Thread: Opinion: Sen. Cruz might face birther problem, isn’t that ironic?

http://www.alipac.us/f19/gop-taxonom...taxers-317422/

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Ted Cruz Has a Weird Obsession With Abolishing the IRS. About That.

By Jordan Weissmann

Imagine.

Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Ted Cruz announced today he is running for president.

It is what it is. The first-term U.S. senator from Texas became famous as a conservative firebrand who made life hell for Congress' Republican leadership by helping force a government shutdown, ostensibly in a failed attempt to defund Obamacare, or at least make himself a semihousehold name. It'll be interesting to see if the man has a similar effect in the presidential primary. Will his mere presence force other candidates to veer hard-right in order to avoid looking insufficiently dogmatic, thus lighting aflame their chances in the general election? Or will he simply make Jeb Bush look palatably mild for the rest of the electorate? Time shall tell.

In any event, the conservative id now has an official candidate, which means some of his pet policy ideas will get a little more attention. My personal favorite, which he mentioned during his speech today, is Cruz's oft-repeated conviction that we should eliminate the Internal Revenue Service—or, as he now likes to half-jokingly put it these days, "abolish the IRS, take all 125,000 IRS agents and put them on our southern border.” Cruz says this would be his second priority, after repealing Obamacare (of course). And it's kind of fun to contemplate. The U.S.-Mexico border is 1,954 miles long. Assuming we rotated those 125,000 newly reassigned agents on three separate eight-hour shifts (gotta guard the border 24/7, after all), we could install one agent roughly every 250 feet. That's less than a football field, people. We could basically handle border security like the world's largest game of Red Rover. Weekends would be a little more porous, but that's what overtime pay is for.

Top Comment
I've always gotten the impression that Republicans are required to attend the first week of Econ101 where they tell you that in a perfect world the free market takes care of everything naturally, cutting taxes spurs growth and that minimum... More...

-Qaqqaq

756 CommentsJoin In

Anyway, getting rid of the IRS would still leave the small matter of collecting taxes up in the air. Because, no, Cruz does not want to eliminate taxes altogether.

Borrowing from Rick Perry and Steve Forbes before him, he wants to create a low, low flat tax that everybody could submit on a form the size of a postcard. Even that light level of taxation would require some enforcement, and his spokeswoman has previously acknowledged that the senator thinks there would need to be "a small department that would enforce the tax code.”

So, why bother with all this talk of abolishing the IRS altogether, if we'd need some government agency to do the exact same thing? It goes back to the conservative trope that President Obama has "weaponized" the IRS—remember the scandal over how it allegedly targeted Tea Party groups for audits?—and the only solution now is to tear out the whole bureaucracy, root and branch. “The last two years have fundamentally changed the dynamics of this debate [on the tax code],” Cruz said at a Heritage Foundation speech in January, “as we have seen the weaponization of the IRS, as we have seen the Obama administration using the IRS in a partisan manner to punish its political enemies.”

In any event, we look forward to hearing Cruz's plan for negotiating a Ukrainian peace deal through a game of Duck Duck Goose.*

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/...bolishing.html

My strong advice to Republican candidates who want to reform the tax code with the FairTax, just say so. There's no reason to dance around it with a flat tax on a post card as some "transition", Herman Cain tried this with his 999 plan, when what he really wanted and really planned to do was help pass the FairTax, because this voter doesn't even want to fill out a post card and report income or pay income tax to the federal government. I'll gladly pay the 23% inclusive FairTax when I voluntarily decide to purchase new goods and services and as a happy taxpayer I will spend much on such. Let those individuals and companies who like showing their underwear to the government and reporting into the Nanny State every time the Nanny says so, adjust to the restored freedom of a country with no federal income tax, they'll soon be counting their money and going oh what a bad boy or girl I was to have ever opposed the FairTax. Whatever their beefs are, they're not legitimate and they'll adjust to the truth, the same way employers of illegal aliens will adjust to the new system that actually forbids hiring illegal aliens or legal aliens when there are American workers somewhere in America, available to do the job.

Finally, there is no time to waste on any intermediary step to the FairTax. We need it all and we need it all now. America can no longer withstand the burden of a proven failed mandatory income tax that steals their earnings and doesn't pay the bills, a proven failed mandatory health insurance system that was just another form of government welfare we can't afford, or massive immigration both legal and illegal that puts Americans out of work and deflates our wages and earnings, against our wills, and no fellow citizen of this country should ever, ever expect or demand through the rule of law, that another American forfeit their freedom, income or job security so someone else can realize some monetary benefit in return.

