Herman Cains plan? 9-9-9 For those that hate it

[Ame®icano]

 

[NYcarbineer]

How do you get elected on a tax plan that raises taxes on the poor and cuts taxes for the Rich?

Where do the votes come from?

 

[Ame®icano]

How do you get elected on a tax plan that raises taxes on the poor and cuts taxes for the Rich?

Where do the votes come from?

CainTaxes - YouTube

So, give us the numbers.

 

[kiwiman127]

5 pages and still no coherent dissent from the left beyond its too simple and can't work. You guys are lookin pretty sad.

Form a real argument and hit me with it.

Well Grampa, I've posted the same post on two boards and asked for someone who is from the far right to dispute my post. And in 24 hours, no takers.
You can't label me as being from the left because I agree with various points from the right, (as well the left). I am a moderate Independent, I represent Main Street America more than anything. And like Main Street America, I'm very, very disappointed with Obama, The Dems and the GOP. I might vote for Romney if he's the GOP nominee but I prefer Huntsman because he comes very close to my beliefs.
The problem you have with this thread is, you got what you asked for and you were set to disagree with the answers anyway. Exactly, what was your point of starting this thread anyway?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

5 pages and still no coherent dissent from the left beyond its too simple and can't work. You guys are lookin pretty sad.

Form a real argument and hit me with it.

:Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh:

it would be the most regressive tax in history; It wouldn't raise enough revenue; He has not the slightest fucking clue how he would even begin to implement it... et al, et al..

But I'm telling you, it would be much more productive to show you that it's a pathetic, gimmicky joke that's not really worthy of debate.

So because someone says it won't work and then tops it off with Cain is an idiot that's clueless I'm suddenly supposed to change my mind?

Fail hard friend.

I gave you circumstances under which the tax could be adjusted to protect the indigent. Try again?

 

[candycorn]

Quit shakin' that stink finger...

Get that finger out of your ear...you don't know where that finger has been!!!

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

5 pages and still no coherent dissent from the left beyond its too simple and can't work. You guys are lookin pretty sad.

Form a real argument and hit me with it.

Well Grampa, I've posted the same post on two boards and asked for someone who is from the far right to dispute my post. And in 24 hours, no takers.
You can't label me as being from the left because I agree with various points from the right, (as well the left). I am a moderate Independent, I represent Main Street America more than anything. And like Main Street America, I'm very, very disappointed with Obama, The Dems and the GOP. I might vote for Romney if he's the GOP nominee but I prefer Huntsman because he comes very close to my beliefs.
The problem you have with this thread is, you got what you asked for and you were set to disagree with the answers anyway. Exactly, what was your point of starting this thread anyway?

The point of this thread was to show that partisan talking points don't equate to facts and that his plan could be made to work.

I thought I made that pretty obvious in the very first post.

 

[candycorn]

5 pages and still no coherent dissent from the left beyond its too simple and can't work. You guys are lookin pretty sad.

Form a real argument and hit me with it.

:Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh:

it would be the most regressive tax in history; It wouldn't raise enough revenue; He has not the slightest fucking clue how he would even begin to implement it... et al, et al..

But I'm telling you, it would be much more productive to show you that it's a pathetic, gimmicky joke that's not really worthy of debate.

So because someone says it won't work and then tops it off with Cain is an idiot that's clueless I'm suddenly supposed to change my mind?

Fail hard friend.

I gave you circumstances under which the tax could be adjusted to protect the indigent. Try again?

I may have missed your answer:

If you accept the GOP narrative that 47% of Americans pay no federal income tax, wouldn't this 9-9-9 plan then represent a tax increase on the 150,000,000+ Americans who currently supposedly are getting a free ride from Uncle Sam?

Don't mean to be redundant...but I didn't see where you answered that question from
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/189503-herman-cains-plan-9-9-9-for-those-that-hate-it-4.html#post4272396

 

[kiwiman127]

5 pages and still no coherent dissent from the left beyond its too simple and can't work. You guys are lookin pretty sad.

Form a real argument and hit me with it.

