Mitt Romney came from wealth and went on to build his own quarter-of-a-billion dollar fortune. Paul Ryan, who has never worked a day in the private sector (outside a few months in the family firm) reports a net worth of as much as $7 million, thanks to trusts and inheritances from his and his wife’s family.

Wealthy political candidates are nothing new, of course. But we’ve never had two wealthy candidates on a national ticket whose top priority is to reduce already low taxes on the well-to-do while raising taxes on everyone else — even as they propose to slash programs that serve the poor, or that (like college aid) create chances for the lowly born to rise.

Article: Matt Miller: The rise of the ‘Drawbridge Republicans’ - The Washington Post

Comments?

I just want to point out the one, overarching hypocrisy of Romney’s plan. Romney waxes poetic about the importance of the private sector. But nothing in his plan offers anything to promote. There’s a strong corporatist/fascist streak throughout the plan. And that is Romney’s idea of the private sector: rearranging the country for the benefit of corporations, not for individual liberty. Romney does not believe liberty. He simply does not. He believes in a society run by government with corporations as junior partners in the scheme. That much is very open in his plan....


Romney’s long-term goal is a “flatter, fairer tax code.” No word on what this means, and I can only guess. Further, I have no idea kind of term “long-term” is. But my guess is that “long-term” means “when it is politically convenient for Mitt.”.....

As it is, Romney’s tax policy is set to add to the deficit and only pass the problems to a different generation. Perhaps this is where Romney’s love of Reagan reaches its peak? Deficit spending has been the policy of Republicans for decades now. Thanks for the bill, Gipper!.....

the liberty, weekly › Romney’s Jobs Plan Deconstructed

Ummmmm,
Have you looked at the ballooning deficit since Obama became President? Do you think this is a good trend?

__________________
1982 300SD " Wotan" ..On the road as of Jan 8, 2007 with Historic Tags

Romney’s “plan” is total nonsense. He’s not promising a small government. He’s promising a fascist/corporatist government, and he’s doing it openly. Romney’s manifesto is strikingly bereft of any details about actually cutting government. His hope is to throw out enough platitudes and vagaries to fool weak minds into supporting him.

Ummmmm, have you looked at what will happen to it based on the Romney Plan?

Or are you a top tier taxpayer who will benefit?

__________________
On some nights I still believe that a car with the fuel gauge on empty can run about fifty more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. - HST

1983 300SD - 305000
1984 Toyota Landcruiser - 190000
1994 GMC Jimmy - 203000

https://media.giphy.com/media/X3nnss8PAj5aU/giphy.gif

But Romney plans to cut almost nothing. He has various plans to “streamline” Obama’s regulations. But none to end them. The only piece of legislation Romney has sworn to repeal is Obamacare. But he wants to replace it with a more “streamlined” regulatory regime. He does not say what that is, but since he loves America so much, it must be better....

Do you have ANY idea whatsoever where the government gets their money? It comes from taxes that are levied against income. Without industry thriving there IS NO income to levy taxes against. B.O. is AGAINST industry, thus is LIMITING the inflow of money to the government.

__________________
2001 SLK 320 six speed manual
2014 Porsche Cayenne six speed manual

Annoy a Liberal, Read the Constitution

And if the middle class does not have the money to purchase services and good industry is not going to create jobs or goods. They only produce/expand if there is demand, not before.

__________________
Sent from an agnostic abacus

2014 C250 21,XXX my new DD ** 2013 GLK 350 18,000 Wife's new DD**

- With out god, life is everything.
- God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller as time moves on..." Neil DeGrasse Tyson
- You can pray for me, I'll think for you.
- When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

Please explain your rationale for saying Obama is against industry.

Does not the Romney plan reduce taxes? Where will the money come from then?

__________________
On some nights I still believe that a car with the fuel gauge on empty can run about fifty more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. - HST

1983 300SD - 305000
1984 Toyota Landcruiser - 190000
1994 GMC Jimmy - 203000

https://media.giphy.com/media/X3nnss8PAj5aU/giphy.gif

I see in writing here and hear the claims about how he is against industry, but can you give an example of how?
I hear the phrase bandied about about how he's for "more regulations on business costing business more and crippling them".

How?
I am truly curious.

__________________
85' 300D No inspection, No registration fees, Cheap insurance
"If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits 88 miles per hour, you're going to see some serious %$&^."

I'm sure the health insurance industry hates the new regulations and rules.

__________________
Remember, Safety Third!
'99 E300 Turbodiesel, '82 300TD, 1996 12V Cummins Turbo, '94 Neoplan - Detroit 6V92TA

Not sure of sarcasm or not, so...

