Posted on 09/29/2011 3:59:45 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
“I’ll take Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan more seriously as soon as he explains what he will cut to eliminate the $1.7 trillion to $2.2 trillion deficit that it will generate.”
Could you please explain this?
Do you assume that spending will continue at the present rate or will increase on a baseline basis as it has been doing for years?
I’m curious, not not accusatory. It’s a bald, unsubstantiated statement. Please provide details.
It’s good that you are considering potential abuses with any new tax.
But you’re ignoring where we are on income taxes. We’re almost to the point that more than half of the population will pay NO income tax.
When we get to the point that more than half of the voters pay no income tax, then they will vote for anyone who wants more spending.
Cain does need to advertise his short term spending plans better, but getting more people to participate in the pains of paying taxes (thru a flat tax or a sales tax) is the best way to reduce spending in the long term.
I think the Federal government needs to get completely out of the “income” tax game. To tempting to play the winners and losers game. The income tax needs to be repealed PERIOD. Until that happens the socialists will always have the upper hand.
ML/NJ
B I N G O!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One of the keystones of taxing in general!
Never add without subtracting somewhere else.
And, as the article states, all 999 does is confuse the issue
which is... CUT SPENDING.
The 2011 federal spending is $3.82 trillion dollars. Earlier in the week the Washington Times, no liberal paper, had a op-ed that estimated that Cain's plan would bring in about $1.77 trillion in revenue at the beginning and rising to about $2.2 trillion as the economy improves. So no, I can't see how government spending can continue at the present rate under Cain's scheme, or any other tax proposal that are being floated out there. And before I take his proposal seriously I would like to know just how he plans to bring finances back into balance. As it stands now, you could eliminate every dollar of discretionary spending - which includes the entire defense budget - and you would still have close to a trillion dollar deficit in the first year or two of Cain's plan.
Basically, it's easy to toss out crap schemes that sound great so long as you aren't faced with answering any questions on the repercussions. But that isn't leadership. It isn't even smart.
Are you OK with a 20% federal income tax combined with a 20% federal sales tax combined with a 20% corporate tax (to be pushed down to the consumer as always)?
That’s where the thieves will increment all taxes to in only a few years.
And no, you can’t build a cap into those taxes in the legislation. The thieves will simply repeal that part of the law in another law.
I’m not ignoring that, I talked about it in post #10. That’s why I like replacing all other taxes with a sales tax in a single bill.
As for waiting for an amendment, that’s really an excuse for Congress to pass the buck. They pass said amendment, then it goes to the states, where 50 legislatures fight over it. Meanwhile Congress can go about business as usual, and say “Hey, it’s not our fault, we’re waiting for the States to act”. I think once it’s abolished public pressure would prevent them from passing a whole new income tax bill.
You see what one good poll result will do? Nobody said a word about Herman Cain before except that he is Black and sold pizza. Now he is a target. This brings us back to my point that who the next Republican president is (and it will be a Republican)will really not be important because the TEA party Congress will control the agenda, not the White House. Welcome to the top tier Herman.
No, we MUST have an amendment that forbids congress from enacting both. Otherwise, they’ll repeal the income tax, implement the sales tax and later they’ll say that the “crisis” is so dire they need the income tax...oh, oh, oh, just for TWO years and then it sunsets, we promise! And then two years later...well, you know the drill.
You have to think of politicians as crack addicts. And you have to limit and restrict them accordingly.
Won’t a federal sales tax increase the underground economy with people going underground to avoid the tax?
I think we need a flatter income tax, where pretty much everyone pays at least something and loopholes are closed. But any consumption tax seems to be bad for the economy.
I love a lot of things about Cain, but not 999.
The problem isn't the Fair Tax in theory, it is the fair tax in implementation. What happens as that tax creeps up?
Bingo!
[Adding a sales tax without repealing the income tax at the same time means you will never get rid of either one.]
And the only real way to do that is by Contitutional ammendment. Ain’t gonna happen
Baloney. Find a way to tax the 49% who pay no income taxes now. Broaden the tax base so that everyone feels the pain, and they'll think twice before asking for more government goodies. Once the scale tips so that 50+% pay no taxes, they will vote themselves endless goodies at the expense of the few remaining tax-paying folks forever.
Nonew taxes is a mindless mantra. Broaden the tax base - I am glad to say it.
See #28.
Please forgive my lack of knowledge on the tax issue, but it has interested me more and more of late.
In your opinions and experience, what is the possibility of the elimination of all income taxes for citizens and have all government taxes be realized through sales or usage tax?
EVERYONE, regardless of socioeconomic status, must buy products and services. This way, EVERYONE pays something, no filing of personal income taxes, and greatly reduces the size of the IRS. No one who doesn’t work should get a tax refund but that happens every year.
I firmly believe you should keep everything you earn on your paycheck and YOU should decide what comes out of it.
Agreed. Cain deserves some credit for his willingness to go out on a limb and start a real discussion. No other candidate has shown the guts to do so.
I am 100% behind Cain. I like his boldness and the fact that he has a plan. I get it but I do agree there are some questions that need to be answered.
I also understand that he needs Congress to buy in. It might not happen but it gets the conversation started and a world with drastically lower corporate taxes, no capital gains taxes and significantly lower costs of compliance is a good thing.
What we can’t afford is more of the same. The social engineering through the tax code has to go. I’m not in love with the “empowerment zones” concept but there are areas that desperately need revitalizing, particularly in a post-Zero world and they aren’t all minority areas.
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.