Perry's Tax Plan

[F-Sharp]

Originally Posted by cckid2006

Show me the math - I'd pay 33% - this isn't consistent with what you said before when you did what I called fuzzy math - what is your growth rate assumptions? Which candidate is proposing this?

Taxable wages paid 2009: $5,900,000,000,000

U.S. Corporate Profits 2009 : $5,000,000,000,000 (based on quarterly avg. of $1.25 Trillion)

5,900,000,000,000 + 5,000,000,000,000 = $10,900,000,000,000 = Taxable dollars under Perry's plan

Current U.S. Budget : $3.7 trillion

3,700,000,000,000,000 / 10,900,000,000,000 = 0.3394495412844037

Closer to 34% actually.

What's so inconsistent or "fuzzy" about it? It's 5th grade math. It just has a lot more zeros.

Current growth rate is a rather dismal 1.3%. You can do the 5th grade math on that if you're really interested.

The only candidate proposing tax hikes to my knowledge is Obama. In all actuality, it doesn't even need to be proposed. Letting the Bush tax cuts expire was for all intent and purpose, built in to the debt ceiling agreement. In a nutshell, they either need to come up with $1.2 trillion before Christmas, or the cuts will default to half discretionary and half defense. None of the idiots in Congress are going to allow defense to be cut by $600 billion. Expiring the tax cuts and creating more revenue is the only other option.


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...due-today.html

[F-Sharp]

Good luck with that. They're all full of shit. Republicans are afraid of the Tea Baggers among us, and would rather drive us all over a cliff than face the truth that raising taxes is the only real and immediate solution to this problem. Obama continues to tip-toe around the topic without really explaining it to imbeciles who can't do 5th grade math (ahem).

The best part about it is that putting back Clinton era tax rates and raising or eliminating the wage base cap on Social Security would solve most of our immediate problems. Essentially 4% away from economic prosperity, but the bus drivers keep heading for that ledge.

Originally Posted by DTorrchia

I have to be honest and say at this point, I don't care WHAT comes out of ANY of these politician's mouths anymore when it comes to anything OTHER than the Economy. What I care about and the one thing I want to hear from all candidates, Republican, Democrat or Independent, is a logical plan for reducing our debt. Not a plan that is obviously lip service but a plan that works. I want to see concrete answers on what is to be cut, how much is to be cut and how much of a tax raise it will take to reduce our debt. Just some straight forward answers to those simple question. It seems ALL of them, current President included, are incapable of doing so.

I threw Perry's plan out there because other than Cain's 999 plan, there seem to be few candidates that are actually coming out and saying how much of a % taxes need to be set at, what programs SPECIFICALLY that they will cut and HOW MUCH they will cut them etc. I just seem to constantly hear..."raising taxes is not the answer" or "we can't cut Social Security", "we need to address the entitlement programs"......all that tells the American voter NOTHING. We need detailed specifics to make an informed choice. No candidate seems willing to go out on the limb and provide those answers however.

[theaustinescorts]

Originally Posted by F-Sharp

Wealth for whom?

The only thing which will increase growth AND EMPLOYEE INCOMES to pre-1980s levels is to address trade imbalances.

I favor re-introducing tarriffs and quotas against anyone undercutting our producers through UNFAIR practices such as currency manipulation, wage suppression, union-busting, and environmental trashing.

But that's not going to happen...

Therefore we should fight back with an unfair trade practice of our own - eliminating all taxes on business.

This will cause our exports to be cheaper and drive corporations to re-locate in the US.

It will eliminate double taxation for dividend holders.

The revenues lost by doing this may be offset by the growth created.

Otherwise the revenues lost should be paid by NEW TAXES ON SPECULATION, such as a 1% tax on all speculative financial transactions.

We should also eliminate capital gains taxes...meaning capital gains should be treated like all other incomes.

And the marginal rates for the uppercrust should return to Clinton-era rates.

I'M FOR SOAKING THE RICH WITH TAXES IN WAYS THAT INCREASE GROWITH, BUT ALSO FOR TAX CUTS FOR BUSINESS IN WAYS WHICH ALSO INCREASE GROWTH.

The current Republican tax proposals will only enrich the wealthy further without creating anything.

ps...
In the last 30 years the incomes of the top 1% has increased by 400% while the incomes of everyone else has been unchanged.

"It's the free market," -- G.Gekko :-)

[cckid2006]

Originally Posted by theaustinescorts

ps...
In the last 30 years the incomes of the top 1% has increased by 400% while the incomes of everyone else has been unchanged.

"It's the free market," -- G.Gekko :-)

In the last 30 years my income has increases 490% and I am not one of the 1%. I am lower middle-class live in a $90k home. I just work hard!

I will respond F-sharp - still gathering data to refute your 5th grade math.

[F-Sharp]

Originally Posted by cckid2006

I will respond F-sharp - still gathering data to refute your 5th grade math.

