Perry wins this comparison in my book.
Once Bachman and then Cain drop out, conservatives will come back around, either to Perry or to Gingrich.
So you’re okay with the Fedzilla tax code staying in place indefinitely (not just as a transition phase)? And with the fact that it can continue to be dorked with, and used for crony capitalism and corrupt funneling of other favors?
Personally, while a true flat tax is great, Perry’s plan is “optional” and it leaves in place the old system, with all its horrors.
Moreover, Perry’s plan does nothing to make more people stakeholders in the federal tax system -— and, thereby, to build in more political accountability. Rather, it builds in less, because it further balkanizes Americans in nontaxpayers, flat tax payers and Fedzilla tax payers. More groups for Congress to pit against each other!
I don’t see any fundamental advantage to this plan. And making it “optional” is weaselly when we need bold.
The Perry plan is like pain medicine: it makes the patient feel better for a while, but does nothing to help cure the patient.
The Cain plan is like chemotherapy: it will have some side effects a few people will be uncomfortable with for a while, but IT SAVES THE PATIENT.
How? Primarily because it increases the stakeholders in our system. Unless that happens, all any plan is accomplishing is rearranging the deck chairs in a very pleasant way for present taxpayers. In the meantime, the parasite class continues to grow . . . until one day, it’s GAME OVER.