Rand Paul Introduces His Tax Plan

[autigeremt 6,589]

I "wonder" if anyone has taken this 14.5% rate and applied it to the 2014 tax year and come up with an estimate on what the government would get if we taxed at this rate and all the loopholes were closed?

I'd like to see what it would be.

[JoeBags7277 734]

I "wonder" if anyone has taken this 14.5% rate and applied it to the 2014 tax year and come up with an estimate on what the government would get if we taxed at this rate and all the loopholes were closed?

I'd like to see what it would be.

I think I saw Rand state somewhere that the 14.5% rate would depend on modest spending cuts to remain solvent. Bill O' Reilly claims the rate would have to be somewhere around 19% to work.

I trust Rand's limited government bona fides and his arithmetic to Bill's any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[AUTUmike 79]

A mix of good and bad. If only we had a system of government that allowed for thoughtful debate, compromise, and refinement of ideas, we could move forward. The "all or nothing", extreme partisan model must be fixed before we are able to fix anything else.

I do not see this plan as workable but, I think it is a great place to start a discussion. The IRS has become an inefficient, often abusive, agency. The U.S. tax code with all of it's complexities, is absurd. Upper middle class entrepreneurs are over taxed. We seemingly do not understand the differences between "investment" and REAL capital investment, job creation.

I like Rand Paul. I think he often gets unjustly criticized from BOTH sides for being "radical". IMO, he could be just what we need, willing to "shake things up" but, mindful of the need for bipartisan cooperation and, showing respect for democracy. I am particularly fond of his willingness to express ideas, not to simply criticize others. I highly respect what I perceive as a desire to effectively govern rather than perpetually playing the partisan political game. Rand's biggest problem may be that, he does not represent any one individual's "perfect" candidate. Unfortunately, most will not see that, that quality may very well make him the best candidate.

I agree with you that this puts a concrete idea on the table worthy for discussion. I don't think the tax code should remain the same, but I also recognize how difficult it would be to move to a flat tax system that actually funds the government at reasonable levels. Now, of course, I am the first to tell you that income taxes are not the only source of revenue for the government... so if Senator Paul was willing to impose new fees and adjust current ones to reflect required revenues to run essential government functions then I would be willing to reconsider my stance. But tax cuts alone (loss of revenue) and spending cuts will not spur our economy. It will only weaken it over the long-term. Look at Kansas for example.

Can you clarify the KS example you site? Don't recognize the reference....

Gov. Brownback basically imposed policies of austerity in Kansas, with the aim of balancing the budget and spurring economic growth. Predictably, neither happened since austerity is a failed policy.

I've written extensively on austerity and stimulus. Austerity has worked in the UK...they are the same place as we are with less debt dragging them down...now, as to whether the KS version was right or not; economically, they rank #21 in actual economic performance and health...so slightly better than avg...their state GDP growth is the same as the US GDP growth and employment gains is running 2% annually since coming out of the recession...what measure(s) are you using to site "failed policy".

If you look at overall competitiveness, I would contend they haven't cut taxes enough given there are only 4-5 other states with higher State businesses taxes, they rank dead last on the "death tax" rate, and they are in the bottom 40% on all but one tax ranking...I use ALEX-Laffer analysis and survey generally as it provides a good overview of about 20 different measures and ranks each state; and their performance and competitive rankings are based on an equal weight of state-GDP groth, non farm employment growth and domestic migration.

Oh I would LOVE to read some of your extensive writings on austerity and stimulus (or are you referring to forum posts?). But as I already demonstrated the last time you claimed that austerity worked in the UK, the British debt has climbed about 10% since their austerity policies began. The very aim of austerity is to decrease government debt to prevent supposed crowding out effects so that private businesses can propel a recovery. By matter of fact, step one in that process has failed in the UK--instead actually worsening the problem (as predicted). Here is a good article by the [conservative-leaning] Financial Times on the subject http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/f59d7128-d121-11e3-9f90-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3dvNkPZNU

As far as Kansas, your contention that they probably haven't lowered taxes enough is laughable, given that even Brownback himself has admitted defeat of his policies and raised taxes a week ago. I've stated many times that given the dollar's value--and more importantly, the luxury of an independent central bank--the U.S. has significant fiscal flexibility that relegates debt concerns to the back of the line. However, Kansas does not enjoy the ability to conduct their own monetary policy and therefore must roughly balance their revenue with spending in order to avoid retrenchment of services.

