My Plan To Turn Around The U.S. Economy - Mitt Romney

[웃 910]

My Plan To Turn Around The U.S. Economy

Barack Obama has had his turn at fixing the American economy. Millions of unemployed Americans can judge by their own experiences what he has done and failed to do.

For my part, I believe America can do better.

I have spent most of my career in the private sector starting new businesses and turning around ailing ones. Unlike career politicians who've never met a payroll, I know why jobs come and go.

Tomorrow, I will introduce a plan consisting of 59 specific proposals — including 10 concrete actions I will take on my first day in office — to turn around America's economy. Each proposal is rooted in the conservative premise that government itself cannot create jobs. At best, government can provide a framework in which economic growth can occur. All too often, however, government gets in the way. The past three years of unparalleled government expansion have retaught that lesson all too well.

Only the individual initiative of entrepreneurs, workers, investors and inventors enables companies, and our economy as a whole, to flourish. We must once again unleash the tremendous economic potential of the American people. The contrast between what the Obama administration has done and what I would do as president could not be starker.

First, President Obama has raised or threatened to raise taxes on both individuals and businesses. I would press hard in the opposite direction. Marginal income tax rates and tax rates on savings and investment must be kept low. Further, taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains for middle-income taxpayers should be eliminated. Our corporate tax rate is among the world's highest. It leaves U.S. firms at a competitive disadvantage and induces them to park their profits abroad, benefiting the rest of the world at our expense. I will fix these problems with permanent solutions. Ultimately, I will press for a total overhaul of our overly complex and inefficient system of taxation.

With scant regard for the costs imposed on consumers and businesses, President Obama has vastly expanded the regulatory reach of government. The federal government has estimated the price tag for its regulations at $1.75 trillion. I will pare back regulation, including eliminating "ObamaCare." I will direct every government agency to limit annual increases in regulatory costs to zero. The impact of any proposed new regulation must be offset by removing another regulation of equivalent cost. Every one of President Obama's regulations must be scrutinized, and those that unduly burden job creation must be axed.

Where President Obama left America's trade interests untended, I recognize the job-creating potential of international commerce. I will create the "Reagan Economic Zone," a partnership among countries committed to free enterprise and free trade. It will serve as a powerful engine for opening markets to our goods and services, and also a mechanism for confronting nations like China that violate trade rules while free-riding on the international system. I will not stand by while China pursues an economic development policy that relies on the unfair treatment of U.S. companies and the theft of their intellectual property. I have no interest in starting a trade war with China, but I cannot accept our current trade surrender.

The Obama administration has severely restricted domestic energy production. I will ensure we utilize to the fullest extent our nation's nuclear know-how and immense reserves in oil, gas and coal. By rationalizing and streamlining regulation, we will harness these resources everywhere it can be done safely, taking into account local concerns. A huge number of jobs is at stake. So, too, is the price of energy, which strongly influences economic growth. We are an energy-rich country that, thanks to environmental extremism, has chosen to live like an energy-poor country. That has to end.

Seeking to pay back political favors, President Obama has catered to the institutional interests of union bosses at the expense of both workers and businesses. I will fight against measures that deprive workers of basic rights, such as the secret ballot. And I will not tolerate federal intrusions of the kind that the National Labor Relations Board initiated when it filed suit against Boeing for opening a plant in a right-to-work state.

We also need a rational system for worker retraining, instead of the existing 47 separate programs run by nine federal agencies. America can have the world's most competitive workforce, and under my leadership, we will.

Finally, President Obama has engaged in a massive spending binge of choice. He threw dollars at every problem he encountered, running up the national debt and accomplishing worse than nothing in exchange. I will restore fiscal discipline by cutting the federal budget and placing an ironclad cap on spending. I will also press for a Constitutional amendment to balance the budget. Tellingly, while the private sector shed 1.8 million jobs since Barack Obama took office, the federal workforce grew by 142,500, or almost 7%. A rollback is urgently required.

As this catalogue of differences makes clear, our country has arrived at a fork in the road. In one direction lies the heavy hand of the state, indebtedness and decline. In the other direction lies limited government, free enterprise and economic growth. I know which direction is the American way. And I know in which direction lie the millions of jobs we need.

- Mitt Romney

[^_^ 5,021]

Further, taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains for middle-income taxpayers should be eliminated.

I read that as a proposal to leave current capital gains rates on higher-income taxpayers as is. I wonder what the income cutoff is.

I will create the "Reagan Economic Zone," a partnership among countries committed to free enterprise and free trade. It will serve as a powerful engine for opening markets to our goods and services, and also a mechanism for confronting nations like China that violate trade rules while free-riding on the international system.

Ooooh. Sounds like NAFTA on steroids. This is going to make a lot of Tea Party types very paranoid.

[peejay 327]

I listened to Obama on the news tonight. Same old sh*t. Nothing new. Still playing the blame game while offering the same old tired #######. Accusing the opposition of putting party above country while he does the same. I never had faith in Obama and I have even less now.

The only thing I do agree on is "Hope & Change". We can only hope his azz is gone in 2012 and then we can get a break from the same tired sh*t this guy is peddling that doesn't work and hasn't worked.

