Rand Paul Budget Thread

[abacabb]

If the budget can get enough steam, it not only makes him the front runner, but it is exactly the compromise and remedy this country needs.

Budget is here: http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=476

Long version here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/84514049/SENATOR-RAND-PAUL-S-PLATFORM-TO-REVITALIZE-AMERICA

I wish Paul would anticipate that the left will attack him for the 17% flat rate proposal and made it clear that the 50,000 dollar exemption exists on the short version, because no one is going to read the long one.

Important points:
-It costs $431 billion per year to comply with our present tax code (p. 59)
-P. 63 details the tax. The exemption is not income below 50,000, but income below 30,320 (on the same page it also says 32,320 is the number). There's a 6,530 deduction for each dependent (so a family of 4 would roughly get $50,000 not taxed). So, you'd be better off cohabitating and having children out of wedlock (surprise, like the current system.)
-Corporate tax is 17% with zero deductions, meaning businesses will likely to just run up expenses and never show profits.
-pg. 71 talks about the healthcare plan, but offers no details, such as its exact costs.

I wish Paul would not be proposing a budget that punishes you if you're married, but it's better than the one we have now. I'd accept the compromise.

I called Paul's office over the marital deduction at 202-224-4343. I suggest everyone here do the same.

[abacabb]

Not a single reply? The budget is 1000X more important than abortion and immigration innuendo! Even "I stand with mitch" is getting replies!

[supermario21]

It seems like last year's budget. Shouldn't it be FY2014?

[abacabb]

It seems like last year's budget. Shouldn't it be FY2014?
Rand just came out with it.

[tsai3904]

Rand just came out with it.

He's going to come out with a FY 2014 budget in the next couple months. The one you linked to is from last year.

[FSP-Rebel]

I'm very pumped about it despite its dismal chances of becoming law. MSM would be freaking out.

[abacabb]

He's going to come out with a FY 2014 budget in the next couple months. The one you linked to is from last year.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9ndS6yu3Kk

Seriously though, what was he referencing on Glenn Beck then?

[tsai3904]

Seriously though, what was he referencing on Glenn Beck then?

The FY 2014 budget that he will release in the next couple months. I'm sure he has all the big policy ideas down but probably needs to work on the details and the writeups before its released.

[abacabb]

The FY 2014 budget that he will release in the next couple months. I'm sure he has all the big policy ideas down but probably needs to work on the details and the writeups before its released.
His talking points seem no different than his 2013 budget. Maybe if we weren't wasting political capital on immigration and abortion, he'd have some momentum behind the budget.

[tsai3904]

His talking points seem no different than his 2013 budget.

Yea, he's already released two five year balanced budgets and they were pretty similar. I'm sure all his future budgets will be pretty much the same.

You can find his 2012 budget here:
http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=issue&id=8

[P3ter_Griffin]

Meh- I think he kinda missed the mark by exempting dividends, capital gains, and interest from taxation. Doing a 0% corporate tax would be a much better policy to reduce the double taxation IMO. I really dislike the current system where you pay a higher tax rate for your labor than someone does for income derived from investments, and his proposal pushes that to the further. I don't mean to make this about X only pays this while Y has to pay this, but I think at some level "fairness" does need to be factored in... If Mitt Romney doesn't get a yearly tax bill then I see no reasonable reason I should be paying any taxes.

All in all though, its a damn plan going forward. I'm surprised Ryan keeps throwing his budget out there when in comparison to Rand's its pretty meek.

[P3ter_Griffin]

Meh- I think he kinda missed the mark by exempting dividends, capital gains, and interest from taxation. Doing a 0% corporate tax would be a much better policy to reduce the double taxation IMO. I really dislike the current system where you pay a higher tax rate for your labor than someone does for income derived from investments, and his proposal pushes that to the further. I don't mean to make this about X only pays this while Y has to pay this, but I think at some level "fairness" does need to be factored in... If Mitt Romney doesn't get a yearly tax bill then I see no reasonable reason I should be paying any taxes.

All in all though, its a damn plan going forward. I'm surprised Ryan keeps throwing his budget out there when in comparison to Rand's its pretty meek.

Less important than this, Rand should take block grant out of his vocabulary. IMO he should completely axe the farm bill from the federal budget and reduce the 17% flat tax by whatever percent the farm bill is of the whole. i.e. if farm bill = 5% of federal budget, .95 * 17 = 16.15 should be the tax rate. His proposal to block grant food stamps says to me he thinks it should be a state responsibility, so why not just give them the responsibility (should the state's constituents decide it is in fact a responsibility)?

