I wanted to post this to show that it's not just Jon Stewart wondering about Rick Perry's behavior. Joe Scarborough was a Republican Congressman, and his show has a definite conservative slant. But even Robert Costa, from the right-wing National Review, was struggling to put a good face on this.
Drunk or stoned? You decide.
Still not sure? Well, take a look at Perry's tax plan:
(click image to embiggen)
Above about $200,000 a year in income, Perry’s plan would be hard to refuse. Once you exceeded that threshold, your effective tax rate would actually drop modestly, falling below people who make less money than you, and more still the richer you get. It would be like codifying the opposite of the Buffett Rule.
That’s true whether you assume the current Bush tax rates and other tax policies remain in effect permanently for the non-rich, or whether they expire, as scheduled by law.
In dollar terms, people with income over $1 million a year would receive, on average, a $637,418 tax cut compared to current law (which assumes the Bush tax cuts expire) and a $495,558 tax cut compared to current policy (which assumes the already-generous Bush tax cuts are extended permanently).
It’s a separate, simple, and extremely generous tax plan — if you’re part of the “one percent.” If you’re not, it won’t necessarily cause your taxes to go up, but it will starve the government of so much revenue that social services you depend on will likely take a huge hit — either that or deficits explode and the country suffers a massive fiscal crisis.
Posts
2 comments:
That show showed more of Perry's weirdness than what I saw on NBC Nightly News. He was loose. Could it be stress? Maybe's he's cracking from campaigning.
I can't believe anyone would suggest such a blatant tax code for the rich. And why do they tax people anything at all if they make less than $10k?
Those aren't the rich, Jim. Those are the "job-creators." :)
Post a Comment