Posted on 10/20/2011 7:49:12 PM PDT by Bokababe
I have followed politics for a long time, and there is never a shortage of politicians promising the world and not delivering. After my recent review of Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan I detailed why this plan is "all sizzle and no steak" and how an additional 9 percent federal sales tax would give the weak consumer driven economy an immediate heart attack. I believe we already collect enough in taxes, seemingly more than enough, and our problem is almost entirely based around our federal government's spending habits.....
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
"The turn will come when we entrust the conduct of our affairs to the men who understand that their first duty as public officials is to divest themselves of the power that they have been given. It will come when Americans, in hundreds of communities throughout the nation, decide to put the man in office who is pledged to enforce the Constitution and restore the Republic. Who will proclaim in a campaign speech: ‘I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel the old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is ‘needed’ before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents’ ‘interests,’ I shall reply that I was informed their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.’"
OK you’re right
it should be 0-9-9
MEANING REPEAL the INCOME TAX AMENDMENT (#16)
Freedom ping.
It’s well balanced. It cuts most federal spending back to the levels of 2006 (I’m sure we can all remember life way back in ‘06) and it saves tax dollars by ending the wars and stops providing any foreign aid. However, Social Security gets increased funding each subsequent year in the Paul presidency as does Medicare, military retirement funding and veterans’ benefits.
More importantly this plan is necessary. Without real major changes in defining what the role of our federal government ought to be, we will not be able to achieve prosperity in America again. Even Rush Limbaugh agreed in saying, “Genuine, big spending cuts are the only thing that is going to bring us back into some semblance of ideas. Now, these aren’t (just) Ron Paul’s ideas. They are ours.”
I am a college graduate, husband and father of two daughters. I live and work in southern New Jersey, and in my spare time I study economics and politics.
Ah well. If Lou Lippencott from South Jersey says Cains plan is garbage and the Israel hating, Reagan hating, Lincoln Hating, Iran loving, Earmark Queen Ron Paul's idea is extra special, we obviously all need to stand up and listen.
This Paulbot asks that we consider trustworthiness as a prerequisite for the Presidency. Is blowing money on ridiculous shrimp studies in Paul's district while railing against spending what the writer is looking for?
Haven’t heard Cain say much about the spending side of the Fed. 7-7-7 anyone?
I think we need to clear the record here. First, Cain's plan does not increase federal revenues except if they occur by way of increased gross national product so it is slightly misleading to imply that the 9% sales tax is an "additional" federal [sales] tax. It is not an accretion of revenues but a transfer to a different source-that of course assuming the plan works out as advertised.
Second, Cain and Paul are at one level of a different opinion that the problem is spending and not insufficient revenues and yet, contrary to the author's implications, they are on the same page. I have heard Herman Cain say that you cannot cut enough to balance the budget. I take this to mean that he believes the political impediments to doing so cannot be overcome, therefore, he wants to stimulate growth which would stimulate revenues but not increase tax rates. This is by no means an abandonment of the goal to balance the budget. It is an attempt to do so by growth rather than by austerity exclusively.
It is up to us to determine which we believe is the more realistic path to the common goal and which is more realistic not only in terms of its practical economic force but in terms of its political viability.
Finally, proposing 9-9-9 does not in itself imply that Cain forsakes spending cuts and any implication in his article to that effect is unwarranted.
A concerned citizen should also consider whether the author's idea of building a consumer economy is to be pursued at the expense of Cain's approach of building a production economy. I do not believe that a 9% federal sales tax will give the consumer a "heart attack." He would be compensated under the Cain plan by reduced taxes elsewhere and, besides, exemption for used goods and some other provisions soften whatever shock might come.
I do not believe in building a consumer driven economy. I think we should be building a manufacturing economy. We should be taxing consumption and rewarding savings and investment.
This is not a defense of Herman Cain because I support Herman Cain. To the contrary in a vanity and in a recent post I have raised the question of the viability and of his candidacy in the general election given his penchant for gaffes. It is just that I am reacting against the tendency in these boards during this primary season to attempt to advance one's champion's chances by denigrating his rivals.
Isn't it something how people intentionally "misunderstand" 999? I mean, seriously.
It's not in addition to the income tax!
Or you can get raw with these strings. Either way, the violin is sweet yet lethal.
Do it!
If we could elect half of a candidate, I would consider Ron Paul.
