Jindal calls for elimination of all Louisiana income and corporate taxes

[Hammer58]

No way. The feds have an enormous spending problem. They bring in about 3 trillion/year and have a debt of over 16 trillion. And most of that goes to social programs or is spent on military research and equipment that will never be used. On the other hand our state is actually pretty damn good with spending. LA only spends what it brings in. And when it comes to taxes Louisiana stays in the top 5 for lowest taxes per individual so it's not like our legislature runs rampant with it's spending.

I don't exactly know what "feel good" crap means but I'm pretty sure I agree with you there. Of course college athletics is probably one of the biggest "feel good" thing our state spends money on. It's certainly not a basic need. So I take it you would love to have our athletic budget cut by 6 million dollars our state gives it?

As far as accounting for basic needs I like what the creators of the fair tax did to make sure the poor wouldn't have to shoulder too much of the burden. They came up with a monthly "prebate" that will be given to every american regardless of income so that everything you spend under the poverty line will be tax free. It's a very reasonable plan and it lets individuals determine what their own basic needs are, not politicians. I hope Jindal does something similar. http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/PrebateExplained2012.pdf

When I wrote that statement I figured someone would bring up the athletic budget. I think the 3% limit on general fund transfers is a fair use. Keep in mind that athletics benefits the university and the students plus many students would not have the opportunity to attend college if not for athletics. When viewing the benefits athletics contributes to the university and the student body I don't think it is a waste, certainly not as much of a waste as some of these pet slush fund projects our legislators waste money on every year.

[Just1More]

Rebel, we probably agree on a lot of tax reform concepts (although I believe the Feds are incapable of achieving any of it). I very much want a simplified tax code. I like exploring national sales tax - consumption taxation is simple and equitable. The "prebate" to ease the pain on everyone's "necessity spending" is sound.

I'm afraid, however, everything in the US economy, including and especially politics, revolves around the current Federal tax code in such an intentionally massively complex spider web, there's no way we will ever get the political foxes to change the locks on the public hen house... short of a bloody revolution. Neither party, even in complete control of both houses and the White House, will take on this task and see it through. They'd never do it with split party leadership.

As for state university athletic budgets and the "feel good" talk... the state does not mandate universities have to have athletic departments any more than they mandate they have to have student unions, covered walkways, research centers or professors that publish. They force a cap on universities' athletic spending, but UL could forego athletics and the state would not take that money away. Just like the university makes decisions that a student union is something other competing universities have, and that provides students a gathering place for a variety of functions, so too does the university realize the necessity to have university athletics as part of the complete university system offering.

If all state schools eliminated, or even massively scaled back athletics, from the extremely low budgets we currently have, they would all shrink in enrollment, lose a great deal of their community tie, lose a huge amount of alumni connections, and all of that would have an enormous overall negative impact on the university's academics.

You need to stop referencing athletics in your comparative arguments. I believe you think you've made several sound arguments on this topic. You simply have not. You fail to accept the relationship aspect of athletics and academics in their healthy cohabitation. You think one penalizes the other, monetarily, when in fact they are inseparable from each other's welfare. Take away the $6 million going to athletics, give it strictly to academics, and watch the systematic collapse of the entire university is all you will accomplish.

[CajunNation]

Property taxes are the most stable tax base period. Set things up like Texas and get out of our Louisiana politics mindset, then we'll actually be able to create a budget for higher education

Ding....Ding

We have a winner.

[TechAlum05]

You have to worry about the motives...is he doing this just to bow down to his base? Or is he doing this for our well-being? If you take one hand from one pocket, it has to go into another pocket somewhere.

It's a bit of both.

Replacing the current convoluted state income and sales tax system with a simpler, flatter sales tax system would make Louisiana more competitive against states like Texas. Eliminating the income tax will help attract more businesses to the state and make Louisiana appear to be more business-friendly. It is better for the state to tax one's consumption than to tax one's hard work and income, especially with the current progressive state income taxes on individuals and corporations.

Bobby Jindal is looking into the future. The governor cannot run for reelection, so there's only one bigger prize in front of him...the Presidency. The 2016 Presidential race is wide open on both sides. There is no favorite on the GOP side, yet. Jindal is the current head of the Republican Governors Association which serves as a springboard for governors onto the national stage (see Ronald Reagan, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and Chris Christie next year). Eliminating the state income tax and greatly simplifying the state sales tax would be a great boost for a Presidential run in 2016 among the party's conservative base.

[Just1More]

It's a bit of both.

Replacing the current convoluted state income and sales tax system with a simpler, flatter sales tax system would make Louisiana more competitive against states like Texas. Eliminating the income tax will help attract more businesses to the state and make Louisiana appear to be more business-friendly. It is better for the state to tax one's consumption than to tax one's hard work and income, especially with the current progressive state income taxes on individuals and corporations.

