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

Skip to comments.

PERRY’S FLAT TAX IS SIMPLIFICATION BUT NOT REFORM
Dick Morris.Com ^ | October 28,2011 | Dick Morris

Posted on 10/29/2011 6:46:57 AM PDT by Hojczyk

But Cain’s proposal is so very much more important. Perry will nibble around the edges, freeing valuable hours from tax preparation to be available for wealth creation. But Herman Cain would establish America as a beacon for investors, entrepreneurs, inventors, creative business people, and all manner of upwardly mobile, ambitious men and women. He would give the U.S. the lowest personal and corporate tax rates in the world, and the only place where investment earnings are tax free. To trivialize Cain’s big idea by comparing to to Perry’s small one is a vast disservice. Perry would not reduce the amount of money taken in by income and corporate profit taxation. He would just shift it to shorter forms and a nominally lower rate (but not really lower). Taxes would appear to be cut, but the amount we would have to pay would be more or less the same. He even strives to have his program seen as revenue neutral.

Cain would shift about half of our nation’s tax revenues to consumption taxes and away from income taxes. He would vastly reduce the disincentive to earn and encourage savings and investment by taxing spending.

It is not enough to undo the damage Obama has done to the economy by repealing his spending, taxing, health care, and regulatory actions. All that will do is dial us back to the sick economy Bush bequeathed to America. The diseases of the first decade of the 21st Century will still be with us. But Cain’s ideas really get at the heart of the problem — in much the same way that Reagan’s reducing of the top personal tax rate from 70% to 28% solved the stagflation of the 70s.

Cain’s reforms are the real deal. Perry’s are a pale imitation.

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


TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: capslock; heartless; morrisisademocrat; perry; toelicker
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last

1 posted on 10/29/2011 6:46:59 AM PDT by Hojczyk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Perry’s plan caps spending.


2 posted on 10/29/2011 6:47:33 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

The toe-sucker is now a tax specialist?

In any case, Cain or Perry, any reform or simplification moving towards relief for the tax payer is a step forward.


3 posted on 10/29/2011 6:50:19 AM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Sounds like Dick is on the Cain train. Guess he wants to win that bet with BOR.


4 posted on 10/29/2011 6:50:32 AM PDT by New Jersey Realist (America: home of the free because of the brave)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: New Jersey Realist

I’m really surprised at Dickie! I suppose the establishment Romney bunch did not want him around because he was certainly peddling their droppings for the longest time.


5 posted on 10/29/2011 6:56:38 AM PDT by mazda77 (and I am a Native Texan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Problem with Perry’s tax plan are numerous.

Perry’s plan is a “what do I need to say to get votes” plan rather then “what do we need to do to fix the tax code” plan.

It does not broaden the tax base thus leaving the current system of payers and payees in play for future political exploitation.

It keeps in place the corrupt practice of playing favorites in the tax code by still granting special exemptions. This is the greatest flaw in Perry’s plan. He leaves in the politically popular exemptions to pander to certain voter blocks. It the best example of where his plan is not a serious attempt to address the fundamental problems in the tax code but a political gimmick designed to rejuvenate his flagging campaign.

It maintains the current focus on taxing income instead of consumption thus punishing the producers at the expense of the users.

It leaves in place the current ability for trust funds and the massively wealthy to avoid paying any tax by structuring their payouts in forms other then income.

It does nothing to tap the underground off the books economy.

So while Perry’s “sort of flat tax” is an improvement over the current system, it is merely tinkering with the existing tax code while leaving in place the same corrupt, flawed foundation.

Of the two, Cain’s 9-9-9 is the much better plan


6 posted on 10/29/2011 6:58:36 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (Giving more money to DC to fix the Debt is like giving free drugs to addicts think it will cure them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

It adds a new layer to the existing tax code. That is not simplification.


7 posted on 10/29/2011 6:58:58 AM PDT by csmusaret (The only borders Obama has closed is a bookstore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg
Perry’s plan caps spending.

It's the spending that is crippling us not the taxes.

Without the spending we don't need the taxes.

8 posted on 10/29/2011 7:04:44 AM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Neither plan stands a snowballs chance in hell of becoming law.
If Dicky the toe sucker is for something I tend to shy away from it.


9 posted on 10/29/2011 7:05:23 AM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

The CATO institute has all but endorsed Perry’s plan.

http://wmal.com/article.asp?id=2318458&SPID=40282


10 posted on 10/29/2011 7:07:32 AM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Rick’s plan sucks dick Morris says.

