Romney/Ryan Want To Redistribute Wealth to the Wealthy

Oh, please. Romney and Ryan talking about Obama wanting to redistribute wealth is absolutely absurd. They want to redistribute wealth from the poor to the wealthy.

I’ve noticed a trend in Romney and Ryan engaging in projection. Projection is defined as “Psychological projection or projection bias is a psychological defense mechanism where a person subconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, usually to other people.” ¹ You can be sure that almost anything Romney and Ryan accuse Obama and the Democrats of, it is they who are guilty of that very thing.

In picking Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney has doubled down on his own campaign promise to give big tax breaks to the wealthy, uniting himself with a candidate who goes even further to do so: While Romney would bring taxes for top incomes down to 28 percent, Ryan has proposed bringing the top rate down even lower, to 25 percent. Meanwhile, Ryan’s plan would actually increase the effective tax rate on the very poorest Americans by getting rid of tax breaks that benefit low earners.

Under Ryan’s plan, the six tiers of tax rates would be simplified to two rates: 25 percent for higher earners and 10 percent for lower-earners. But the overall impact of the Ryan budget would still disproportionately benefit the wealthy. The top 20 percent would get a $13,907 tax cut in 2015, and the top 1 percent would get a whopping $155,808 tax break, according to an analysis by the Tax Policy Center. By contrast, the bottom 20 percent of Americans would pay $159 more in taxes in 2015.

Ryan wants to give the wealthy even bigger tax cuts than Romney does.

¹ Source

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Romney/Ryan Want To Redistribute Wealth to the Wealthy

  1. Wizcon says:

    The thing that bothers me most about this video is not the 47% thing. We already knew or at least suspected it. His description of the chinese factory and the fact that other donors there were familiar with it is the point. You see venture capitalists tend to see labor in units or ergs. Measuarable cost of energy expended. you see it in cost analysis. You hear it discussed. I did in one of my first jobs as a file cleark for a major construction project (subway system). If you can control the cost and use of the ergs used, your profits go up. Remember the song with the phrase I owe my soul to the company store”? If you can purchase cheap ergs by creating a glut of ergs, ergs cost goes down. Supply and demand. So if you have a lot of jobless, there is a lot of competition for those jobs. You can make a lot of demands of the workers you have, like long hours, poor living conditions and charge them for the privelaege. Ever wonder why the union busting push, the fight against equal pay? Cutting education funding? Voter disenfranchisement of certain populations?
    Romney has stated that as soon as he takes office, jobs will abound and he does not have to do anything. To me, this says that potential employers, who are doing great on Wall st, are holding out for cheapers ergs. Their problem is they need consumers. And tax payers. Rick Santorium said it the other day. The comment about liberals being the smart people. There is a dawning realization, apparently, of the intentional dumbing down of the American.
    So my freinds all I can say is that in the eyes of Mitt and freinds, you are an erg, I am an erg. Nothing human about us.

    Sage Reply:

    You make great points, Wizcon. The whole Chinese factory description is horrifying and Romney plainly doesn’t care about the conditions under which the ergs work. As you said, more people competing for jobs means the corporations can make all kinds of unreasonable demands and the workers they already have.

    Romney made it plain he believes the economy will get better by him being elected president, without him having to do a thing. While I commented about his magical thinking, we all have suspected and now have confirmed that corporations are holding back jobs deliberately. They are doing it for a number of reasons – one to make Obama fail and two so that they have the upper hand in the supply/demand equation of jobs and job seekers.

Comments are closed.