Skip to comments.Raisin' [a Few Issues for the Purpose of Honestly Vetting Herman] Cain!
Posted on 10/16/2011 2:32:45 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
"I'm the only problem-solver in the group," Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain told Mike Huckabee in an August Fox News appearance. Well, many candidates bill themselves as problem-solvers. In fact, if we asked any candidate running for any office in the entire country, practically every one would likely define him- or herself as able to solve problems. Yet we know that politicians, as a rule, create and worsen problems rather than fix them.
.....Overconfidence turns the hopeful campaign pronouncements of otherwise successful people into dismal policy. In the end, Americans usually end up with more laws, less freedom, and no money.
The question is what type of problem-solver Cain will be as president......
Examining Herman Cain's record leaves serious questions about which type of problem-solver he is. In a column published October 20, 2008, Cain blamed conservatives' "economic illiteracy" for their opposition to the freshly passed Trouble Assets Relief Program.
"Wake up people!" admonished Cain with typical candor. "Owning a part of the major banks in America is not a bad thing. We could make a profit while solving a problem." Cain goes on to defend Treasury's decision to post-legislatively change TARP to buy preferred stock in banks rather than toxic mortgages. "You got a problem with that?" asks Cain. Apparently he didn't.
Cain reassures "free market purists" that the Treasury's stock purchase is "not nationalization because that would require government to own at least 51% of the entity for an indefinite period of time." (This is a relief, because some of us thought that government would use this foot in the door to force mergers, control salaries, and set lending rules. Oh, wait...)...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
SS and savings are taxed now! Everytime you buy something or get a service you are taxed an average of 22% in hidden tax and that is before adding state sales tax.
If consumption drives capitalism wouldn’t a consumption tax stymie spending?
I think Cain is FOS
"Rick Perry is an imbecile. I don't think he's capable of thinking on his own."
His supporters try to cover it by saying he is not a great debater but the truth is he is not a great anything.
Unfortunately his supporters seem to demonstrate the same traits in their transparent trashing of Cain.
Not true. Read the mans plan.
>> The only way to justify that statement is to ignore the free market which inevitably lowers prices through competition.
Looking at the economy as a whole, if there are to be tax savings to business with which to lower prices (pressured by competition), then the net amount of taxes extracted from the economy must decrease.
Cain’s plan, being revenue neutral, does *not* decrease the net portion of GDP that goes to government.
No one has explained where this price-lowering savings will come from. Yes, corporate taxes may decrease, but other costs will go up to compensate. They HAVE to, if the plan really IS revenue neutral.
Therefore I can’t believe across-the-board price cuts will actually happen. The only way to give business a break is to cut NET taxes, cut government SPENDING and reduce burdensome regulations. Cain’s gimmick, while it’s an effective “brand” for him, doesn’t quite connect these dots for me.
OTOH, I would like to see the global warming crap buried 10 feet underground the way Perry wants to do. He believes there is an important role for green, but not for subsidized green energy (except for R&D).
Yes, Yes, all I do I bash Cain LoL
I have some serious issues with Mr Cain is that acceptable to you?
OK. No problem. First, you have to define income.
Does it include capital gains? Interest income?
The current system has thousands of pages devoted to defining what is income and what is not.
All this before you get to deductions. What is deductible?
My point is that either the Fair Tax or Flat Tax will still be subject to all sorts of discussion, debate, challenges, hate, etc.
Both systems are superior to our current system, but both will be opposed by those who are embedded into our current system, including conservatives.
The bottom line is that no system will be perfect. No system will eliminate fraud, black markets, abuse, etc. No system will stop a future Congress from raising rates and playing shenanigans with deductions, definitions, etc.
However, by moving towards a simpler system that makes everyone pay something into the gov't, we move away from the current approach that is creating a majority of non-taxpayers who can vote themselves benefits.
“Everytime you buy something or get a service you are taxed an average of 22% in hidden tax and that is before adding state sales tax.”
That is just like the “saved or created jobs”, it can’t be measured and is nothing but spin.
Capitalism is driven by capital which requires deferred consumption. If someone consumes, that capital is gone and can't be invested.
>> That is just like the saved or created jobs, it cant be measured and is nothing but spin.
:-0 YOU BROKE THE CODE! You dog!
Yeah, the EPA and environmentalists are after his scalp.
I believe Gov. Perry’s full economic speech will be Oct 25th.
Hows that 401K working for ya?
Dont forget, you get to pay taxes on that and then Hermans gonna tax it again!
The way I read it there will only be a 9% max tax on withdrawls from a 401 since those withdrawls are treated as normal income. Depending on how I spend or what I buy there may only be an additional 9% on those purchases. Even if I end up getting the full hit on some items it’s still cheaper than the rate I will pay now on normal withdrawl.
