Cains 9-9-9 plan,or Perry’s flat tax will devastate the economy

“failed to back up your contention that a flat tax would ruin this country”
Actually I did explain it in plain English, if your not smart enough to underatnd then I’m not going to bother to repeat myself over and over.

You should also know that republicans in Arizona tried a flat tax, and despite the fact that Arizona is one of the most conservative states in the country, it angered so many voters, including the majority of conservative voters, that they couldn’t drop it fast enough.
In fact one could say the feedback on that little plan just about sounded a political Brown note in Phoenix, Flat-tax proposal dropped for now and I predict in a general election it’ll be a political Brown note for the campaign of whatever fool tries it.

No, you did not explain it. You spun a scenario based on nothing but your own opinion. Totally fact-free. I guess I don't understand Moron.
Arizona did not try a flat tax. There was a proposal to implement one that was not passed. It is hardly the same thing. Nor is that responsive to the idea of a flat tax working or not working. Every place one has been implemented, it is still in effect and working well.

A flat tax takes money out of the pockets of people who already cant afford the consumer goods they want and need for the sake of giving to a tiny minority of people who wont buy more consumer goods, because they have no need of more and make up such a small percentage of the population that their purchases of consumer goods wouldn’t impact the market anyway, in essence the buying power of 150,000 of the richest is outweighed many times over by the buying power of 150 million.

All the new ventures in the world aren’t going anywhere because there’s not enough economic activity to support them.

Not to mention that it’ll never get passed because all but the most die-hard minority of conservative voter will spit in your face for trying. In other words what fly’s in a primary won’t fly in a general election, and if you try you might as well be throwing said election.

No, fantasy is not argument. A flat tax does not take money out of people's pockets any more than any other tax. Less, actually. For low income earners there is an exemption so they have no money taken out of their pockets.
It isn't about buying power. Forget that.
Flat tax first off yields dividends right away in its simplicity. How much money is spent in this country on tax prep every year? Almost all of that will be saved and available for more productive uses. How much inefficiency comes about because the best way to do something often incurs the most tax? This gets rid of that. Flat tax encourages people earning lots of money to earn even more. Their economic activity spurs other activity. No, it isn't about rich people buying yachts. There is much more there.

As for your contention that it wont pass politically, we'll see. Almost everyone across the spectrum agrees our tax system is woefully outdated and riddled with inefficiency.
 
No, fantasy is not argument. A flat tax does not take money out of people's pockets any more than any other tax. Less, actually. For low income earners there is an exemption so they have no money taken out of their pockets.
Beware the flat-tax scheme, which rewards the rich and punishes the middle class

and I quote.

“According to the Arizona Department of Revenue, if the flat income tax bill introduced last session passes, 8 out of 9 Arizonans will see their taxes raised while the wealthiest 12 percent will get yet another tax cut.”


By the way Arizona is extremely conservative and this is according to the state department of revenue, so don’t try to claim any bias, and the Arizona daily star is a largely conservative paper often in lock step with fox news, so don’t try the old “liberal media” ploy either.

It isn't about buying power. Forget that.
And

“It also hurts the economy. 70 percent of an economy is generally consumer-based, driven by consumer spending of middle class families who will most likely turn around and spend it on food, gas, rent, medicine, et cetera.”

Flat tax first off yields dividends right away in its simplicity. How much money is spent in this country on tax prep every year? Almost all of that will be saved and available for more productive uses.
And the tax preparers that earn a living and spend money on goods and services? That’s really a none issue anyway, the real issue is that it lowers taxes on the upper 10% or so by raising them on everyone else.
How much inefficiency comes about because the best way to do something often incurs the most tax? This gets rid of that. Flat tax encourages people earning lots of money to earn even more. Their economic activity spurs other activity. No, it isn't about rich people buying yachts. There is much more there.
Yes, you already said it creates new venture capital, we talked about that already. Without the economic activity to support new ventures they will fail because the number of new ventures in the market can’t enter fast enough to spur consumer spending. The necessary consumer spending to support new ventures must exist first.
As for your contention that it wont pass politically, we'll see. Almost everyone across the spectrum agrees our tax system is woefully outdated and riddled with inefficiency.

Well that’s all about how you ask the poll question isn’t it. Ask voters if they think the tax code is outdated and inefficient and the vast majority will say yes, ask the voters if they want their taxes raised so the wealthiest can have a break and see what answer you get.
I think the most common answer will be… hell no!

And if you don’t believe that, check these out.

