Posted on 04/10/2011 9:14:28 PM PDT by mnehring
So Donald Trump wants to run for the Republican ticket, eh? He's going to have some trouble explaining this away.
Trump, a prospective candidate for the Reform Party presidential nomination, is proposing a onetime net worth tax on individuals and trusts worth 10 million or more. By Trumps calculations, his proposed 14.25 percent levy on such net worth would raise 5.7 trillion and wipe out the debt in one full swoop.
--
The net worth tax is the cornerstone of Trump's economic plan released Tuesday morning.
"No one has put forward a plan to make this country entirely debt free as we enter the next millenium," Trump said in a written statement.
"The plan I am proposing today does not involve smoke and mirrors, phony numbers, financial gimmicks, or the usual economic chicanery you usually find in DisneylandonthePotomac," Trump said.
Trump would exempt the value of an individual's principal home from the net worth total.
"By my calculations, 1 percent of Americans, who control 90 percent of the wealth in this country, would be affected by my plan," Trump said.
"The other 99 percent of the people would get deep reductions in their federal income taxes," he said.
Eliminating the national debt would save the federal government 200 billion a year in interest payments, Trump said. He proposes to earmark half the savings for middle class tax cuts, and the other half for Social Security.
Yeah, Trump is done. Newt's got some big problems with flip-floppage. That leaves Mittens, Palin, Bachmann, and TPaw. Oh, and Boss Hawg Barbour. It's going to be a very interesting Republican primary season.
Pitchforks! Argh!!
Socialist! Pitchforks! Arghhh!
Old news!
Sure, sounds fine to me. Soak the rich in taxes.
I am not saying I agree with it, but as a one time wealth tax it would claw back some of the Kennedy Money. They haven’t paid zip in generations due to their opure trust.
The largest problem with becoming wealthy in this country is the tax system. It penalizes effort and rewards non-effort. Wealth is different from income. Because a gargantuan amount of income is confiscated it is difficult to amass wealth from simply savings on income. Investment, passive income, is even taxed differently than wage income at only 15%.
I do not agree with the plan, but it is legitimate.
Just to put it in comparison, here is Rudy's policy chart.
..and Bill Clinton's chart
From ontheissues.org He is way closer to Bill Clinton than he is someone we all agree is a RINO. Heck, on a straight right/left paradigm, he is almost identical to Bill Clinton.
I think the phrase you are looking for is "Eat The Rich". I think they sell t-shirts with that slogan over at Mother Jones.
So what you're saying is he's pretty mich like Bush?
1999?
The D-E-S-P-E-R-A-T-I-O-N of the Palin establishment is truly humorous.
I believe you are truly inflicted with TDS.
Yep, let's do that. After, it's the poor who invest in economic growth in this country, not the rich. It's the poor who create jobs, not the rich. It's the poor who invent, innovate, support charity, give scholarships away...not those nasty old rich people. Yep, let's raise those taxes so high they won't even want to live here. Good riddance to bad rubbish. Yep...that'll fix it.
Alas...I'm not sure you're smart enough to see this is sarcasm...
Forgiven now that he is birther ;)
Lame.
Even if that is 12 year old news, it is a very conservative position because it will get rid of the debt which is a long term problem. A one time pain is better than death by thousand cuts.
What is Trump’s current position on this issue, any one know?
What I find funny is people willing to accept a guy that is to the left of Rudy on most issues. BTW, I'm not one of those Palin or no-body people, I'm an old-school Steve Forbes team member. I'll fight in the primary season for who I think is the most Conservative who can run with the ball and not just sell out to the media darling of the moment who shares almost no values with our side.
1999 was a whole different animal then 2011. Times change, situations change and so do people. Remember the %18 tax increase in CA Reagan did? He also bumped up SS taxes in the early 80’s. He was still a great President.
The idea of taxing the rich is the basis of the progressive tax system. However, as one learns more, the idea is impossible and does more harm. I am sure The Donald has learned quite a lot since he made that statement.
I doubt the “Rich” will be able to provide enough tax income to actually erase the debt, and such a move will only encourage politicians to spend even more. Spending cuts are the answer, and increasing taxes on the “rich” hand in hand with drastic and deep spending cuts would be one possible plan that has a chance.
This "tax the rich while cutting taxes for the other 99%" spiel is a populist message whose intent is to get someone elected as its aim is to appeal to all segments of society, however, in reality it is yet another move towards socialism/communism/marxism. It is not the answer.
+1
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.