But I was thinking more about his tax proposal and I do think it is something we should fight to have him change. I'll use an example to exemplify why I think it could be a major problem. Say someone has a large sum of money to either start a business or invest. If that person decided to start a business the salary they pay themselves will be taxed at his proposed 17% rate. If they instead decide to invest the money they would receive tax free compensation. On both sides of the equation there is the risk of losing all invested money. So from my perspective, its a punishment to entrepreneurs-- and as I said earlier, to the working man--, and I think it carries the risk that people will decide to invest their funds instead of starting new ventures. Which there is nothing inherently wrong with that, except that it'd be caused by government policy.

I think its real bad policy. I'm more than open to being explained to why I'm wrong on this issue, so if you disagree please explain where my logic is off. I wouldn't find this important if I didn't think the rest of his budget was right on. I think Rand takes a much more balanced approach to his budget than Ryan does, and consequently, I think Rand's budget has the possibility of gaining support from both sides. So I think its important we voice our opinions to Rand to make sure we get a budget we're happy with.

[P3ter_Griffin]

Rand released his 2014 budget today.

http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=747

[MaxPower]

I'm very pumped about it despite its dismal chances of becoming law. MSM would be freaking out.
After the way they went into convulsions over the sequester, can you imagine? Half of MSNBC's anchors would probably have to be hospitalized when they got the news.

[supermario21]

Think progress is talking about how Rand's budget is calling for withdrawal from the UN and freaking out about it.

[Feeding the Abscess]

Why is he still increasing defense spending?

[itshappening]

Why is he still increasing defense spending?

My guess is to attract more votes.

[P3ter_Griffin]

Another question worth asking Rand, does he support eminent domain in his support for the Keystone Pipeline? I haven't seen a single proposal for the pipeline that respected private property rights.

[KrokHead]

Wow, only two pages for this very good budget plan. I see that the "Jews have hook noses and started WW II" thread has 18 pages.

[FriedChicken]

Someone told me the tax end of it was 0% on your first $50,000 and 17% on everything you earn beyond that.
How accurate is that? Did some really quick looking but didn't really find anything.

[abacabb]

Wow, only two pages for this very good budget plan. I see that the "Jews have hook noses and started WW II" thread has 18 pages.

+rep

[P3ter_Griffin]

Someone told me the tax end of it was 0% on your first $50,000 and 17% on everything you earn beyond that.
How accurate is that? Did some really quick looking but didn't really find anything.

It doesn't specify for single filers, but for married filing jointly the new standard deduction would be $30k.

[NY-Dano]

Eliminating Double Taxation:
“We (the United State) tax everything that moves and doesn’t move.”--Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State

We tax everything in this country, but what the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton didn’t mention was the frequency with which we tax everything-not once, but twice. The most common forms of double taxation in the United States are the capital gains, dividend, estate, gift, and interest tax. The flat tax would eliminate every form of unfair double taxation.

From the long version. Prelude to 2016 :)

[FriedChicken]

It doesn't specify for single filers, but for married filing jointly the new standard deduction would be $30k.

A part I'm not clear on is whether a couple in the $30k and above bracket would pay a flat 17% on ALL their income or ONLY the income that exceeded the $30k?

Recently I've been weighing out an option of quitting a second job I have because it pushes me [just barely] into the next bracket and devalues my earnings from my other employer as well as the additional income employer -- I still make more money than I would have other wise but am making less per hour for a very hard living and I'm not really happy about sacrificing $1 per hour on all my wages for the privilege of having a second job that is a huge responsibility taking (technical director for a ballet company).

The tax bracket thing, to me, only seems fair is EVERYONE gets their first "X" amount tax free - that way it takes away all the incentives to earn less rather than more. There is actually a line somewhere in all brackets that means you would have actually earned more money by making less - just because of what you had to pay in taxes.

I really hope Rand has eliminated that hazard in his tax plan by making it so that the couple who makes $35k only pay 17% on $5k of their earnings ... does anyone know if that is the case?

[spladle]

I really hope Rand has eliminated that hazard in his tax plan by making it so that the couple who makes $35k only pay 17% on $5k of their earnings ... does anyone know if that is the case?

Yes, that is the case, assuming I've understood what I read correctly. I'm pretty sure I did.