Skip to comments.Obamas 9-9-9 Tax Cut | For the Blind
Posted on 10/29/2011 11:14:22 PM PDT by NaturalBornConservative
click here to read article
In that day the deaf will hear the words of the scroll, and out of gloom and darkness the eyes of the blind will see. ~Isaiah 29:18
So is there a Conservative Progressive income tax that is better? Or are you just concerned with “fairness”?...If the tax exposure is the same for all people, it is fair....period.
So then if a person is on social security, food stamps, unemployment, or SDI, already receiving a hand from the government, that person ought to give the government back 9% just to be on an equal playing field with everyone else? I’m conservative and I think it’s just a dumb idea, and I won’t vote for it, or support any party that supports it. The FairTax, or a Flat Tax above a certain exemption amount is more appealing.
If they are receiving income, they should pay tax on it. What does it matter the source?
So you are happy with the current tax code I presume.
Obama's income tax burden would've dropped? So what!
9% is less than the phony 35% Obama didn't pay anyway. Why would his liability rise? Why do you care?
You can put any numbers on a return to make a case for or against.
The most powerful argument for this plan .... the rich man will never pay less than his secretary, it just isn’t possible.
We need to end the bs cloak and dagger act....lets get down to something simple that will pass both houses.
Face it guys, the sales tax is progressive, but a flat tax isn’t going to pass. ..... in our dreams .....
I don’t like Cain’s plan because it doesn’t make essential services and food tax free. But the sales tax is noticeably absent from these returns.
Why did you include only the single ‘9’ Personal Income Tax of the ‘9-9-9’ plan ?
The 9% business tax would apply to almost the same Income (minus only the State refund, and dividends, and capital gains). Or did you think Corporations would have to pay 9% on their wages and profits, but non-corporate businesses would somehow be given a pass on the business tax ?
The other ‘9’ is the Sales Tax, and you’d have to figure what he spends his money on, which is probably almost nothing due to having the White House pay all his living expenses. But for anybody else with income, you can figure the 9% sales tax will apply to almost all of it — we do have an almost zero savings rate, after all.
So your tax amount should basically be tripled.
He’d still pay less total tax than he did under the current system, but nowhere near as much less as you are showing. So what if he pays only $1.5M rather than $1.8M ? The other $300K will probably be invested in the private economy rather than letting the government spend it. Tax cuts on the investor class feed economic growth, and that is about as Conservative as it gets.
That said, I prefer my MinMax plan over the ‘9-9-9’ plan. It has no Sales Tax component, includes all forms of income from all sources, with a Min 10% and Max 15% of AGI. The Business Tax portion is a flat 10% on payroll and expenditures to foreign entities, but not profits. The above return would owe only ~$900K, leaving the other $900K in the economy where it can be productive rather than wasted as government spending.
BTW, your comment about a Flat Tax that only applies to income above some level is ridiculous. By definition you would be guaranteeing a big block of voters who are paying no taxes ... and therefor free to vote for cake and circuses without worrying about the cost. That is NOT a Conservative position.
Ok... so you say you are a conservative?
What does that mean then?
We would like to know.
Maybe i’ll read your blog if you know what a conservative is.
He means well, I think Herman is the best of the best. I pray he is not just a super well disguised/manipulated illuminati finger puppet.
He was with THE FED.
"Give me control over a nations currency, and I care not who makes its laws. Baron M.A. Rothschild
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Thomas Jefferson
I worry about history repeating. It has done that many times.
We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. We are no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominate men. I have unwittingly betrayed my country. President Woodrow Wilson, 1916
Even our brightest can be deceived!
>If the American people ever allow the banks to control issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers occupied. Thomas Jefferson
At least Cain’s plan is fair. Today, 47 percent of Americans are free-loaders, contributing absolutely zero in income taxes, while they sit in the wagon letting the other 53 percent do all of the pulling. Cain’s plan makes everyone contribute to society.
If Obama’s tax picture were that of a small business, it would have a huge tax burden lifted, with which to hire, expand, and/or lower the prices of its product or service. In the sense that the 999 plan would benefit largely private sector players, your example is misleading.
Admittedly, Obama is “rich”, and even he would have more to invest in the private economy, having the effect of fostering further private sector growth.
I feel that any monies not sent to government will have the effect of reigning in the out of control spending that is the biggest problem we have today.
The fact that citizens in Obama’s income bracket have to shoulder the entire burden for government IS the problem. Everyone else constitutes the dependency class, now gathering in parks clamoring for more goodies from you know who. This must stop, and if people in government get to keep more too. well that’s the problem we should have to tolerate.
DO you want to know why the streets, buses, libraries and schools are so filthy in poor areas? BECAUSE THEY NEVER PAID A RED CENT FOR THEM.
“But but but but the poor will actually have to pay for what they get.” Well, no, they’ll still be getting more from the system than they put in, they’ll just have to put in for the first time. Maybe they’ll stop voting for socialists like Obama if they are required to pay out more money when tax rates go up.
You want to be a citizen? You want to vote? PAY IN. Universal suffrage is a freaking joke. Our founding fathers knew it. In the early days, no property, you didn’t pay taxes, you didn’t get a vote.
Well, if we can’t take away their “right” to vote *my* income into *their* pockets, we can make them pay a meager percentage, just like the rest of us.
A viable third party candidate?
that person ought to give the government back 9% just to be on an equal playing field with everyone else?
Apart from the fact that you are missing all that is involved here, what's your objection to making nontaxpayers into taxpayers?
What's your objection to "an equal playing field"?
Are you concerned, or not, about the fact that the taker class in this country is fast approaching and will soon exceed 50% of the population? Once that occurs, what, in your view, will stop the parasite majority from making ever-more onerous demands for free stuff?
I became a fan of The Fair Tax when I read the first book but the earliest objections were that it would never pass. I never could figure out how we were going to get it enacted but it seems Cain has that covered. You are right about it being a phase-in but the steps required could be many. It’s worth it. The faster the better because the first major country to install it will be the biggest winner and I want that to be us.
“The FairTax, or a Flat Tax above a certain exemption amount is more appealing.”
Yes, lies can be very appealing.
NBC, you’re absolutely right.
Billionaire-funded ‘tea party’ groups like the Kochs’ Center for American Prosperity, who have funded Cain in the past and provided him his intellectual horsepower for the campaign, are big on this type of solution. As are the multimillionaire conservative talk-show hosts.
But blue-dog type Dems are right to point out that the tax code that allowed us to thrive under Reagan, Clinton and parts of Bush, hasn’t suddenly become the problem with out economy.
It’s a heck of a lot easier to campaign on tax cuts than on spending cuts, which further contributes to our candidates going this route. But four years into this economic pain, middle America is not going to go for this drastic leveling of the tax code, and Obama is going to scamper to reelection if he has the good fortune to campaign against it.
Eradicating Obamacare, cutting the corporate income tax, which Palin rightly points out is the breeding ground for the crony capitalism that is ruining our governance, and cutting spending and regulations are parts of the solution for the economy and the GOP. Not this drastic rebalancing of the tax code—that fails every time it is ultimately put to the electorate.
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.