How about a little help with some source links?

http://www.census.gov/retail/

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/2009rd.htm

http://bls.gov/oes/

[cckid2006]

Why not point me to the links you used rather than 100 links? The 2009 news releases are old info. Why did you use this when more up-to-date info is available? Corporate income that you quote does not match info I found. Unlike some, I do not throw numbers around without verification. I seek the truth not political rhetoric!

[F-Sharp]

I used 2009 because it was the most current I could find for retail sales, corporate profits, and wages paid. The links I posted are the sources for this data, and is exactly where I took it from. I did take a little liberty with averages, but those liberties would have been in Perry's favor over the period I used. If you have some conflicting data, post it. I'm more than happy to look at it and compare notes.

Some people like pretty pictures, how about a chart?

Originally Posted by cckid2006

Why not point me to the links you used rather than 100 links? The 2009 news releases are old info. Why did you use this when more up-to-date info is available? Corporate income that you quote does not match info I found. Unlike some, I do not throw numbers around without verification. I seek the truth not political rhetoric!

[theaustinescorts]

Everybody knows that corporate profits are high and they have record high levels of cash.

They make a lot of profit from their foreign operations in places like China, etc, but still are doing okay in the US despite the recession because of population increase.

People with jobs are doing okay except for their stock funds losing value.

The major problem is that record numbers of Americans have no jobs, and there's no reason for employers to make more jobs for them.

Another problem is that wages in most categories have been mostly stagnant for the last thirty years.

Things can be done with tax policy to spur business while increasing wages at the same time.

I would begin by having more of a unity and nationalism in this country, like Germany, Japan, Korea and China possess, instead of this class consciousness which has existed here since we were colonies. But it's hard to have unity when we've inherited the British class system [which most people don't even percieve we've done] and grafted onto that a polyglot of many cultures.

There doesn't have to be this conflict between job creators and job holders that both the Republicans and Democrats both believe is inevitable. But if there is a remedy it will mean that the vast concentration of wealth in the hands of one or four percent will have to go. Joe the plumber should like that except he's been brainwashed to believe otherwise.

[F-Sharp]

Originally Posted by theaustinescorts

Joe the plumber should like that except he's been brainwashed to believe otherwise.

Worried about taxes he will never pay, on money he will never have, from a business he will never own. Classic symptoms of TPS, or "Tea Party Syndrome".

[munchman350]

All I know is that republican'ts are DEAD in the water...

[theaustinescorts]

Originally Posted by munchman350

All I know is that republican'ts are DEAD in the water...

After Romney's nominated he'll move to the center and independents will welcome him.

After spending One Billion Dollars on ads, Obama's lefist and youth base will fail to show.

Romney will be elected and govern as George Bush Sr. would have, which will be better than any other Republican, and with less hypocracy and deception than Obama.

Obama will go home to Chicago, where he will spend the balance of his life drinking beer, watching sports on television, and smoking unfiltered Camels.

Change You Can Believe In

[F-Sharp]

Wanna bet? In order to win he'll not only need to appeal to the independents, and with 68% of the population favoring the Occupy movement curently, he's got a long way to go to convince those folks he's pro Main Street. One more idiotic statement like "Corpporations are people too", or "Don't try and stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom." and he'll be finished.

He'll also need the support of the Christian right who will be staying home this election. No God-Fearing Baptist or hardcore Catholic would dare cast a vote in favor of a Mormon "cult member" for President.

Remember that the Mormon Church considers all other religions to be "...an abomination in the sight of God." More specifically, both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the "whore of Babylon" according to their doctrine. I have no doubt that churches across the country are already influencing the gullible among us with this information.

Another thing to consider, opponents to gay marriage are now in the minority. Mormons spent $18.6 million (77% of all contributions) in suppport of Prop 8 in California. Just wait until some of this information comes out in the debate circuit. They will save the best for last.

Originally Posted by theaustinescorts

After Romney's nominated he'll move to the center and independents will welcome him.

After spending One Billion Dollars on ads, Obama's lefist and youth base will fail to show.

Romney will be elected and govern as George Bush Sr. would have, which will be better than any other Republican, and with less hypocracy and deception than Obama.

Obama will go home to Chicago, where he will spend the balance of his life drinking beer, watching sports on television, and smoking unfiltered Camels.

Change You Can Believe In

[DTorrchia]

Originally Posted by theaustinescorts

After Romney's nominated he'll move to the center and independents will welcome him.

I hope you're right. Obama's economic advisers have failed him miserably. Many of his earlier supporters now lament about his inability to lead.

After spending One Billion Dollars on ads, Obama's lefist and youth base will fail to show.

I'm not sure about that. The current "Occupy" movements that are occurring nationwide show that there is still plenty of anti-establishment anger out there and unfortunately the Republicans usually bear the brunt of that come election time. Like it or not, Wall Street's excesses are more often blamed on Republicans.