Flat-tax proposal dropped for now

Sponsor says Arizona flat tax bill dead

Republicans would hurt working poor with flat-tax plan

and now Perry’s poll numbers are down the drain, in the basement, and headed for Australia. Hmmm gee.
 
Opinion pieces...

Wrong, one op/ed and two stories. And the numbers in the op/ed where gleaned from valid sources, such as the Arizona department of revenue. Why would Jan Brewers own agency lie to hurt a conservative tax plan.
 
Now that I think about it I’ll just lets this drop because it’s a really dumb idea and if Perry’s other policies look like that I would prefer he not even look at pictures of the oval office.
 
Now that I think about it, Cain’s plan is really just a flat tax by another name isn’t it?
 
Now that I think about it, Cain’s plan is really just a flat tax by another name isn’t it?
That would be a first for you.

So do you get paid to undermine the best interests of the United States of America with every post, or is it just fun for you to betray your country?

Do you make this shit up or just write what the voices in your head tell you?

You are possibly the most ignorant poster here, although I admit competition is rough. You cannot frame an argumetn and defend it, not if your life depended on it. You throw in irrelevance as though it is proof and then when called failed to answer for it.
 
In a related story, which can be found here Americans spending more with income almost flat it’s clear that there are those who would undermine efforts to recover the economy in favor of supporting the agenda of the wealthy, even when that agenda is not in the best interest of the nation as a whole. This article which was released by the associated press yesterday stands as a fine example of conservative spin doctoring intended to mislead the public into favoring conservative economic policies when in fact those policies are fundamentally flawed.

First, this article states that

“Under normal circumstances, that would be a troubling sign for the economy. But a closer look at some new government figures suggests another possibility: People are saving less money because they're earning next to nothing in interest.”
This is false. If one examines the figures, one will see that income has remained flat for years while expenses have risen dramatically due to the skyrocketing cost of fuel. Not only do households need to buy gas for their cars, which is more expensive than ever, the cost of fuel has driven up prices of everything from food and clothing to diapers. This has left the entire lower 50% of earners (who make only 12.7% of income) with little to no disposable income to save.

The article then goes on to say.

“Critics say the Fed is punishing those who play by the rules - those careful enough to set aside money for savings or people who built up a nest egg and are living on fixed incomes that depend on interest.”
Clearly this was stated to support the conservative agenda aimed at abolishing the fed, which is solely to eliminated or undermine regulations in the financial sector. In reality the reductions in interest rates were intended to reduce the long term cost of loans in hopes of spurring investment in new job creating ventures. This failed however because of the lack of sufficient economic activity to support such ventures, those who invest thusly know well that any such venture will likely fail in this economy and therefore is a poor investment.

This article further states that.

“Americans spent 0.6 percent more in September, three times the increase from the previous month, the government said Friday. Spending was especially strong on durable goods - things like cars, appliances and electronics.”

“At the same time, what they earned was mostly flat. Pay increased 0.3 percent, and overall income just 0.1 percent. After deducting taxes and adjusting for inflation, income fell for a third straight month.”

“So to make up the difference, many have cut back on savings. The savings rate fell to its lowest level since December 2007, the first month of the recession - and right about the time the Fed started its dramatic series of interest-rate cuts.”

This may well be the most nauseating example of spin doctoring I have had the misfortune of reading in some time. First and foremost an increase of 0.6% is hardly the massive, robust, rocketship-to-the-moon increase that the authors try to play it off as. Furthermore the fact that this increase occurred in September and coincided with a slight decrease in the rate of saving plainly shows that this minor increase is the result of a relatively small portion of the population trying to beat the rush of the official start of the holiday shopping season on November 1st. Additionally, the fact that the data shows that it’s the result of money being taken from peoples meager savings shows the increase in consumer spending to be unsustainable.
As money from savings is spent, a percentage is siphoned off by the top earners who profit from economic activity, as such as the money circulates in the economy it reduces with every cycle through retail businesses and gets diverted to Wall Street, where it fuels stock price increases that are not related to a real increase in economic activity. Such overvaluations are known as stock bubbles and have a destabilizing effect on the economy as they depend on investors’ perceptions of what the market will do in the future, not on sustainable growth. As such perceptions change, stock bubbles rise then burst, hence market instability.

The only way to produce sustainable growth in the market and thereby produce jobs is too substantially increase economic activity, and the only way to do that in this market is to increase consumer spending by increasing the income of those whose budgets are constrained by a lack of disposable income.

What truly disgusts me is that these figures are in fact “a troubling sign for the economy”, but conservatives are so blinded by their own greed and so manipulated by the blind greed of their campaign contributors , that they are willing to push economic policies and tax plans that will have disastrous consequences for the economy without regard to the harm those policies will cause this country, the world that depends on our economy, and thereby ultimately, harms the very wealthy people that they are trying to appeal to.

