Replies

“Perhaps what wilco200 meant was that the average household defined as a family of four making a median income does not pay any taxes.”

Thank you. That is indeed what I meant. Got a little carried away. As my history indicates, I am against all taxes, support lowing all taxes for everyone and under NO circumstances instituting a new tax.

As far as Cain’s plan. I am against the 9% sales tax. I would be for a flat 9% income tax alone, however. The only way I would possibly support a sales tax of any kind would be a Constitutional amendment removing the income tax first.

That’s my take on the matter as well.

One or the other, not both. There is too much potential for mischief during the rare times that the opposition is in power.

That's a fair position to hold.

I'm a little ambivalent on 999, although I do think that we need to increase the 53% of households who pay no income taxes to 100% -- not by increasing total tax revenue, mind you, but by spreading the taxes out more fairly. (Or do away with the income tax altogether, like you said.)

Yes, having everyone pay some taxes means that some old people, some single moms, and all those hard cases will have less money to spend with; however, it also means they'll be more likely to vote for spending cuts to reduce their share paid. Also, the 53% include the people who are employing others; reducing their tax burden will result in lifting up everyone's boats.

That's not an argument that will fly over with much of the 47%, though, and as such, I think Cain needs to back off 999 a bit.