Bobby Jindal is looking into the future. The governor cannot run for reelection, so there's only one bigger prize in front of him...the Presidency. The 2016 Presidential race is wide open on both sides. There is no favorite on the GOP side, yet. Jindal is the current head of the Republican Governors Association which serves as a springboard for governors onto the national stage (see Ronald Reagan, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and Chris Christie next year). Eliminating the state income tax and greatly simplifying the state sales tax would be a great boost for a Presidential run in 2016 among the party's conservative base.

Good post. But, we're going to see Ronald Reagan next year?

[CharlieK]

Good post. But, we're going to see Ronald Reagan next year?

If only.

[TechAlum05]

Good post. But, we're going to see Ronald Reagan next year?

I meant Chris Christie heading the RGA next year. Although, seeing Reagan again would be great.

[CajunRebel]

Rebel, we probably agree on a lot of tax reform concepts (although I believe the Feds are incapable of achieving any of it). I very much want a simplified tax code. I like exploring national sales tax - consumption taxation is simple and equitable. The "prebate" to ease the pain on everyone's "necessity spending" is sound.

I'm afraid, however, everything in the US economy, including and especially politics, revolves around the current Federal tax code in such an intentionally massively complex spider web, there's no way we will ever get the political foxes to change the locks on the public hen house... short of a bloody revolution. Neither party, even in complete control of both houses and the White House, will take on this task and see it through. They'd never do it with split party leadership.

As for state university athletic budgets and the "feel good" talk... the state does not mandate universities have to have athletic departments any more than they mandate they have to have student unions, covered walkways, research centers or professors that publish. They force a cap on universities' athletic spending, but UL could forego athletics and the state would not take that money away. Just like the university makes decisions that a student union is something other competing universities have, and that provides students a gathering place for a variety of functions, so too does the university realize the necessity to have university athletics as part of the complete university system offering.

If all state schools eliminated, or even massively scaled back athletics, from the extremely low budgets we currently have, they would all shrink in enrollment, lose a great deal of their community tie, lose a huge amount of alumni connections, and all of that would have an enormous overall negative impact on the university's academics.

You need to stop referencing athletics in your comparative arguments. I believe you think you've made several sound arguments on this topic. You simply have not. You fail to accept the relationship aspect of athletics and academics in their healthy cohabitation. You think one penalizes the other, monetarily, when in fact they are inseparable from each other's welfare. Take away the $6 million going to athletics, give it strictly to academics, and watch the systematic collapse of the entire university is all you will accomplish.

It wouldn't be hard to change the tax code and curb spending in Washington. We just need for the American people to vote for more candidates who would actually be willing to reform it. Conservatives specifically need to realize that the party they support has actually done just as much to expand entitlement spending than the party they hate so much because they expand government. Putting a libertarian in the White House would instantly put a stop to the shenanigans.

And I'm just not going to get into the athletics vs. academics argument with you again. I can only beat my head against a wall so many times.

[TechAlum05]

Yes it would, but it won't because it is not about a simple swapping of taxes. This needs far more than a bill, it takes a complete remake of the entire local, and state revenue, and expense streams.

The biggest problem with this state is not income vs sales taxes, it is too much state control of what should be local money and local expenses. This would require something that nobody will ever vote for elimination of the homestead exemption, and locals taking over much of what the state currently pays for. We cannot simply pretend we are Texas, Tennessee, or Florida with no income taxes.

All these states have incredibly high local taxes borne by the locals, not so much by the state. The locals determine how much they can afford. Right now the legislature gets to divvy the money to help them get re-elected. Trading sales taxes for income no income taxes is a shell game.

It will require a long process for Louisiana to transition from a state where most power is concentrated at the state government level to where power is better distributed to the governments at the state, parish, and local levels.

The state government must enact policies that will promote freedom and opportunity for the prosperity of individuals and businesses in Louisiana without obstacles, oversized bureaucratic agencies, or complex tax systems standing in their way. Eliminating the individual and corporation income taxes will not be the magic bullet for Louisiana, but it will remove a sizable obstacle that hinders economic growth and business development in the state.

Tax reform will be Jindal's big crusade for the 2013 Regular Session. The governor could make the devolving of state government powers and responsibilities to the parish and local governments his crusade for 2014. It would help the state, and serve as another example of what he could do as U.S. President in 2017 (devolving powers of the Federal Government back to the states and the people).

[Just1More]

It wouldn't be hard to change the tax code and curb spending in Washington. We just need for the American people to vote for more candidates who would actually be willing to reform it. Conservatives specifically need to realize that the party they support has actually done just as much to expand entitlement spending than the party they hate so much because they expand government. Putting a libertarian in the White House would instantly put a stop to the shenanigans.

And I'm just not going to get into the athletics vs. academics argument with you again. I can only beat my head against a wall so many times.

No, no... do not keep banging your head against a wall... the damage is already noticeably profound. And I request if you aren't going to argue your favorite points, please don't keep repeating them in a hopeless attempt to convince others they have merit.

I suggest you find a soft spot to imitate your head banging ritual while your Liberatarian candidates fail to accomplish anything except the offering of great ideas that will never see the light of day. Oh, and if one did manage to get in the White House, but the party doesn't control both houses of Congress, you wouldn't even put a dent in the shenanigans, ever, much less instantly.