Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
Math

Posted by david52 z5CO (My Page) on
Thu, Oct 4, 12 at 21:22

"Let's take Mitt Romney at his word, and see how the numbers he cited during Wednesday night's debate add up. We can begin with a pop quiz in Presidential arithmetic:

If you have a $1.3 trillion annual deficit, and you are going to make it shrink to zero without raising any tax, how many new jobs will the economy have to create? Show your work.

Starting with Romney's assertion that his policies will lead to 12 million new jobs over four years and provide the government with fresh tax revenue, how close will that come to plugging the gaping hole in the federal budget? Answer: Not very close.

If we assume that those jobs pay $40,000 per year and that each new job pays 20 percent in Federal taxes, the total additional revenue comes to just $96 billion in 2016.

That $96 billion obviously doesn't come close to the $1 trillion currently projected deficit - not to mention the $300 billion in additional spending Romney proposes for the military and the insurance company subsidies he's "returning" to Medicare.

Never mind that there's a problem lowering the top tax rate to 28 percent from 35 percent, which will cost $250 billion in revenues. Plugging that hole by taking away the $165 billion in deductions used by top earners simply doesn't work. Then there's an even bigger problem making his tax cut of $5 trillion "revenue neutral" while giving the middle class "tax relief."

But let's continue taking Romney at his word, even if it's not worth the paper it isn't printed on.

Let's imagine those new jobs are really, really good jobs. How good do they have to be to provide enough new tax revenue to cover the deficit?

At a 25 percent Federal tax rate on all the new income, the average new job would have to pay a mere $433,333 per year to fill the gap. Sign me up for one of those new jobs, please.

The other possibility is that Romney's policies will magically create even more jobs than he's assuming. If the new jobs were those $40K per year jobs each paying 20 percent in taxes, we'd need 162.5 million new jobs. For those playing along at home, that's more jobs than the total current civilian labor force, which stood at 154.6 million last month.


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: Math

Don't forget since Romney's definition of middle class starts at 200k and he' going to give them a tax break that further makes his math "vodoo". Anyone making under 200K & voting for him and his suspect economics/math is dumber than a box of rocks. He's the person who has already admitted to writing off 47% of this country. The only people he's looking after are people who already don't need him to to help them.


 o
RE: Math

I'm not that great at math, and even I can see that his figures and ideas don't quite add up to reality or rationale. He IS in place to look after those who least need any help, which says everything about his lacking integrity. The man is morally bankrupt, and needs to deal with his own mental deficit before offering to screw up our national one further.


 o
RE: Math

I did wonder how much his jobs would fill the gap, but now I know. I didn't think it would work, but it could sound good to someone who doesn't think too deeply. I too, would like one of those $433,333 per year job. Just one year would do it for me. Please? Then, I can go back to my lower rate for a few years. I promise I'll pass my $433,333 job onto someone else. We can share it. See, isn't my fantasty just as nice as Romney's? Fantasy don't feed the bulldog dude!


 o
RE: Math

I didn't think it would work, but it could sound good to someone who doesn't think too deeply.

And that's the problem! There are way too many of those people around, plenty right here on HT.


 o
RE: Math

  • Posted by kwoods Cold z7 Long Is (My Page) on
    Fri, Oct 5, 12 at 10:13

I think if Obama's hope rests on the ability of the voters to do simple arithmetic... or to use logic for that matter... or to even care about these things, he's done for. Romney's people know this. We are a proud people of broad strokes and big ideas... not details. The man won in 2008 on "Hope and Change" for god's sake!

Did you notice how much Romney sounded like Reagan the other night?

Total tangent but I haven't seen this addressed and David has been nibbling around the edges of this kind of stuff; Didn't Romney claim 3% of small businesses employ 50% of the workforce or some such thing? How do 3% of small businesses employ 50% of the workforce? Those are some big small businesses.


 o
RE: Math

kwoods - the Reagan similarity is/was discussed on the debate topics. It was noticed by a lot of people.

I agree that most people will not use critical thinking to see if what he says makes sense. If it sounds good, they want to believe it, so they do. That's why Obama has to do a better job of showing quickly why it doesn't add up. Clinton did an excellent job of that at the convention. Obama did a little of it in the debate but he needs to do more.


 o
RE: Math

  • Posted by kwoods Cold z7 Long Is (My Page) on
    Fri, Oct 5, 12 at 12:14

<sarc>Did you notice how much Romney sounded like Reagan the other night?</sarc>

Mentioned because it seems to be more important to most than any actual facts or substance.

"Obama did a little of it in the debate but he needs to do more."

Agree. I actually watched a rerun of the debate (yes, there is something wrong with me) with a more critical/skeptical eye. Yes, Obama was at a disadvantage because facts were... arbitrary, and positions as previously stated were.... flexible. If you take into consideration that he was navigating such a surreal landscape, he actually did quite well on the facts and substance. The problem, I think, is that he didn't "look good" traversing the uneven terrain of Romneyland.

It is very difficult to differentiate your vision from something as chimeric and variable as Romney's. It's like boxing against a tub of jello. I think Obama should lay out his own plan/accomplishments and dismiss Romney for what he is... a pretender.


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here