This is America, and it's time we all started acting and thinking like Americans who defeated the British Empire, who fought a Civil War to end slavery in the United States, and who fought and won 2 World Wars on two fronts in less than 3 years and 8 months, instead of the bunch of losers we've allowed our government to make US.

Yes, there will be some who lose some money through these initiatives, but the money they lose was money they should have never earned, kept or received in this country to begin with.

‘The View’ Launches Ted Cruz Birther Movement Following His Presidential Bid (Video)

The Wrap
Jordan Chariton


‎March‎ ‎23‎, ‎2015

“The View” panel took on the first official presidential candidate, Ted Cruz, on Monday when a guest co-host rallied for a birther movement to haunt the Canadian-born politician’s campaign.


“He was not born in America, he was born in Canada, so how can he run for president?” comedian Michelle Williams said. “I’m a Ted Cruz birther — I want to see the birth certificate.”


Rosie Perez blasted the Texas senator for his denial of climate change, and backed California Governor Jerry Brown’s criticism of Cruz as being unfit for the role of president during a “Meet the Press” appearance on Sunday.


“For you to say, as a Republican, him not being born in this country is the least of his problems is insane, insane; I love you darling, but with the birthers and all of that stuff, they made it a huge issue,” Perez said to co-host Nicolle Wallace.


Whoopi Goldberg suggested it’s not fun being on the receiving end of the birther movement, like President Obama has been, and chimed in: “I want to see your birth certificate.”


Cruz announced his run for president via Twitter on Sunday night, and formally announced his run at Liberty University Monday.

https://www.yahoo.com/tv/s/view-star...164505735.html

Video at link. I didn't watch as I can't stand these loud mouthed women.

Where They Stand: Ted Cruz on Key Issues of 2016 Campaign

AUSTIN, Texas — Mar 23, 2015, 3:23 PM ET
By WILL WEISSERT Associated Press


The Associated Press

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz announced his 2016 campaign for president Monday, hoping to energize the evangelical wing of the Republican Party and supplement his already strong support among tea party and grassroots conservatives. Here's a snapshot of where Cruz stands on issues likely to be debated during the GOP's presidential primaries.
———
IMMIGRATION
The son of a Cuban immigrant, Cruz has been among his party's harshest critics of the Obama administration's executive actions on immigration, decrying them as "amnesty." He opposes a popular Texas law offering in-state tuition at public universities to the children of people in the U.S. illegally, and kept a campaign promise by pushing to triple the size of the U.S. Border Patrol. Cruz also has been criticized by Texas Democrats for more frequently visiting the early presidential primary states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina than his home state's border with Mexico.
———
FOREIGN POLICY
He favors deploying U.S. ground forces to battle Islamic State militants if necessary, warns that failure to secure the U.S.-Mexico border means terrorists could slip over to U.S. soil, and pledges firm solidarity with Israel. He was among 47 senators who signed a letter warning that Congress could upend the deal being worked out by the U.S., Iran and others to control Tehran's nuclear program. The letter infuriated the White House, which considers a diplomatic deal the best way to dismantle Iran's nuclear program. But Cruz remained defiant, saying he'd sign it again if given the chance.
———
BUDGETS AND ENTITLEMENTS
Cruz talked for more than 21 hours in the Senate against President Barack Obama's health care law, solidifying himself as a tea party star. He's also vexed fellow Republicans by opposing their past budgets, demanding even deeper spending cuts while keeping the defense budget flush. He'd abolish the IRS and institute a flat tax, ideas that often float in GOP discourse but have never gone anywhere. A simple flat tax can only work by significantly increasing taxes for most low- and middle-income families or by cutting spending far more deeply than most lawmakers are willing to go.
———
COMMON CORE
Opposing what he calls Washington bureaucrats overriding state and local school curriculums, Cruz has for months made "repeal Common Core" a rallying cry, even though the initiative was led by governors. That sets him apart from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. But Cruz agrees with Bush on the need to expand "school choice," promoting charter schools and helping parents get state money to remove their children from struggling public schools and send them to private and religious alternatives.
——
SOCIAL ISSUES
Cruz has pushed for barring federal judges from overriding state bans on gay marriage. He opposes abortion even in cases of rape, and once argued on Texas' behalf before the U.S. Supreme Court, successfully defending a federal law against late-term abortions. Cruz bucked the tradition of courting votes in agriculturally friendly Iowa by opposing renewable federal fuel standards that include ethanol subsidies. He's also opposed so-called net neutrality, likening it to "Obamacare for the Internet" and saying government regulation of cyberspace will stifle innovation.
———
CLIMATE CHANGE
When Cruz recently startled a New Hampshire 3-year-old girl by declaring "your world is on fire," he was attacking the Obama administration's foreign policy — not talking about climate change. Cruz says that for the past 17 years, satellite images show that "there's been zero global warming." But scientific experts say satellite data is the wrong way to measure global warming, which the vast majority of scientists say is happening and is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. Temperatures at ground level show that the planet has warmed since 1998 and that 2014 was the hottest on record. Cruz has acknowledged that climate change is real — but does not attribute that to human activity.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireS...inglePage=true

Originally Posted by Judy

. . . Yes, there will be some who lose some money through these initiatives, but the money they lose was money they should have never earned, kept or received in this country to begin with.

