Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Details of Sen. Tom Coburn's $9 trillion plan to balance the budget
The Oklahoman ^ | 7/18/2011 | Chris Casteel

Posted on 07/18/2011 12:38:25 PM PDT by gwjack

Sen. Tom Coburn's deficit-reduction plan

Details of Sen. Tom Coburn's $9 trillion plan to balance the budget

NewsOK Related Articles

Sen. Tom Coburn's plan:

Would save about $9 trillion over 10 years, including $3 trillion from entitlements, $3 trillion from government departments and agencies, $1 trillion from defense, $1 trillion from ending or modifying tax breaks and deductions, and $1 trillion in interest on the debt.

Would reduce the size of government by 25 percent over 10 years.

Would balance the budget within 10 years.

Read more: http://newsok.com/details-of-sen.-tom-coburns-9-trillion-plan-to-balance-the-budget/article/3586676#ixzz1SUBIXa8X

(Excerpt) Read more at newsok.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy; Politics/Elections; US: Oklahoma
KEYWORDS: budget; coburn; debt; deficit; tomcoburn
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-98 next last
I am still digesting the reported plan. But, at first glance, the workforce on the federal governemnt is reduced by 15%, ages for Medicare, Medicaid, and retirement are increased. Underlying plan is for 10 years. [Research question to Gwjack: Is this because of the Byrd Rule?].

On a quick read through, I see nothing that would directly impact me or clients other than the age increase. Hmmmm. I don't like the limitation on mortgage interest deduction even if it is $500,000. I think this is bad tax policy.

Thoughts?

Gwjack

1 posted on 07/18/2011 12:38:28 PM PDT by gwjack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: gwjack

We need some significant spending reductions in FY 2012.


2 posted on 07/18/2011 12:41:05 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gwjack

balance the budget now... not in 10 yr. plan is crap...


3 posted on 07/18/2011 12:42:00 PM PDT by GreaterSwiss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gwjack

If things were handled correctly by the government, I don’t believe people of this country would mind some of the required changes, if and only if, it helped this country get back to where we want it.


4 posted on 07/18/2011 12:42:44 PM PDT by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gwjack
Would balance the budget within 10 years.

The average American has the concentration of an ant these day's.

The 10 year balanced budget plan would be historical fodder in a year.

We need to cut NOW to see any effective salvation of our economic stature.

5 posted on 07/18/2011 12:43:47 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gwjack

Lower the rates(preferably a one rate flat tax) and eliminate ALL deductions, even the sacred cow mortgage interest. You want to buy a big house, God bless you, just don’t ask my tax dollars to subsidize it.


6 posted on 07/18/2011 12:44:18 PM PDT by almcbean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

Hi Paladin2 —

Can’t tell for sure, but if his plan is equally phased on the spending side, there should be about a Trillion dollar cut for fiscal year 2012. I still think that is meager, and am hoping for a greater reduction than that. There are a couple of loose threads in the article. I am trying to tie them down now.

Even yet, I think that is the most amount cut in fiscal year 2012 of all the numbers that have been tossed around.

Gwjack


7 posted on 07/18/2011 12:48:30 PM PDT by gwjack (May God give America His richest blessings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: gwjack
US$ 9 Trillion in reductions over a 10 year period WILL NOT BALANCE THE BUDGET.

US$ 9 Trillion is LITERALLY THE ROUNDING ERROR IN THE CURRENT CBO PROJECTION FOR REVENUES AND OUTLAYS over the next 10 years.

US$ 9 Trillion in reductions over a 10 year period is a victory in battle that will cause the loss in the wider war.

US$ 39 Trillion is a bare minimum requirement to actually "Balance the Budget over a 10 year period."

This macabre dance over the gravesite of the US socioeconomic order is the end of the Republic.

There are hundreds of pundits trying to point out the obvious, the System as a whole, the two parties, the MSM, the elite institutions and the controlling interests in the US are doing their best to create this false dichotomy to distract the American People to make it through the next 17 months until the elections.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2011/06/03/GOPs-Fuzzy-Math-Misstates-CBO-Revenue-Projections.aspx

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2738714/posts





8 posted on 07/18/2011 1:00:08 PM PDT by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gwjack
It was rumored that a simplification and lowering of income taxes was to be part of the Coburn package. To me, this is what would leave more money in the private sector, and perhaps increase economic activity and thereby revenues. It's not there.

The housing and construction markets need a cap gains tax reduction in the worst way, again, this would have the effect of increasing economic activity and revenues. It is not clear if one of the corporate "tax breaks" that is being eliminated is depreciation. This needs to be left alone, also LIFO inventory accounting. Removing these two things would simply cause the price of everything we buy go up, and in the end we the consumers would foot the bill.

