Posted on 10/12/2011 6:50:02 PM PDT by justsaynomore
As businessman Herman Cain surges atop state and national polls and becomes a top-tier presidential contender, his signature "9-9-9" plan, which calls for a nine percent tax on income, a nine percent national sales tax, and a nine percent corporate income tax, has come under scrutiny from the right and the left.
Famed supply-side economist Art Laffer told HUMAN EVENTS that Cain's "9-9-9" plan was a pro-growth plan that would create the proper conditions for America's economy to grow and thrive again.
"Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan would be a vast improvement over the current tax system and a boon to the U.S. economy," Laffer told HUMAN EVENTS in a statement. "The goal of supply-side tax reform is always a broadening of the tax base and lowering of marginal tax rates."
Added Laffer: "Mr. Cain’s plan is simple, transparent, neutral with respect to capital and labor, and savings and consumption, and also greatly decreases the hidden costs of tax compliance. There is no doubt that economic growth would surge upon implementation of 9-9-9."
Laffer also said that "such a system provides the least avenues to avoid paying taxes, yet also maintains the strongest incentives for work effort, production, and investment."
At the GOP presidential debate in New Hampshire on Tuesday, Cain's plan received criticism from many of the candidates on stage.
Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman said that Americans needed a plan that was "doable-doable-doable" when asked his opinion on Cain's "9-9-9" plan.
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R.-Minn.) said that the "9-9-9" plan was not "a jobs plan," but was rather "a tax plan." Bachmann also complained of Congress getting another revenue stream from the plan and said, "you turn the 9-9-9 plan upside down, and the devil's in the details."
Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum said that the "9-9-9" plan was not a passable solution.
Further, Cain has been criticized from the left as well, as charges that his "9-9-9" plan is regressive have been made, charges that Cain has often refuted by citing that the payroll tax would be eliminated under his plan and used goods would not be levied sales taxes.
As Cain's profile increases and poll numbers rise, his opponents will attack him more fiercely over his "9-9-9" plan, but it looks like Cain has found an ally in Laffer, an economist who is more than respected by fiscal, pro-growth conservatives.
I agree.
It was a childish and gratuitous remark, AND clearly doesn't reflect anything concerning Cain's convictions.
Bachman screwed up with this cheap shot, IMHO...
Every time they may try to raise 9-9-9 to anything more than 9-9-9 it would effect every American. It would be political suicide to try to raise the rates without severe national need and broad consensus.
The current code divides us and is used to create class warfare and hide loopholes and the like. The 9-9-9 plan unites everyone against the government insofar as the tax code goes. It includes everyone and effects everyone and therefor everyone will have something to say about it.
Some other attributes that benefit 9-9-9 which may have not been calculated are that it claws back “black market” money - drug dealers for example or other “cash businesses” will pay taxes on at least one of those 9’s - consumption - that they never did before. Tourists, businessmen etc coming to the USA, and foreign workers who pay income tax abroad will also now start contributing via consumption tax. I like the idea of German tourists at Disneyworld helping to pay our cost to house NATO bases in Europe. And of course as mentioned 9-9-9 brings every citizen, resident and illegal alien into the system in some way. It is 100% inclusive -more than 100% when you add tourists- instead of the current system which leaves more than 50% out. These 100% will join in the cries any time Congress tried to raise 9-9-9. In fact there would be an ongoing movement to lower 9-9-9 to 7-7-7 as the economy grows and brings in more revenues in future years.
Also, since 9-9-9 eliminates employer payroll tax and other contributions it is fairly plausible that people will get a raise. I know that I would give back the payroll tax I am forced to pay to most of my employees. So people making $15 an hour could get a bump to $16 or $16.50 simply because that $1.50 an hour is money I am paying to Fed Gov simply for the privilege of hiring them in the first place! This would offset any potential risk of a 15% payer paying more under 9-9-9. It would spur growth in the economy I am sure as tax compliance costs drop leaving more money to invest in the economy. Cain has not done a good job explaining this side of things, but he should.
Good. We then start to put the capital that was being malinvested to better, more productive uses.
Does this even matter? As many have already pointed out, the power to raise taxes through the roof already exists. I don’t understand why you’re okay with Congress having the power to raise income tax rates to 90% but the power to raise sales taxes from 0% to 9% is somehow just plain wrong?
Among the many things in our history that couldn't happen:
Many influential statesmen and patriots didn't think the Constitution could be ratified by thirteen states.
A two hundred year old economic system based on slavery was abolished.
White men voted to give the voting franchise to women.
White men voted to eliminate Jim Crow.
Given the above, we can repeal the Marxist 16th Amendment and its attendant assault on our liberties and traditions known as "progressive" taxation.
Our country prospered like no other in the 19th Century. Outside of wars, the government lived on excise taxes and imposts. The Fair Tax, which is the goal of the 9-9-9 interim plan, will bring us closer to the way were taxed during the most prosperous century in our history.
