Just once, could we cut spending first?

Every election those fiscally responsible republicans decry the national debt, and vow to fix it,,,,,,,,,,,by bringing in less money? Yea, they are going to eliminate the deficit and decrease the debt by cutting taxes. And so, they go on with great enthusiasm about lower taxes flat taxes etc.

But, when someone points out that these plans don't bring in enough revenue, the candidate just shrugs and says, "I'll cut spending, eliminate waste, yada yada."

OK. so how about this one time, I get to see the spending cuts first. How about you show people what will happen to military spending, social programs, the elderly etc.
How about you vow to get those spending cuts through Congress first, and then cut taxes.
And vow that, if you can't pass the spending cuts, you won't make a bad situation worse by cutting revenue.




The G.O.P. Tax Debate: Low or Lower; Flat or Flatter?
NOV. 11, 2015

Josh Barro

At Tuesday’s Republican debate, candidates discussed two main questions about taxes: Should they be lower than they are now, or should they be way lower? And should there be fewer tax rates, or just one single rate for everyone, rich and poor?

On the first question, you might say the proposed tax cuts range from huge to yooooooge. Donald Trump has proposed a tax cut that would appear to lose about $11 trillion in revenue — a quarter of expected government revenues — over a decade. Gov. John Kasich of Ohio said that’s too much, because a tax cut that big “will put our kids way deeper in the hole than they have been.”

But even Mr. Kasich, despite his relative restraint, is proposing to cut taxes more deeply than George W. Bush did during his presidency and more deeply than Mitt Romney promised to in 2012. He would lower the top personal income tax rate to 28 percent from 39.6 percent, the top capital gains tax rate to 15 percent from 23.8 percent, and the top corporate income tax rate to 25 percent from 35 percent — an approach that would greatly increase the deficit, if not as greatly as Mr. Trump’s ideas would.

The second point of contention: Should taxes be progressive, or should everybody pay the same rate? This question split the debate stage evenly. Four candidates (Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Carly Fiorina) have endorsed single-rate taxes, with Mr. Carson explicitly tying his proposal to the religious concept of tithing, though he now says the government might need more than the traditional 10 percent tithe. The other four candidates (Mr. Trump, Mr. Kasich, Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio) would keep a system of graduated tax rates, though they would all substantially lower the top rate of income tax from the current 39.6 percent.

While candidates often frame flat tax proposals as a matter of simplicity, this second question is really a fight over who wins: Will substantially all the benefit of a tax cut go to the rich, with some poor people (many of whom currently pay no income tax) actually getting a higher tax bill after you equalize tax rates? Or will reform be designed to ensure everyone gets a nice slice of the tax cut pie?


On the anti-flat side, Mr. Rubio has proposed a plan that combines big tax cuts for the rich (such as abolishing taxes on capital gains altogether) with big tax cuts for families with children. He would greatly increase the child-tax credit and allow that credit to offset not just income tax but also payroll taxes, an idea that would significantly benefit many people with low to moderate incomes. Mr. Paul attacked this idea as “a welfare transfer payment” that would cost $1 trillion over a decade.

It’s worth noting that the tax flatteners are not necessarily the biggest tax cutters. While Mr. Paul’s plan would transform the tax code more aggressively than Mr. Rubio’s and impose a lower maximum rate, it would collect more revenue. At $2 trillion, Mr. Paul has actually proposed one of the smallest tax cuts in the Republican field.

What’s Mr. Paul’s secret? Well, he would combine his flat income tax with a value-added tax — yes, the same kind of tax that finances the French welfare state. This tax is similar to a sales tax, it would generate several times more revenue than the existing corporate income tax, and it would ultimately be paid by consumers in the form of higher prices. This idea is central to both his and Mr. Cruz’s plans to abolish payroll taxes and cut personal income taxes below 15 percent, without generating yoooooooge, Trump-level deficits.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/12/upshot/the-gop-tax-debate-low-or-lower-flat-or-flatter.html?hpw&rref=upshot&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=well-region&region=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well