And last, come on people: I can "cite" to you that Kansas has pursued failed policies by directing you to an internet "site," or archives at the "site" of a government office.

[JoeBags7277 734]

Today, I'm announcing my Fair and Flat tax plan

I'm kind of suprised he called it a Fair and Flat Tax plan. If he leans more toward the Fair Tax then I'm in. The president of Fair Tax Alabama told me a year ago, that there were over 100 sponsors of the Fair Tax Bill in Congress, so if a president were pitching the Fair Tax I think it would see the light of day.

"Fair and Flat" is an oxymoron.

Let's face it, some people just don't accept the moral value of a progressive tax system.

To me, it's both logical as well as moral.

So you dont see any abuses in the present tax system with the bought and paid for big business exemptions and corporate welfare? You dont have a problem with any of the 1000s of loopholes in our present 70,000 page document? You are truly one of a kind to defend that mess.

It seems that many on the left for whatever reason have been either unable or unwilling to grasp the true level of abuse inherent in the not-so-progressive tax system. They seem to think the kickbacks and favors are not nearly as widespread as they are, nor do they realize that said favors are a feature for the leftist elite, not a bug. I'd much rather assume that than assume that they are in on the scheme, and the former seems easier to bellieve.

[homersapien 11,357]

Today, I'm announcing my Fair and Flat tax plan

I'm kind of suprised he called it a Fair and Flat Tax plan. If he leans more toward the Fair Tax then I'm in. The president of Fair Tax Alabama told me a year ago, that there were over 100 sponsors of the Fair Tax Bill in Congress, so if a president were pitching the Fair Tax I think it would see the light of day.

"Fair and Flat" is an oxymoron.

Let's face it, some people just don't accept the moral value of a progressive tax system.

To me, it's both logical as well as moral.

So you dont see any abuses in the present tax system with the bought and paid for big business exemptions and corporate welfare? You dont have a problem with any of the 1000s of loopholes in our present 70,000 page document? You are truly one of a kind to defend that mess.

It seems that many on the left for whatever reason have been either unable or unwilling to grasp the true level of abuse inherent in the not-so-progressive tax system. They seem to think the kickbacks and favors are not nearly as widespread as they are, nor do they realize that said favors are a feature for the leftist elite, not a bug. I'd much rather assume that than assume that they are in on the scheme, and the former seems easier to bellieve.

That doesn't make any sense to me but it sounds a little crazy.

[JoeBags7277 734]

Today, I'm announcing my Fair and Flat tax plan

I'm kind of suprised he called it a Fair and Flat Tax plan. If he leans more toward the Fair Tax then I'm in. The president of Fair Tax Alabama told me a year ago, that there were over 100 sponsors of the Fair Tax Bill in Congress, so if a president were pitching the Fair Tax I think it would see the light of day.

"Fair and Flat" is an oxymoron.

Let's face it, some people just don't accept the moral value of a progressive tax system.

To me, it's both logical as well as moral.

So you dont see any abuses in the present tax system with the bought and paid for big business exemptions and corporate welfare? You dont have a problem with any of the 1000s of loopholes in our present 70,000 page document? You are truly one of a kind to defend that mess.

It seems that many on the left for whatever reason have been either unable or unwilling to grasp the true level of abuse inherent in the not-so-progressive tax system. They seem to think the kickbacks and favors are not nearly as widespread as they are, nor do they realize that said favors are a feature for the leftist elite, not a bug. I'd much rather assume that than assume that they are in on the scheme, and the former seems easier to bellieve.

That doesn't make any sense to me but it sounds a little crazy.

The idea that maybe you may have fallen so in love with a theory that you fail to see how contrary to its ideals it plays out in the real world? It happens to the best of us from time to time when our guard is down.

[AUTUmike 79]

Today, I'm announcing my Fair and Flat tax plan

I'm kind of suprised he called it a Fair and Flat Tax plan. If he leans more toward the Fair Tax then I'm in. The president of Fair Tax Alabama told me a year ago, that there were over 100 sponsors of the Fair Tax Bill in Congress, so if a president were pitching the Fair Tax I think it would see the light of day.

"Fair and Flat" is an oxymoron.

Let's face it, some people just don't accept the moral value of a progressive tax system.

To me, it's both logical as well as moral.

So you dont see any abuses in the present tax system with the bought and paid for big business exemptions and corporate welfare? You dont have a problem with any of the 1000s of loopholes in our present 70,000 page document? You are truly one of a kind to defend that mess.

