Cain tax plan shifts tax burden from the rich to the poor

[NYcarbineer]

Please explain the 'kookiness' that everyone should have to pay taxes.

Do you ask that of the people who want to get rid of the capital gains tax, or the corporate tax?

Call capital gains income and tax it like income. Problem solved. Corporations aren't people. Now explain why it is kooky that all PEOPLE should contribute to tax revenue you chicken shit.

Because poor people are poor.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I can live with the 9 9 9 thing except a 9 percent corporate tax rate? C'mon. Thats called a giveaway. I'm for lower tax rates, especially for the middle class. But 9 percent? Ok, fine with me. Then start gutting national defense as nothing, I mean nothing, should be protected from the cuts.

I could see lowering the corporate tax 5-8 percent to make our nation competitive against other nations, but I'd agree with the rest. I think if we could pull completely out of the middle east, we could cut at least a hundred billion from the defense budget per year.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

My problem is that by giving the government the power to impose a sales tax and an income tax at the same time will eventually lead to them taxing the entire system to sustain their favored programs. I want a cap on spending that forces cuts, and revenue restrictions that are impossible to skirt around.

QW, the devil is in the details. Unfortunately, debates are limited to x amount of time per response and the candidates never fully get to explain their ideas and policies. People hear the "pizza man" say he has a 9-9-9 deal where business and people each pay 9% and plus a 9% sales tax and then jump to say why it sounds dumb and won't work. Cain has thought the program thru and there is much more under the surface. He simply doesn't have time to explain it in detail during a debate and the media is too damned lazy to put enough information out to their customers for comparison and contrast. We end up having to do that individually thru our own personal research and lets face it, many Americans are too lazy to do that for themselves. Cain's plan calls for something like 2/3rd's or 3/4th's vote in Congress to increase any element of the tax. It isn't as simple as one party or the other having a simple majority changing it.

I do not think he has thought the problem through. Ignoring the logistical details of implementing a national sales tax, if it is actually implemented it will actually expand governmental control of commerce down to everything that is sold in the US, even things that do not cross state lines. This would effectively eliminate all arguments against the individual mandate, and expand federal power way past what it is now.

Sooner or later progressives and all the big government types are going to realize all the implications of 9-9-9 and jump on the band wagon.

as Bachmann said... the devil's in the details....
and upside down it becomes 6-6-6.....
omg!.....satan's number....!
...and his name is CAIN...!

 

[kiwiman127]

Actually, it places the burden on all equally.

No it doesn't.
The less money a family/individual makes, the higher the tax burden, thanks to the 9% Sales Tax. More and more Middle Class families/individuals are living check-to-check, thanks to flat wades that haven't kept up with inflation for the last three decades. Much of their expendable goes to necessities and many of those necessities would be taxable under Cain's tax plan.
According to the Department of Labor, a "typical average family" uses over 12% of their income for food. Now for simplicity, let's say their household income is the national average of $50,000. So, this family spends $6,000 on food in a year. With the 9% Sales Tax, they'll pay $540 in taxes on their food, that's a little over 1% of their income or now a total tax rate of 10%. A family whose household income of $250,000 also spends $6,000 for food and also pays out an extra $540 in taxes. That translates into .002% of their income, or now a total tax rate of 9.002% That purchase of a basic necessity translated into a almost a full 1% increase in the Middle Class's tax rate. But the wealthy family who is five times richer realized a .002% increase in their tax rate. Equality?
Now typically a family making $250,000 probably spends more on food than the family making $50,000. But to equal the sales tax's effect on their income, the wealthier family would have to spend the unrealistic total of $30,000 on food annually. Unless everyone in the family weighs 400 pounds, that's a whole lot of food.
The wealthy come no where near the spending totals of the Middle Class, when comes to spending as a percentage of their expendable income. Necessities spending makes up a higher percentage of a Middle Classes expendable income than it does for the wealthy.
I'm sorry, that placing "the burden of all equally" is not a truism at all.

 

[Bern80]

Do you ask that of the people who want to get rid of the capital gains tax, or the corporate tax?

Call capital gains income and tax it like income. Problem solved. Corporations aren't people. Now explain why it is kooky that all PEOPLE should contribute to tax revenue you chicken shit.

Because poor people are poor.

How much you make has nothing to do with what is fair. This is not the U S S R. 'From each according to his ability, to each according to his need' does not apply here. Our government needs a certain amount of money to provide protection of our basic freedom and basic levels of infrastructure. Supposedly ALL of us receive the benefits of that. How much any single one of us has or earns does not change the fact that certain benefits are held amongs all of us. Thus it is only fair that ALL of us contribute to them to some extent. How much you actually have is irrelevent.

 

[kwc57]

Actually, it places the burden on all equally.

