Romney, The Inevitable Nominee

[Shady]

you don't get to cherry-pick your quote... what do you think this is - The Daily Caller, The Drudge Report... Fox News?

let's continue your cherry-pick:

No, I'm not cherrypicking anything. I'm just addressing the falsehood perpetuated by a couple of minions of the forum. That Mitt Romney wants to eliminate all captial gains taxes. Which isn't true at all. So these minions are either lying, or completely ignorant. It's one or the other.

Once again, from your link...

To cover the cost of his plan — which would reduce tax rates by 20 percent, repeal the estate tax and eliminate taxes on investment income for middle-class taxpayers— the researchers assume that Romney would go after breaks for the richest taxpayers first.

Anyways, what this study fails to take into account is the increase in economic growth resulting from this tax plan, the replacement of the debacle known as Obamacare, the elmination of repressive EPA regulations on energy production, and holding countries like China accountable for their trade mispractices and currency manipulation. Under the current policies of the economic illiterate in the white house, this is the weakest recovery on record. That's not by accident. When pro-growth policies are put into place, the economic expansion will be quick and impressive.

[waldo]

No, I'm not cherrypicking anything.

no - your cherrypicking intent was to ignore the study summation which shows the (lacking in detail) "Romney Tax Plan" proposals would mean big tax cuts for the highest-income taxpayers and increases for everyone else.

Anyways, what this study fails to take into account is the increase in economic growth resulting from this tax plan...

no - perhaps you should actually read the summations of the study... at least read the follow-up Q/A to save being called out on everything you say.

We showed, in addition, that the same qualitative conclusions arise even when we added in feedback effects of tax changes on economic growth and revenues, using estimates of those effects that were developed by Harvard professor, and economic advisor to the Romney campaign, Greg Mankiw.

.

.

Q: How does your analysis deal with potential economic growth effects of the tax proposals?

A: Estimates from the Congressional Budget Office and other sources indicate that the effects of tax cuts on the macroeconomy are likely to be small or even negative over the typical 10-year budget window, depending in part on how they are financed.

In revenue-neutral tax changes, the tax rate reductions can raise incentives to work, but the base-broadening measures increase the portion of Americans’ income that is subject to tax, and create incentives that would work in the other direction. At the end of the day, the net effects are likely to be small (Auerbach and Slemrod 1997, Brill and Viard 2011). A 2007 Treasury report that analyzed the effects of business tax changes on business competitiveness concluded the following: "Indeed, the Treasury Department estimates that the combined policy of base broadening and lowering the business tax rate to 28 percent might well have little or no effect on the level of real output in the long run because the economic gain from the lower corporate tax rate may well be largely offset by the economic cost of eliminating accelerated depreciation" (p. 48).

Nevertheless, as we discuss in the paper, our results are not qualitatively different, even if we include additional taxes generated from the growth effects implied by the rule of thumb estimates from Mankiw and Weinzierl (2006).