Rick Perry's economic plan: Can he balance the budget?

[candycorn]

Nobody has a plan to truly balance the budget.


Seems to me like everybody does have a plan to make the depression worse, though.

Balancing the budget is comparatively easy. Just raise taxes to make up the short fall or cut services. We're wasting--and I do mean wasting--billions on subs we don't need and fighters that...besides not needing them...nobody wants them. What the US had 2 "classes" ago are far superior to anything else in the air or subsurface. We should go on researching the items but not building them. As we saw with WWII, we can pretty rapidly convert our plants to war time production and destroy any enemy within a matter of years with these new super weapons if, and it's a HUGE if, the current inventories of superior firepower are insufficient.

What is more difficult is deficit reduction. Nobody has a plan to do that.

I often wonder why we don't just deem 2015 or 2016 or 2017--pick one or two or three--a year(s) when the taxes will be raised for that one year enough to pay off the debt. Then be done with it and balance the budget as a % of GDP afterword.

One time tax to pay off the debts and go forward with an actually firm balanced budget rule tied to real life figures.

 

[The Rabbi]

Nobody has a plan to truly balance the budget.


Seems to me like everybody does have a plan to make the depression worse, though.

Balancing the budget is comparatively easy. Just raise taxes to make up the short fall or cut services. We're wasting--and I do mean wasting--billions on subs we don't need and fighters that...besides not needing them...nobody wants them. What the US had 2 "classes" ago are far superior to anything else in the air or subsurface. We should go on researching the items but not building them. As we saw with WWII, we can pretty rapidly convert our plants to war time production and destroy any enemy within a matter of years with these new super weapons if, and it's a HUGE if, the current inventories of superior firepower are insufficient.

What is more difficult is deficit reduction. Nobody has a plan to do that.

I often wonder why we don't just deem 2015 or 2016 or 2017--pick one or two or three--a year(s) when the taxes will be raised for that one year enough to pay off the debt. Then be done with it and balance the budget as a % of GDP afterword.

One time tax to pay off the debts and go forward with an actually firm balanced budget rule tied to real life figures.

When has raising taxes balanced the budget? Just ask people in MI, CA, and NJ. The answer is never. It just provides more opportunity for spending.
Which section of the budget has experienced the most increase over the last 10 years? That's right, social services/transfer payments. There's where cuts need to be made. WE can start with eliminating Fan/Fred and turning student loans back over to private lenders.

 

[Toro]

I try not to insult people without first being insulted. So I will invite you to show us where in American history, taxes on the rich were lower than they are now, and the economy prospered.

The 19th century.

Good point and totally valid.

Of course the fact that the American people did not prosper even while the macro-economy did?

Well let's just pretend that wasn't ALSO true, shall we?

The American people prospered in the 19th century.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The history is that lower, simpler taxes and a more stable regulatory environment induce people to start or expand businesses and generate much more economic activity. I think the effects of Perry's plan are grossly underestimated.

I try not to insult people without first being insulted. So I will invite you to show us where in American history, taxes on the rich were lower than they are now, and the economy prospered.

The 19th century.

As someone once said, the past is another country; they do things differently there.

 

[candycorn]

Nobody has a plan to truly balance the budget.


Seems to me like everybody does have a plan to make the depression worse, though.

Balancing the budget is comparatively easy. Just raise taxes to make up the short fall or cut services. We're wasting--and I do mean wasting--billions on subs we don't need and fighters that...besides not needing them...nobody wants them. What the US had 2 "classes" ago are far superior to anything else in the air or subsurface. We should go on researching the items but not building them. As we saw with WWII, we can pretty rapidly convert our plants to war time production and destroy any enemy within a matter of years with these new super weapons if, and it's a HUGE if, the current inventories of superior firepower are insufficient.

What is more difficult is deficit reduction. Nobody has a plan to do that.

I often wonder why we don't just deem 2015 or 2016 or 2017--pick one or two or three--a year(s) when the taxes will be raised for that one year enough to pay off the debt. Then be done with it and balance the budget as a % of GDP afterword.

One time tax to pay off the debts and go forward with an actually firm balanced budget rule tied to real life figures.

When has raising taxes balanced the budget? Just ask people in MI, CA, and NJ. The answer is never. It just provides more opportunity for spending.
Which section of the budget has experienced the most increase over the last 10 years? That's right, social services/transfer payments. There's where cuts need to be made. WE can start with eliminating Fan/Fred and turning student loans back over to private lenders.

You couple the tax increases with discipline. That is what was missing.

As for the student loans; if you want the loans to not be made in the first place...you have a good idea. If you're interested in moving the country forward; you have a bad idea. What were the odds of that?