“When judging what is truly important this election cycle voters should be focused on two things: Is the candidate trustworthy, and does the candidate know how to fix what’s wrong with America? After reading this Plan to Restore America, I feel I have found the answer to both, and I believe that you will too.”
With regards to Paul the answer to both questions is a resounding NO. The man is neither trustworthy or does he know how to fix anything. Quite honestly I consider him to be a nutcase...seriously...I don’t think he is sane.
“If we could elect half of a candidate, I would consider Ron Paul.”
Funny you should say that. I happen to think that most of the other candidates are pretty two-faced, so if we’re voting for half-candidates, there are suddenly a lot of good options!
Truth spoken!
‘Is blowing money on ridiculous shrimp studies in Paul’s district while railing against spending what the writer is looking for?”
I missed where you claimed Paul actually voted for including those in the federal budget, or voted for any of the absurd funding that may be directed via earmarks (such as the shrimp study). As you well know, Paul has never voted for any budgets with earmarks—he’s simply utilized his limited ability to direct those unconstitutionally expended funds after the fact. As you also undoubtedly know, Paul has stated that he would rather have Congress allocating funding through earmarks than by letting either lefty bureaucrats or worse, the Obama administration, decide who gets the money.
I guess you trust the administration to do the right thing and spend the money wisely, of course. No surprise you would appreciate Herman Cain, who thought the same way when he voted to give the administration carte blanche with TARP. We know how well that turned out, as Obama has paid off a whole stable of cronies with that taxpayer money.
I haven't heard bold "eliminate departments" talk from Cain so far but in one debate he said he'd go department by department, just as he did in business, and if necessary, rebuild them from the ground up to do the job they're supposed to do and he'd start at the EPA.
There's no question, any candidate will have to cut somewhere even if there's growth because spending is so far above revenues. Eliminating ObamaCare is something they all agree on.
We know there's about $200 billion in duplicative spending from Sen. Tom Coburn's study. That's a place to start.
That is true! I could create a great candidate out of mixing and matching our choices, Mr.Potato-Head 2012!
Yes, wasn’t that just the bees knees that Lou Lippincott of New Jersey has figured out that not only is 999 not a good plan, but that it will quickly RUIN the “weak consumer economy by giving it a heart attack”?
Where to begin.
I grow tired of trying to educate these nincompoops.
As I see it, the main purpose of this discussion now is so that those of us who do view major tax reform as absolutely critical to restoring our economy as well as to maintaining our freedom can get trained up on all the arguments for and against. So as to be ready when the LSM finally turns its guns on Herman Cain for real.
But maybe Lou Lippincott will find his article here on FR, do some reading of other threads, and figure out where his myopic, part-time economist analysis falls short and why, um, Art Laffer, Stephen Moore and many other actual and experienced economists say 999 will create an immediate economic boom, including lowering the unemployment rate by 50% within a few years.
Ah. The typical canard about Ron Paul's voting habits. Paul loads bills that have 100% chance of passing with lard and pork for his district and then votes against it. Surprise Surprise. All of a sudden his district get loads of cash for stupid projects and this old fraud can claim purity.
