• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Rick Perry wants a 20% flat Federal income tax

Right, actually in the side of the actual taxpayers and against the big govt. policies. No wonder liberals are fighting so hard to destroy any competition to Obama

Well, I am a taxpayer and nobody has yet been able to quantify what exactly this vague concept BIG GOVERNMENT actually is - and I know Perry is most certainly not on my side.
 
Well, I am a taxpayer and nobody has yet been able to quantify what exactly this vague concept BIG GOVERNMENT actually is - and I know Perry is most certainly not on my side.

You think a 3.7 trillion dollar is appropriate for a free enterprise and capitalism economy? where does personal responsibility lie in your world and what is the role of the state in that responsibility?
 
How dare he want everyone to pay their fair share by proposing a flat tax. Shame on him. I mean it. What the **** is he thinking that everyone should pay their fair share?

that's not what he is proposing.

he is proposing everyone have a choice between their current FIT rate, or 20%.
 
It just amazes me that people think that is fair.

but, but, but...they can't afford to pay taxes. I mean, they're just struggling, do-gooder types with absolutely no means or opportunity to do anything but suffer the burdens of their paltry lifestyles.

*sigh*
 
Hey Texas would not have a "balanced" budget if it was not for that stimulus money...

Actually, take a browse through the articles at the time, you will find that Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and others rejected accepting the stimulus money. While some of the money may have in fact migrated to these states through other means, they all rejected and did not receive direct payments from the stimulus plan.
 
The way I read that, 20% flat tax on wage earners, 0% flat tax on rich investors. Am I surprised?
 
$45,000 / year @ 20% = $9000. Which leaves the average American with $36,000 to live on.


When you consider the median family budget is $39,000/year...



Perry will go down in flames...

Yes, I am sure that is what you believe and yet you ignore that deductions still exist as well as the option to retain the current tax structure. Typical liberal who continues to buy the lies of the liberal elite who continue to make a fool out of you
 
$45,000 / year @ 20% = $9000. Which leaves the average American with $36,000 to live on.


When you consider the median family budget is $39,000/year...



Perry will go down in flames...

Before you account for the mortgage interest deduction and dependent deduction (which increases), charitable deductions, etc., etc., etc.
 
You think a 3.7 trillion dollar is appropriate for a free enterprise and capitalism economy? where does personal responsibility lie in your world and what is the role of the state in that responsibility?

Are we talking magic numbers here?
 
Last edited:
Are we talking magic numbers here?

No what we are talking about is the role of the Federal Govt. which if it is as liberals seem to believe there is no need for a state govt. employee like you. You see, with a large central govt. why waste money on you?
 
$45,000 / year @ 20% = $9000. Which leaves the average American with $36,000 to live on.


When you consider the median family budget is $39,000/year...



Perry will go down in flames...

You forgot state and local taxes, plus of course healthcare costs..
 
Actually, take a browse through the articles at the time, you will find that Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and others rejected accepting the stimulus money. While some of the money may have in fact migrated to these states through other means, they all rejected and did not receive direct payments from the stimulus plan.

Nice one.. "articles at the time"... yea propoganda is nice is it not? Reality is a whole other bag of facts..

Texas balanced budget with stimulus money from Washington - Jan. 23, 2011

Turns out Texas was the state that depended the most on those very stimulus funds to plug nearly 97% of its shortfall for fiscal 2010, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

PolitiFact Texas | President Obama says Gov. Perry used stimulus fund to help balance budget, then started 'blaming' federal lawmakers who voted for legislation

Mostly true according to politifact.com

Perry and the Stimulus: It's Complicated — 2012 Presidential Election | The Texas Tribune

Texas has used $17.4 billion in federal stimulus money — including $8 billion of the one-time dollars to fund state expenses that recur over and over. In fact, Texas used the federal stimulus to balance its last two budgets.

So you were saying?

Rick Perry is a typical hypocritical right wing opportunist... and frankly a freaking liar....
 
The GOP CONSTANTLY tries to sell the concept to the American people that "giving huge tax breaks to the most wealthy is really good for the economy...because....see.....if you give the rich lots of money, they will give some of it back into the system via creating jobs and so the wealth that you give to the wealthy will TRICKLE down from the rich to the working class"......yet.....it never works.....and sadly....some of the drones of our society get suckered into believing it despite the history of failure time and time again.
 
Nice one.. "articles at the time"... yea propoganda is nice is it not? Reality is a whole other bag of facts..

Texas balanced budget with stimulus money from Washington - Jan. 23, 2011



PolitiFact Texas | President Obama says Gov. Perry used stimulus fund to help balance budget, then started 'blaming' federal lawmakers who voted for legislation

Mostly true according to politifact.com

Perry and the Stimulus: It's Complicated — 2012 Presidential Election | The Texas Tribune



So you were saying?

Rick Perry is a typical hypocritical right wing opportunist... and frankly a freaking liar....

Would love to tackle that leftwing bull**** and distortion but that isn't the thread topic. Start another thread and I will be happy to make you look foolish but in the meantime explain to me why you support the massive expansion as to the role of the U.S. Govt and total lack of faith in the American people? Such passion for higher taxes and greater role of the Federal Govt. which makes you a good candidate for liberal leadership. You see if you keep people dependent you will always have a job. Let people control their own lives and they need fewer liberals. Obama truly has a big supporter in a lot of brainwashed people.
 