Well Grampa, I've posted the same post on two boards and asked for someone who is from the far right to dispute my post. And in 24 hours, no takers.
You can't label me as being from the left because I agree with various points from the right, (as well the left). I am a moderate Independent, I represent Main Street America more than anything. And like Main Street America, I'm very, very disappointed with Obama, The Dems and the GOP. I might vote for Romney if he's the GOP nominee but I prefer Huntsman because he comes very close to my beliefs.
The problem you have with this thread is, you got what you asked for and you were set to disagree with the answers anyway. Exactly, what was your point of starting this thread anyway?

The point of this thread was to show that partisan talking points don't equate to facts and that his plan could be made to work.

I thought I made that pretty obvious in the very first post.

What isn't factual about my initial post? It's very simple scenario displayed math in conjunction with Cain's plan as described by him and statistics from the Department of Labor. I have only seen financial experts concur with my statements and yet to see an opposing position by an economist from the right.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

:Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh:



But I'm telling you, it would be much more productive to show you that it's a pathetic, gimmicky joke that's not really worthy of debate.

So because someone says it won't work and then tops it off with Cain is an idiot that's clueless I'm suddenly supposed to change my mind?

Fail hard friend.

I gave you circumstances under which the tax could be adjusted to protect the indigent. Try again?

I may have missed your answer:

If you accept the GOP narrative that 47% of Americans pay no federal income tax, wouldn't this 9-9-9 plan then represent a tax increase on the 150,000,000+ Americans who currently supposedly are getting a free ride from Uncle Sam?

Don't mean to be redundant...but I didn't see where you answered that question from
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/189503-herman-cains-plan-9-9-9-for-those-that-hate-it-4.html#post4272396

Yes it would be technically. Finally everyone would contribute to the support of our nation rather than reaping the rewards paid for by the other half. And yes I did answer a question similar to yours earlier.

 

[BenNatuf]

5 pages and still no coherent dissent from the left beyond its too simple and can't work. You guys are lookin pretty sad.

Form a real argument and hit me with it.

How about one from the right?

1. The idea of having both a sales tax and an income tax simultaneously at a federal level should be anethema to conservatives. Unless of course the idea of instituting new taxes is now in vogue.

2. Regardless of whether or not its "fair" which is a strictly liberal argument about taxes it will increase the tax burden on just about everyone from the middle of the middle class and below. It won't have much effect on those up to about upper middle class level and will be a major tax cut for those above that. I don't want to increase taxes on ANYBODY, which is what I thought being "conservative" entailed.

3. The "Flat business tax" may as well be called the small business destruction act, as excluding COL from allowable deductions from revenue will result in a MAJOR tax increase for small business' that have most of their revenue invested in labor.

4. How is charging people in detroit (empowerment zones) less in federal taxes than people in charlotte a "good thing"? By what constitutional mechanism does the federal government have any power to change the tax rates for people based on thier geography?

5. Since the courts have found that for business' income=profit, how does excluding costs like COL from the deductable computation from revenue to figure profit, and therefor income, square constitutionally?

9-9-9 is 9-9-nonsence. It is not well thought out, it is not a good plan, and it is not "conservative" in any way. I do support reform for broader, flatter and lower tax rates, I will not support any "change" and "hope" for the best because I don't like the current system, thats what happened in 2008 and so far... it ain't worked out real well.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

How do you get elected on a tax plan that raises taxes on the poor and cuts taxes for the Rich?

Where do the votes come from?

Republicans.

The point of this thread was to show that partisan talking points don't equate to facts and that his plan could be made to work.

The irony of this, of course, is your advocacy of the plan is predicated on partisanism.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Well Grampa, I've posted the same post on two boards and asked for someone who is from the far right to dispute my post. And in 24 hours, no takers.
You can't label me as being from the left because I agree with various points from the right, (as well the left). I am a moderate Independent, I represent Main Street America more than anything. And like Main Street America, I'm very, very disappointed with Obama, The Dems and the GOP. I might vote for Romney if he's the GOP nominee but I prefer Huntsman because he comes very close to my beliefs.
The problem you have with this thread is, you got what you asked for and you were set to disagree with the answers anyway. Exactly, what was your point of starting this thread anyway?

The point of this thread was to show that partisan talking points don't equate to facts and that his plan could be made to work.

I thought I made that pretty obvious in the very first post.

What isn't factual about my initial post? It's very simple scenario displayed math in conjunction with Cain's plan as described by him and statistics from the Department of Labor. I have only seen financial experts concur with my statements and yet to see an opposing position by an economist from the right.

