Comment: This quote is being misinterpreted.

(See in situ)


This quote is being misinterpreted.

If you actually listen to the interview, you will find that the interviewee argues that the solution is spending cuts and growth, not tax increases. The interviewer is the one that is constantly pushing the idea of "compromise", saying that, at least politically speaking, there will have to be tax increases as well. What the quote is saying is that IF we are forced down that road (e.g., can't get enough votes for a pure spending cut + growth solution), THEN you can't just "tax the rich" -- you would have to tax (most) everyone to get enough money to matter. He is saying this specifically because he knows people do not want to see their taxes increased and may therefore be persuaded that a spending-cut-and-growth-only solution is the way to go. (Note that in the specific context of this quote "revenue" == "increased taxes via tax law" and not "increased taxes via growth" -- the interviewer started using "revenue" to mean this so the interviewee responded in the same way.)

At around 3:02 he does say "broaden the tax base". But I believe he is talking about a revenue-neutral change there.

BTW, the real problem with what the interviewee is saying is that Mitt is not going to reduce spending at all (he will increase it) nor make any significant reductions in regulation, so the growth he talks about will not come. (And therefore when he says at around 3:20 "well I don't think anybody's going to jump off a fiscal cliff in the long run" he's only fooling "mitt-wits".)