The 9-9-9 Controversy.

The Silent Majority ^ | 10-19-11 | Southernman

[NoGrayZone]

You’re correct. With the money I could save under Cain’s 999, I could perhaps afford to buy a new car one day.

My bedroom alone would have saved me a bundle. The only thing I would have had to pay a tax on is the boards from Home Depot to support my new box spring and mattress.

I’m into antiques. “They just don’t make em like they used to” is not a myth, but a reality.

I had to buy my bedroom one piece at a time, but it is complete. Antique mahogany furniture. I had to put a lot of elbow grease into restoring it, but it was so worth it.

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

Any tax strategy is subject to abuse in the wrong hands. The notion of simplification has mereit on it’s own. It cuts the costs of the middlemen in the army of private service and rids us of excess govermment bureaucrats. Go Herman.

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

Any tax strategy is subject to abuse in the wrong hands. The notion of simplification has mereit on it’s own. It cuts the costs of the middlemen in the army of private service and rids us of excess govermment bureaucrats. Go Herman.

[NoGrayZone]

"Care should be taken to watch out for what this idea would do to retired seniors on fixed incomes and social security. They cannot handle LARGE sales taxes."

Then they can by used, just as I do now.

[justsaynomore]

“Cain at this stage does not have a very impressive organization.”

Care to elaborate?

[Ingtar]

Calculating my situation:

2010 effective tax rate: 13.59%
2012 changes to tax rate: 16.37%

9-9-9 assuming everything I earn is paid for taxable items:
17.19%

9-9-9 assuming my employer passes on the payroll taxes to me:
13.46% + I have more to spend (about $3600)

9-9-9 assuming an evil employer and 75% of items are taxable:
15.14%

Because of what I believe it will do to the economy and prices, this seems reasonable to me. It is a step in the right direction. Someone who is paying nothing now will view that differently, of course.

[Reagan Man]

Economist Stephen Moore worked on creating the 999 tax plan. Last Saturday he told Larry Kudlow that Cain needs to rework a critical component of the plan. Moore called for the 9% sales tax component to be replaced with a 9% payroll tax.

>>>>>“I’ve come to the conclusion that the American people and the voters do not want a national sales tax,” he said. “[Cain’s] going to have to replace that national sales tax with a 9 percent payroll tax. And if you do that, it’s a total winner.”

Just what many of us have been saying for the last few weeks. Still won't be a total winner, not until the Fair Tax is dropped for the Flat Tax. Then people will buy it. One thing Cain's effort is doing, fostering debate on the issue of tax reform. That is good.

[Chuzzlewit]

At some point, Cain must explain the potential economic benefits from his plan

I agree. Look, I really like this guy, but telling those he is debating and potential voters over and over again to go to his website to get the specifics on his plan is simply not going to cut it... He has to explain it, in all it's ramifications, otherwise it just ends up looking like a think tank proposal. it's his job to explain it so the "folks" can understand why a sales tax is a good idea, in conjunction of course with a 9 % income tax and a 9 % corp tax...

In California, we pay about 9.0 % sales tax, which is our legislatures fault and a constant irritation for me, but add on another 9% and I'm looking at almost 20% tax on every darn thing I buy in this state... that is crushing.. I guess I could move, but work is not exactly in abundance in many of the states.

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

To me, the plan was attacked irrationally and defended poorly. So nothing was accomplished.

True. Cain kept referring to his website. Doesn't work in a debate. Romney was a complete sophist on the sales tax. Cain was incomplete in telling Romney Nevadans presently pay federal taxes that his plan would replace.

[NoGrayZone]

Only on NEW items. If you’re on a strict budget, like I am, buy used, as I do.

Garage sales, flea markets, antique shops, used cars, secondhand stores, Salvation Army, etc.

There would be NO taxes on these items.

P.S.......just a side note. Spoke with the Salvation Army here on Long Island yesterday. They are over run with flat screen tv’s.

If you can’t afford a new one, look into your nearest Salvation Army.

[EagleUSA]

“Then they can b(u)y used, just as I do now....”

:::::::::::

Yeah, used medicines, used medical supplies, used taxable food items, and the list goes on.....great idea.

[doc]

The liberals, MSM, and the beltway politicians made sure the first attack was on Herman Cain’s 999 plan. After seeing him rise in the polls the above groups got very concerned that a black conservative actually has a chance at winning the republican nomination. All Herman has to do is say that he is going to tweek and put in provisions to his plan that answeres any objections.

[sevinufnine]

You hit the nail on the head. Those contributing NOTHING want the rich to pay more because it is “fair”. What’s fair about them paying zero? We have way, too many with the welfare mentality. Always jealous because they don’t have what someone else has either worked for or inherited. (I think that’s called coveting!)

[C. Edmund Wright]

With such clarity and logic, I can imagine that you are indeed a “Lone Ranger” in Massachusetts.....

[TruConservative]

I am so depressed. I hate Romney. He’s a flip-flopping hypocrit with no soul and a total Wall Street boy.