Romney will be elected and govern as George Bush Sr. would have, which will be better than any other Republican, and with less hypocracy and deception than Obama.

Obama has certainly taken hypocrisy and deception to a new level. One of the things I rarely see liberals on here admit is that all his promises of having an "open and transparent" government have turned out to be complete lies. His administration has attempted to block most congressional inquiries, most media and private FOIA requests and has failed to be forthcoming about questionable practices by the Department of Justice, Homeland Security etc.

Obama will go home to Chicago, where he will spend the balance of his life drinking beer, watching sports on television, and smoking unfiltered Camels.

That would be nice but unfortunately he will continue to make MILLIONS of dollars by selling books about the evil Republican Congress and blaming any and everyone for his one term Presidency. The far left will continue to hold him up as a Champion who simply wasn't allowed by the Republicans to show his true genius. He will probably be one of the most sought after Speakers out there, something he excels at because it addresses theory rather than actual practice.

Change You Can Believe In

.

[theaustinescorts]

Originally Posted by F-Sharp

Wanna bet? In order to win he'll not only need to appeal to the independents, and with 68% of the population favoring the Occupy movement curently, he's got a long way to go to convince those folks he's pro Main Street. One more idiotic statement like "Corpporations are people too", or "Don't try and stop the foreclosure process. Let it run its course and hit the bottom." and he'll be finished.

He'll also need the support of the Christian right who will be staying home this election. No God-Fearing Baptist or hardcore Catholic would dare cast a vote in favor of a Mormon "cult member" for President.

Remember that the Mormon Church considers all other religions to be "...an abomination in the sight of God." More specifically, both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the "whore of Babylon" according to their doctrine. I have no doubt that churches across the country are already influencing the gullible among us with this information.

Another thing to consider, opponents to gay marriage are now in the minority. Mormons spent $18.6 million (77% of all contributions) in suppport of Prop 8 in California. Just wait until some of this information comes out in the debate circuit. They will save the best for last.

I could be wrong but I don't think Romney is perceived by many as a doctinaire Mormon. He's marginally Mormon in the same way most professional people also fail to adhere to the more draconian aspects of their various faiths.

The problem Obama has is the electorial college. It's going to be difficult for any Democrat to win this election given the Republican nature of the important electoral states.

Romney says whatever he needs to say to be elected, and then seeks to govern rationally and sanely. That's his record. George Bush Sr. was the same way. Neither Bush Sr. or Romney are visionaries, but they're not idiots either. They're normal professional men who've comported themselves to the level of intelligence needed to gain the respect of the normal business/professional world. They're mediocre.

The problem with Obama is that he had no real career or record before being elected, and in office he's indifferent to any form or decision-making or guidance to anyone. He merely lets the bureaucrats do whaever they want without any intervention. He has no ideology, no opinions....nothing but an ignorant faith that everyone around him must know what they're doing, and he doesn't feel any obligation to do any of the things he promised the public.

The Republican mainstream is solidly behind Romney, and they'll offset the loss of the evangelicals and others which were Bush's base. He'll have all he needs in the face of high unemployment and general dissaffection which are hobbling Obama IN ADDITION to the electorial structure.

ps....

On this occupation of Wall Street thing...

The guys doing the occupying are a strange brew of committed weirdos, but they've garnered wide support [including from myself] from people who don't share their various strange views EXCEPT that the 1% of the richest is running wild and has ruined the economy for the rest of us. If it wasn't for these kooks camped out this way the media wouldn't acknowledge the widespread public outrage at what we're letting the finanical elites get away with.

Send Gordon Gekko back to jail where he belongs!

[cckid2006]

From the IRS website Corporate profits for 2008 (latest available) were:

$1,534,397,243

Not $5,000,000,000

I believe you took a projected annual number from third quarter of 2009 and extrapolated an annual number.

Statistics used by people promoting an agenda are always misused. For you only F-sharp (its probably too boring for everyone else - including me):

Corporate pre-tax profits, also known as net income (less deficit), decreased by 46.4 percent, from $1.84 trillion to $984.3 billion (Figure B). When excluding pass-through entities from the total, pretax
profits decreased from $1.06 trillion to $388.7 billion, a drop of 63.4 percent.

Income subject to tax (the tax base), shrank from $1.25 trillion in 2007 to $978.2 billion in 2008, a
decrease of 21.6 percent. Total income tax before credits decreased from $437.1 billion to $342.4
billion, a decrease of 21.7 percent. Income tax decreased 21.6 percent from Tax Year 2007 to 2008,
a decrease from $433.5 billion to $339.7 billion. Total income tax after credits, the amount paid to the U.S. Government, decreased by $102.9 billion or 31.0 percent from $331.4 billion to $228.5 billion.