(Moderators have mercy: my keyboard is 999% to blame. It lacks capital. And comma sense.)


11 posted on 10/29/2011 7:10:30 AM PDT by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk
Sorry Dick, but you are wrong!

My accounts have worked the Perry numbers on my return, and on every employee's, and guess what, to the person we save money.

Just the opposite with Cain's 999.

12 posted on 10/29/2011 7:10:50 AM PDT by JakeS (If occupy wallstreet had any brains or honesty they would be in front of the <s>w</s>shitehouse)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

It gives us a choice - and that’s a start.


13 posted on 10/29/2011 7:12:47 AM PDT by jersey117
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Perry’s plan is a “what do I need to say to get votes” plan, it is not a serious attempt to address our fiscal crisis.


14 posted on 10/29/2011 7:13:03 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (Giving more money to DC to fix the Debt is like giving free drugs to addicts think it will cure them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Funny how none of the other candidates brought up this issue until Herman Cain propsed his 999 plan. At least Cain had the balls to toss the idea out there, and see what the people made of it. Sure it can use some tweaking and refinement, but it shows that Cain isn’t afraid to push forward with new ideas that may make things better for everybody.


15 posted on 10/29/2011 7:13:10 AM PDT by factoryrat (We are the producers, the creators. Grow it, mine it, build it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: factoryrat

Perry was for the flat tax before any of us heard of Herman Cain.
He touted it in his book “Fed up”


16 posted on 10/29/2011 7:15:46 AM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JakeS

Interesting to hear.

I’m still on the fence, I confess. However, if your accounts showed that you (and your employees) all saved money with Gov. Perry’s plan, as opposed the 9-9-9, I find that enlightening.

Without disclosing any personal info on your part, what would say the average saving was, in ballpark numbers?


17 posted on 10/29/2011 7:16:33 AM PDT by AnAmericanAbroad (It's all bread and circuses for the future prey of the Morlocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

people should research the only tax policy Perry pursued and enacted as governor, not the plan that magically appealed to him when Cain and his 9-9-9 mantra eclipsed him in the polls:

“Rick Perry and the Largest Tax Hike In Texas”

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/8714-rick-perry-and-the-largest-tax-hike-in-texas


18 posted on 10/29/2011 7:19:04 AM PDT by Puddleglum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Puddleglum

Yeah, I pay that tax, and it was nothing compared to obama’s 2500% increase on tobacco tax.


19 posted on 10/29/2011 7:22:48 AM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

I prefer the 999. Not only would we save about $1200, but it makes the mooches contribute.


20 posted on 10/29/2011 7:24:49 AM PDT by Netizen (Path to citizenship = Scamnesty. If you give it away, more will come. Who's pilfering your wallet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Puddleglum
The tax swap created a net tax decrease, but the new business tax coupled with one added to tobacco still counts as the largest tax increase in Texas.
21 posted on 10/29/2011 7:31:04 AM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Puddleglum
I like this bit of wordplay

but the new business tax coupled with one added to tobacco still counts as the largest tax increase in Texas.

22 posted on 10/29/2011 7:34:43 AM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: New Jersey Realist

Morris is merely giving his audience what it wants.


23 posted on 10/29/2011 7:34:59 AM PDT by Huck (TAX TEA NOW==SUPPORT 9-9-9!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pW0A9XONEo

Was Karl Rove,Dick Morris Or Frank Luntz Involved In Fox News Poll About Sarah Palin

.....................
According to this guy , well listen to it. Then consider the source.
I agree with him that Rove,Morris, and Luntz have a pony in this show and we know it’s not Perry,Cain,Palin Newt. And that Fox by going along with the poll fixing should not have any of them as commentators.

a few days ago Morris was saying Perry’s plan was great. Guess he got his marching orders from Rove.


24 posted on 10/29/2011 7:35:48 AM PDT by marty60
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: csmusaret

I like Cain’s plan. He’s proposing that the millions of illegal immigrants pay taxes just like the rest of us.

Perry and Newt let the illegals slide by without paying anything.


25 posted on 10/29/2011 7:37:47 AM PDT by o2bfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: o2bfree

How does Perry’s plan let the illegals slide?


26 posted on 10/29/2011 7:42:03 AM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

For the first time ever I completely agree with what Dick Morris says here.

Tinkering around the edges WILL NOT fix anything! Never has and never will!