I really like Cain, but I hate his 9-9-9 plan. See http://taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/displayatab.cfm?Docid=3220&DocTypeID=2 . The tax policy center, which is not partisan, says it will increase everyone’s taxes except the top 20%. So people in the lowest quartile, whose average income is $14,000/year, end up paying $1659 more in taxes, while those in the top 20%, pay $23,522 less. The top 0.1% pays $1,690,000 less.

This is the hard truth that no Republican will deal with. The top 1% have such a large share of income and wealth, that this nation is collapsing under them. That just sounds so socialist and hippy and 99%er that we can’t deal with it. But not dealing with it will lead to America’s collapse into latin-America like failure.

We America’s conservatives have to address this, otherwise one of two things will happen. The Dems will win in 2012 on the backs of rich-envy, and we will see some real socialist wealth distribution; or we will win in 2012, and we will create more rich-envy as we further impoverish the middle class with more tax breaks for the top 1%.

We need a conservative solution to the weakening of America’s working people. And no, the solution is not just to blame Obama or cut taxes or cut spending to the poor or cut spending to retirees while give, give, giving to the rich and letting them run roughshod over us (including outsourcing all jobs and cancelling all pensions).

We need to go back to our roots of fiscal responsibility, and Eisenhower-like realism. We need an Eisenhower. We need someone willing to stand up against the military-industrial complex. We need someone to stand up against Wall Street and bankers. We need to return to the Bible that tells us greed is a sin. We need to recover our souls from Mammon. We need to get back to single-worker families with kids who get to be raised by moms.

[justsaynomore]

I hope everyone will look at the actual cost of things under 999:

http://www.999calculator.net

[going hot]

This is the hard truth that no Republican will deal with. The top 1% have such a large share of income and wealth, that this nation is collapsing under them.

The top one percent? TTOP!. So, the top one percent have most of the bucks. Well, that is why they are the top one percent. If they were the top 10 percent, they would even have more of the bucks.

Your basic premise, that the US is collapsing under their weight has no basis or foundation. It is simply not factual.

[TruConservative]

"Your basic premise, that the US is collapsing under their weight has no basis or foundation. It is simply not factual."

Look - the top 1% obviously will always have the most by the laws of math. But in the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s they got 10% of everything. Their wealth has exploded since 1980 to 24% of all income and 43% of all financial ownership.

Do you think welfare is a burden on the nation? Welfare is tiny. It is unimportant economically. What is important is that somewhere around 35% of all money goes to the top 1% (35% of all profits, income, stock sales, business sales, etc.). Everything is made more expensive because we have this immense burden on us. Gasoline is $4/gallon because the owners earn (literally) $10 million/day. Healthcre is so expensive because the CEO earns literally $65,000 per hour. These expenses come out of our pockets, just like taxes. Everyone's saying "oh, a new 9% sales tax is going to kill us."

Wake up. The top 1%'s take increasing from 10% to 35% is the equivalent of a 25% tax on everything.

This is no joke and no socialism. You want to know what really killed the USSR? Wealth imbalance. After the USSR collapsed, Moscow had more billionaires than any city in the world (google it - oh hell, here it is: http://www.forbes.com/2011/05/17/cities-with-most-billionaires.html note that 3 of the top ten cities ranked by billionaires are in communist China)

We are seeing corporate communism. And we are being suckers. What passes for conservatism today is often closer to Chinese style communism than true American freedom. It is not freedom to surrender your economic wealth, your job, your pension, your security and your nation to a few Wall Street boys and businesses whose best friends and business partners are Chinese billionaires.

[NoGrayZone]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2794987/posts?page=56#56

[The Sparrow]

I think I agree with what you said. Well, most of it. I’m not convinced the top 1% are causing problems. Maybe if the gov’t stopped wasting so much of our money, we could actually stimulate the economy ourselves. As it is now, I’m not buying anything major. I just won’t. And I likely won’t under 9-9-9. I’m not buying used crap either. Come to think of it, what does that do to new home sales? Is it better to buy a “used” home? That will kill off new construction worse than it’s already suffering, because home buyers will go right for the pre-existing homes.

I really like Herman Cain. I’m very close to volunteering for him. But I do not like 9-9-9, and Mr Cain does little to dispel the myths and problems. Like someone said, 15-15-0 would be better or even 14-14-0. Whoever said 9-9-9 started out as a great catchy phrase was spot on.

Cain’s clean (so far, no skeletons have come out). He’s great on his feet (though the negotiating with terrorists thing was a major faux pas). He’s strong. His business experience is exactly what we need. The fact that he’s black is an added bonus, because it knocks the “GOP hates Obama because they’re racist” thing right off the table (not with the kooks, but who cares about them). But like it or not, this national sales tax thing could cost him the election. Maybe it makes sense mathematically, but average voters do not like homework. That’s why these guys love to talk in sound bytes.

I don’t think Mr Cain did enough explaining last night when he had the floor. I think he was losing ground until Romney & Perry started pulling each other’s pig tails. At that point, they looked silly.