Archive | talking points defined RSS for this section

Talking points defined.

Revenue neutral.

How do Republicans plan on lowering the deficit if the plans they are promoting are “revenue neutral”?

Think about it. What is neutral? It means it doesn’t go anywhere. How far does your car go in neutral? Unless it is on a hill, it goes nowhere. That is the point. They are going to lower the tax rates for the wealthy, while cutting spending for unemployed, disabled, some elderly, poor, children, and lower income citizens, and taking away some tax credits for home interest deductions, considering insurance from your employer as taxable income from the middle class to pay for those tax cuts.

But how exactly does that lower the debt? It doesn’t. But the followers of the Cons do not seem to think that matters or they don’t understand it. They see spending for the moochers and leeches and the parasitic lower classes of society and the union and public workers being cut and that is enough for them. Even if it means they will pay more.

Well, at least until they figure out they will be paying more. Here in Michigan, some of these Cons are starting to see that this year as they renew their vehicle registration and find out it has doubled. A wonderful result in “revenue neutral” tax cuts for corporations at the taxpayers expense. With NO promise of jobs.

Please remind me again, was Robin Hood a hero or a villain? I seem to have been mistaken in my interpretation.

Thank you for reading, it means a lot to me. I hope you enjoy it.



Talking points defined

Lower the rates and broaden the base.  This is conservative talk for lower the tax rates on the wealthy ( lower rates) and tax the poor and middle more. (broaden the base.)

Think of it like this. Picture 3 triangles side by side. 1 is right side up and 2 are upside down. The first is a representation of the population. Most of the population is on the bottom. The second is the income distribution. Most of the wealth is on top. The third is the tax structure. The people at the top who make the most money, pay for most of the taxes.

The thing is, this plan only broadens the base of the third (tax structure) pyramid, instead of both the second and third. What the wealthy would like is to see 1 right side up, one upside down, and the last one right side up. That leaves most of the people making a little bit of money, but expected to pay most of the taxes, while a few on top make most of the money, and pay little to no taxes.

Kind of reminds me of a period in history when Dukes and Lords ruled the lands. I thought this was America. Didn’t we tell those that condoned that lifestyle where to go once? And now we are going to fight for this?