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 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
Sound familiar?
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?
Riiiight.
How do you propose we fix this? By cutting taxes disproportionately on the lower end of the scale? Again? Did I mention that this is what is always done?
Not sure I see your point. Is your point that:
- Some who now pay higher taxes will pay *less* taxes
- Some who now pay *no/few* taxes will pay some/more taxes?
- Is it a “rich vs poor” argument?
- Is it that govt needs more/less revenue?
So far, all you’ve pointed out is the glaring obvious — that 9% income tax is less than 35% (or whatever) and more than 0%.
Might want to clarify or bottom-line your point. It’s not all that clear.
“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” ~attributed to Benjamin Franklin
Right now we have a system that rewards failure and punishes success, a system that crushes innovation and tears as the very heart of our economic system by penalizing small businesses.
Do I care if some of the rich are going to get richer with 999? No.
I see the potential for ALL of us to live in a thriving economy. The potential for ALL of us to benefit from less regulations. THERE WILL BE LESS POOR PEOPLE.
Damnit, my husband and I have each dreamed of opening our own small businesses after he gets out of the army. In this economy, our dreams are DOA. 999 will bring us back from the brink and allow us to ALL flourish.
So I’m supposed to kill my dreams just because Obama will benefit from the new tax code, too?
I’m not stupid enough to cut off my nose just to stick it to Obama.