The GOP CONSTANTLY tries to sell the concept to the American people that "giving huge tax breaks to the most wealthy is really good for the economy...because....see.....if you give the rich lots of money, they will give some of it back into the system via creating jobs and so the wealth that you give to the wealthy will TRICKLE down from the rich to the working class"......yet.....it never works.....and sadly....some of the drones of our society get suckered into believing it despite the history of failure time and time again.

Kind of like the drones of society in California that believe the govt. is the answer as the debt continues to roll up. Aren't there enough rich people in California that you can extort money from?

California's continued revenue slide could trigger cuts - Sacramento Politics - California Politics | Sacramento Bee
 
$45,000 / year @ 20% = $9000. Which leaves the average American with $36,000 to live on.


When you consider the median family budget is $39,000/year...



Perry will go down in flames...

Isn't the income tax rate for someone who is single and making 45,000 a year 25%? So wouldn't they right now be paying $11,250,which leaves them $33,750? Seems to me under Perry's plan that person would be paying less in federal income taxes.

2011-2012 Tax Rates – Federal Income 2011-2012 Tax Brackets
 
$45,000 / year @ 20% = $9000. Which leaves the average American with $36,000 to live on.


When you consider the median family budget is $39,000/year...



Perry will go down in flames...
No.
I believe his proposal is 20%... MINUS a deduction of 12,500 Per Person.

meaning (if I'm reading it correctly) a couple with 45K income gets a 25K deductible first, which makes their burden 20% of 20,000 or $4000.
They could further lower that with Mortgage deduction.
A single person/or not filing Jointly couple would pay 7500.
Not sure if this deduction includes dependent children.
if so, a family of 4 with 50k income pays no taxes.
Again, his proposal isn't 100% clear to me except your 45k example doesn't include at least the one 12.5k deductible.


Does his plan add up/Rev Neutral?
Probably Not.
That remains to be seen/analyzed in the next few days.
 
Last edited:
We don't need to increase taxes. What we need is to re-establish rule of law and close the loopholes so that the richest 1% are not evading taxes as they currently are.

Simply increasing taxes will ensure that the middle class pays more while still permitting the richest to evade paying at all.

Such a plan makes me wonder who Perry is really working for.
 
How dare he want everyone to pay their fair share by proposing a flat tax. Shame on him. I mean it. What the **** is he thinking that everyone should pay their fair share?
But everyone Still does NOT pay "their fair share".
And it's anything but simpler.

Perry
"...The plan, announced today in a speech in South Carolina by the Republican presidential candidate, would create a single tax rate of 20% for individuals and a $12,500 per-person exemption. Taxpayers could choose that system or file under the existing tax code with all of its exemptions, credits and deductions, a setup that economist Jared Bernstein described as a “complicated beast” that creates parallel systems.

The thing that makes the tax system complex is Not graduated rates,” said Bernstein, a former adviser to Vice President Joseph Biden and a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in Washington, which advocates policies that help low-income families. “That’s one of the big Misunderstandings of this flat-tax discussion. You can have as many rates as you want and figure out what you owe on a postcard.”"..."

It's Much better than Cain's in regressivity.
Cain's is DOA, IMO.
Perry's though, still get's rid Cap Gains/Divs so leaves a Hole that has to be plugged by the Middle/Low income. Billionaires tax goes to -0-.
ie, At the extremes.... Working poor currently getting EITC lose it and the Billionaires get to keep it.

"...Still, Perry is proposing a few twists on the flat-tax concept. By giving taxpayers a choice between the systems, he doesn’t remove complexity from the tax system and avoids the kinds of tax increases for lower-income people that have led to criticism of rival Herman Cain’s plan for 9% income, business and sales taxes.
In the simpler system Perry proposes, he would retain tax breaks for mortgage interest, charitable contributions and state and local taxes for people earning less than $500,000 a year.
No ‘Fear’ Reform
“He’s just taken the fear out of tax reform,” said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, a small- government group in Washington.
Such efforts usually involve “a bunch of politicians in D.C.” making changes that leave a taxpayer fearing that “I don’t know, but I fear I’m going to get screwed,” he said.
With the choice offered by Perry, taxpayers will gravitate to the system that gives them the most benefits, Norquist said. Perry’s proposal doesn’t punish people who have organized their financial lives around tax breaks such as the mortgage interest deduction or the earned income tax credit, he said.

“It just strikes me as political pandering at its worst,” said Leonard Burman, a former Treasury Department official who now teaches at Syracuse University in New York. “It doesn’t seem like a serious policy proposal.”

Low-income taxpayers, who benefit from refundable tax credits for work and children that generate benefits in excess of their tax liability, might prefer the current system.
Perry, who has described himself as “dismayed at the injustice” that nearly Half of households don’t pay federal income taxes, wouldn’t change that number with his plan, Burman said."...
 
Last edited:
Right. As opposed to spending $2 trillion on stimulus, several hundred billion on a failed "save your house" program, increasing federal obligations through the creation of Obama care (and double countying Medicaid money to call it "balanced"), asking (then implying he'll just take) for more money for the failed "save your house" program, and asking for what will be another $1 trillion or more in another weak stimulus. Or, as opposed to suggesting virtually nothing, as senate democrats have done since '08. Or, as opposed to a skeleton budget that provided no source of funding for proposed changes in spending, as Obama did.

An idea is better than nothing. Or failed programs. Both of which rest largely on the left's shoulders right now.

i thought this post was about perry's proposal, not obama. is it because you can't argue the merits of the proposal thst you make this about obama and dems? i thought you were better than that.
 
Back
Top Bottom