Insurer Profits Are Up In The Wake Of Health Care Law They Opposed

The fight over health care reform, which ended when President Obama signed the legislation into law in March 2010, was one of the most prolonged and contentious political battles in recent memory. Conservatives mounted a fierce opposition to the reform effort, aided by a $380 million lobbying campaign on behalf of the health care industry. Insurers claimed that the new system would lead to skyrocketing coverage costs for all Americans, while politicians favoring reform countered that the insurance companies were merely worried about their own bottom lines.

If that was indeed the case, it seems insurers can breathe a bit easier now. The Bloomberg report surveys the recent earnings of five of the country's largest insurers -- WellPoint, UnitedHealth Group, Aetna, Humana and Cigna -- and finds that their profit margins have climbed to an average of 8.24 percent in the year and a half since the health care reform package was signed into law.

By contrast, in the 18-month period before health care was passed, profit margins at these five insurers averaged just 6.88 percent.

Revenue from government business -- namely, Medicare and Medicaid -- has soared for these insurers since the reforms were signed into law, according to the Bloomberg report. Meanwhile, revenue from ordinary commercial business has grown only slightly, as more and more Americans, looking for ways to trim basic expenses, are choosing not to seek medical care if they can cope without it.

The report's findings may not tell the whole story, as the health care law may yet become more or less fully realized. A number of provisions in the law are scheduled to take effect in future months and years, while conservative politicians, including Republican presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney, have threatened to roll back the reforms entirely.

__________________
85' 300D No inspection, No registration fees, Cheap insurance
"If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits 88 miles per hour, you're going to see some serious %$&^."

Here's a pretty good summary:

Regulations Stifling Business Growth

__________________
2001 SLK 320 six speed manual
2014 Porsche Cayenne six speed manual

Annoy a Liberal, Read the Constitution

OK, I let you have the benefit of the doubt and I watched the Fox Business news video from Sept. 15, 2011.
A link to a video of opinions of talking heads on a Fox channel of all things isn't what I had in mind, but I guess I should have been more specific.

There is not one mention of any regulation or policy against industry or small business or specific tax to be imposed mentioned in the video, but just that there might be a threat of one. Simply doom and gloom words without substance typical from Fox anything.
But, I took it at face value, giving Mr. Fleischer the benefit of some experience.

I even went so far as to research Mr. Fleischer and I found this article from back on August 9th 2010 Why I'm Not Hiring
When you add it all up, it costs $74,000 to put $44,000 in Sally's pocket and to give her $12,000 in benefits.
In it, he mentions...
"Every year, we negotiate a renewal to our health coverage. This year (2010), our provider demanded a 28% increase in premiums—for a lesser plan. This is in part a tax increase that the federal government has co-opted insurance providers to collect. We had never faced an increase anywhere near this large; in each of the last two years, the increase was under 10%."

What he mentions happened back in 2010 ( His 28% increase in premiums in August after the health care bill passed and long before anything was required to happen as a knee jerk reaction by his health insurance provider and likely his broker).

This is akin to an auto insurer raising your premiums based on a report of police statistics that your car is on the "top stolen" list, even though your town and where you drive your car has 0 auto theft and you don't live anywhere near the town where the police report came out.
There is no real basis for the rise in premium other than "they want to", and can get away with it, if you let them. Do you just pay the increase, or do you act as a smart person and shop around?

Our company was presented with an increase back then as well, and our owners went shopping and got a much better plan from Blue Cross/Blue Shield of NJ, for 15% less than we were paying as opposed to Aetna and Oxford who wanted massive increases.
Everyone in the company got to keep their same doctors, and the benefits were actually increased for a lower price, adding vision and a better prescription plan.
We are also in NJ, so if this guy did a little homework and didn't likely roll over to what his probable insurance broker who gets a commission from the insurance companies wanted to do, he would have been better off.
Oh, and by the way, we kept our same broker/negotiator for insurance..We just made him work for us instead of blindly take a massive increase.

Now, going based on his little written opinion piece above, that ratio of cost of employee to salary and take home pay has been the same for decades, minus his little rant on health care premiums going up, which he could have prevented.
By his own words in the article, this guy would like it very much if he didn't have to pay for any health insurance for his employees at all, that they should just take care of it themselves.
But, I would be willing to bet he would not be removing healthcare for himself either partially or fully paid by the company, but just for the underlings.
Sure that is speculation, but I am pretty confident based on what I know of small business owners, having worked closely with them for decades now.

With all of that being said, and his talk of not hiring, here in 2012, his company is hiring for at least two positions, so things can't be all bad.

Also, here is a link to their Annual Report, where the numbers and profits are up, even with all the doom and gloom.

Bogen financials

So much for a pretty good summary.

__________________
85' 300D No inspection, No registration fees, Cheap insurance
"If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits 88 miles per hour, you're going to see some serious %$&^."