You can count on this....
Under Cains plan your sales tax will go up %9 and the FEDs will be on you for it.
You can start by pointing to a written Perry plan. I have listened for 1/2 hour now and Perry is just spouting rhetoric against Obama’s war on energy. I agree with the rhetoric, but I want more specifics especially on taxes.
As a conservative who likes both Cain and Perry, wish I could be here to interact in this conversation.
Questions regarding policy are legitimate and we should look at both candidates to see who is the best conservative to defeat Romney.
Looking forward to reading this when I get back from my son’s Fall Ball Wood Bat league Doubleheader.
Since you brought up the 401 need I remind you that the money in there has yet to be taxed?
The reason his plan is revenue neutral is because you get the 47% of americans that are not paying taxes to pay taxes. Thats not including and visting foreigners that buy things and all the criminals that pay no taxes.
People that lived under the old system and paid taxes all their life aren't going to vote for a new system that taxes them again on everything they have. 999 is DOA.
If you have a ping list, please put me on it. I am especially interested if there is a transcript or written plan that I can read (video is horrible on my internet connection)
We had one Perry hater who tried to paint Perry as a rapist.
One who tried to paint him as a porno loving homosexual
and one who tried to paint his as a fake Christian.
Oh and then you have the ones who would rather take someones word who just 3 weeks ago they barely knew existed, who hovered at 4%, that he was gonna build a 20" high electrified fence with barbed wire at the top, all along the border and the fence would have a sign saying, "this will kill you".
Now tell me Cain is not trying to pull the right into Romney's camp when he picks him as his VP.
Then you’ll need a government that doesn’t inflate our money supply, dropping it’s value every year.
You’ll also need a government that doesn’t tax savings interest or capital gains.
And I really don’t see how Cain’s plan would do that. It’d help companies, but as for the individual saver... I just don’t see it.
My current tax bracket has me pay 15%. Sure my income tax rate would drop to 9%, but then I’d pay a 9% sales tax... equalling 18%. As a whole, I might save a bit more, as the 9% sales tax would fall on my consumption.
But then, what kind of consumption are we talking about? Is my apartment rent considered ‘consumption’, fit to be hiked an additional 9%? I *AM* buying the apartment month by month, you know...
Same for food, electricity, gas, utilities, sewage, trash collection, internet, cable, phone.
Will these rise an additional 9%?
Or is it on the more traditional point of sale transactions?
I’m just a heartless guy who makes decisions based on peoples last name. Perry isnt presidential
>> Under Cains plan your sales tax will go up %9 and the FEDs will be on you for it.
Not only... but also consider this.
Since the plan is revenue neutral, for every “winner” (say, corporate tax is reduced) there *has* to be a “loser” (for example, a low-compensated person now pays more income tax).
This MUST be, as surely as night follows day, if the plan is indeed revenue neutral.
So, a business “winner” that employs low compensated “losers” may WANT to reduce prices, but will be unable to because the “losers” clamor for more money in salary to pay their increased taxes. And, remember, competition works both ways. If business “A” refuses to raise salaries, they will lose workers to business “B” who will increase salaries to market level, and so “A” will go out of business.
Sure, this is a contrived example, but so is the simplistic scenario where businesses suddenly drop prices 9% or more. My scenario is more sophisticated; it takes more variables into account and deals with the zero-sum nature of the issue.
For me, 9-9-9 is a gimmick. BECAUSE it is revenue neutral, it won’t have the stimulative effect that so many attribute to it — and the downside (a new federal revenue stream) is a HUGE liability.
If Cain’s plan was revenue-adverse and coupled with a plausible plan to cut SPENDING and REGULATIONS to the bone, I’d be all in. But that’s not the case.
You forgot the barf warning
Why not complain about the democrat socialists like Obama, Reid, and Pelosi... They’re medieval tax plan works like this:
Democrat Socialist tax plan = 30% federal, plus fica, plus state, plus local sales tax,
Plus capital gains tax on top of that if you choose to invest any of your income outside of a 401k.
Plus death tax where it’s taxed again when you die.
Democrats Socialism really sucks when you look at the tax rates.
You are just all over the place. You want the current tax rate? That probably means you dont pay any and want everyone else to pay for you.
I wouldn’t have any deductions. None, zilch, zippo.
As for income, if it was paid to you with no stipulations to be respent, than it’s income. (So if you required to sell stock for reinvestment, then that doesn’t count, as it never made it ‘home’ to you, so to speak.)
>> Now tell me Cain is not trying to pull the right into Romney’s camp when he picks him as his VP.