 

[The Rabbi]

Balancing the budget is comparatively easy. Just raise taxes to make up the short fall or cut services. We're wasting--and I do mean wasting--billions on subs we don't need and fighters that...besides not needing them...nobody wants them. What the US had 2 "classes" ago are far superior to anything else in the air or subsurface. We should go on researching the items but not building them. As we saw with WWII, we can pretty rapidly convert our plants to war time production and destroy any enemy within a matter of years with these new super weapons if, and it's a HUGE if, the current inventories of superior firepower are insufficient.

What is more difficult is deficit reduction. Nobody has a plan to do that.

I often wonder why we don't just deem 2015 or 2016 or 2017--pick one or two or three--a year(s) when the taxes will be raised for that one year enough to pay off the debt. Then be done with it and balance the budget as a % of GDP afterword.

One time tax to pay off the debts and go forward with an actually firm balanced budget rule tied to real life figures.

When has raising taxes balanced the budget? Just ask people in MI, CA, and NJ. The answer is never. It just provides more opportunity for spending.
Which section of the budget has experienced the most increase over the last 10 years? That's right, social services/transfer payments. There's where cuts need to be made. WE can start with eliminating Fan/Fred and turning student loans back over to private lenders.

You couple the tax increases with discipline. That is what was missing.

As for the student loans; if you want the loans to not be made in the first place...you have a good idea. If you're interested in moving the country forward; you have a bad idea. What were the odds of that?

Discipline? Really? LOL!!! You're kidding, right? When has Congress, or any legislature, been disciplined? Never happened, will never happen.

As for student loans, if you mean moving the country forward to bankruptcy, you're right. But I want to avoid bankruptcy. Why should the gov't give student loans?

 

[IndependntLogic]

When has raising taxes balanced the budget? Just ask people in MI, CA, and NJ. The answer is never. It just provides more opportunity for spending.
Which section of the budget has experienced the most increase over the last 10 years? That's right, social services/transfer payments. There's where cuts need to be made. WE can start with eliminating Fan/Fred and turning student loans back over to private lenders.

You couple the tax increases with discipline. That is what was missing.

As for the student loans; if you want the loans to not be made in the first place...you have a good idea. If you're interested in moving the country forward; you have a bad idea. What were the odds of that?

Discipline? Really? LOL!!! You're kidding, right? When has Congress, or any legislature, been disciplined? Never happened, will never happen.

As for student loans, if you mean moving the country forward to bankruptcy, you're right. But I want to avoid bankruptcy. Why should the gov't give student loans?

Wait. Hasn't Perry increased the debt in his state? Like doubled it since taking office? Increased the size of government? Why on Earth would anyone looking for solutions to the problems we have now, vote for a Bush clone?

 

[The Rabbi]

You couple the tax increases with discipline. That is what was missing.

As for the student loans; if you want the loans to not be made in the first place...you have a good idea. If you're interested in moving the country forward; you have a bad idea. What were the odds of that?

Discipline? Really? LOL!!! You're kidding, right? When has Congress, or any legislature, been disciplined? Never happened, will never happen.

As for student loans, if you mean moving the country forward to bankruptcy, you're right. But I want to avoid bankruptcy. Why should the gov't give student loans?

Wait. Hasn't Perry increased the debt in his state? Like doubled it since taking office? Increased the size of government? Why on Earth would anyone looking for solutions to the problems we have now, vote for a Bush clone?

Do you really need this explained to you for the 30th time, you ignorant moran? Are you that stupid or just trying out for a Democratic primary?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Tax Policy Center's analysis of Perry's plan:

TPC Tax Topics | Governor Rick Perry's Tax Reform Plan

For one thing, they estimate lost revenue for the year 2015 would be 995 billion. So whatever else Perry plans to cut to balance the budget,

he's got to cut another 995 billion.

 

[The Rabbi]

Tax Policy Center's analysis of Perry's plan:

TPC Tax Topics | Governor Rick Perry's Tax Reform Plan

For one thing, they estimate lost revenue for the year 2015 would be 995 billion. So whatever else Perry plans to cut to balance the budget,

he's got to cut another 995 billion.

What's Obama's plan? Oh yeah, borrow and spend another $500B.

 

[FactFinder]

Rick Perry's economic plan: Can he balance the budget?


Well seeing as how he couldn't balance the Texas budget without stimulus funds, it seems rather unkikely.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Discipline? Really? LOL!!! You're kidding, right? When has Congress, or any legislature, been disciplined? Never happened, will never happen.

As for student loans, if you mean moving the country forward to bankruptcy, you're right. But I want to avoid bankruptcy. Why should the gov't give student loans?

Wait. Hasn't Perry increased the debt in his state? Like doubled it since taking office? Increased the size of government? Why on Earth would anyone looking for solutions to the problems we have now, vote for a Bush clone?

Do you really need this explained to you for the 30th time, you ignorant moran? Are you that stupid or just trying out for a Democratic primary?

Well that one got to you, didn't it. Getting emotional, are we? Perry had NINE years to balance the Texas budget. How many times did he do so? Ooops.

 

[The Rabbi]

Wait. Hasn't Perry increased the debt in his state? Like doubled it since taking office? Increased the size of government? Why on Earth would anyone looking for solutions to the problems we have now, vote for a Bush clone?

Do you really need this explained to you for the 30th time, you ignorant moran? Are you that stupid or just trying out for a Democratic primary?

Well that one got to you, didn't it. Getting emotional, are we? Perry had NINE years to balance the Texas budget. How many times did he do so? Ooops.

Do you really need this explained to you again? Are you that stupid not to understand what happened?

 

[IndependntLogic]

Do you really need this explained to you for the 30th time, you ignorant moran? Are you that stupid or just trying out for a Democratic primary?

Well that one got to you, didn't it. Getting emotional, are we? Perry had NINE years to balance the Texas budget. How many times did he do so? Ooops.

Do you really need this explained to you again? Are you that stupid not to understand what happened?

Awww, you're still upset. Yes, I'm aware of the bullshtt spin put on it but see, us non-kool-aid-drinkers ain't a buyin' the product he's a sellin'. I'm sure you see the guy as pure and faultless in every way and it's all good. I think he sucks. Besides, we've already had one idiot from Texas embarrass us for too meany years. Really don't need the clone in there.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Tax Policy Center's analysis of Perry's plan:

TPC Tax Topics | Governor Rick Perry's Tax Reform Plan

For one thing, they estimate lost revenue for the year 2015 would be 995 billion. So whatever else Perry plans to cut to balance the budget,

he's got to cut another 995 billion.

What's Obama's plan? Oh yeah, borrow and spend another $500B.

Is that what you think passes for a rebuttal of the Tax Policy Center's analysis?

 

[The Rabbi]

Tax Policy Center's analysis of Perry's plan:

TPC Tax Topics | Governor Rick Perry's Tax Reform Plan

For one thing, they estimate lost revenue for the year 2015 would be 995 billion. So whatever else Perry plans to cut to balance the budget,

he's got to cut another 995 billion.

What's Obama's plan? Oh yeah, borrow and spend another $500B.

Is that what you think passes for a rebuttal of the Tax Policy Center's analysis?

No, it's a rebuttal to people who would bad mouth Perry's plan no matter what it was, even without understanding it.
Like you.

 

[freedombecki]

What's Obama's plan? Oh yeah, borrow and spend another $500B.

Is that what you think passes for a rebuttal of the Tax Policy Center's analysis?

No, it's a rebuttal to people who would bad mouth Perry's plan no matter what it was, even without understanding it.
Like you.

Well said. Rep coming your way.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's Obama's plan? Oh yeah, borrow and spend another $500B.

Is that what you think passes for a rebuttal of the Tax Policy Center's analysis?

No, it's a rebuttal to people who would bad mouth Perry's plan no matter what it was, even without understanding it.
Like you.

I understand it better than you do since I've read an actual analysis of it. You were sucking his dick before he even had a plan.

The Tax Policy Center's analysis clearly shows that Perry has no chance of balancing the budget with his stupid plan.

 

[The Rabbi]

Is that what you think passes for a rebuttal of the Tax Policy Center's analysis?

No, it's a rebuttal to people who would bad mouth Perry's plan no matter what it was, even without understanding it.
Like you.

I understand it better than you do since I've read an actual analysis of it. You were sucking his dick before he even had a plan.

The Tax Policy Center's analysis clearly shows that Perry has no chance of balancing the budget with his stupid plan.

And Obama's plan is?
You can't beat something with nothing.

 

[AquaAthena]

Rick Perry has an economic plan. He wants the federal government to spend less money, and he wants huge tax cuts. Oh, and a balanced budget by 2020. Here's the rub: Perry's plan would drastically reduce the amount of money the government collects in taxes. Link to article

​

Aw, the naysayers cast off the winning strategy with "Oh, and a balanced budget by 2020." Gee, a balanced budget would destroy Obama's spendthrift legacy. Awwwwwwwwww

From what I understand, Perry's and Gingrich's plan would be more effective. Perry...a 20% flat tax and Gingrich, a 15% flat tax. I think either of these two experienced gentlemen could and would balance the budget. Gingrich has already down it in the 90's.