There's a lot to like here, but for me these are glaring omissions.

9 posted on 07/18/2011 1:00:57 PM PDT by wayoverontheright (The Democratic Party is trying to end "the private sector as we know it".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

Yup. Cut now. And cut deeply. And I’d go for excluding the mortgage interest deduction. In fact I’d go for eliminating all deductions. Just take a flat 10 percent of gross income across the board and be done with it. If the government can’t be run on 10 percent of our income, then it needs to be cut until it can.


10 posted on 07/18/2011 1:01:27 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Impeach the corrupt Marxist bastard!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: gwjack

The numbers are half-fast on their face. Maybe it would be a good start but there’s no arguing the current federal spending level is 40% borrow. A reduction in Gov’t of 25% over ten years is closer to a joke than a real solution. The older Rand plan-—half a trillion$ in cuts three years in a row is even short but is still the best proposal so far. Obamuzzie’s new spending MUST be rolled back immediately to keep the spending level from going exponential.


11 posted on 07/18/2011 1:13:12 PM PDT by cherokee1 (skip the names---just kick the buttz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander

This is why there is nothing that can come from DC that will save this economy... there is no will to do the right thing.

LLS


12 posted on 07/18/2011 1:13:35 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH"! I choose LIBERTY and PALIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Yup. Cut now."

Yep! The only way to do this, is to FORCE THE ISSUE by NOT APPROVING a debt ceiling increase! Period!

The 'HOUSE' has all the cards that count!

House Republicans - STAND FIRM and DON'T GIVE IN to the reckless spender's pressure!!!

13 posted on 07/18/2011 1:15:33 PM PDT by The Bronze Titan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I’d also go for the immediate imposition of a 25% tariff surcharge on imports from China. It is worth $91 billion first year to the Treasury. Hopefully it would decline each year as more production returned to the US.


14 posted on 07/18/2011 1:20:00 PM PDT by Soul of the South (When times are tough the tough get going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Boop Their Bottle Noses!

Flying Dolphins Say Support Free Republic

Give what you can
Only Five More New Monthly Donors Needed for the Current Challenge
A sponsoring FReeper will contribute $10
For Each One

15 posted on 07/18/2011 1:22:42 PM PDT by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
"And I’d go for excluding the mortgage interest deduction. In fact I’d go for eliminating all deductions."

Though I think eliminating deductions is a good long term goal, I don't think it is either fair or economically advisable to just - Wham! - slam the door on them. People have based their lives and their budgets on the current rules and should be given time to adjust - a phase out over at least five years.

I don't understand why there is a provision to prevent Medigap policies from covering the 1st $500 - aren't medigap policies private policies bought and paid for by individuals. Let's get the government out of the business of dictating the terms of private contracts (except to prevent fraud).

By the way, my recollection is that at the time the 16th amendment was crafted, there was discussion of limiting the tax to a maximum of 10% - but the thought was that 10% was such a ridiculously high figure that it would never be reached. (Maybe someone with a better memory can confirm or refute.) Maybe this time we DO need to put it in the Constitution.

16 posted on 07/18/2011 1:30:12 PM PDT by In Maryland ("The Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers." -Justice Clarence Thomas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wayoverontheright

The housing and construction markets need a cap gains tax reduction in the worst way


Aren’t personal residences largely exempt from capital gains taxes if you follow the rules?


17 posted on 07/18/2011 1:30:51 PM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Government borrowing is Taxation without Representation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: gwjack

http://thesantosrepublic.com/2011/06/usa-deficit-120-trillion-new-debt-to-the-unborn/


18 posted on 07/18/2011 1:31:26 PM PDT by Force of Truth (You don't have to be smart or be good even. If you want my vote, you just have to be CHEAP.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soul of the South

Um, you might want to do a little research on tariffs in the Great Depression. It didn’t work out too well then.


19 posted on 07/18/2011 1:32:10 PM PDT by rwrcpa1 (Sarah Palin, will you be my President?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: gwjack

Although it may not be perfect, I give Sen. Coburn & his staff credit for at least doing their homework. With the exception of Paul Ryan, no else in DC seems to be coming up with any concrete ideas on how to tackle the problem.

Here’s the link to the pdf of Coburn’s plan. It’s very detailed and 621 pgs: http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?a=Files.Serve&File_id=c6590d01-017a-47b0-a15c-1336220ea7bf


20 posted on 07/18/2011 1:32:48 PM PDT by patriotldy22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-98 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson