By The Right Scoop


An interesting part of this interview is where Paul Ryan notes that by getting rid of special deductions an tax shelters, that even Mitt Romney will pay more taxes under their tax plan. He explains it below:

About 

Blogger extraordinaire since 2009 and the owner and Chief Blogging Officer of the most wonderful and super fantastic blog in the known and unknown universe: The Right Scoop


Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.


NOTE: If the comments don't load properly or they are difficult to read because they are on the blue background, please use the button below to RELOAD DISQUS.

  • stage9

    So how is this different than what Obama is suggesting or OWS has been calling for? Both have demanded that the wealthy 1% pay more in taxes, that they “pay their fair share”.

    How is that any different than what Obamney is proposing?

    This is utterly absurd!

    • IwjwI

      It is very different. Watch it again to see the differences.

      • Galatiansch2vs20

        Romney’s plan- Lower the tax rate for the upper income bracket, but close tax shelters STARTING with people like Mitt Romney, so they will have to have more income taxable and pay more taxes, so that other tax payers can have their taxes lowered.

        And I can see how higher tax rates Ryan says Obama is proposing could kill jobs, but he says Obama is proposing more loopholes. While I don’t think a higher tax rate and more loopholes is the right thing to propose, how does Romney’s plan to make more income taxable for the upper income people help encourage job creation anymore than Obama’s plan? I don’t get it.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/6TFSBPXVSCDIMIGDESK63L4VKY Michael

          Simple by simplifying the tax code and lower the tax rate fewer people will need deductions and hence more capital will be taxed….more like a Flat Tax…it simplifies the regulations and the code. Deductions are used my many to manipulate the tax code….you lower the top rates like Reagan did look what happened to the US Economy…it Exploded with growth. Basically it is simpler….here is your tax rate, there will still be deductions just not as many and with a lower rate. I like the idea!

          • Galatiansch2vs20

            But he responded to the interviewer with a yes, that those in the upper income bracket would pay more taxes. While lowering corporate taxes is a good thing, though I think that message did get somewhat lost in the shuffle there toward the end. The first part sounds like tax the upper bracket more money (just by a different method), but it still sounds disturbingly similar to the Democrats.

        • stage9

          “Lower the tax rate for the upper income bracket, but close tax shelters STARTING with people like Mitt Romney, so they will have to have more income taxable and pay more taxes, so that other tax payers can have their taxes lowered.”

          Um, isn’t that the same thing? Lower bracket – pay higher taxes.

          I’m failing to see the difference here.

          • Galatiansch2vs20

            When it comes to the upper brackets, it seems like Romney is proposing to get more money to the government from those at that level of income, but in a different way than Obama. Also, I emphasized the word starting that Ryan said because that makes a person wonder are these tax shelters going to be eliminated from people in lower brackets than Romney down the road with the plan?

    • poljunkie

      “Paying their fair share” as a phrase should be illegal to say.

    • BS61

      The difference is Romney doesn’t have any communist/socialist/terrorist friends!

      • stage9

        Ohhhhhhh…..huh?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/F7HSF4L4LJZGICEWROUCXNGMNA Toadfrog Jr

      Cutting loop holes I believe is a good idea. For instance,
      If I have a business that can
      A. Choose to acquire material from other countries and bring them here to the U.S.
      B. Acquire the materials from the U.S.

      Currently with A. I am able to get deductions on my taxes which allows me to turn around a better profit.

      Now if those loop holes were removed it would be in my better interest in buying materials from other companies within the U.S. thus reduce additional spending for a number of things.

      Lower overall tax rate. Less deductions I can claim. Very well could make my taxing increase overall, but not to the extent that it will increase with Obama’s plan. Obama looks to nail companies with additional taxes to support his Healthcare plan for everyone. It is said some of us will be paying up to 41% of our income. I say NO.
      With Romney/Ryna, this allows my said company to do more business with other U.S. companies therefore increasing profits in the U.S. therefore increasing production, jobs, and economy overall.

      This would in turn make all of us more profitable and self reliant and encourage great growth.

      That is only ONE way of how I have come to understand there ideas regarding taxes.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steve-Angell/100001860262545 Steve Angell

    So Romney will raise taxes on the top 1% to give others a tax break.

    How is that different than what Obama wants to do?

