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.
Of course the state loses money providing in-state tuition for illegals. All the states lose money on every in-state tuition student they have.
You lead the skeet. Come on man!
Why not? It's a plan. Why can't they say "We love Neal's plan, so if I'm elected, I'll push to enact Neal's plan into law"? I've never heard of a plan you aren't allowed to use. And I can't believe Neal refuses to let the government enact his plan.
Rick Perry published a book in 2010 which discussed the flat tax and other good consevative ideas. Now that he has entered the run for President, I expect to see several of those ideas become parts of his campaign platform.
Of course, Romney had a 150-page plan. Cain isn't the only one to put out a plan; and I guess each voter can decide if putting out a plan you don't support, and plan to replace later with the plan you DO support, because the first plan is politically popular and the second might not be, makes you a "man".
I don't particularly like Fairtax, nor do I want to spend a lot of time in the next two years debating an overhaul of the tax code. It's not the thing stopping our economic growth, and I wish everybody would focus on THAT, not the next step after that. But I wouldn't vote AGAINST someone because I think their plan is wrong-headed, like 9-9-9, because I figure it will never pass anyway, at least not with the things in it that are bad.
If it makes you happy to think that, go for it.
How would you even know what Cain is getting or that Perry’s is dwindling? Is that just your gut or is there somewhere with some numbers?
Perry is pretty good on his feet in a press conference type setting or if you are standing around with a bunch of people asking him questions. His performance in the debates have not been stunning. That is true. But we are not electing a guy as head of the class debate team. So I myself am not all wrapped up in the way these folks handle themselves in what they are calling "debates" on TV. I know several people, one in particular, who would make any of the people "moderating" the debates and any candidates in the debates look like idiots. The guy is so sharp and so smart he would even make Newt loook like he was in first grade. But as my friend says, "he is not a politician".
It is interesting that many people look at the debates as a benchmark for someone having the tools to be president. To me the debates are helpful but not the only thing I'd depend on. One of the biggest skills I want to see is that we elect someone who understands the government systems and has the ability to unravel what Obama and others have done. I'd also like to see the next president primarily just doing that. Unringing all these bells Obama has rung. Getting rid of the "czars" and in general shrinking government as rapidly as possible. I'd REALLY like for the next president to be doing this while shutting the hell up!
We did not need to see Clinton day in and day out. The same goes for Obama. These guys are two of the biggest penis heads I've ever seen. Self-absorbed puffed up little boys who are really really screwed up between the ears. They love themselves! I don't want talk-talk-talk like we got from them over and over while they let others run the show. That is what Romney will be like. Clinton/Obama redux. I want action! So I don't care if the guy can talk like a stage trained actor. I want him to know how the watch ticks and I want him to fix the damn thing!
Sure Rita it is Fairer and Flatter, meaning it is still progressive.
It was the Texas Legislatures opinion that college educated Texas citizens actually lower the tax burden on Texas by being more productive citizens in the long run.
The only reason they get instate tuition rates is because the state pays all of it in the first place, so when they make their student loans, it costs less. Just moved from California, so I know something about that.
They all have to live (or be hung) by whatever they say right now. They need to be very accurate right now and figure out where the debate will go during the election.
Romney sounds like tricky Dick Nixon. Freeze spending increases... Avoiding all reform as extremist is what Rinos all do to kill momentum and keep the status quo.
Americans don’t want the status quo. They want reform of the Federal government and an end to globalist croney capitalism (corporate welfare and shysterism.)
And then there is Obammy who wants to bring communist change through collapsing free markets and bringing black shirt chaos and death in the streets.
Of course, that only can happen if Texas employers are hiring illegals. (And it runs against the experience of college grads with the average test scores of illegals.)
Cain couldn't even explain it himself.
I believe Perry hates the intrusion of the Federal Government into states business at a real, honest, gut level because he knows how hard it is to govern with the Feds breathing down your neck. Cain and Romney could care less because they really never had to deal with it. They don't understand it just like they don't understand border security and have taken to copying Perry.
Perry will make Washington inconsequential because he actually wants it to be inconsequential and you'll see more and more Republican governors begin to endorse him for the same reason.
As sure as leaves in the fall turn golden brown, republicans move to the right, but the leaves turn green again in the spring, and the republicans move left. Perry follows the same pattern.
The worst Supreme Court justices in my life time were appointed by Republican Presidents.
Not Cain - Perry has Steve Forbes as an advisor. I'm pretty sure Forbes' flat tax has been around longer than 9-9-9.
This is the sort of thing Perry should have been doing all along. I believe a flat tax is much better than the 999 plan as it simplifies the tax code and does not introduce a new tax (vat/federal sales) that can be increased at a later time.
A flat tax is actually my second favorite approach. Ideally, I would like to see the 16th Amendment repealed and the government abolish all income taxes. Institute a national sales tax and tariffs as the government used to be funded. This would have the dual benefits of taxing all people, even those in the underground economy and strengthening American industry. Whatever you make you keep. Business would flock to the U.S. Politicians would have less control over us because they wouldn’t be able to use the Byzantine tax code to manipulate us. Life would be wonderful.
Cain amended his FEC filing with the numbers from the first 2 weeks of the new quarter. He totaled about $2 million in donations, with more in the second week (trending up). An analysis of the Perry donations show that the vast majority of it came in large ($2000 or $2500) chunks. Adding reports of $15 million ready to hit his coffers as soon as he announced and other reports that his fundraising, which had barely begun, dropped 60% after the first debate, and that he as fallen so dramatically in the polls, it follows that his current fundraising is likely less.
You can read much of this in FEC releases. Yes, some of it is a gut feeling from looking at the numbers.
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.