No it doesn't.
The less money a family/individual makes, the higher the tax burden, thanks to the 9% Sales Tax. More and more Middle Class families/individuals are living check-to-check, thanks to flat wades that haven't kept up with inflation for the last three decades. Much of their expendable goes to necessities and many of those necessities would be taxable under Cain's tax plan.
According to the Department of Labor, a "typical average family" uses over 12% of their income for food. Now for simplicity, let's say their household income is the national average of $50,000. So, this family spends $6,000 on food in a year. With the 9% Sales Tax, they'll pay $540 in taxes on their food, that's a little over 1% of their income or now a total tax rate of 10%. A family whose household income of $250,000 also spends $6,000 for food and also pays out an extra $540 in taxes. That translates into .002% of their income, or now a total tax rate of 9.002% That purchase of a basic necessity translated into a almost a full 1% increase in the Middle Class's tax rate. But the wealthy family who is five times richer realized a .002% increase in their tax rate. Equality?
Now typically a family making $250,000 probably spends more on food than the family making $50,000. But to equal the sales tax's effect on their income, the wealthier family would have to spend the unrealistic total of $30,000 on food annually. Unless everyone in the family weighs 400 pounds, that's a whole lot of food.
The wealthy come no where near the spending totals of the Middle Class, when comes to spending as a percentage of their expendable income. Necessities spending makes up a higher percentage of a Middle Classes expendable income than it does for the wealthy.
I'm sorry, that placing "the burden of all equally" is not a truism at all.

Why is Bill Gates rich? Why is Steve Jobs rich....or was? Why is Warren Buffett rich? Why are poor people poor?

 

[Bern80]

If a poor person working at low wages gets food stamps, Medicaid, maybe some heat/energy assistance, etc.,

what's the point of then taxing that person?

You're then effectively taking away a portion of his assistance.

Why don't you just take away his food stamps, or his Medicaid?

I guess any response to this won't be forthcoming anytime soon.

Probably because it is a nonsensical statement and not remotely true. A person earning some type of income yet deemed low enough to qualify for assistance in the form of food stamps or medicaid. Is obviously receving far more benefit in have those things paid for by government than if he simply kept the tax money and tried to pay for them him/her self. The mere 9% being taken out of there check is relatively nothing when your checks are that small. Certainly not enough to cover an energy bill or health care.

 

[Claudette]

I guess because they are poor that they don't have to bear any of the fiscal burden of keeping the country running??

They can of course take all they need from the public largesse but don't have to contribute anything.

Good deal if you can get it.

 

[kiwiman127]

Actually, it places the burden on all equally.

No it doesn't.
The less money a family/individual makes, the higher the tax burden, thanks to the 9% Sales Tax. More and more Middle Class families/individuals are living check-to-check, thanks to flat wades that haven't kept up with inflation for the last three decades. Much of their expendable goes to necessities and many of those necessities would be taxable under Cain's tax plan.
According to the Department of Labor, a "typical average family" uses over 12% of their income for food. Now for simplicity, let's say their household income is the national average of $50,000. So, this family spends $6,000 on food in a year. With the 9% Sales Tax, they'll pay $540 in taxes on their food, that's a little over 1% of their income or now a total tax rate of 10%. A family whose household income of $250,000 also spends $6,000 for food and also pays out an extra $540 in taxes. That translates into .002% of their income, or now a total tax rate of 9.002% That purchase of a basic necessity translated into a almost a full 1% increase in the Middle Class's tax rate. But the wealthy family who is five times richer realized a .002% increase in their tax rate. Equality?
Now typically a family making $250,000 probably spends more on food than the family making $50,000. But to equal the sales tax's effect on their income, the wealthier family would have to spend the unrealistic total of $30,000 on food annually. Unless everyone in the family weighs 400 pounds, that's a whole lot of food.
The wealthy come no where near the spending totals of the Middle Class, when comes to spending as a percentage of their expendable income. Necessities spending makes up a higher percentage of a Middle Classes expendable income than it does for the wealthy.
I'm sorry, that placing "the burden of all equally" is not a truism at all.

Why is Bill Gates rich? Why is Steve Jobs rich....or was? Why is Warren Buffett rich? Why are poor people poor?

We're talking about the inequality of the Sales Tax on the Middle Class versus the wealthy. Did you even bother to read the post? I don't see the word "poor" in my post at all!!!
Refute my post.

 

[Claudette]

Why is it an inequality??

The rich are gonna buy more stuff than the middle class and the poor put together. The rich buy big ticket items and anythign that strikes their fancy. They will pay way more in taxes than either the middle class or the poor.

Did you ever meet a cheap rich person?? I haven't.

 

[Wiseacre]

I like the basic idea but would have to fiddle with the numbers a little bit and add some exemptions. There's a lot of people just getting by right now, living month to month. Adding a 9% tax on their food and energy bills is something they just couldn't handle. I would exempt food, clothing, and utility bills for starters, and if that means we need to raise the income tax rate from 9 to 12%, so be it.

 

[kiwiman127]

Why is it an inequality??

The rich are gonna buy more stuff than the middle class and the poor put together. The rich buy big ticket items and anythign that strikes their fancy. They will pay way more in taxes than either the middle class or the poor.

Did you ever meet a cheap rich person?? I haven't.

The wealthy are going to spend as much of their expendable income as the Middle Class!
Got proof?