27 posted on 10/29/2011 7:51:06 AM PDT by Bigun ("The most fearsome words in the English language are I'm from the government and I'm here to help!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Whenever the issue of raising taxes on the “rich” has arisen, I have attempted to bring the forgotten stakeholder in all such arguments into the discussion-the consumer.

I’m pretty sure most on this forum are aware that the “rich” happen to be our employers, entrepreneurs, and investors, and my contention has been that taxes are an expense to them, such that every good and service produced will have included in its end price the taxes charged. The consumer, in the end, pays for all tax increases, especially those levied on the aforementioned producers. This is a very good argument to use with liberals who advocate increasing taxes on the “rich”.

When looking at the Cain and Perry plans, I can’t help but feel the consumer is being ignored once again.

Perhaps the most important benefit of the Cain plan is that there will definitely be some unknown and in my view unquantifiable reduction in the cost of goods produced and services rendered. This will happen by virtue of the fact that taxes are a cost of producing these goods and services, and these taxes will go down during each step of the production process, on up until the purchase at retail by the consumer.

It’s my bet that this reduction in prices to consumers would be significant. It only takes one player in any given market to decide it will use the new cost structure to increase market share, then all other players will have to follow or perish.

I say the effect is unquantifiable because it will depend on the relative competiveness of any given market. I own a small company and I can assure you my competitors will lower their prices by virtue of any reduction in cost, and I will have to react to remain competitive, as all players in my industry are vying for market share in addition to profit.

Just my two cents.


28 posted on 10/29/2011 7:52:30 AM PDT by wayoverontheright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Indeed ... You’re absolutely right ... Perry’s campaign is just a professional Karl Rove boondogle “smoke and mirrors” circus ...


29 posted on 10/29/2011 8:02:45 AM PDT by Patton@Bastogne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk
The Forbes tax plan, helped him and Judy win??/ maybe that is not correct///???? Actually is is no reform at all, just a gimmick, so you can claim to have a tax reform plan. Adds more cost to the system more pages of regulation and saves the IRS. Cronyism and social engineering will be alive and well.
30 posted on 10/29/2011 8:04:21 AM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow demorats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JakeS
See in your own statement you proved yourself wrong. Why in the world would you need to keep spending money on accountants doing taxes for. Under Cains plan, the little accountants doing taxes goes away and they get back to doing accounting. Less money, less cost, now where do I send the bill,
31 posted on 10/29/2011 8:11:31 AM PDT by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by Perry and his fellow demorats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: o2bfree

“Perry and Newt let the illegals slide by without paying anything.”

That is not an intended feature of either man’s plan. It is merely an indication that those plans are adjustments to the old as opposed to Cain’s which is new and decidedly bold.

Which is Dick’s point.

And... regardless how many feet (or at least toes) have trodden his tongue in times past... he is quite correct on his Perry=simplification versus Cain=reform assessment.

No question, flatter is gooder.

But Cain’s shift of emphasis away from income taxes toward consumption taxes is the true freedom-lover’s fancy.

While I understand some conservatives’ groanings about adding another form of taxation, I fail to comprehend why they don’t recognize such natural and common revulsion as the consumption tax’s number one advantage.

All spending should hurt. Everybody.


32 posted on 10/29/2011 8:13:05 AM PDT by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

There is no tax reform without the abolishment of the anti-American IRS.


33 posted on 10/29/2011 8:15:40 AM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk
If one lives in the real world an immediate scrap of the tax code is impossible without total collapse of the entire Federal Government. A beta check of any complete change would have to be done and that is impossible. So what is the answer. Not 999 for sure. Too much of America could not gear up for this massive change. It involves bookkeeping that every business would have to do not to mention how the system would be audited with any accuracy. A more coherent way would be to start a gutting process on the system of tax and would take years. Perry has the right idea. I marvel at the intelligent people that just think that a change is like just turning off a faucet.
34 posted on 10/29/2011 8:27:55 AM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Do You Want FR To Survive?


Click The Starving Forum Skeleton To Donate

Then Support Your Forum

35 posted on 10/29/2011 8:43:46 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: deport
I like the idea of reforming the tax and spend cabal that is currently in place; however, most of what I have seen defends a new plan the doesn't really deal effectively with the spending side of the issue. I would think that if you could reign in the spending first, it would be easier to move to a more simple and tax plan. I don't have a lot of faith that there is any fortitude in Congress to accomplish this.

