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

[IndependntLogic]

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.

 

[editec]

Perry wants to institute an optional flat tax rate of 20%, eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits, throw out taxes on qualified dividends and capital gains, while sacking the estate tax. Corporate taxes would decrease as well.

Yeah? show us the numbers, Ric.

We'd all love to see the plan.

 

[candycorn]

In Texas.

Minimum wage jobs, filled by illegals drawn by Perry's free education for illegals plan.

Sorry, Inthemiddle. A drive through the Woodlands north of Houston and in areas between Dallas and Ft. Worth would tell you there's a lot of jobs here, and by the fabulous homes and yards, they're paid well.

There really are a lot of good jobs here. I pass their homes every week.

The homeowners pay the illegals pretty well to maintain those yards; you're probably right about that.

 

[candycorn]

Because it makes it tough for accountants and bureaucrats to keep their jobs.

You're kidding, right? Do you have any idea what the practical implications of an "optional flat tax" - two different tax regimes - would be? This would be a boon to accountants and IRS bureaucrats! Every year, people would do their taxes both ways, then decide to pay the lower. The idea that it would decrease bureaucracy is a laughable fairy tale sold to a gullible base that still believes cutting income taxes raises revenues. lol If you're going to have a flat tax, have a ******* flat tax! I might even support it! But not this weird pick-whatever-tax-regime-you-want.

Anyways, Perry has been getting raked over the coals by some conservatives for his plan.

Rick Perry's Tax Plan Would Be A Disaster For America | Fox News

Rick Perry’s MAXTAX vs. Stephen Moore’s MAXTAX - By Reihan Salam - The Agenda - National Review Online

Well, Toro, there are businesses that are very popular who run tv ads saying "We beat all competitor's rates."

What's so different about a government plan offering everyone to choose which rate they want--the high one or the low one?

Everybody will pick the low one.

As a tv adman would say, "Do you hear me now?"

Some people don't like others to have choices. Rick Perry gives you the choice.

If you want to hire more people, you take the lower rate and hire people with the savings.

If you want to be Lord Beneficent Foundation, you can feel good about giving more than you had to give when you're not condescending about all your brains, hot cars, hot chicks, super great stuff, etc.

See? There's a choice for everyone. Rick Perry is just reflecting the times, and it's about time you can get a bargain basement tax if you want one.

Are you insane?

I'm sorry but wow; after reading that I've never been more proud to be as politically the polar opposite of Rick Perry as possible.

 

[candycorn]

Screw the budget.

Where's the ******* jobs?

In Texas.

Facts whisper much louder than your lies.

Texas is in the middle of the pack when it comes to unemployment. They are actually in North Dakota and you don't have to worry about the homes and yards in The Whitelands.

 

[Toro]

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.

 

[Toro]

Well, Toro, there are businesses that are very popular who run tv ads saying "We beat all competitor's rates."

What's so different about a government plan offering everyone to choose which rate they want--the high one or the low one?

Everybody will pick the low one.

As a tv adman would say, "Do you hear me now?"

Some people don't like others to have choices. Rick Perry gives you the choice.

If you want to hire more people, you take the lower rate and hire people with the savings.

If you want to be Lord Beneficent Foundation, you can feel good about giving more than you had to give when you're not condescending about all your brains, hot cars, hot chicks, super great stuff, etc.

See? There's a choice for everyone. Rick Perry is just reflecting the times, and it's about time you can get a bargain basement tax if you want one.

Well, if choice is a good thing, then why not more than two choices? Why not 10 or 20 different tax regimes to choose from?

Why don't you write Governor Perry and tell him which ones work for you and why America would be a better place if he included them in his budget plan? You're a lot smarter about market issues than me, Mr. Toro. Governor Perry needs the best. I just make little quilts for wheelchair victims and the abuse center, do charity sewing, and admire bright people from many walks sharing their knowledge online here at USMB currently.

I will rep you later for blatant flattery but I can assure you I am far from the best.

 

[jillian]

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.

but never during wartime. yes?

 

[editec]

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.

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 Rabbi]

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.

The 18th century, the 1900s, to the 1920s.
The era before the income tax was the era of philanthropy. How many Carnegie this and Ford that are there still doing good charitable work, based on accumulation of wealth?
We could add Germany in the 1950s and 1960s.

 

[IndependntLogic]

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.

Also: 1900 - 1920's

Ah! Well THAT applies! After all, we have an abundance of land, a shortage of immigrants, a huge trade surplus, an agriculturally based economy, more people living in rural areas than cities, we lead the way in manufacturing a cutting edge technology called "cars" ...

 

[The Rabbi]

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.

Also: 1900 - 1920's

Ah! Well THAT applies! After all, we have an abundance of land, a shortage of immigrants, a huge trade surplus, an agriculturally based economy, more people living in rural areas than cities, we lead the way in manufacturing a cutting edge technology called "cars" ...

There was a shortage of immigrants in the 1880s to 1920s? Where? Cuba? All of my family came here during that period.
Daimler Benz led the way in cars, btw.

