Posted on 04/15/2011 12:24:34 PM PDT by neverdem
The Grand Compromise
Republicans are right not to budge on taxes until serious spending cuts are in place.
The most serious charge against Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget is not the risible claim, made most prominently by President Obama in his George Washington University address, that it would “sacrifice the America we believe in.” The serious charge is that the Ryan plan fails by its own standards: Because it only cuts spending without raising taxes, it accumulates trillions of dollars of debt and doesn’t balance the budget until the 2030s. If the debt is such a national emergency, they say, Ryan never really gets you there from here.
But the critics miss the point. You can’t get there from here without Ryan’s plan. It’s the essential element. Of course Ryan is not going to propose tax increases. You don’t need Republicans for that. That’s what Democrats do. The president’s speech was a prose poem to higher taxes — with every allusion to spending cuts guarded by a phalanx of impenetrable caveats.
Ryan reduces federal spending by $6 trillion over 10 years — from the current 24 percent of GDP to the historical post-World War II average of about 20 percent.
Now, the historical average for revenues over the last 40 years is between 18 percent and 19 percent of GDP. As we return to that level with the economic recovery (we’re now at about 15 percent), Ryan would still leave us with an annual deficit in 2021 of 1.6 percent of GDP.
The critics are right to focus on that gap. But it is bridgeable. And the mechanism for doing so is in plain sight: tax reform.
Real tax reform strips out exclusions, deductions, credits...
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Wrong. GOP should not cave on it ever...
DO NOT RAISE TAXES in a recession.
Taxes are too high as it is, there is no reason to raise them higher. ever.
We shouldn’t even be using the word “taxes” until at least HALF of the deficit is deleted.
Did you even read the article?
I’m perfectly willing to mention taxes as long as it’s in the phrase “significant reduction in tax rates.”
Thanks.
If we could get a max income tax rate in the country of 23%, the IRS would be awash in income tax receipts. We'd have such an influx of capital--including the Pacific Rim--with a resultant explosion in employment, it would make the libs head spin. So, why don't we do it? Because the politicians fear it would take their power to give YOUR money away.
I think a simpler tax code without all these bifurcated credits, deductions, and so on, would be excellent. I’d accept lower rates coupled with elimination of all of these deductions, even if it meant I had a slightly higher annual tax bill. The reason I’d accept it is that 1) simplifying the tax code has a positive monetary value for me in terms of planning, filling out tax returns, etc, and 2) it would end a lot of economic distortions caused by the tax code, and in the long run that would mean a higher standard of living for all of us.
They are right not to cave, but Boehnor will weep as he caves complaining that the GOP only has 1/3 of the non-judicial branches of government. Lyndsey will weasel in the Senate and mew about reaching across the aisle to his friends.
Cave they will. Make bank on it.
Wonder what is the real reason O wants to strip deductions for charitable giving.
Red Cross
Salvation Army
Fischer House
Ronald McDonald House
Wounded Warriors
St. Jude’s Hospital
Seems to me that this one deduction ought not be eliminated. The consequences are too serious.
So how does a flat tax of 23% affect me if my AGI is just over $100K but with deductions, etc., my effective tax rate is 7%?
Colonel, USAFR
Coburn (R-OK), Crapo (R-ID), DeMint (R-SC), Ensign (R-NV), Graham (R-SC), Hatch (R-UT), Inhofe (R-OK), Johnson (R-WI), Leahy (D-VT), Lee (R-UT), Levin (D-MI), Paul (R-KY), Risch (R-ID), Rubio (R-FL), Sanders (I-VT), Shelby (R-AL), Toomey (R-PA), Vitter (R-LA), Wyden (D-OR)
Grahamnesty did the right thing! A conversion on the road to Damascus, or lousy reelect numbers?
Not well. Although I haven't heard of a flat tax proposal of 23%.
I love “The Hammer!!”
The left has a history of being cheap creeps with respect to charities. They just want control so they can spend other peoples' money.
...the sun goes nova and our atmosphere spins off into outer space.
Imagine those charities.........depending upon the government. Rationing of support favoring political cronies.
I think Ryan’s flat 25% tax is a good idea, even eliminating deductions. Just not taking the deduction away from charities.
I’ll admit it’s Friday afternoon and the Battle of Flowers Parade is going on in San Antonio, so I may not have read as carefully as I should...
Colonel, USAFR
It may not affect you, directly, too much. But, that's not the point.
It would have a massive investment incentive effect, however, on those in the top income brackets, especially millions of small business people, hence the expected huge boost to economic activity and prosperity.
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.