for His Tax Plan: VIDEO

Taxes_ryan

Pressed on how mathematically the Romney-Ryan tax plan would lower taxpayer bills by 20 percent without costing anything, Paul Ryan tells FOX News Sunday's Chris Wallace: “I don’t have the ... It would take me too long to go through all of the math."

Writes NY Mag:

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are understandably reluctant to explain the specifics their tax plan, because then they'd have to admit that it is mathematically impossible for them to institute their proposed cuts for the rich without raising the middle-class's tax burden.

Adds DailyKos:

Ryan is straight-up using his reputation as the Republican party's big budget wonk to get out of giving direct answers to any actual budget wonking questions. Because from his point of view, "I don't want to get too wonky" or "I don't have the time" are more palatable answers than "if I gave you details you'd see that I've been lying."

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Of course he doesn't. Just a minor detail.

    Posted by: Matt26 | Oct 1, 2012 5:26:12 AM


  2. I think someone among the punditry must have bought the Republicant party assertion that Ryan is smart and an expert in taxes and wonky. Then the belief spread throughout fellow pundits and the MSM. But I agree with Rob Zeleniak that he is a charlatan. What he offers is an attempt at a smokescreen to cover his plans to destroy Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid, and to stick it to the poor and middle classes so he and his fellow rich people can enjoy more and more riches till they die and are buried and turn to dust.

    Posted by: john patrick | Oct 1, 2012 8:20:41 AM


  3. More Voo-Doo Economics. Bush I was right about that.

    Posted by: chasmader | Oct 1, 2012 9:11:21 AM


  4. Funny.. I've been getting messages on my smart phone about my 4G connection being "wonky." In that sense, it means it's unreliable to a point where it doesn't work.
    So I guess it's true that Ryan "doesn't want to get too wonky." Problem is, it's too late.

    Posted by: Brendan | Oct 1, 2012 9:12:22 AM


  5. Yet another reason Romney isn't qualified to be president, let alone wipe President Obama's ass!

    Posted by: Jeffrey | Oct 1, 2012 9:19:34 AM


  6. Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding... the sound of red flags popping up everywhere!

    Voter Beware!

    Posted by: mytwocents | Oct 1, 2012 9:41:35 AM


  7. Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding... the sound of red flags popping up everywhere!

    Voter Beware!

    Posted by: mytwocents | Oct 1, 2012 9:41:36 AM


  8. Theoretically this is actually a good idea. Make tax simpler is a conservative value (at least over here in the the UK), but it's sad he doesn't have - to hand or in memory - a list of loopholes to be closed. It is quite logical that rates can be lower when the ridiculous list of 'loopholes' (or exemptions as they are better called in the UK) are closed.

    The logic extends however to closing loopholes but lower taxes meaning those who pay tax won't pay any more or less. So why bother, other than for cost/complexity reasons? What normally happens is that closing loophole favours the poor as they have fewer to take advantage of. Is this really what's going to happen? He already lists a few loopholes that he wouldn't close, health care for example.

    Does he know what the Romney/Ryan ticket are going to do? Perhaps, but there is no evidence that he does, as he refuses to provide it. He's clearly ticked off by someone who asks anything more than 'we're going to lower taxes'.

    A politician at his worst. Full of crap and no evidence to back up anything he says. Dreadful.

    Posted by: Henry | Oct 1, 2012 10:24:35 AM


  9. Here's some simple math for you Paul. If I'm paying an effective rate of 15% your 20% reduction will mean a break for me of 3% down to 12%. Now if I was paying 30% my rate would be reduced 6% down to 24%. So even though "20% for everyone" sounds like we all get the same tax break the more you're paying (i.e. the wealthier you are) the bigger your return both by percentage of income and in gross dollars.

    But then again since it's allegedly "revenue neutral" you're just going to have to eliminate my deductions so that my taxable income will increase and I'll end up paying the same amount as a "smaller" percentage of a higher income. Because if it's revenue neutral for the government the it's gonna be revenue neutral for me too? Right?

    Does that about cover it Paul?

    Posted by: e.c. | Oct 1, 2012 10:26:13 AM


  10. Mitt who wants to be our leader does not have time to tell us how he is going to screw us and thinks 47% of us who are American seniors who worked and paid taxes and put out the fires and policed the streets and fought wars to keep all Americans free and Mitt does not care about us or want to spend the time on us because we are takers. How did this clown even get to run for president? Who the hell did he pay off to get that far?

    Posted by: Bob | Oct 1, 2012 11:50:26 AM


  11. Mr. Ryan, do you have someone keeping track of all the lies and half truths you have been telling us so that when you next go to confession you can give an accurate account of your Sins to your Confessor?

    Posted by: Jerry6 | Oct 2, 2012 7:40:05 PM


  12. @Jerry6: google Maddow mendacity

    Posted by: Diogenes Arktos | Oct 4, 2012 3:19:09 PM


  13. « 1 2

Post a comment







Trending


« «Arnold Schwarzenegger Married Gay Couples While California Governor: VIDEO« «