Me doth think “the emperor is naked”.
 
Last edited:
Do you ever get tired of repeating drivel?

Do you ever get tired of supporting a donkey in an elephant costume? At least Bachmann has some substance; Perry’s a laugh and his campaigns going down the tubes about as fast as hers.

Why don’t you support a real presidential hopeful and let him fail alone?
 
Do you ever get tired of repeating drivel?

Do you ever get tired of supporting a donkey in an elephant costume? At least Bachmann has some substance; Perry’s a laugh and his campaigns going down the tubes about as fast as hers.

Why don’t you support a real presidential hopeful and let him fail alone?

See, there you go deflecting again.
Perry is an excellent candidate. ALl the media stories against him shows how scared they are of him.
 
Do you ever get tired of repeating drivel?

Do you ever get tired of supporting a donkey in an elephant costume? At least Bachmann has some substance; Perry’s a laugh and his campaigns going down the tubes about as fast as hers.

Why don’t you support a real presidential hopeful and let him fail alone?

See, there you go deflecting again.
Perry is an excellent candidate. ALl the media stories against him shows how scared they are of him.

I see what you mean; he’s so scary even the voters are afraid. :lol:
 
Do you ever get tired of supporting a donkey in an elephant costume? At least Bachmann has some substance; Perry’s a laugh and his campaigns going down the tubes about as fast as hers.

Why don’t you support a real presidential hopeful and let him fail alone?

See, there you go deflecting again.
Perry is an excellent candidate. ALl the media stories against him shows how scared they are of him.

I see what you mean; he’s so scary even the voters are afraid. :lol:

There has been no voting as of yet.
You really are a loser, aren't you?
 
See, there you go deflecting again.
Perry is an excellent candidate. ALl the media stories against him shows how scared they are of him.

I see what you mean; he’s so scary even the voters are afraid. :lol:

There has been no voting as of yet.
You really are a loser, aren't you?

Oh so all those polls showing his numbers in the toilet are just meaningless. Oh of course he’s going to win somehow when the majority of voters don’t support him. Why, Perry’s a veritable Harry Potter who will magically conjure votes from his arse with a wave of his +3 Charmed Long Staff. :lol:
 
Last edited:
What? Nothing else to say? Oh well I gotta go take a leak anyway. laters
 
I see what you mean; he’s so scary even the voters are afraid. :lol:

There has been no voting as of yet.
You really are a loser, aren't you?

Oh so all those polls showing his numbers in the toilet are just meaningless. Oh of course he’s going to win somehow when the majority of voters don’t support him. Why, Perry’s a veritable Harry Potter who will magically conjure votes from his arse with a wave of his +3 Charmed Long Staff. :lol:

Yes, they are meaningless.
Any other questions, turd-breath?
 
There has been no voting as of yet.
You really are a loser, aren't you?

Oh so all those polls showing his numbers in the toilet are just meaningless. Oh of course he’s going to win somehow when the majority of voters don’t support him. Why, Perry’s a veritable Harry Potter who will magically conjure votes from his arse with a wave of his +3 Charmed Long Staff. :lol:

Yes, they are meaningless.
Any other questions, turd-breath?

Look, if you need any more proof that conservative economic policies are fundamentally flawed, you need only take a look at china. The increase in earnings in China of the lowest wage earners as a result of the manufacturing of goods for export to the United States has resulted in an economic boon for the Chinese economy. That's why American service companies like Mc Donald's and KFC have focused their expansion plans on the Chinese market, because the lower earning, higher percentage portion of the population has more disposable income that their eager to spend on things that would have been expensive luxuries before.

Conservatives argue that undermining Unions to prevent them from negotiating fair wages will give more money to the rich, and that this combined with endless tax cuts will spur investment in job creating ventures, but because there's insufficient economic activity do to stagnant consumer spending here in the U.S, those job creating ventures will be in places like china and India (the countries our manufacturing has been moved too because of the sweetheart trade deals our elected officials have given them as a result of the efforts of corporate lobbyist!).

Don't misunderstand. I'm glad the people of china, India, Taiwan and so forth are getting some of the good-life thanks to those American jobs. But the economy of those countries and much of the world depends on our economy, and our economy is not going to recover until we get some of those job creating ventures. In order for jobs to be created here we must have an increase in consumer spending and that can only come from an increase in the earnings of the lower 50% of earners.
 

Forum List

Back
Top