Happy Labor Day! I hope you have a job to go to tomorrow.

[웃 910]

I read that as a proposal to leave current capital gains rates on higher-income taxpayers as is. I wonder what the income cutoff is.

One of the reasons I wanted Romney to win in 08 was because he said this a handful of times.

The magic number was 0 cap gains on families that make $250,000 or less if I remember correctly.

[^_^ 5,021]

One of the reasons I wanted Romney to win in 08 was because he said this a handful of times.

The magic number was 0 cap gains on families that make $250,000 or less if I remember correctly.

I like that a lot!

I wonder how competitive Romney is really going to be though. Perry seems to have it all sown up.

Edited September 5, 2011 by \

[웃 910]

I like that a lot!

I wonder how competitive Romney is really going to be though. Perry seems to have it all sown up.

Mitt Romney suggested that welfare recipients should go to work immediately. He suggested doing away with capital gains taxes for those firms that invest in inner city enterprise zones also advocated tax credits for hiring poor residents of those areas.

http://2012.republican-candidates.org/Romney/Issues.php

Romney has said for months that he aimed to cut the capital gains tax for middle class investors to zero. But he didn't spell out how he'd define middle-class--until this week, as Fred Thompson was dominating the news with his belated entry into the race. It's a broad (and therefore politically-appealing) definition--families earning less than $200,000 would pay nothing on capital gains income. His campaign says that would apply to 95 percent of American households.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/20638782/Romney_s_Zero_Sum_Capital_Gains_Tax_Plan

[^_^ 5,021]

Mitt Romney suggested that welfare recipients should go to work immediately. He suggested doing away with capital gains taxes for those firms that invest in inner city enterprise zones ...

Around here, that would result in a windfall for financial firms that really don't employ those inner city residents but rather draw their employees from a wealthier suburban pool.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I used to support Romney, but now I realize that there are too few Mormons in the country for me to vote for one.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I used to support Romney, but now I realize that there are too few Mormons in the country for me to vote for one.

I'm guessing this is an Islam reference.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I'm guessing this is an Islam reference.

No, it's a reference to careless Romney comments indicating, among other things, that there aren't enough Muslim-Americans to make us worth his time, attention or respect.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

No, it's a reference to careless Romney comments indicating, among other things, that there aren't enough Muslim-Americans to make us worth his time, attention or respect.

Has he said anything negative? (I don't actually know)

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Mitt Romney suggested that welfare recipients should go to work immediately. He suggested doing away with capital gains taxes for those firms that invest in inner city enterprise zones also advocated tax credits for hiring poor residents of those areas.

http://2012.republican-candidates.org/Romney/Issues.php

Romney has said for months that he aimed to cut the capital gains tax for middle class investors to zero. But he didn't spell out how he'd define middle-class--until this week, as Fred Thompson was dominating the news with his belated entry into the race. It's a broad (and therefore politically-appealing) definition--families earning less than $200,000 would pay nothing on capital gains income. His campaign says that would apply to 95 percent of American households.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/20638782/Romney_s_Zero_Sum_Capital_Gains_Tax_Plan

http://news.yahoo.com/ridiculous-obama-administration-blocks-modest-medicaid-reforms-illinois-163406029.html <---- I know you and Scandal like to sometimes cherry pick your threads on here, but I was curious LI, what's your take on this?

[^_^ 5,021]

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, asked about putting a Muslim in his presidential Cabinet, said that he “cannot see that a Cabinet position would be justified” based on the percentage of Muslims in the U.S., according to an Islamic businessman who asked the question at a fundraising reception.

Kevin Madden, Romney’s national press secretary, told Politico: “At this point, we're not focused on what Gov. Romney's Cabinet might look like. But the governor does not believe that in order to effectively fight radical jihad you need to have Muslims serving in the Cabinet.”

Mansoor Ijaz, a New York financier and commentator of Pakistani ancestry, says the exchange with Romney occurred at a closed fundraiser in Las Vegas in mid-November. Ijaz describes himself “an American-born citizen of the Islamic faith.”

Fundraisers for Romney’s Republican presidential campaign are generally closed to the press, so the full context of the comment is unavailable.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1107/7059.html

I didn't realize GOP Presidents appointed cabinet members based on ethnicity and religion. Nor did I realize that the only purpose a Muslim could ever serve is in the fight against radical jihad.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

I didn't realize GOP Presidents appointed cabinet members based on ethnicity and religion.

I guess you never heard of Condoleezza Rice and Alberto Gonzales.

[웃 910]

http://news.yahoo.co...-163406029.html <---- I know you and Scandal like to sometimes cherry pick your threads on here, but I was curious LI, what's your take on this?

I think I might drive out to Chicago next weekend - get a part time job at Mickey D's for 1 pay check - find a Chicago address to use - and then apply for benefits before the law gets changed

I'm kidding, that is ridiculous. My cousin hasn't worked for years. Was sorta homeless in California for a period of time. He's been in Michigan for years, living with his parents, jobless, no car due to a suspended license due to not paying tickets, over 300 pounds, pretty unhealthy guy.

He is the type of person that probably should be on medicaid, but even he was denied in this state. Maybe IL will approve him