Posted on 10/19/2011 11:05:30 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Las Vegas - In a brief speech this morning at the Western Republican Conference, Texas governor Rick Perry announced that in six days he would reveal an “economic pro-growth package that will create growth” and encourage investment in America. The plan will involve major tax reform, entitlement reform, a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, an abolishment of earmarks, and a recommitment to energy exploration in the United States.
“Our long term growth requires a fundamental tax reform,” Perry said. Therefore, his plan “starts with scrapping the three million words of the current tax code—starting over with something simple: a flat tax.”
“I want to make the tax code so simple that even Timothy Geithner can file his taxes on time,” the Texas governor said, taking a jab at the treasury secretary who had major errors in his tax returns that were revealed after he was nominated by President Barack Obama for his present job.
“The second part of my plan involves the serious commitment to spending, realizing alternatives” to the path taken by Europe, Perry said. In this vein, the Texas governor went on to affirm his commitment to “reforming entitlements, preserving those commitments to those who are on Social Security … and those approaching the age of retirement.”
Perry did not give further details on what the new flat tax rate would be (or how it might work) or on how he would reform entitlements.
On the balanced budget amendment, Perry committed to campaigning in all fifty states, if necessary, in order to get the provision added to the Constitution.
And he promised to end earmarks: “My plan is to end earmarks for good.”
In revealing tidbits of his economic plan, Perry played up his anti-establishment credentials.
You should try reading some of the many books Gingrich authored. Perry is a mental midget.
Cain and Forbes know each other from Cain’s restaurant days. Cain supported the flat tax years ago, until the Fair Tax came along. His 999 is a hybrid of the two and is bringing Flat Tax and Fair Tax supporters together.
That is the saddest statement I have seen in a while. If only money matters and ideas or character are irrelavent, then why bother?
I went to college in Texas. I was a resident. I paid “in-state” tuition. It was not free or paid for by the state. I paid for it myself. It’s a discount. That’s all. The schools offer in-state rates instead of the insanely high and unreasonable out of state rates so they have full classrooms. I don’t think the state of texas re-imburses the schools for the difference.
Not everyone that goes to school - takes out a loan.
In-State in California may be much different.
Perry has been three times the governor of the largest conservative state in the Union, and under his leadership Texas became one of the most prosperous states in the country and created 40% of the new jobs in the entire country since 2009. Now that is a record that no one can match, neither a super liberal like Romney can and certainly not Cain the TALKER whose only record is of TALK and RHETORIC, and running a Pizza company does not count as a record for someone running for the most powerful job in the world.
Even more likely she could run as VP again with Newt? Wouldn't that just upset you apple cart?
It’s just a statement of fact. Anyone deciding to run for president knows it too. If you cannot get the money and organization together - how the heck are you going to run the country?
In some states, the state payments cover the physical plant and fixed asset costs; the incremental costs per student are more than covered by the in-state tuition, so in fact they make money on each in-state student.
There are states where the state contributions also cover part of the incremental cost.
Under Perry, Texas has cut per-student university funding. From 2002-2007, Texas cut real-dollar per-student funding by 20%. Texas is 26th in funding among the states.
In some ways, it's like a car pool. You bought the car, you bought the gas, now you add a rider, and the extra cost is very low. And if you get them to pay for half the gas, you come out ahead, even though you had to buy the car. Sure, they didn't pay for half the car, but you needed the car anyway, and now you are only paying for half the gas.
Texas built the colleges. The buildings are there, the support staff is there. There's a million kids in the school, and there are 10,000 or so that might be illegal. So in a lecture hall with 100 students, one might be illegal. Clearly, they didn't have to build a new building, or new lecture halls. They didn't have to hire new teachers. They don't need more dining halls. There are probably a few more dorm rooms needed, but only if you were already at capacity.
So the incremental cost of bringing an additional 1% of students into the school are very low, easily covered by the in-state tuition.
Now, what I can't say is whether there is a lost opportunity cost. How many of these kids would go to school anyway, and pay the out-of-state tuition? If it's more than half, Texas is "losing money". If it's only 20%, Texas is clearly making money.
