Boop Their Bottle Noses!
Flying Dolphins Say Support Free Republic
Give what you can
Only Five More New Monthly Donors Needed for the Current Challenge
A sponsoring FReeper will contribute $10
For Each One
Posted on 07/18/2011 12:38:25 PM PDT by gwjack
Sen. Tom Coburn's deficit-reduction plan
Details of Sen. Tom Coburn's $9 trillion plan to balance the budget
NewsOK Related Articles
Sen. Tom Coburn's plan:
Would save about $9 trillion over 10 years, including $3 trillion from entitlements, $3 trillion from government departments and agencies, $1 trillion from defense, $1 trillion from ending or modifying tax breaks and deductions, and $1 trillion in interest on the debt.
Would reduce the size of government by 25 percent over 10 years.
Would balance the budget within 10 years.
Read more: http://newsok.com/details-of-sen.-tom-coburns-9-trillion-plan-to-balance-the-budget/article/3586676#ixzz1SUBIXa8X
(Excerpt) Read more at newsok.com ...
On a quick read through, I see nothing that would directly impact me or clients other than the age increase. Hmmmm. I don't like the limitation on mortgage interest deduction even if it is $500,000. I think this is bad tax policy.
Thoughts?
Gwjack
We need some significant spending reductions in FY 2012.
balance the budget now... not in 10 yr. plan is crap...
If things were handled correctly by the government, I don’t believe people of this country would mind some of the required changes, if and only if, it helped this country get back to where we want it.
The average American has the concentration of an ant these day's.
The 10 year balanced budget plan would be historical fodder in a year.
We need to cut NOW to see any effective salvation of our economic stature.
Lower the rates(preferably a one rate flat tax) and eliminate ALL deductions, even the sacred cow mortgage interest. You want to buy a big house, God bless you, just don’t ask my tax dollars to subsidize it.
Hi Paladin2 —
Can’t tell for sure, but if his plan is equally phased on the spending side, there should be about a Trillion dollar cut for fiscal year 2012. I still think that is meager, and am hoping for a greater reduction than that. There are a couple of loose threads in the article. I am trying to tie them down now.
Even yet, I think that is the most amount cut in fiscal year 2012 of all the numbers that have been tossed around.
Gwjack
US$ 9 Trillion is LITERALLY THE ROUNDING ERROR IN THE CURRENT CBO PROJECTION FOR REVENUES AND OUTLAYS over the next 10 years.
US$ 9 Trillion in reductions over a 10 year period is a victory in battle that will cause the loss in the wider war.
US$ 39 Trillion is a bare minimum requirement to actually "Balance the Budget over a 10 year period."
This macabre dance over the gravesite of the US socioeconomic order is the end of the Republic.
There are hundreds of pundits trying to point out the obvious, the System as a whole, the two parties, the MSM, the elite institutions and the controlling interests in the US are doing their best to create this false dichotomy to distract the American People to make it through the next 17 months until the elections.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2738714/posts
The housing and construction markets need a cap gains tax reduction in the worst way, again, this would have the effect of increasing economic activity and revenues. It is not clear if one of the corporate "tax breaks" that is being eliminated is depreciation. This needs to be left alone, also LIFO inventory accounting. Removing these two things would simply cause the price of everything we buy go up, and in the end we the consumers would foot the bill.
There's a lot to like here, but for me these are glaring omissions.
Yup. Cut now. And cut deeply. And I’d go for excluding the mortgage interest deduction. In fact I’d go for eliminating all deductions. Just take a flat 10 percent of gross income across the board and be done with it. If the government can’t be run on 10 percent of our income, then it needs to be cut until it can.
The numbers are half-fast on their face. Maybe it would be a good start but there’s no arguing the current federal spending level is 40% borrow. A reduction in Gov’t of 25% over ten years is closer to a joke than a real solution. The older Rand plan-—half a trillion$ in cuts three years in a row is even short but is still the best proposal so far. Obamuzzie’s new spending MUST be rolled back immediately to keep the spending level from going exponential.
This is why there is nothing that can come from DC that will save this economy... there is no will to do the right thing.
LLS
Yep! The only way to do this, is to FORCE THE ISSUE by NOT APPROVING a debt ceiling increase! Period!
The 'HOUSE' has all the cards that count!
House Republicans - STAND FIRM and DON'T GIVE IN to the reckless spender's pressure!!!
I’d also go for the immediate imposition of a 25% tariff surcharge on imports from China. It is worth $91 billion first year to the Treasury. Hopefully it would decline each year as more production returned to the US.
Though I think eliminating deductions is a good long term goal, I don't think it is either fair or economically advisable to just - Wham! - slam the door on them. People have based their lives and their budgets on the current rules and should be given time to adjust - a phase out over at least five years.
I don't understand why there is a provision to prevent Medigap policies from covering the 1st $500 - aren't medigap policies private policies bought and paid for by individuals. Let's get the government out of the business of dictating the terms of private contracts (except to prevent fraud).
By the way, my recollection is that at the time the 16th amendment was crafted, there was discussion of limiting the tax to a maximum of 10% - but the thought was that 10% was such a ridiculously high figure that it would never be reached. (Maybe someone with a better memory can confirm or refute.) Maybe this time we DO need to put it in the Constitution.
The housing and construction markets need a cap gains tax reduction in the worst way
Um, you might want to do a little research on tariffs in the Great Depression. It didn’t work out too well then.
Although it may not be perfect, I give Sen. Coburn & his staff credit for at least doing their homework. With the exception of Paul Ryan, no else in DC seems to be coming up with any concrete ideas on how to tackle the problem.
Here’s the link to the pdf of Coburn’s plan. It’s very detailed and 621 pgs: http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?a=Files.Serve&File_id=c6590d01-017a-47b0-a15c-1336220ea7bf
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.