The January 7, 2012 debate ended with each candidate giving what they considered their great vision for America. Paul said to restore our freedoms, liberties and Constitution; he said we’ve been in a financial bubble for the last 40 years and it broke; the bankers and Wall Street have been bailed out, we need to liquate debt to have growth and it’ll only end when we understand the business cycle. My response – I agree that we have to get to a balanced budget but I don’t believe that it’s all about business.
Perry said there is a vision for America; the people have lost confidence in the government and Wall Street; people want less government, less taxation, less regulation and less litigation. He went on to say we’re sitting on 300 years of energy in this country and we need to let our federal lands and waters to be opened up so that we’re not held hostage and if you pass the right to work law in New Hampshire it’ll become a magnet for jobs. My response – I’m not sure he has a handle on what the American people want and maybe he didn’t hear on January 3 that oil and gas drilling was suspected of causing minor earthquakes in Ohio. And, perhaps since he’s an oil man that won’t be around in 300 years he’s not concerned with pollution or what the next generations are suppose to do if there is no Apocalypse and they’re around to suffer the consequences of our decisions.
Huntsman said if we can fix our taxes and move toward a friendlier regulatory environment we can get back in the game. My response – I believe this to be true.
Romney said the question is what is the soul of America going to be – we have a President that has put us on a road to decline – militarily, internationally, domestically, we’re looking more like Europe and that’s not working; return America to the first words that were written down in the Declaration of Independence – life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, as people pursue education, work hard, take risks and build enterprises of all kinds they make us better; we have a President who doesn’t understand that in his bones. My Response – I don’t agree with his assessment of the President. To me the key in what he said is – work hard. An investor may take risks but they do not know the toils of the blue collar worker. I don’t care about his or anyone else’s investments as long as they’re legal and fairly taxed like the income of ordinary people.
Gingrich’s plan is zero tax on capital gains, 12.5% corporate tax, 100% expensing (write off) for new equipment and abolish the death tax. He went on say that the Wall Street Journal said Romney’s plan was more like Obama’s. My response – You’ve already heard my opinion about taxes. I’m okay with allowing the option for 100% expensing and abolishing the death tax with something like a $500,000 limit until our tax system is fair and assures the rich have paid their dues – when this occurs I’m okay with abolishing it completely.
Santorum agrees with Gingrich and said America doesn’t have classes, we don’t allow for titles – maybe call them middle income people - but he doesn’t want to buy into the Obama class warfare argument; he wasn’t for a health care mandate or a Wall Street bailout, he’s about cap and trade and blue collar workers. I have to take a minute here. I recorded this debate and went over it to make sure I didn’t give bad information. Earlier I wrote that he worked to defeat cap and trade. So I either made a mistake or he contradicted himself. I believe he supports blue collar workers because he said he wanted no tax on manufacturers and processors and doesn’t see this as a type of bailout. And I don’t care what you call the 3 groups of Americans – lower, middle, upper income, the problem is the same, there are large gaps between the groups that need to be addressed. Although I wish that businesses would give to their employees (wages and health benefits to survive) instead of themselves and their stockholders (yes, even his manufacturers and processors can be a part of Wall Street) it isn’t what is happening.
Romney came back with his plan is not just about taxes, we have to open up markets for our goods, in the last 3 years China and Europe opened up 44 trade agreements, this President has opened up none. Not true. On October 13, 2011 it was reported that Congress passed free trade deals with South Korea, Columbia and Panama. On November 12th, the President held an economic summit in Hawaii with Asia-Pacific leaders and it was reported that Canada and Mexico are interested in joining the new Pacific Free Trade Agreement that was initiated. Romney said Huntsman was implementing Obama policy in China and they’re stealing our patents, designs, know how, brand names, hacking into corporate and government computers and manipulating their currency to get American jobs. He also said we have to hold China to the free and fair trading rules. Huntsman said you can’t slap a huge tariff on China and not expect repercussions; trade deals with them are like they are with any other country; what Romney is calling for would lead to a trade war, it makes for easy talk and applause but doesn’t work in reality; it would hurt small business and exporters. No one disagrees that China needs to be held accountable for their actions but when I looked around the internet I discovered that for example the solar industry exports well over a billion dollars of products (inverters and more) to China each year and somehow they undersell the panels that they make and sell to the US (this makes me think our labor costs are high) and experts are saying a huge tariff on them could start an international trade war with China so Huntsman is right.
No comments:
Post a Comment