Yeah, Cain’s unabashed support of Romney is (WARNING! METAPHOR COLLISION AHEAD!) the 800 pound gorilla in the living room.
The fact is, Cain with his gimmickry is *not* the anti-Romney — he’s pulling in the same harness. Federal sales tax, indeed. Perry, with his “make government inconsequential in our lives” philosophy, IS the anti-Romney.
From a 2007 Heritage analysis:
Economic growth rates have more than doubled since the 2003 tax cuts;
Tax revenues are above the historical average, even after the tax cuts;
Myth #8: Tax cuts help the economy by "putting money in people's pockets." Fact: Pro-growth tax cuts support incentives for productive behavior. . . . If policymakers intend cigarette taxes to discourage smoking, they should also expect high investment taxes to discourage investment and income taxes to discourage work.
Regardless of the tax rate, tax revenues have almost always come in at approximately 18 percent of GDP. Since revenues move with GDP, the common-sense way to increase tax revenues is to expand the GDP. This means that pro-growth policies such as low marginal tax rates (especially on work, savings, and investment).
Government spending does not "pump new money into the economy" because government must first tax or borrow that money out of the economy. Claims that tax cuts benefit the economy by "putting money in people's pockets" represent the flip side of the pump-priming fallacy. Instead, the right tax cuts help the economy by reducing government's influence on economic decisions and allowing people to respond more to market mechanisms, thereby encouraging more productive behavior.
Yet some propose demand-side tax cuts to "put money in people's pockets" and "get people to spend money." The 2001 tax rebates serve as an example: Washington borrowed billions from investors and then mailed that money to families in the form of $600 checks. Predictably, this simple transfer of existing wealth caused a temporary increase in consumer spending and a corresponding decrease in investment but led to no new economic growth. No new wealth was created because the tax rebate was unrelated to productive behavior. No one had to work, save, or invest more to receive a rebate. Simply redistributing existing wealth does not create new wealth.
In contrast, marginal tax rates were reduced throughout the 1920s, 1960s, and 1980s. In all three decades, investment increased, and higher economic growth followed. Real GDP increased by 59 percent from 1921 to 1929, by 42 percent from 1961 to 1968, and by 31 percent from 1982 to 1989. More recently, the 2003 tax cuts helped to bring about strong economic growth for the past three years.
Like Trump said when criticizing Paul Ryan's plan, "you don't throw the whole thing out there so the press and the Dems can carve it up, you give it to them piecemeal and while their still chewing on it, hit them with the next phase" (or something like that).
That is what Perry is doing. His first phase is a jump start to the economy. The next phase coming in 10 days will address taxes and entitlements.
I know CW posted a link to the full transcript of Perry's speech a couple days ago.
The cashisnt gone, its called income by another person.
You are telling me no one pays 9% more on earnings already taxed and saved?
Then, as a good religious man, how could you vote for Cain?
After all, you base your vote on a person’s last name... and G-d cursed Cain, you know.
Things you already pay taxes on at a higher rate.
Oh, the plan is garage sales?
If we are to use garage sales to avoid retail, will *Resale Roundup* be addressed? Though, I do suppose that law falls under the democrats ‘jobs created/saved’ plan—lawyers have a new open door.
Also, if they don’t remove the 9% on food people are SOL, as I doubt anyone will be seeking out ABC food. Though we could suggest our seniors dumpster dive. Seems to be somewhat the rage these days.
I give Cain a pass on the bailout mess, many big-heads thought it was a good idea. Owning the banks? The only republican I recall that thought that might be a good idea is Lindsey Graham. There may be more...it has been a while. Graham is just the one that stands out to me.
Cain’s position to own the banks registers as—Fed man— in my thinking. And how good was that Greenspan, best in last 40 years!
All those ‘hidden’ savings that we’ll never see?
Even if Cain were to upset Perry, Romney will crush him in a one on one debate.
But SS and savings were already taxed once, 999 will tax it again.
What makes you so special that you shouldn’t pay a tax that those who support you are paying?
Herman Cain is going to be vetted for the 2012 election?
Is Obama going to be vetted for the 2012 election?
So I guess you are saying there is no hidden taxes on goods and services right? Where is your proof?
Here is mine before you ask.
Those hidden taxes will wind up a hidden savings too. We will never see them.
Thank you for the link and the information.
Under Cains plan your sales tax will go up %9 and the FEDs will be on you for it.
shield -- FReeper palmer wants on the *ping" list -- is interested in upcoming Gov. Perry policy roll-outs.
Hardly the same thing at all. One can be shown mathmaticaly, the other only in leftists minds.
All their after tax savings have already been taxed. A national sales tax, like 999, is a total fail. DOA along with who it is tied to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.