Father of Supply Side Economics Supports Cain's '9-9-9' Plan - HUMAN EVENTS

 

[The T]

5 pages and still no coherent dissent from the left beyond its too simple and can't work. You guys are lookin pretty sad.

Form a real argument and hit me with it.

How about one from the right?

1. The idea of having both a sales tax and an income tax simultaneously at a federal level should be anethema to conservatives. Unless of course the idea of instituting new taxes is now in vogue.

2. Regardless of whether or not its "fair" which is a strictly liberal argument about taxes it will increase the tax burden on just about everyone from the middle of the middle class and below. It won't have much effect on those up to about upper middle class level and will be a major tax cut for those above that. I don't want to increase taxes on ANYBODY, which is what I thought being "conservative" entailed.

3. The "Flat business tax" may as well be called the small business destruction act, as excluding COL from allowable deductions from revenue will result in a MAJOR tax increase for small business' that have most of their revenue invested in labor.

4. How is charging people in detroit (empowerment zones) less in federal taxes than people in charlotte a "good thing"? By what constitutional mechanism does the federal government have any power to change the tax rates for people based on thier geography?

5. Since the courts have found that for business' income=profit, how does excluding costs like COL from the deductable computation from revenue to figure profit, and therefor income, square constitutionally?

9-9-9 is 9-9-nonsence. It is not well thought out, it is not a good plan, and it is not "conservative" in any way. I do support reform for broader, flatter and lower tax rates, I will not support any "change" and "hope" for the best because I don't like the current system, thats what happened in 2008 and so far... it ain't worked out real well.

So just keep applying bandaids to a patient already in a full body cast?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

5 pages and still no coherent dissent from the left beyond its too simple and can't work. You guys are lookin pretty sad.

Form a real argument and hit me with it.

How about one from the right?

1. The idea of having both a sales tax and an income tax simultaneously at a federal level should be anethema to conservatives. Unless of course the idea of instituting new taxes is now in vogue.

2. Regardless of whether or not its "fair" which is a strictly liberal argument about taxes it will increase the tax burden on just about everyone from the middle of the middle class and below. It won't have much effect on those up to about upper middle class level and will be a major tax cut for those above that. I don't want to increase taxes on ANYBODY, which is what I thought being "conservative" entailed.

3. The "Flat business tax" may as well be called the small business destruction act, as excluding COL from allowable deductions from revenue will result in a MAJOR tax increase for small business' that have most of their revenue invested in labor.

4. How is charging people in detroit (empowerment zones) less in federal taxes than people in charlotte a "good thing"? By what constitutional mechanism does the federal government have any power to change the tax rates for people based on thier geography?

5. Since the courts have found that for business' income=profit, how does excluding costs like COL from the deductable computation from revenue to figure profit, and therefor income, square constitutionally?

9-9-9 is 9-9-nonsence. It is not well thought out, it is not a good plan, and it is not "conservative" in any way. I do support reform for broader, flatter and lower tax rates, I will not support any "change" and "hope" for the best because I don't like the current system, thats what happened in 2008 and so far... it ain't worked out real well.

1. 9+9 is far less than I'm taxed now with only the income tax.

2. Of course its an increase on the lower half that currently pay no taxes. And I'm not sure how you consider yourself a conservative if you don't think everyone should bare the responsibility of contributing to our society.

3. I own a small business and would welcome the stability of a tax plan like this. A flat rate is something that can easily be incorporated into the cost of doing business.

4. What does this shit have to do with 9-9-9?

5. Couldn't care less what some court says. Congress passes laws not our courts. A judgement based on previous tax law would be null.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

How do you get elected on a tax plan that raises taxes on the poor and cuts taxes for the Rich?

Where do the votes come from?

Republicans.

The point of this thread was to show that partisan talking points don't equate to facts and that his plan could be made to work.

The irony of this, of course, is your advocacy of the plan is predicated on partisanism.

My op is based in reality. The possibility of compromise. I fail to see partisanship.

 

[pgm]

1. 9+9 is far less than I'm taxed now with only the income tax.

Congrats. Does this include the tax increase of the new 9.1% sales tax?