Again, people shouldn't draw conclusions about the Texas program based on their knowledge of their own state. States are different. In Virginia, the state supports our schools more, and the universities are very competitive so it's hard to get enough slots for all the in-state students. Adding illegals here could hurt legal residents. That doesn't appear to be the case in Texas.
As for the endorsement you referenced that doesn't carry much weight with me because her endorsements were not all that consistent. I still like her, but I don't put much stock in her endorsements.
Yes, he spoke of it. I would not call the book a “policy book”, but it also wasn’t an entertaining book like Sarah Palin’s first book. It’s kind of boring. He does go through a list of conservative ideas he says we should consider to see if they would fix what is wrong with our country. If I’m remembering right, Fairtax was one of those ideas, or maybe he mentioned that when discussing the Flat Tax.
He doesn’t say in the book that we need to do any of the things in the book, like I said, he offers them as starting points in a discussion. That is why I assume he will now go through them and add some, but not all, to his campaign.
I was kind of hoping he’d leave the flat tax alone, as I’m not a fan. But it was one of those ideas.
I still can’t figure out what Perry is doing in the debates. In my opinion, knowing what I know now, he should have just stayed out of the debates. It would have been an interesting tactic, he’d have been criticized, but I think it would have been better than the performance he has been giving (although he’s getting a little better).
He doesn’t seem to talk about his ideas until he puts them out as plans. In reality, we are still early in the campaign. In 2008, everything really started happening in December. So there’s no rush for him to put out his ideas. That’s why I think staying out of the debates might have been a good idea, since he was so high in the polls anyway that the name recognition wasn’t an issue.
This should get him to 8 percent......maybe. He is polling at 3 and 5 percent recently. Flat Tax has been done many times. He needs to do better than that if he thinks this is going to put him back up to the 40’s.
How nice of you to completely overlook President Eisenhower's "Operation Wetback."
Well, haulin’ my Winchester 1300 w/collapsible stock and pistol grip, side-saddle six extra rounds, I don’t go after clay discs. I’m strictly a feral yutes and zombies type of guy.
Not this year. Some people could be voting in December.
LOl, a pack of feral yutes can be vicious.
You’ve surfaced a very important point, albeit done obliquely. No candidate is as smart as clinton though he was ... a candidate cannot know everything about anything. It is whom he asks to advise him and whether he listens to that advice in making his decisions that makes a great president out of an ordinary man. When Newt stated flatly that he is not a scientist and will be getting advice from scientists on the question raised, he was making the same point. Herman Cain has said he doesn’t have foreign affairs experience and he is learning from those who do. Milt Rominy (it rhymes with hominy, the dried huskless corn) would have the world believe he knows it all. Just watch his condesc ending expressions when others are speaking. Michelle Bachmann doesn’t care that she doesn’t know enough. And Ron Paul doesn’t want to know enough. And then there is Rick Santorum ... he isn’t enough. In a sane world, we would be pushing Newt Gingrich into the limelight to lead this Republic in getting back to its roots andrecapturing world leadership. But the fatc that a commie wannabe has been elected by the voters to run this nation into the shitter tells us we are not in a sane world.
I have a ‘secret’ magazine strategy ...
a good choice for texas
Yes Sarah said while he was running for Governor that he would be good for Texas. I agree. Why not keep him there. He is quitting his job????? Why?????
So he came up with a plan neither Fair Tax or Flat Tax supporters like. I personally like the Fair Tax, but no way in hell will I support adding a sales tax without repealing the income tax at the same time. And now that he has made 999 the centerpiece of his campaign there is now way Cain can get away from it.
Perry hasn’t been running for a year or more like Cain has, so it’s not surprising he didn’t have a plan ready to go. And his plan is not similar to 999 at all, since it doesn’t add a sales tax on top of an income tax. I like the Fair Tax, and the Flat Tax is a good second choice. I don’t want both at the same time, which is what Cain foolishly proposes.
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.