You are too stupid to breathe.

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

The deficit was caused by GOP spending.

Many people from both sides of the proverbial aisle are the blame.

 

[The Rabbi]

The deficit was caused by GOP spending.

Many people from both sides of the proverbial aisle are the blame.

True,
Which side has crafted a real solution?

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

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

In my opinion, saying one's plan will balance the budget is nothing but political smoke and mirrors.

It seems Rick Perry, along with the majority of other present and future employees want the employers to believe that current spending cannot be well regulated or controlled until 2020. And for that, we are supposed to cheer?

There is nothing in Rick Perry's plan, that actually addresses paying off the national debt, not to mention actually stopping spending that doesn't fall within one of the 18 enumerated powers of Congress.

 

[candycorn]

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

In my opinion, saying one's plan will balance the budget is nothing but political smoke and mirrors.

It seems Rick Perry, along with the majority of other present and future employees want the employers to believe that current spending cannot be well regulated or controlled until 2020. And for that, we are supposed to cheer?

There is nothing in Rick Perry's plan, that actually addresses paying off the national debt, not to mention actually stopping spending that doesn't fall within one of the 18 enumerated powers of Congress.

The "balance the budget" crowd is wrong on 2 fronts. In the first place, a "balacned budget" is no guarantee or any sort of American renaissance. If we're taxed at 70% and we spend every penny, that is a balanced budget. So unless there are figures tied to Perry's latest gimmick err plan, there is no solace in such a thing.

Secondly,...by 2020? Do you have any idea how much a new car will cost in 8 years? Or a new highway? Or a naval destroyer? Or just about anything? Targeting a balanced budget for 2020 in an atmosphere as complex as the US Government is impossible. Any sober observer could tell that a mile away. As we've seen lately; if Perry supporters are taking their cue from their boy, apparently sober is too much to hope for.

 

[IndependntLogic]

The 19th century.

Also: 1900 - 1920's

Ah! Well THAT applies! After all, we have an abundance of land, a shortage of immigrants, a huge trade surplus, an agriculturally based economy, more people living in rural areas than cities, we lead the way in manufacturing a cutting edge technology called "cars" ...

There was a shortage of immigrants in the 1880s to 1920s? Where? Cuba? All of my family came here during that period.
Daimler Benz led the way in cars, btw.

You are too stupid to breathe.

Well Daimler Benz sold more cars in America than anyone else?!?!? Wow!
Look, I get it. You can't quite grasp complex stuff. Okay. And as far as an abundance of land, a huge trade surplus, an agriculturally based economy, more people living in rural areas than cities, nice dodge.
But like I said, if you're so stupid, you can't figure out that times are different now than they were in that period, well, we won't even go into things like FIRE economies etc... I'll leave that for the grown-ups.

 

[The Rabbi]

Also: 1900 - 1920's

Ah! Well THAT applies! After all, we have an abundance of land, a shortage of immigrants, a huge trade surplus, an agriculturally based economy, more people living in rural areas than cities, we lead the way in manufacturing a cutting edge technology called "cars" ...

There was a shortage of immigrants in the 1880s to 1920s? Where? Cuba? All of my family came here during that period.
Daimler Benz led the way in cars, btw.

You are too stupid to breathe.

Well Daimler Benz sold more cars in America than anyone else?!?!? Wow!
Look, I get it. You can't quite grasp complex stuff. Okay. And as far as an abundance of land, a huge trade surplus, an agriculturally based economy, more people living in rural areas than cities, nice dodge.
But like I said, if you're so stupid, you can't figure out that times are different now than they were in that period, well, we won't even go into things like FIRE economies etc... I'll leave that for the grown-ups.

Nice way to shift goalposts. You wrote the US led in technology called cars. I point out Daimler was the techology leader. You then shift to number of cars sold here. Not the same thing. OR do you understand that?
Men also wore hats outside and women seldom wore hats. Was there a point you were trying to make here? The truth is that the income tax was a drag on national wealth, and has only gotten more so as it has expanded.

 

[candycorn]

Also: 1900 - 1920's

Ah! Well THAT applies! After all, we have an abundance of land, a shortage of immigrants, a huge trade surplus, an agriculturally based economy, more people living in rural areas than cities, we lead the way in manufacturing a cutting edge technology called "cars" ...

There was a shortage of immigrants in the 1880s to 1920s? Where? Cuba? All of my family came here during that period.
Daimler Benz led the way in cars, btw.

You are too stupid to breathe.

Well Daimler Benz sold more cars in America than anyone else?!?!? Wow!
Look, I get it. You can't quite grasp complex stuff. Okay. And as far as an abundance of land, a huge trade surplus, an agriculturally based economy, more people living in rural areas than cities, nice dodge.
But like I said, if you're so stupid, you can't figure out that times are different now than they were in that period, well, we won't even go into things like FIRE economies etc... I'll leave that for the grown-ups.

Don't mention "fire" to him, he hates fire.

Especially the ones in Texas that are now burning for the 11th month.

 

[editec]

Nobody has a plan to truly balance the budget.


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