Here is some of what is wrong with 9-9-9: The 9% sales tax would lead to an unregulated underground economy. As prohibition gave rise to the mafia and the drug war gave us the drug cartels the underground economy will feed the creation of a new organized crime establishment. No deductions from the 9% income flat tax - this is great for high earners and gives an advantage to those who need spend no money earning their income. How about the office worker who might only buy a pencil and the mechanic who must spend a thousand dollars a year on new tools in order to do his job? Who gets screwed here? Removal of the safety net - there has been little said about the de-funding of medicare and Social Security. Won't the sick and dying clog up the streets? Elimination of the "Death" tax - Family dynasties, just like in other third world countries running government. These are a few of the negatives. I can't think of any positives.
Excellent points one and all but,... 　 　 　 　 Only for a short period of time and then it will balance out according to most supremacists. 　 　 　 If the government wasn't already so easily owned by the rich elites, finance reform eliminated the power of political parties, and the country wasn't already a plutocracy, this wouldn't be a problem so much. There are also rules established by the best government corporate money can buy, that already eludes the death tax, so at this point dynasty creation is already a reality.
But realistically there is no chance congress would go for Cain's plan. Congress is in the business of selling loop holes. Why would they kill that golden goose?
That's one way to look at it, but realistically they have already been bought and paid for to create them.
9-9-9 is another scheme for the upward redistribution of income. I have noticed that all the Republican candidates have a deep contempt for working people. So this plan of Cain's fits right in. But congress is still in the business of selling tax breaks for campaign donations. If I had enough cash I could get them to pass a Timber Depletion Allowance so I could clearcut my acreage and sell the timber without paying my fair share of income tax. Isn't that what big business does?
One thing that is true here is that tax breaks do not create jobs. Jobs are created by businesses when their success requires them to have more people to operate profitably and grow. It has nothing to do with taxes. It has everything to do with success. The positive thing that tax cuts do is give the government less money to spend and that has some long term benefit to society and the economy. The reason our economy is not successful is that we have been sending our manufacturing, jobs and wealth to other countries for the the past 40 years and we are at the point where we have few of these things left to export. Until you reverse that, things will continue to worsen. This recession is already 4 years old with no end in sight. I don't even view it as a recession any longer. To me it is simply a long term economic decline. There won't be an end until these three things start coming back to America.
Cain's 9-9-9 plan is simple...it raises taxes on the poor/middle class and lowers them for the rich and lowers them significantly for (most of) the very rich - who make the vast majority of their money through capital gains; which this plan eliminates as a source of taxation. If you like this concept - you should probably be for this plan. If you don't like this concept - you should probably be against this plan.
The man is a loon. This morning he said it wouldn't work to make the national sales tax, an income tax. So obviously he wants the rich not to pay taxes on their entire income but has no problem with everybody who lives paycheck to paycheck doing so. He also said his plan would eliminate state sales taxes. As president he wouldn't have that power. The man is just another opportunistic wanna be celebrity. 　 　 His plan is he doesn't have a plan, and has intension of becoming president. He’s just riding the benefits of the tax free presidential campaign just like the majority of the rest of them. Book deal and bigger radio show here he comes.
Problem is he also lies about the concept and claims that it's "dynamic", by which he apparently means that the poor, being forced to pay higher taxes, will work harder to become rich, so that they can pay less. That's how lunatic conservatism has become.
The progressives are much more sane..... They want to tax the producers, to be sure to capture the few non-producing rich, allowing those below the median wage, that use most of the government services, to pay no taxes. Unfortunately, they assume their politicians are altruistic (Hope and Change). That only conservatives have been corrupted by lobbyist. Silly progressives.....
See how well California's initiative process works. A hugely progressive state votes in all kinds of unfunded mandates, yet shoots down tax increases. The state would have defaulted several years ago, but for 6, term limited Republican's being bought off by the State workers unions, and voted in the biggest tax increase in the states history (mostly on the poor and middle class, that is how the Democrats wrote it). The voters were asked to extend this 2 year tax hike for an additional 5. That lost, 2:1. Moonbeam tried to extend it again when he took office, it polled so bad, he didn't even try for an election.
to elucidate this, demand "case studies": Case study 1. A single person making $30 K per year that rents an apartment. What did they pay in 2010 and what will they pay under Cain's proposed plan? Repeat for married couple with 2 kids and a house and a representative mortgage. Case study 2. A single person making $100 K per year that rents an apartment. What did they pay in 2010 and what will the pay under Cain's proposed plan? Repeat for married couple with 2 kids and a house and a representative mortgage. Case study 3. A single person making $2 million per year that rents an apartment. What did they pay in 2010 and what will the pay under Cain's proposed plan? Repeat for married couple with 2 kids and a house and a representative mortgage. My suspicion is that case studies 2 and 3 will benefit and case study 1 will suffer. Of course, Cain has already made a 9-0-9 amendment for those making less than the "poverty level". Perhaps he can complicate things to the extent of the IRS or greater with increased scrutiny?
Why do people insist to believe people who rent don't pay the property tax on the place? They pay the taxes someone else will/does benefit from. Just like corporate taxes are paid for by the consumers who pay 12-35% more for the merchandise they buy to pay those federally imposed taxes. The corporations then pocket the money after they use the tax code exemptions, breaks, loopholes, and grants to keep the money you as a consumer paid but have no access to once it has been extorted from you. Wait until the other exemptions start being introduced. Oh wait that won't happen because 9-9-9 is a campaign talking point. It will never take place.
Amusing, you persist in referring to the Tea Party with a term from porn movies, and stumble on the use of the accurate term "producers". You probably didn't read far enough to understand the context. Who is more dangerous, a kid afraid of the dark, or an adult afraid of the light? Back under your rock, the sun is coming up....
Unfortunately Herman doesn't understand that as much as we Americans hate being taxed it is the reason why we are the most advanced nation in the world. The protections (not just military) are designed to keep us safe to live our lives with reletively little fear keeping our minds open to exploration and advancement. Our government is failing us only because it has become to afraid to tell us the truth in fear of losing their jobs. Having the ability to hold every dollar you make is useless if the dollar itself is worthless.
The most dangerous person is an insecure ignoramus, and they way you tell that is when they use terms like "producer" to avoid discussing real issues about tax policy. **********s simply cannot address issue. All they can do is use talking points.
Producers..... Producers work for a living and make things. I am highly doubtful that the gamblers in stock and commodity markets produce much more than social anxiety and periodic economic calamity. As such, taxing the producers of social anxiety and economic calamity at high levels to discourage the production of these commodities does not seem like a bad idea to me. Since social anxiety and economic calamity are commodities with limited consumer demand their production should be discouraged, much like pollution and murder are discouraged by the imposition of high penalties. "You can still do it, but it will cost you."
Exactly. Case in point: all the stories about Enron when Bush was president.....but hardly anything on the front pages about Fast & Furious or Solyndra. The mainstream liberal press is bending over backwards.....AGAIN.....to protect Obama from his scandals, by not reporting on them. Where's the investigative reporting on THIS president?
It sounds great to only pay 9%, WHICH WE COULD AFFORD IF THE RICH PAID 90%! But 9-9-9 would only work if we had no social programs, which would be ridiculous.
You mean if the rich hadn't fleeced the country out of everything over the last 4-5 decades and jobs were not outsourced and capitalism was still alive and well, and pay/cost of living was comparable to what people actually earn and take home at every level, it might be a reasonable idea??