Perry and even Cain are trepid about true "Reform."

It's like they are looking for less objectionable ways to confiscate wealth, and hiding the pea under a different nut. Any social engineering, picking winners or losers in a tax plan, dooms it to ultimately fail, i.e. Cain's "Empowerment Zones" is nothing but meddling in the market. It is hard for any politician to not put his hands on the market.

I say pick ONE, Make it simple, make it fixed and tied to the GDP, so the politicals can't tamper with it; put the spenders on a diet (balanced budget amendment); and get out of the way.

As Murray Rothbard put it "J.B. Say's policy recommendation was crystal clear and consistent with his analysis and that of the present paper. "The best scheme of [public] finance is, to spend as little as possible; and the best tax is always the lightest."

No matter the form of taxation, it is the spending that is the problem. "Revenue nuetral" It's kinda like rearranging the chairs on the Titanic

36 posted on 10/29/2011 8:44:39 AM PDT by Cannoneer ("All things are possible if you don't know what you're talking about.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Yes.

Perry’s plan leaves the Fedzilla tax code in place indefinitely. (Although any major reform will have a transition period where the old tax code is being phased out, Perry’s plan doesn’t do that. The old tax remains.)

Thus, crony capitalism and corrupt funneling of favors will continue. And may even increase, since the number of tax payers paying under the code will decrease, thus there will be fewer people paying attention than even are now.

Some argue the flat tax will be so great that the old Fedzilla code will die on the vine, a natural death, the result of “choice.”

DON’T BET ON IT.

If history teaches us anything, it is that the Fedzilla code will never die unless it is killed. 999 sticks a knife in it. That is necessary.

The congresscritters and special interests will get even busier entrenching their schemes, payoffs and rip-offs into the code, all the while arguing that it’s continued existence is necessary for “choice” and that “it’s not fair” because they might lose ten cents under the flat tax.

Perry’s flat tax provisions are very generous and provide many jellybeans to present taxpayers.

But overall the plan is a disaster without a clear way to kill the Fedzilla code and a clear way to broaden the tax base, and thus make most Americans have a stake in the system and ALL congresscritters accountable to ALL their constituents if they raise tax rates.


37 posted on 10/29/2011 8:47:18 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: deport

In the end, I don’t think it’s even accurate to say Perry’s plan “simplifies” anything.

It creates a two-tiered system, a hybrid flat tax and Fedzilla code tax system. Thus, it builds in even more bureaucracy and, importantly, stands to greatly increase rather than eliminate compliance costs. Many taxpayers will need to figure their taxes twice to determine which of Perry’s two systems is most advantageous. And what happens if a taxpayer needs to amend a prior tax return? Is there again the choice of using either system?


38 posted on 10/29/2011 8:50:00 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: csmusaret

Agreed.

At the same time, the Perry plan does nothing to broaden the tax base by making more nontaxpayers into taxpayers.

That is the ultimate failure to “simplify.”

If we don’t implement the simple principle that everyone needs to have a stake in the system, the takers will soon outnumber the producers and it won’t matter one whit what the tax rate is at that time.

Once they’re in the majority, the tax rate will quickly be raised — look, Obama would have already raised rates sky-high if he could have gotten away with it. Watch for them to go up to 90% once the gimme train gets rolling. Remember: FDR raised rates to 90%, and for the same reason: to pay for all the free stuff demanded by those not paying taxes.


39 posted on 10/29/2011 8:53:23 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

The tax system and spending are inextricably intertwined.

Reforming the tax system in a way that gives Fedzilla less power and more accountablility, as Cain’s 999 plan does, is an important step in reducing spending.

Bottom line: tax reform and spending cuts work together, they are not mutually exclusive projects.


40 posted on 10/29/2011 8:55:03 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

That’s not good.


41 posted on 10/29/2011 8:55:40 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
The 999 plan does kill the current tax code, but I am not all too happy about a three headed snake (999) taking the place of the black mamba we have. I say the mamba does need to be gone but chose just one, please just one, non venomous snake to replace it not three mystery vermin.
42 posted on 10/29/2011 8:59:46 AM PDT by Cannoneer ("All things are possible if you don't know what you're talking about.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: mylife; All
Fundamental Tax Reform is now Unstoppable

With Rick Perry’s call for a 20% Flat Tax, the movement for fundamental, pro-growth tax reform became unstoppable. Perry, Herman Cain, and Mitt Romney are now the only viable candidates for the Republican presidential nomination remaining. With both Cain and Perry now offering dramatic pro-growth tax reform proposals, Romney will either jump on the tax reform bandwagon or be left in the dust (or possibly both).