Yes but Cain the TALKER wants to tax the 9% without any deductions plus another 9% national sales tax on everything they purchase including food and cloth. The 9-9-9 tax plan is insanity on many levels.
I prefer we don’t give them another tax revenue stream.
Cain killed whatever small chance he had by embracing this stupidity.
It’s embarrassing to see FReepers twist and spin trying to defend it just because they otherwise like Cain.
And who were Clinton’s opponents both times?
1992: George W. Bush - the man that called supply side economics “vodoo economics”, who ran in 1988 as having converted to Reganomics, but implemented Keynesian economic policies as president.
1996: Bob Dole - A down the line keynesian on economic issues. The guy that echoed Nixon’s famous “We’re all keynesians now” statement. That election was similar to the 2008 election, in that the GOP candidate (Dole/McCain) was so liberal they had to add a bastion of the right (Kemp/Palin) to the ticket to get any conservative votes at all.
The fact is Clinton was at least open to supply-side economic ideas, unlike the two GOP candidates (Bush & Dole) who were simply hard-core keynesians trying to pretend they were supply-siders.
RE: Right. This about Cain’s tax plan which imo, is a gimmick to attract voters. Its plain dumb. Take out the sales tax and may be then we can talk. Otherwise, its a moot point. No one will buy into it.
NO ONE? As in ZERO ?
9-9-9 has been out for several months now and has been scrutinized and attacked as well as discussed int he debates.
Look at the latest WSJ/NBC and PPP Polls — who’s leading with his so-called gimmick?
And Just look at the title of this thread. Art Laffer is no fool (otehrwise Reagan and Jack Kemp would not have listened to him)
NO ONE indeed...
I want to have faith in your one word answer to my question. I really do. But, it is elections that gave us the scurrilous reprobates we have running the country now.
In my own position things have gone from bad to worse economically and I am worried about how my 90 year old mother who subsists only on social security will be hit by the sales tax impact on everything from her groceries to utilities.
Because I am not an economist and trust no one when it comes to politics, I am uneasy with comments such as these . But like I said I trust no one, so the same goes for that editorial.
Don’t think I said I want anyone to lose their home. We’re talking about the tax deduction which incentives people to buy homes, sometimes even homes they can’t afford.
Are you also for mortgage bailouts?
Yes, true...sadly.
Yes, true...sadly.
Thanks for the support. Always nice to get feedback on a frustrated rant.
I already covered that in post #49. Besides, this 2011 and not 1980. In 1996 when Jack Kemp was running as Dole's VP, Art Laffer was getting ready to vote for Bill Clinton a second time. LOL Wake up. Art Laffer hasn't been relevant for 30 years!
In my book and the book of many hardcore fiscal cosnervatives, Cain's 999 plan is a NO NO NO! No sales tax, no way, no how!
Using your own line of reasoning, your own arguments are more “Straw” than Dr. White’s.
You support your opinion with the lie that it would somehow be more difficult to raise taxes under Cain’s plan, but the opposite is logically true: because there are more types of taxes, it would be way easier to raise taxes under Cain’s plan.
In addition, any kind of sales tax will drastically weaken America’s jobs engine: Small Business.
I believe that was asked during the debate.
CAIN: There are three deterrents to this nightmare scenario you described in terms of how bad things are going to be, because we are trying to fix the real problem.
The first deterrent is that I'm going to ask the United States Congress to include a two-thirds majority vote before they can raise the 999 tax. The second deterrent, the second deterrent is the fact that because it is visible, simple, and transparent, the American people are going to be the ones to hold Congress's feet to the fire.
The third return is that I will be president and I won't sign anything that raises the 999.
Absolutely agree with you. Be skeptical. I am very skeptical too. I could be wrong, I am trusting others to some degree when they say the math is revenue neutral. If 9-9-9 does not bring in $2.2 Trillion then Democrats will definitely want to raise it for their pet projects. And perhaps I am just a little too hopeful that Washington can be reformed, so perhaps I am a little more enthused about 9-9-9. Which means you should be skeptical of what I say too. Absolutely.
One thing Cain doesn’t get to in the debates, but that is on his website, is that 9-9-9 is temporary. It is meant to start us towards the repeal of all income taxes and move us to a pure consumption tax called the Fair Tax. While 9-9-9 does not do this and perhaps Cain should figure out whether it can, the Fair Tax will rebate all taxes paid at the poverty level. In other words, the poor (and even the rich) will get their taxes back on the first apx $15,000 of spending.
I do agree and sympathize with those who object to these types of plans because they already paid taxes all their life and do not want to pay consumption tax now on their savings and retirement funds. I think the fair way to fix some of that is to raise SS by 9% and exempt Medicare purchases. But any kind of consumption tax plan needs to be careful not to exclude too many pet constituencies as we don’t want all the loopholes and complexities of a system we have now. So it is a fine line.
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.