Looking at the "Fair Tax," an Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) study found that the bottom 80 percent of taxpayers would see their federal taxes go up by about $3,200 on average annually. In contrast, ITEP found that the top 1 percent of taxpayers would receive an average annual tax cut of $225,000.

How Presidential Candidate Ted Cruz Would Radically Increase Taxes on Everyone But the Rich

@ http://www.alipac.us/f19/gop-taxonom...taxers-317422/

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Looking at the "Fair Tax," an Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) study found that the bottom 80 percent of taxpayers would see their federal taxes go up by about $3,200 on average annually. In contrast, ITEP found that the top 1 percent of taxpayers would receive an average annual tax cut of $225,000.

How Presidential Candidate Ted Cruz Would Radically Increase Taxes on Everyone But the Rich

@ http://www.alipac.us/f19/gop-taxonom...taxers-317422/

Here's the "study" from ITEP:

http://www.itepnet.org/pdf/sale0904.pdf

They're using a 50% tax rate without a rebate. They say they're using a rebate but their charts show otherwise.

Page 6, they show Alabama taxpayer earning $8900 a year paying $4,414 in FairTax. No, that's a 49.6% tax rate. That is wrong. The FairTax is 23% inclusive and is offset by a Rebate for everyone. And it's not charged on someone's income, it's only charged on new goods and services. Someone earning $8900 a year who spent every cent on new goods and services would either pay $2,047 a year in FairTax or if they signed up for the Rebate, as an individual with no one else in the household, would receive approximately $218 a month or $2,616 to pay the $2,047 in FairTax and have a residual of almost $600 in their pockets. So looking at the first item on their chart, the ITEP is off by more than $5,000. The person with $8900 income would pay zero FairTax and have $600 of their Rebate left over to save or spend as they see fit.

So all the statements made by ITEP based on their calculations about the FairTax are dead wrong, and deliberately and intentionally so, which makes them yet another 501 C 3 tax fraud. Why the Congressional Budget Office, the Joint Committee on Taxation or any other government entity would rely on their figures is beyond belief, at least with regards to the FairTax, and can only be explained by the fact that no one actually read the entire report or were so uninformed about the FairTax legislation to know the difference.

It should also be noted that it's primary contributors are the Annie E Casey Foundation, the Ford Foundation and the New York Community Trust. 501 C 3 "charities" contributing to 501 C 3 "charities" lying about legislation they are deprived by the tax code from influencing or impacting. Under the FairTax, they would still exist but would have no money as a consequence of income tax deductaibility, and would be treated like any and every other business in the United States. They would not have to collect FairTax on goods or service they give away, but would have to collect it on all sales of goods or services at the final point of sale, like every other business.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institu...conomic_Policy

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Looking at the "Fair Tax," an Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) study found that the bottom 80 percent of taxpayers would see their federal taxes go up by about $3,200 on average annually. In contrast, ITEP found that the top 1 percent of taxpayers would receive an average annual tax cut of $225,000.

How Presidential Candidate Ted Cruz Would Radically Increase Taxes on Everyone But the Rich

@ http://www.alipac.us/f19/gop-taxonom...taxers-317422/

THANK YOU! I've read a ton of information on the issue and came to that very same conclusion ages ago (that the so-called Fair Tax plan would hurt everyone but the wealthy). The so-called fair tax plan does not pass the smell test and never will.

Originally Posted by MW

THANK YOU! I've read a ton of information on the issue and came to that very same conclusion ages ago (that the so-called Fair Tax plan would hurt everyone but the wealthy). The so-called fair tax plan does not pass the smell test and never will.

Yea. I've done a lot of research and came to that conclusion too.

Originally Posted by MW

THANK YOU! I've read a ton of information on the issue and came to that very same conclusion ages ago (that the so-called Fair Tax plan would hurt everyone but the wealthy). The so-called fair tax plan does not pass the smell test and never will.

Based on the ton of information you've read, can you explain why you conclude the FairTax plans hurt everyone but the wealthy? In your own words please, or don't bother.

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Yea. I've done a lot of research and came to that conclusion too.

Based on the lot of research you've done, can you explain why you conclude the FairTax plans hurt everyone but the wealthy? In your own words please, or don't bother.