Skip to main content

Mitt Romney - attempting to make sense to the senseless (most namely - himself)

Mittens Romney has stated that he plans on cutting taxes by 20% for all Americans, including the wealthiest of Americans.

On NBC's Meet The Press Sunday morning, Romney said the following:

"Well I can tell you that people at the high end, high-income taxpayers, are going to have fewer deductions and exemptions. Those numbers are going to come down. Otherwise they'd get a tax break, and I want to make sure people understand, despite what the Democrats said at their convention, I am not reducing taxes on high-income taxpayers. I'm bringing down the rate of taxation, but also bringing down deductions and exemptions at the high end so that the revenues stay the same, the taxes people pay stay the same -- the middle income people are going to get a break, but at the high end the tax coming in stays the same..."

Eh, what? Under him, the wealthiest of Americans, like everyone else, will see their taxes decrease, but won't be receiving any tax cuts and their taxes will stay the same? Something isn't adding up right in this equation. Under Romney's plan, it's estimated that the wealthiest Americans will receive a $264,000 tax break, while middle-class families will see their taxes increase by as much as $2,000. I keep telling people that 2 + 2 = 4, but it appears as if the Romney/Ryan team believe in a different form of math. While there's a "Math for Dummies" book that is available for purchase, I have a wild theory that Romney and Ryan will author their own book before long and title it, "Math by Dummies". Indeed...

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/09/09/816841/romney-says-his-plan-to-cut-taxes-on-the-rich-doesnt-actually-cut-taxes-on-the-rich/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i...