Not Good After All! Cain’s “999 Plan To Raise Taxes On 84 Percent

[Bass v 2.0]

Herman Cain's "9-9-9 Plan" To Raise Taxes On 84 Percent | News One

The Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank, says low- and middle-income families would be hit hardest, with households making between $10,000 and $20,000 seeing their taxes increase by nearly 950 percent.

“You’re talking a $2,700 tax increase for people with incomes between $10,000 and $20,000,” said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center. “That’s huge.”

Households with the highest incomes, however, would get big tax cuts. Those making more than $1 million a year would see their taxes cut nearly in half, on average, according to the analysis.

Among those in the middle, households making between $40,000 and $50,000 would see their taxes increase by an average of $4,400, the report said. Those making between $50,000 and $75,000 would see their annual tax bill go up by an average of $4,326.

“It’s very, very regressive compared to the current system, and that’s largely because we’re exempting capital gains, and we’re taxing your spending with the sales tax,” Williams said. “People at the top end don’t spend all their money and they get a lot of capital gains, so they are doing pretty well here.”

One would expect Caintard to release his own research showing how his 9-9-9 plan would not shift a bigger burden on lower income earners but he hasn't done so and is playing the victim card.

 

[BDBoop]

"After all?" Dems and economists have been saying that since the day he presented.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

"After all?" Dems and economists have been saying that since the day he presented.

Cain is financed and owned by his overseers and slavemsters, the Koch brothers, his credibility is gone.

 

[Zoom-boing]

It seems to me that with this plan those who currently pay nothing would now be required to pay their fair share while those who are currently paying for themselves, as well as for those who pay nothing, would now be required to only pay their fair share (hence the 'big tax cuts on the rich').

I thought Obama said that everyone needs to pay their fair share?

 

[Full-Auto]

It seems to me that with this plan those who currently pay nothing would now be required to pay their fair share while those who are currently paying for themselves, as well as for those who pay nothing, would now be required to only pay their fair share (hence the 'big tax cuts on the rich').

I thought Obama said that everyone needs to pay their fair share?

 

[Bass v 2.0]

It seems to me that with this plan those who currently pay nothing would now be required to pay their fair share while those who are currently paying for themselves, as well as for those who pay nothing, would now be required to only pay their fair share (hence the 'big tax cuts on the rich').

I thought Obama said that everyone needs to pay their fair share?

it seems to me that you don't understand jack crap, this plan will simply shift more of a tax burden, not a *FAIR* burden on lower income earners, earth to Zoom-boing-earth to Zoom-boing, please take off the retard hat.

 

[The T]

It seems to me that with this plan those who currently pay nothing would now be required to pay their fair share while those who are currently paying for themselves, as well as for those who pay nothing, would now be required to only pay their fair share (hence the 'big tax cuts on the rich').

I thought Obama said that everyone needs to pay their fair share?

he only meant the so-called rich. Only fools buy into a campaign by this president based on class warfare. And that's all he has. Pitting Americans against themselves as he smugly stands back and plays referee.

 

[Zoom-boing]

It seems to me that with this plan those who currently pay nothing would now be required to pay their fair share while those who are currently paying for themselves, as well as for those who pay nothing, would now be required to only pay their fair share (hence the 'big tax cuts on the rich').

I thought Obama said that everyone needs to pay their fair share?

it seems to me that you don't understand jack crap, this plan will simply shift more of a tax burden, not a *FAIR* burden on lower income earners, earth to Zoom-boing-earth to Zoom-boing, please take off the retard hat.

Of course it will. Because a huge percentage of people currently have someone else footing the bill for them. Now they would have to foot their own bill.

One group paying a big percent while another group pays zero percent is fair but everyone paying the same percent isn't fair? Is that that liberal math I've heard about?

Obama said everyone should pay their fair share. Or was that a lie?

btw, you can knock off the insults. It makes you look like a petulant asshat.

 

[BDBoop]

"After all?" Dems and economists have been saying that since the day he presented.

Cain is financed and owned by his overseers and slavemsters, the Koch brothers, his credibility is gone.

Exactly. The internet is going to be the downfall of the Kochroaches. Now that somebody has turned on the light, they're going to spend the rest of their lives scurrying for the dark, ugly corners.

 

[JimH52]

Well then, that is exactly what the GOP wants to accomplish. If they can overtax the middle class, then the rich and affluent can prosper. You know, they are the "job creators." HA!

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Of course the article in the OP is complete horseshit...but I imagine no matter how hard he thinks why - he will never get at how glaringly obvious that it leaves out some really big pieces of information.

 

[Full-Auto]

Well then, that is exactly what the GOP wants to accomplish. If they can overtax the middle class, then the rich and affluent can prosper. You know, they are the "job creators." HA!

CLASSIC



SOMEONE ELSE SHOULD PAY..NOT ME!!!!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"After all?" Dems and economists have been saying that since the day he presented.

True, the fact remains that the ‘plan’ was ill-conceived by an unqualified candidate and his handlers.