It seems that many on the left for whatever reason have been either unable or unwilling to grasp the true level of abuse inherent in the not-so-progressive tax system. They seem to think the kickbacks and favors are not nearly as widespread as they are, nor do they realize that said favors are a feature for the leftist elite, not a bug. I'd much rather assume that than assume that they are in on the scheme, and the former seems easier to bellieve.

That doesn't make any sense to me but it sounds a little crazy.

The idea that maybe you may have fallen so in love with a theory that you fail to see how contrary to its ideals it plays out in the real world? It happens to the best of us from time to time when our guard is down.

As to your highlighted statement, I disagree prima facie. Big business and the wealthy are more in line with both tax loopholes and the Republican Party, so your assertion isn't really even logical.

[JoeBags7277 734]

Today, I'm announcing my Fair and Flat tax plan

I'm kind of suprised he called it a Fair and Flat Tax plan. If he leans more toward the Fair Tax then I'm in. The president of Fair Tax Alabama told me a year ago, that there were over 100 sponsors of the Fair Tax Bill in Congress, so if a president were pitching the Fair Tax I think it would see the light of day.

"Fair and Flat" is an oxymoron.

Let's face it, some people just don't accept the moral value of a progressive tax system.

To me, it's both logical as well as moral.

So you dont see any abuses in the present tax system with the bought and paid for big business exemptions and corporate welfare? You dont have a problem with any of the 1000s of loopholes in our present 70,000 page document? You are truly one of a kind to defend that mess.

It seems that many on the left for whatever reason have been either unable or unwilling to grasp the true level of abuse inherent in the not-so-progressive tax system. They seem to think the kickbacks and favors are not nearly as widespread as they are, nor do they realize that said favors are a feature for the leftist elite, not a bug. I'd much rather assume that than assume that they are in on the scheme, and the former seems easier to bellieve.

That doesn't make any sense to me but it sounds a little crazy.

The idea that maybe you may have fallen so in love with a theory that you fail to see how contrary to its ideals it plays out in the real world? It happens to the best of us from time to time when our guard is down.

As to your highlighted statement, I disagree prima facie. Big business and the wealthy are more in line with both tax loopholes and the Republican Party, so your assertion isn't really even logical.

They're actually in line with both. But don't take it from me, take it from those right wing nuts at Salon and Mother Jones.

http://www.salon.com/2014/07/10/corporate_welfares_quiet_enablers_how_democrats_pander_to_big_business_partner/

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/democratic-candidates-chamber-commerce-endorsement

Also,

http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/senate-democrats-try-to-win-big-business-by-exploiting-the-gop-split-on-the-ex-im-bank-20140706

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-big-money-democrats-1411599398

I'm no GOP shill, and there's certainly no shortage of cronyism playing out on the GOP side, much to the chagrin of my comrades in the liberty wing. But the days when oversimplifications like the uber wealthy and Big Everything are overwhelmingly aligned with Republicans were valid are over, assuming they were true to begin with.

[DKW 86 7,419]

Today, I'm announcing my Fair and Flat tax plan

I'm kind of suprised he called it a Fair and Flat Tax plan. If he leans more toward the Fair Tax then I'm in. The president of Fair Tax Alabama told me a year ago, that there were over 100 sponsors of the Fair Tax Bill in Congress, so if a president were pitching the Fair Tax I think it would see the light of day.

"Fair and Flat" is an oxymoron.

Let's face it, some people just don't accept the moral value of a progressive tax system.

To me, it's both logical as well as moral.

So you dont see any abuses in the present tax system with the bought and paid for big business exemptions and corporate welfare? You dont have a problem with any of the 1000s of loopholes in our present 70,000 page document? You are truly one of a kind to defend that mess.

It seems that many on the left for whatever reason have been either unable or unwilling to grasp the true level of abuse inherent in the not-so-progressive tax system. They seem to think the kickbacks and favors are not nearly as widespread as they are, nor do they realize that said favors are a feature for the leftist elite, not a bug. I'd much rather assume that than assume that they are in on the scheme, and the former seems easier to bellieve.

That doesn't make any sense to me but it sounds a little crazy.

The idea that maybe you may have fallen so in love with a theory that you fail to see how contrary to its ideals it plays out in the real world? It happens to the best of us from time to time when our guard is down.

As to your highlighted statement, I disagree prima facie. Big business and the wealthy are more in line with both tax loopholes and the Republican Party, so your assertion isn't really even logical.