 

[Claudette]

Got proof that they won't???

 

[kiwiman127]

Got proof that they won't???

The rich are harder to stimulate than the poor

"Doug Elmendorf notes that "increases in disposable income are likely to boost purchases more for lower-income than for higher-income households," and points to several papers on that issue, including one by Jonathan A. Parker and others titled "Consumer Spending and the Economic Stimulus Payments of 2008". Here's their comparison of how high and low earners spent those Bush-era $300-per-person stimulus checks:"Tax cuts: The rich are harder to stimulate than the poor | The Economist


There you go!

 

[grunt11b]

Typical Republican...

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Herman Cain has a plan to radically reform the nation's tax system and make things a lot simpler for taxpayers.

Problem is, it could end up adding to the deficit and shifting the tax burden away from the wealthy and onto the poor, according to some leading tax experts.

Cain, who's recently moved up in the polls to become one of the leading Republican presidential candidates, is basing much of his campaign on what he calls the 9-9-9 plan, which would get rid of almost all current taxes and replace them with a 9% flat tax on income, a 9% flat corporate tax and a 9% national sales tax.

Herman Cain's 9-9-9 tax plan: Break for the rich? - Oct. 11, 2011

Don't you want to pay your fair share? Hypocrite.

 

[pgm]

Call capital gains income and tax it like income. Problem solved. Corporations aren't people. Now explain why it is kooky that all PEOPLE should contribute to tax revenue you chicken shit.

Here's a random idea: Replace the corporate tax with an inescapable franchise tax (similar to many states) that is lower than the current rate. Then, tax capital gains at the same rates as income. If you do that, you address four issues: 1) people who make money from capital investments paying lower taxes than those who make money from income, 2) it lessens the double taxation of capital gains (at the corporate rate and capital gains rate), 3) America's high corporate tax rate and 4) companies using tax dodges to avoid paying corporate tax rates.

I think this will work best as a part of a comprehensive tax code reform. Anyway, liberals and conservatives, any thoughts why this will or will not work?

 

[kiwiman127]

Typical Republican...

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Herman Cain has a plan to radically reform the nation's tax system and make things a lot simpler for taxpayers.

Problem is, it could end up adding to the deficit and shifting the tax burden away from the wealthy and onto the poor, according to some leading tax experts.

Cain, who's recently moved up in the polls to become one of the leading Republican presidential candidates, is basing much of his campaign on what he calls the 9-9-9 plan, which would get rid of almost all current taxes and replace them with a 9% flat tax on income, a 9% flat corporate tax and a 9% national sales tax.

Herman Cain's 9-9-9 tax plan: Break for the rich? - Oct. 11, 2011

Don't you want to pay your fair share? Hypocrite.

In this thread, I proved that the Middle Class will pay a higher overall tax rate than someone wealthy. This fact has been pointed out often.
Why people ignore reality, particularly when they are the victim just amazes me. We have people who post on these boards that want to pay more than their "fair share" because they are so infatuated with the wealthy?

 

[Mustang]

Actually, it places the burden on all equally.

No it doesn't.
The less money a family/individual makes, the higher the tax burden, thanks to the 9% Sales Tax. More and more Middle Class families/individuals are living check-to-check, thanks to flat wades that haven't kept up with inflation for the last three decades. Much of their expendable goes to necessities and many of those necessities would be taxable under Cain's tax plan.
According to the Department of Labor, a "typical average family" uses over 12% of their income for food. Now for simplicity, let's say their household income is the national average of $50,000. So, this family spends $6,000 on food in a year. With the 9% Sales Tax, they'll pay $540 in taxes on their food, that's a little over 1% of their income or now a total tax rate of 10%. A family whose household income of $250,000 also spends $6,000 for food and also pays out an extra $540 in taxes. That translates into .002% of their income, or now a total tax rate of 9.002% That purchase of a basic necessity translated into a almost a full 1% increase in the Middle Class's tax rate. But the wealthy family who is five times richer realized a .002% increase in their tax rate. Equality?
Now typically a family making $250,000 probably spends more on food than the family making $50,000. But to equal the sales tax's effect on their income, the wealthier family would have to spend the unrealistic total of $30,000 on food annually. Unless everyone in the family weighs 400 pounds, that's a whole lot of food.
The wealthy come no where near the spending totals of the Middle Class, when comes to spending as a percentage of their expendable income. Necessities spending makes up a higher percentage of a Middle Classes expendable income than it does for the wealthy.
I'm sorry, that placing "the burden of all equally" is not a truism at all.

Why is Bill Gates rich? Why is Steve Jobs rich....or was? Why is Warren Buffett rich? Why are poor people poor?

Let me guess. Social Darwinism?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

So according to the title of this thread Chris admits that......

THE RICH BARE THE BURDEN OF TAXES IN THIS COUNTRY.


Thanks for finally admitting it.

 

[kiwiman127]

Well, I was kinda hoping that someone who supports Cain's 9-9-9 and who is also Middle Class explain why they have no problem paying at a higher overall tax rate when including the 9% Sales Tax.
I'll wait.