    Why is Romney even considering raising any taxes in an recession?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/6TFSBPXVSCDIMIGDESK63L4VKY Michael

      He says he is lowering Corporate Tax Rates and will lower income tax rate but reduce deductions….he makes no mention of raising taxes!

    • BS61

      Romney has yet to be associated with marxist/communist/terrorist, so I’m voting for him!

  • Galatiansch2vs20

    I don’t see how talking about making the rich pay more taxes really advances the conservative agenda about cutting spending in government? The way I understand it, there are big taxes initially on large sums the rich make and then they pay capital gain taxes on what they make off of the initial income (minus taxes).

    • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

      It doesn’t does it? How does increasing the burden on the wealthy, however that is defined, going to bring more jobs?

      Yep, the owner has to pay an extra million dollars a year so that I can get a $30 increase in my return. Oh, sorry about you losing your job because of it but hey there is always unemployment benefits.

  • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

    I must confess that I am unsure as to exactly what Paul is trying to say regarding taxes. The loopholes regarding tax shelters will go away, which will cause the upper percentage to pay even more of the tax burden?

    It would seem easier instead of plugging holes to just scrape this tax code and start all over again from scratch. If GOP wins the House and the Senate, why not do this instead. It makes much more sense and easier to defend. The optics would be great.

    Get the huge tax code that they drag out every April and torch it! People would appreciate the idea of simplicity. Ryan’s explanation makes my head spin!

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/6TFSBPXVSCDIMIGDESK63L4VKY Michael

      What he is saying they will lower the tax rates across the board but will close some of the deductions which in essence would make more income taxable but at a lower rate…and for some reasons people here missed the part of lowering Corporates from 35 percent which is the highest in the world to 25 percent which will bring back more income from Companies to the US for investment, jobs and growth!

      • Galatiansch2vs20

        But the interviewer asked Paul Ryan about the upper income bracket, so they would pay more? And Paul Ryan says yes.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/6TFSBPXVSCDIMIGDESK63L4VKY Michael

          No he did not….he said they will pay a lower tax rate but will have fewer deductions which would mean they could pay more….

          • Galatiansch2vs20

            I had gone back and listened to that section before saying what I did.

      • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

        I agree that the 25% bracketing is very important. Bringing down the cost of producing goods in the US is always a great idea and is very much needed. This is not very hard to grasp.

        However, the question was on Romney’s taxes. Every person has to file personal income taxes and are more familiar with this and not the 35% which is mostly passed along to the person purchasing the product any way.

        Trying to explain what they want to do with the income tax code in this sound bite was a bit more difficult to follow. Yes, plugging holes is great but my question is what exactly is the reduction of the rate. Is it lower than GWB’s? Are they just wanting to maintain it?

        They need to offset plugging the holes with an equally effective reduction in the tax rate. On the other hand, it would be better to not use Romney as the example.

    • proudhispanicconservative

      Great point. He has to explain it so the average Joe can understand it.

  • Goldni007

    You raise the tax burden by closing loop holes. You don’t raise tax rates. A simplified tax code with less deductions for the wealthy, brings in more revenue by increasing their tax burden afa share. Reagan did the same thing.

    • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

      But Reagan did cut the overall tax rate from the 70 percentile down to the 20’s that off set such a burden.

      Exactly what will be the new rates in the Romney plan?

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/6TFSBPXVSCDIMIGDESK63L4VKY Michael

        I think his top rate would be 28 percent or 30 percent which is in line with Reagan.

        • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

          Now that would have been nice to mention in this bite wouldn’t it?

      • Galatiansch2vs20

        I thought I’d heard he adopted a Santorum proposal of going back to Reagan’s level of tax rate percentages some time back, didn’t he?

        http://www.ricksantorum.com/pressrelease/santorum-releases-made-america-plan-revitalize-us-economy
        “Cut and simplify personal income taxes by cutting the number of tax rates to just two – 10% and 28% returning to the Reagan era pro-growth top tax rate”

        • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

          Putting that into the sound bite would have been nice to know! Instead, one scratches their head and hopes for the best.

          • Galatiansch2vs20

            I haven’t really been hearing this message in the news and am not positive on this. And I am concerned Ryan’s talking of a higher tax burden on the rich, even though the details of how he goes about it are different. Many times I’ve heard Hannity speak of how the top few percent pays a huge percentage of all the federal taxes of this country already. How is creating a higher tax burden for them going to encourage the job creators among them to want to create more jobs?

            • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

              You have no argument here from me. I think I understand what Ryan was trying to do and grasp the concept, but it is definitely hard on anyone when you insist on talking about the theory instead of the concrete simplicity.

              It would probably have been easier if Ryan said, “We are rolling the tax rates back to Reagan’s era and closing even more loopholes encouraging everyone to pay the burden more proportionately.” Granted he is on the hot seat being asked questions, but then again the reporter seemed to be easy going and Ryan should have this down pat.

  • marketcomp

    Tak’in it to the streets! Go Ryan!

    • Galatiansch2vs20

      His message is confusing on this and doesn’t sound right to me. I don’t think the average voter is going to understand this.

      • marketcomp

        I’m sorry G! What part do you not understand? Let’s see, we are living in Obamaville because Obama’s policies are not working because more people are defendant on Government programs which is not economic growth! Obama never talks about a plan for economic growth because he has no plan for economic growth and the Romney Ryan plan is all about growing the economy and reducing Government growth which will open-up opportunities for businesses to hire and entrepreneurs to start business which is an opportunity for job growth. Ryan has said that by deciding, with Congress, what deductions to eliminate they will reduce tax rates in conjunction with reducing deductions. So lower rates, reduce deductions, shrink the size of government will produce economic growth. Or, let’s see, Obama’s policy on energy, which has resulted in increased gasoline prices, is stifling energy exploration and production which also hinders economic growth where in places like North Dakota and Texas energy production is a critical element in economic growth. Now do this, go to mittromney.com and read Romney’s economic plan and maybe you will have a better or clearer understanding of Romney/Ryan’s economic plan for America.

        • Galatiansch2vs20

          You mean reduce Obama and Democrat-induced government growth, right?

          The part that doesn’t sound right to me is when he says yes to the interviewer’s question “So he would pay more?”

          Then when Ryan goes into some initials (is it JCT?) and not agreeing with their modeling, I don’t know what he’s talking about- it’s confusing to me.

          • marketcomp

            Oh , ok G! I think that’s some organization that create economic models to predict growht. Yea, I have seen Paul Ryan make these references before and he is refering to organizations that model the economy like the American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

            • Galatiansch2vs20

              Thanks!

      • wodiej

        It wasn’t confusing to me. He was very detailed in what they want to do and the results from it. Lower the corporate tax rate, more jobs created. More jobs created, more people working and taxes being paid. There are too many tax deductions. We need to just have a flat rate so the 47% who pay no taxes are paying something.

        • Galatiansch2vs20

          Please see my explanation to marketcomp.

          About your comment about the 47 percent paying something, I believe some of that 47 percent paid federal taxes for a long time and paid into social security & social security disability insurance. It does not make sense to me for the federal government to pay out those particular benefits and say, “Now you’ve got to pay part of it back to the government.”

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/6TFSBPXVSCDIMIGDESK63L4VKY Michael

    Over at Ace…take a look at the FLORIDA 2000 Story…absolutely fascinating about Polls…please read the post in the story from the Republican Pollster…this should help many of you understand why the 2012 race looks so tight or shows Obama slightly ahead…IT WILL MAKE YOU UNDERSTAND how the Dem and Pollsters are working together to suppress the GOP TURNOUT!! Similar to what CBS did in 2000 in Florida….PLEASE READ!!

    Here is sample…many of the pollsters that are MEDIA POLLSTERS are using GOP turnout in 2012 the same as it was in the 1960s!!!!!!!!!!!!! YES 1960s!!! That will help you understand Florida, Ohio, Virginia and others like NC!!

    The Goal for Obama’s team…AFFECT EARLY VOTING and then in essence deflate Nov 6th Voting for the GOP!!!

    And when you read all the posts crying about how the race can be this way and Mitt could be losing…YOU WILL SEE HOW EFFECTIVE THEY HAVE ALREADY BEEN WITH MANY OF YOU as you have FALLEN HOOK LINE AND SINKER for the MEDIA NARRATIVE since the end of the DNC!! We have the numbers ladies and gentlemen to win…JUST VOTE and get others to VOTE….Obama wants you to stay home…Take us out early and he wins!

    I hope many of you will finally SPINE UP and STOP YOUR WHINING and understand it is US vs THE MSM and OBAMA….we will KICK BUTT if we sta energized and understand how scared Obama and the MSM is of US when we show in numbers and ready to win!!

    • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

      And what does this have to do with the tax code?

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/6TFSBPXVSCDIMIGDESK63L4VKY Michael

        Nothing I address the tax code above….it is to help people who get discouraged…called Multi-tasking!

        • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

          You mean multi-posting! LOL

    • actionsspeaklouder

      I have been depressed lately – but, your post gives me hope. Although, there is no way I would not vote or “stay home”. Michael, you must post this everywhere you can on every conservative (or just any) “forum” you can think of. Thank you for the information. I will share it with my family, friends and neighbors. Please get the word out. It will make a difference – it did for me! God Bless.

      • Nukeman60

        K-Bob posted this earlier on a different thread. It’s what a lot of us have been saying for some time now, in various ways.

        http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2012/09/unskewedpollscom-answers-question-what.html

      • actionsspeaklouder

        Nukeman60 – I LOVE THIS SITE! LOVE IT. Never saw it before, but will visit every day now. What a relief. I feel right at home there! Afraid I’m guility of being an Eeyore – skittish and worrisome. One of the questions at the bottom of the piece did catch my eye – the person who asked about why the Intrade percentage favors Obama – and, by a huge margin I might add. Good question . . .

  • drphibes

    Does anyone seriously think we can replace the Foreign Policy gravitas of Joe Biden with this young man? Why, he looks like he only started shaving yesterday.

    Seriously, it is amazing how character and seriousness of purpose transcend all else.

    We will replace a man who call “jobs” a three letter word and who promises a summer of recovery in 2009 with a true architect of fiscal responsibility, someone with a substantive plan.

  • proudhispanicconservative

    I am very uncomfortable when our side starts talking like the liberals, this thing about taxes we should not be talking like them, when they say that the rich should pay more. I am not a rich guy I make $15.00 an hour, but in my life I have never worked for someone poor. Bottom line we have to start talking about lowering taxes for everyone, and when we say lower taxes for small business, say for all businesses. So this is really troubling when we start talking like them.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/6TFSBPXVSCDIMIGDESK63L4VKY Michael

      Nothing he said sounded liberal to me….sorry…lower tax rates for all but cutting out some loopholes…did you miss the lowering of Corporate Tax rates from 35 to 25 percent as well….not sure what you were referring to but nothing Paul said sounded liberal but more sound fiscal policy and I heard lowering tax rates for all and lowering corporate tax rate….

      • proudhispanicconservative

        I meant that instead of going into all these details that normal people would just tune him out because it sounds so complicated. I have heard him saying that the rich should not have “tax shelters” that really sounds like the left attacking the successful people, and we fall into the trap set by the liberals. It would be a simpler answer to say we want to lower taxes for everyone, that message will attract and will resonate better than a long explanation. I mean my head was spinning after hearing him explain his plan. At the end I want Romney to win and I want him to win big and this is not to be taken by criticism its constructive criticism.

    • wodiej

      We have to get more than 53% of people paying taxes to begin with before we lower anything but the corporate tax rate.

  • poljunkie

    My internet is slow slow slow tonight for some reason so I cant watch the clip. It wont play with out continual buffering.
    Did he say get rid of the (primary home) mortgage deduction?
    I hope not. Thats the one deduction we value.
    Plus if that goes, I see the real estate housing “recovery” stalling even further. If people cant write off that interest, why would they finance such a huge albatross?

    • actionsspeaklouder

      I agree – that’s my only helpful deduction.

      • poljunkie

        Yep.

    • proudhispanicconservative

      Its a little bit complicated they should try to simplify their message.

      • actionsspeaklouder

        Yes, I agree. These are “detail-oriented” men (numbers men). The “man/woman on the street” might tune them out because of too much “information”. Make is short and sweet.

      • poljunkie

        Thank you.

    • Galatiansch2vs20

      I didn’t hear him say that. However he was talking about eliminating some tax shelters beginning with people like Mitt Romney. I think I recall Romney saying the details of the tax loop hole eliminating would have to be hammered out with Congress.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/6TFSBPXVSCDIMIGDESK63L4VKY Michael

        Correct…both Paul and Mitt have said the deductions that would be eliminated would have to be done in conjunction with Congress….which is smart….why? because if Mitt and Paul said they would eliminate this loophole or that one….LOBBY groups would complain, you would have the MSM calling them unfair, picking on this group but helping this group….by working with Congress it looks like they were fair and looked for input from both sides….it is smart!!