[snip]

With 75% of Americans saying that the country is “on the wrong track”, Progressives have started to pin their hopes for the 2012 elections on the notion that the American people don’t want pro-growth tax cuts, and would instead prefer to punish “the rich” via tax increases.

Once the electorate concludes that drastic change is needed, they will elect someone promising drastic change. In terms of tax policy, right now, only Perry and Cain are advocating drastic change. Romney is currently offering an economic program that involves minor tinkering at the margins of the tax code. Meanwhile, Obama is promising to fight for tax increases that would make the economy worse.

Under current circumstances, it will do Progressives no good to point out flaws in Cain’s 9-9-9 program, or in Perry’s Flat Tax plan. The voters know that major tax reform would have to be enacted by Congress, and that the problems and inequities of any outline would be ironed out during the legislative process. They also realize that by the time that the crucial details of fundamental tax reform would be decided, a new president would have had another 15 months to refine his proposal.

Accordingly, what the electorate is listening for right now is the candidates’ level of commitment to major pro-growth economic policy reforms, and a sense of how they view the world and make decisions. The voters are not particularly concerned about the details of any particular plan, because they know that the plans being offered on the campaign trail are not what will emerge from Congress.

The electorate knows that America needs a sustained period of very fast economic growth. Only prolonged, rapid GDP growth can create the 15 million good, high paying, permanent jobs that we need to get back to full employment. And only fast economic expansion will make it possible for the nation to afford Social Security and Medicare without painful cuts in benefits. The voters also know that raising marginal tax rates would just make all of our problems worse.

Continued at the link, above. Thread HERE.

43 posted on 10/29/2011 9:05:06 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JakeS

Well, by all means, let’s make it “all about me.”

BTW, did your accountants account for the fact of how pricing and other tax-sensitive behaviors will change?

Look. I’m not saying the impact on any given individual is not important. Of course it is. But it’s also important, maybe more so, to think about the impact on the nation.

Also please consider that what you are comparing to reach the conclusion that you’re better off under this plan or that is your tax status TODAY. But your tax status TODAY is not set in stone. In fact, Obama would change it tomorrow if he could: he would immediately raise taxes on producers sky-high if he could get away with it.


44 posted on 10/29/2011 9:09:02 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jersey117

If you’re talking about the Perry plan and the fact that the flat tax is optional, in my view, that the major flaw, not a selling point.

Do you really want to see the present tax code debacle extend and entrench out into the future?

I don’t.

And that’s just for starters.

What we need is “bold,” and what “optional” is is weaselly.


45 posted on 10/29/2011 9:10:36 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mylife

Herman Cain was on Steve Forbes’ campaign staff when he was running for President on a flat tax program.

ALL conservatives who have been paying attention have been interested in various iterations of flat and fair tax systems for DECADES.

The point here, though, is that Cain indeed revved up the national discussion and passion for tax reform. It took a while for Perry to get anything out there — even though, as you point out, he was supposedly well-versed in the issue since it was part of his book. But he still didn’t have a plan ready when he started his run for President.


46 posted on 10/29/2011 9:13:23 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Such a very good catch! Good one!


47 posted on 10/29/2011 9:15:34 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: BuddhaBrown

Thank you.


48 posted on 10/29/2011 9:16:23 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777

There is no abolishment of the IRS without abolishment of the present tax code.

Cain’s plan does that (probably after the usual transition period).

Perry’s plan does not.


49 posted on 10/29/2011 9:17:07 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Logical me

Not very logical.

Of course, in the real world major reform legislation is never imposed without a transition period and some grandfathering in of certain provisions.

Even Reagan’s tax cuts did not take effect for TWO YEARS. This was to allow business and individuals to transition.

And oh btw, the present Fedzilla code scraps provisions right and left whenever some congresscritter wants to or finds it politically advantageous. Ask an accountant how many times the depreciation schedules have been changed on a dime.

So people need not act as though they have blessed security and stability under the present code.

And this would only get worse under Perry’s plan because it balkanized taxpayers into two groups (flat tax payers and Fedzilla taxpayers), with each group having even less political clout than today to fend off tax hikes, crony capitlism and so on. There will be more shenanigans and sudden changes than ever.


50 posted on 10/29/2011 9:21:14 AM PDT by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 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