They're actually in line with both. But don't take it from me, take it from those right wing nuts at Salon and Mother Jones.

http://www.salon.com...siness_partner/

http://www.motherjon...rce-endorsement

Also,

http://www.nationalj...m-bank-20140706

http://www.wsj.com/a...rats-1411599398

I'm no GOP shill, and there's certainly no shortage of cronyism playing out on the GOP side, much to the chagrin of my comrades in the liberty wing. But the days when oversimplifications like the uber wealthy and Big Everything are overwhelmingly aligned with Republicans were valid are over, assuming they were true to begin with.

Read anything by Matt Taibbi at Rolling Stone. He will convince you it is indeed both sides. How do you think ZERO Wall Streeters went to jail back in 2009?

[DKW 86 7,419]

Today, I'm announcing my Fair and Flat tax plan

I'm kind of suprised he called it a Fair and Flat Tax plan. If he leans more toward the Fair Tax then I'm in. The president of Fair Tax Alabama told me a year ago, that there were over 100 sponsors of the Fair Tax Bill in Congress, so if a president were pitching the Fair Tax I think it would see the light of day.

"Fair and Flat" is an oxymoron.

Let's face it, some people just don't accept the moral value of a progressive tax system.

To me, it's both logical as well as moral. You obviously think the current mess of a system is working well.

So you dont see any abuses in the present tax system with the bought and paid for big business exemptions and corporate welfare? You dont have a problem with any of the 1000s of loopholes in our present 70,000 page document? You are truly one of a kind to defend that mess.

What exactly was it I said that suggested your response?

Did I say anything about current abuses?

Did I say anything about loopholes?

Did I defend our current tax system?

I don't care if you want to rant, but don't try to hang your straw man around my neck in doing so.

You beat all I've ever seen when it comes to inventing or imagining arguments in another's post.

Did you really just post that? :lmao:

[homersapien 11,357]

Today, I'm announcing my Fair and Flat tax plan

I'm kind of suprised he called it a Fair and Flat Tax plan. If he leans more toward the Fair Tax then I'm in. The president of Fair Tax Alabama told me a year ago, that there were over 100 sponsors of the Fair Tax Bill in Congress, so if a president were pitching the Fair Tax I think it would see the light of day.

"Fair and Flat" is an oxymoron.

Let's face it, some people just don't accept the moral value of a progressive tax system.

To me, it's both logical as well as moral. You obviously think the current mess of a system is working well.

So you dont see any abuses in the present tax system with the bought and paid for big business exemptions and corporate welfare? You dont have a problem with any of the 1000s of loopholes in our present 70,000 page document? You are truly one of a kind to defend that mess.

What exactly was it I said that suggested your response?

Did I say anything about current abuses?

Did I say anything about loopholes?

Did I defend our current tax system?

I don't care if you want to rant, but don't try to hang your straw man around my neck in doing so.

You beat all I've ever seen when it comes to inventing or imagining arguments in another's post.

Did you really just post that? :lmao:

Well address those questions if you don't believe it.

(It would be a lot more convincing that a bunch of laughing icons.)

[icanthearyou 4,462]

Today, I'm announcing my Fair and Flat tax plan

I'm kind of suprised he called it a Fair and Flat Tax plan. If he leans more toward the Fair Tax then I'm in. The president of Fair Tax Alabama told me a year ago, that there were over 100 sponsors of the Fair Tax Bill in Congress, so if a president were pitching the Fair Tax I think it would see the light of day.

"Fair and Flat" is an oxymoron.

Let's face it, some people just don't accept the moral value of a progressive tax system.

To me, it's both logical as well as moral. You obviously think the current mess of a system is working well.

So you dont see any abuses in the present tax system with the bought and paid for big business exemptions and corporate welfare? You dont have a problem with any of the 1000s of loopholes in our present 70,000 page document? You are truly one of a kind to defend that mess.

What exactly was it I said that suggested your response?

Did I say anything about current abuses?

Did I say anything about loopholes?

Did I defend our current tax system?

I don't care if you want to rant, but don't try to hang your straw man around my neck in doing so.

You beat all I've ever seen when it comes to inventing or imagining arguments in another's post.

Did you really just post that? :lmao:

Well address those questions if you don't believe it.

(It would be a lot more convincing that a bunch of laughing icons.)

I agree with you. I don't know how you get that a "flat" tax is not necessarily "fair" or practical as being an endorsement of the current system. DKW being DKW.