        The bottom line simplify the tax code, lower rates and lower loopholes. In conjunction lower Corporate Rates which will bring alot of capital home which is key to companies expanding and in essence more hiring which leads to more income, less debt and better quality of life. Canada now has 15 percent Corporate Rate and are now listed as the 5th best place in the world for business we have slipped to 17th!!

        • http://twitter.com/PuritanD71 PuritanD71

          The problem here Mike is the problem that this campaign has had from the start. It takes others to explain what they are trying to say. It has got to make people rack their brains in frustration at times.

        • Galatiansch2vs20

          I don’t have a problem with them working with Congress (provided they aren’t compromising principles), but I do have a problem with essentially having the upper income brackets, some of whom are job creators, having an even higher tax burden. I understand the top few percent pay around half of the whole country’s tax burden already (if I recall correctly). And it’s just that much worse to propose that during a deep recession it seems to me.

          Lowering corporate taxes is a positive move for sure!

        • sybilll

          It is so hard to explain to someone that is not a numbers cruncher, but Romney’s plan frees up wealthier taxpayers to direct more of their money to investments, which creates more jobs. Kind of a variation of the Laffer curve. If I find a source that explains it more clearly, I will post it.

      • poljunkie

        Thank you. I know eventually it is going to go- like interest did on credit cards. Remember that deduction back in the 80’s?
        The good old days. hahaha Not really.

        • Galatiansch2vs20

          No, I don’t remember people having that. You may be right about the mortgage deduction going eventually, given the national debt and government spending.

    • actionsspeaklouder

      When that happens, this helps me – I go to “Control Panel” and click on Internet Options – then go to “Browsing History” and delete all temporary files, cookies, Internet history, etc.. This helps. At least it does for me. It’s like getting a fresh start on your browsing. Good luck!

      • poljunkie

        Thanks actionspeak. I will give it a try. I wasnt having a problem with clips and videos accessed on their own- straight from the internet (via youtube etc) but trying to view clips here at the RightScoop or other similar sites the videos were taking FOREVER to buffer and load.

    • wodiej

      there are too many deductions that is why half the country doesn’t pay taxes. Deductions for kids, school, homes, charity, etc. Why do people need a deduction for owning a home? That is an investment. We don’t get to write off interest for anything else. Flat tax, everyone pays. End of story.

      • poljunkie

        Well, when you pay quite a bit in taxes and have for nearly 25 years- and your house is upside down because the housing prices in “your” area have fallen from under you- (but you dont want to short sale) I feel the deduction is a nice offset to a bad situation. So thats the last 5 years of this economy. Our area isnt projected to return to the level we bought our house for at least another 6-8 years. We have no hope of selling our house- we cannot afford to take the loss- we wont short sale, we arent going to walk away. We just continue to pay our mortgage.

    • sandynsavannah

      I agree with this post. I think we need some of the deductions…. but they must be the right deductions.

  • MaxineCA

    Oh for goodness sakes. After reading the comments here, I’m not sure how many have actually gone to Romney’s website to actually read his plan. And I don’t want to get responses about people not having access to the internet. If you are on this site, or if you watch Fox Business, you are on the internet.

    There is no one better than Ryan and Bachmann who understands and can explain how screwed up our 70,000+ (maybe more) tax code, thanks to the lobbyists and corrupt politicians influence over decades.

    Hey, maybe GE & GM (and other cronies) might start paying taxes!!!!!! Boo hoo, if they take away the mortgage interest deduction on someone’s million dollar vacation home in the Hamptons or any vacation home. WE are NOT the focus of the reforms they are suggesting.

    Not to worry folks. Stay calm and stay focused.

    • wodiej

      I understood what Ryan said perfectly. Lower the corporate rate, business will create lots more jobs. More jobs, more people working. more than 53% paying taxes. Romney has also talked about our trade deficit with China and other countries and how we need to balance that for more US jobs. GE paid NO TAXES on billions of dollars last year. That is why they want to close loopholes. There are a lot of middle class people who pay no income tax either because of all the deductions. We need to go to a flat tax.

    • Rshill7

      Congratulations Maxine. You’re the only one who mentioned GE as an example, who a couple of years ago, not only paid zero in taxes on profits of 10 billion, they got a refund of about 3 billion dollars. In other words, the Government took my federal income tax payments and gave them to GE. So, every person or company who paid any taxes at all paid more than GE. Loopholes like this are killing revenue and enriching tax attorneys, lobbyists, etc.

      That I paid more income tax than GE bugs me…a lot.

  • wodiej

    He’s really good at explaining the financial changes that need to be made and what the results would be.

  • 3EYE

    Reagan cut and eliminated some deductions, you could could take.. One I remember,you could take the interest paid on Credit Cards, as a deduction, now you can’t. Reagan did that, along with increasing rates on medical,and some others, to increase the percentage rate, you paid before, you could take a deduction. If you paid more, then you count the difference between the rate paid, and what you paid, to get how much you could deduct. This was reflected in medical deductions, and others. Once the other deductions were raised by,some percentage rate. Once you met that, then the amount difference you could take to reduce your taxable income. Reagan or Congress limited some amounts you could take as a deduction. They eliminated other deductions. This reduction helped raise more income tax, you paid to the IRS. So the amount of deductions, you normally could count was removed, or jacked up. Then you were paying more taxes as a result, and govt has a rise in revenue. Govt still can eliminate or close loopholes in our tax structure, to make it more fair, to all, and maybe coming up with a tax rate for all incomes. As you see just eliminating deductions, would raise more revenue for govt.

  • sandynsavannah

    I would like to see a tax reform that would encourage high income people to spend their money instead of place it in tax shelters.
    For example how about a tax break for commissioning an American built yacht.
    Or buying foreclosed homes.
    What about tax breaks for funding the refit of shut down factories in small towns….get us making things again.

    I was so disgusted I was at Micheals looking for fall decorations there was not a single American made silk flower, wreath, or table ornament. Everything was made in China. I had no choice but to buy Chinese and I would have willingly paid MORE for American.

    Same thing with Cracker Barrel, after Sunday dinner we were in the store and I saw the cutest little toy wooden tea set I would have bought it as Christmas present for my niece….I passed it up because it was made in China.

    I know we can make things if we just create the right environment.

    • stage9

      You running for office? I like your plan best!

    • RosiesSeeingRed

      Sandy, couldn’t agree more, but the problem is, most people are not willing to pay more, and unfortunately, the business environment in the US makes it such that you cannot produce it in this country and even come close to compete with items made overseas. If we could close the gap, I think people would be willing to pay a LITTLE more, but not the extreme difference in pricing now.

      Case in point (and a story of the hypocrisy of the left), I’ve been in business for 10 years with an extreme left liberal progressive business partner. We have the opportunity to buy one of our essential product components (which we regularly purchase) from an American-made source vs. the Chinese-made component. The American-made component costs 7 times that of the Chinese-made and is marked with the union label (no surprise there, right?).

      Of course, if we buy the American-made component, we’d either have to raise our prices or take a pay cut. If we raise our prices, we will quickly lose our competitiveness in our market, and we will lose business. There’s no way out of this reality. Knowing how strongly my business partner feels about supporting unions, and how strongly she feels about her paycheck, I told her to go ahead and purchase the American-made component, just to see if she was willing to put her money where her mouth is.

      Oh no, she said, I’m not paying 7 times more when we can buy the same thing for less money.

      Here’s my surprised look.

  • sandynsavannah

    I like tax deductions for wealthy people when they spend money. My husband is in the marine/mechanical engineering business, I know from experience what placing a “luxury” tax on things wealthy people buy does to to a business.

    They should get deductions on money they spend on American made and American service.

    I have no qualms over wealthy spending money on things I can’t afford.

  • kong1967

    It won’t matter. Obama will still claim Romney’s giving tax cuts for the wealthy. When Kerry was accusing Bush of passing the tax cuts for himself and his rich buddies, Bush paid 38% and Kerry paid a whopping 5% because of all the loopholes he found.

    Democrat = lying hypocrite.

  • stage9

    Do you really want to know what this is? It’s “pillow talk”, because Republicans are so useless and they believe that unless they get the liberal vote they can’t win. Someone has convinced them that they need to lean more left.

    FORGET THAT NOISE!

    It’s time for a TRUE CONSERVATIVE PARTY!

  • aposematic

    Not comforting Mr. Ryan, not comforting at all! The only way to defeat the beast that America’s Government has become over the past Century is to starve the beast, not feed it.