Let's see what the good Dr "didn't" vote for in '09:
Ron Paul’s earmark requests for FY2009 house.gov Ron Paul has disclosed his earmark requests for 2009. • $250,000 for Galveston Economic Development Partnership, for Galveston Center for Business and Technology Development to help spin off private investment at National Lab of the University of Texas Medical Branch • $500,000 for City of Bay City for NuBlac Rehab Center (youth rehabilitation) Subcommittee on Defense: • $3.5 million for study of health risks of exposure to vanadium Subcommittee on Military Construction: • $2 million for City of Bay City for NuBlac Rehab Center (serving minority veterans) Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development: • $41.073 million for Army Corps of Engineers to deepen and widen Texas City Channel • $21.6 million for Army Corps of Engineers to dredge and reconfigure jetties at mouth of Colorado River • $7.02 million for Army Corps of Engineers to dredge Freeport Harbor • $16.021 million for Army Corps of Engineers to maintain Galveston Harbor • $1 million for Army Corps of Engineers for construction at Cedar Bayou • $3.297 million for Army Corps of Engineers to maintain Texas City Channel • $200,000 for Army Corps of Engineers to maintain Cedar Bayou • $13.038 million for Army Corps of Engineers to maintain Matagorda Ship Channel • $42.018 million for Army Corps of Engineers to maintain Gulf Intercoastal Waterway • $3.026 million for Army Corps of Engineers to maintain channel to Victoria • $600,000 for Army Corps of Engineers for feasibility study for Sabine Pass to Galveston Bay • $400,000 for Army Corps of Engineers for feasibility study for Feeport Harbor • $100,000 for Army Corps of Engineers for feasibility study for Lower Guadalupe River Basin • $400,000 for Army Corps of Engineers for preliminary engineering and design study at Freeport Harbor. • $21.7 million for Army Corps of Engineers for construction at Houston Galveston Navigation Channel • $2.165 million for Army Corps of Engineers to maintain Trinity River • $6.979 million for Army Corps of Engineers to maintain Wallisville Lake • $1.3 million for Army Corps of Engineers to study flooding around Colorado River • $11 million for Army Corps of Engineers for construction at Wharton and Onion Creek • $3.026 million for Army Corps of Engineers for Chocolate Bayou • $533,000 for Army Corps of Engineers to maintain channel to Port Bolivar • $41.623 million for Army Corps of Engineers to maintain Houston Ship Channel • $1.01 million for Army Corps of Engineers to maintain Double Bayou • $3 million for Army Corps of Engineers for construction at Clear Creek • $500,000 for Army Corps of Engineers to maintain Port Palacios • $100,000 for Army Corps of Engineers to study sand placement near Brazoria County shoreline Subcommittee on Interior and the Environment: • $5 million for Fort Bend County for City of Kendleton water and sewer improvements Subcommittee on Homeland Security: • $10 million for Coast Guard to improve Galveston Rail Causeway • $8.8 million for FEMA for drainage at Cove Harbor in Aransas County • $2.2 million for FEMA to reconfigure and stabilize Capano Causeway Pier • $500,000 for FEMA for Aransas County drainage master plan • $35 million for FEMA for drainage in Friendswood • $10 million for FEMA for drainage project for Friendswood/Clear Creek • $10 million for FEMA for drainage project for Friendswood/Clear Creek • $5 million for FEMA to recycle household hazardous waste in Friendswood Subcommittee on Transportation: • $1.96 million to replace buses in and around Victoria • $2 million to renovate transit maintenance facility in Galveston • $5 million to reconfigure Texas Clipper training ship • $25,000 to install security cameras at Fox Run Apartments in Victoria • $2 million to beautify Galveston Seawall and support Transit Access Program in Galveston • $3.6 million to construct inter-modal transit facility in Victoria • $3.5 million for analysis of commuter rail alternatives in Galveston • $10.3 million for City of Bay City for NuBlac Youth/Community Center • $2.2 million for City of Bay City for improvements to electrical wiring in low and moderate income housing Subcommittee on Labor, HHS, Education: • $90,000 for Victoria Chamber of Commerce for business/career-related education for youth • $248,942 for UTMB for employee wellness program for small businesses • $1.748 million for University of Houston-Victoria for DNA testing and genetic diagnostic lab • $300,000 for Bay City MEHOP for fund reinstatement of mobile unit • $200,000 for Bay City MEHOP to recruit nurse practitioner • $1.92 million for UTMB to study muscle mass loss in aging vs. microgravity (NASA related) at International Space Station National Lab • $750,000 for Houston Memorial Hermann HealthCare system for Life Flight operations center • $26 million for Washington, D.C. “Reading is Fundamental” program • $10 million for Boston, Mass., “Reach Out and Read” national center
Yes, Paul, Cain and every conservative who is not otherwise insane are on the same page as to spending.
The logical fallacy here is that spending is somehow a distinct and distinctly solvable problem from the problems with our present tax system, necessitating major tax reform.
This is not an either/or, a zero sum game. 999 can be implemented and major spending cuts pursued at the same time.
In fact, one of the criticisms I see around here on 999 is “it won’t generate sufficient revenue.” To that, I call B.S. But let’s say it’s true? Downward pressure on revenues, in an administration that will not let the Fed keep doing QE, means more political will for spending cuts. Isn’t that a beautiful thing?
The same people who are clamoring “repeal the 16th Amendment” before taking any steps toward major tax reform also seem to be those criticizing 999 because it either “can’t pass” or “won’t be implemented fully for a couple of years.”
Now think about it.
FACEPALM.
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.