2. Of course its an increase on the lower half that currently pay no taxes. And I'm not sure how you consider yourself a conservative if you don't think everyone should bare the responsibility of contributing to our society.

But surely you don't think people should have to pay taxes to the point of starvation? If you make less than $20K a year, should you pay 9% income tax + 9% sales tax?

3. I own a small business and would welcome the stability of a tax plan like this. A flat rate is something that can easily be incorporated into the cost of doing business.

How much would you be paying under the 9-9-9 plan? Keep in mind that you can't deduct the expense of labor or for purchases of any products made outside the United States. There's no word yet whether gasoline costs will be deductible since it's impossible to tell where the oil came from. Let's just say they're not. If you have a supplier, let's assume that supplier will pass the cost of transportation on to you.

I'm not sure what you do, so I don't want to assume too much. I don't know if you provide goods or services. I apologize if it's too personal to ask what your business takes in. On a side note, how many more people will you hire if your tax rate was 9% off the income minus the few deductions?

Edit: There's also a risk of a trade war igniting over Cain's plan. At the very least, it would violate WTO rules.

 

[The T]

1. 9+9 is far less than I'm taxed now with only the income tax.

Congrats. Does this include the tax increase of the new 9.1% sales tax?

2. Of course its an increase on the lower half that currently pay no taxes. And I'm not sure how you consider yourself a conservative if you don't think everyone should bare the responsibility of contributing to our society.

But surely you don't think people should have to pay taxes to the point of starvation? If you make less than $20K a year, should you pay 9% income tax + 9% sales tax?

3. I own a small business and would welcome the stability of a tax plan like this. A flat rate is something that can easily be incorporated into the cost of doing business.

How much would you be paying under the 9-9-9 plan? Keep in mind that you can't deduct the expense of labor or for purchases of any products made outside the United States. There's no word yet whether gasoline costs will be deductible since it's impossible to tell where the oil came from. Let's just say they're not. If you have a supplier, let's assume that supplier will pass the cost of transportation on to you.

I'm not sure what you do, so I don't want to assume too much. I don't know if you provide goods or services. I apologize if it's too personal to ask what your business takes in. On a side note, how many more people will you hire if your tax rate was 9% off the income minus the few deductions?

Edit: There's also a risk of a trade war igniting over Cain's plan. At the very least, it would violate WTO rules.

YOU need to get out of the box of thinking of the OLD system. I know it's hard for some of you...but at least try?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

1. 9+9 is far less than I'm taxed now with only the income tax.

Congrats. Does this include the tax increase of the new 9.1% sales tax?

2. Of course its an increase on the lower half that currently pay no taxes. And I'm not sure how you consider yourself a conservative if you don't think everyone should bare the responsibility of contributing to our society.

But surely you don't think people should have to pay taxes to the point of starvation? If you make less than $20K a year, should you pay 9% income tax + 9% sales tax?

3. I own a small business and would welcome the stability of a tax plan like this. A flat rate is something that can easily be incorporated into the cost of doing business.

How much would you be paying under the 9-9-9 plan? Keep in mind that you can't deduct the expense of labor or for purchases of any products made outside the United States. There's no word yet whether gasoline costs will be deductible since it's impossible to tell where the oil came from. Let's just say they're not. If you have a supplier, let's assume that supplier will pass the cost of transportation on to you.

I'm not sure what you do, so I don't want to assume too much. I don't know if you provide goods or services. I apologize if it's too personal to ask what your business takes in. On a side note, how many more people will you hire if your tax rate was 9% off the income minus the few deductions?

Edit: There's also a risk of a trade war igniting over Cain's plan. At the very least, it would violate WTO rules.

Read the op before you blindly attack. I clearly said their should be a trigger point to protect the indigent.

As far as my business goes I sell and install home remodeling products. At this point without all the details of its implimentation its hard to say exactly how the outcome will turn out. But I for one will not jump the gun and make broad based assumptions beyond the fact that this is a good starting point for "REAL" change.

 

[LilOlLady]

Pimp Daddy's 999 plan will put more money in the hands of Cain’s Government and in the hand of Fat Cats. Designed to give tax breaks to Fat Cats and hurt the elderly, poor and minorities. Elderly who has paid their dues will have to once again pay taxes. Back door raising taxes.