|Yeah, but she says we can trust Mitt. Guess we’ve been saved. /sarcasm|
Just a little simple example illustrating how they are very much vehicles used by the same machine despite the fact that they are sold to the masses as different at face value. The need for examples like this is absurd; examining the transition from Bush to Obama yields only evidence of forward momentum in shared policy. For those that think that one or the other will destroy the economy, or that Obama will destroy the economy single-handedly (a la Obama 2016); I have news for you and a reality check – the economy is already in shambles… where’ve you been?
Looks like either way, we are in store for more of the same. Mark my words, and I’ll see you back here in 2016.
(Excerpt taken from Infowars) In January, Romney refused to rule out a value-added tax, which is a hidden tax and more politically acceptable. Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 tax plan also had a VAT (as represented by the last 9), and Romney’s supposed Tea Party friendly vice president pick, Paul Ryan, included a value-added tax in his “roadmap” scheme.
Obama and the Democrats also like the VAT idea because they realize increasing income taxes on the rich will not generate the revenue they require to keep expanding the size of government. Obama has said he thinks value-added taxes are “something that has worked for other countries.” Obama and the Democrats have not specifically called for a VAT because they are politically addicted to the class warfare mantra that brings disgruntled Americans to the polls.