The night of Herman Cain’s “9-9-9 Plan

Yahoo News ^ | 101111 | Chris Moody

[heiss]

What is so difficult to understand?
Any law, including sales tax, can be changed anytime by simple majority vote just like any other law (senate filibuster may or may not help a bit)

It is meaningless what protections you write in to the law. What congress passes, can be changed if (future) congress and president so want.

[Future Snake Eater]

What do you propose? Keep the current system in place? Business as usual?

[JohnKinAK]

To change a law requires both houses and a Presidential signature, or veto override in both houses.

It’s really elemental. Just read the constitution or look up School House Rock on how a bill becomes a law.

[heiss]

You have serious issues.

Anything passed by congress (and signed by president) can be changed by congress (and signed by president). There are no protective measures. Got that? This 2/3 change requirement is absolute BS and only an absolute fool would claim otherwise.

Congress is not bound by the measures in existing laws, it can simply rewrite them anytime.

Once day there will be Dem president and Dem congress again.

This 999 can become 9-9-25, or 20-20-20 anytime. It would be foolish to create a new tax (remember AMT for “the 20 rich families”)

[Pan_Yan]

Hope and change aren't economic plans

You are exactly correct, which is a great reason to support the only candidate serious about replacing our current nightmare, not just tweeking it.

particularly for a tax plan that increases taxes on seniors, the average family, "the poor," etc

Who should pay taxes? How much is the poor's fair share? How much is the rich's fair share? That is not an argument normally espoused by conservatives so I would like some explanation on what exactly you think our tax code should look like and who should pay how much.

... companies and individuals in "empowerment zones" get tax breaks others don't.

I don't know what an empowerment zone is, but I don't like it. We both know Cain's plan doesn't have a snowballs chance in Hades of getting passed. But he is advancing the argument that the current system is broken and needs to be replaced. That's worth a lot more to me than a typical candidate that panders about tweeking the current system.

[JohnKinAK]

Repeal won’t be nearly as easy as you think. See Obamacare as an example.

[DTxAg]

Who should pay taxes? How much is the poor's fair share? How much is the rich's fair share? That is not an argument normally espoused by conservatives so I would like some explanation on what exactly you think our tax code should look like and who should pay how much.

In an ideal world, we all pay the same rate. In reality, you don't run a presidential campaign with your central policy being that you're going to raise taxes on massive segments of the population.

I don't know what an empowerment zone is, but I don't like it.

You and me both.

We both know Cain's plan doesn't have a snowballs chance in Hades of getting passed.

Cain isn't running on "hey let's use my 9-9-9 plan as a basis to talk about tax reform." It is the central policy in his campaign. And what is his fallback position if that central policy has no chance of ever passing?

[DTxAg]

Repeal won’t be nearly as easy as you think. See Obamacare as an example.

No? With a Dem Congress and a Dem President? See Obamacare as an example. ;)

[Pan_Yan]

In an ideal world, we all pay the same rate. In reality, you don't run a presidential campaign with your central policy being that you're going to raise taxes on massive segments of the population.

So your opposition is political, not fiscal? He could just give a vague outline in flowery conservative sounding language like all the others. I appreciate that he isn't.

It is the central policy in his campaign. And what is his fallback position if that central policy has no chance of ever passing?

I would think Cain is a smart enough businessman to have a Plan B and a Plan C and a Plan D. But like other smart businessmen you don't start moving to compromise on Plan D until you have pushed Plan A as far as it will go. All the other serious candidates sound like they'll fight tooth and nail to try and get a few of their ideas added to whatever Congress wants. That's not enough for me anymore. I want fundamental conservative change and we need a President willing to shoot for that lofty goal.

[DTxAg]

So your opposition is political, not fiscal? He could just give a vague outline in flowery conservative sounding language like all the others. I appreciate that he isn't.

Personally, I MIGHT be better off under 9-9-9, but I can't be sure until the final plan is unveiled where he doesn't contradict himself (like saying charitable contributions are the only deduction while saying medical stuff is also a deduction).

Nominating someone whose plan increases taxes on lots of people is a horrible idea politically. Introducing a national sales tax without simultaneously repealing the 16th Amendment is a recipe for disaster. And until Cain says that the 9-9-9 plan is just a starting point for discussion, it is the central policy in his campaign.

[Brookhaven]

Change makes me nervous,...

Bingo, you have nailed the biggest issue people have about the 9-9-9 plan.

Some people would rather stay stuck in a deep hold forever, because they're afraid if they attempt to climb out they might hurt themselves.

[annieokie]

Rick was really put in a bind last night.

1.First Huntsmans statement: ".....but I won't mention your religion, OH!, sorry Rick."

Perry wouldn't/couln't respond to that one either.

2. Romney with the uninsured children statement:

Perry wouldn't/couldn't respond to that, as most of those uninsured would be illegals, and he didin't want to go there either.

I suspect, due to those statements by nasty Huntsman and Romney, Perry was set up for disaster last night. Pre-arranged PILE on/Gotcha.

[Brookhaven]

Cain has stated that the tax will only be on new items, not re-sold items. So only the first owner would pay the 9% tax on the house. However, I am concerned that because everyone would scramble for pre-owned housing, the new housing market would go down even further. Not a good thing. Current new homes have the 35% income tax built into the price. Cain replaces that with a 9% income tax. By the time you add the 9% sales tax, I think it would be a wash.

Of course, Cain could also add an expention for new homes (as a trade off for the home interest deduction going away--something I support). The plan right now is just a framework, not the finished product.

[Pan_Yan]

I think it’s pretty obvious you and I have the same basic goals and agree on the same fundamentals. We may not agree on which is exactly the right path to get us where we need to go but we don’t have to. I also think we have the same concerns about the candidates and their vision and plans. Thanks for the discussion, I enjoyed it.

[pfflier]

I already pay 10% state/city sales tax at the point of sale anyway. That won't change.

I already pay 21% income tax to the feds under the existing tax structure.

Just using those two figures, I pay 31% of my income JUST TO EXIST. That ignores state income tax and local property tax.

Under Cain's 9-9-9 plan, I pay 9% flat tax plus 9% consumption tax for a total of 18% to the feds.

Add the existing state and local sales tax, I pay 28%

Not only is MY tax rate reduced, but 50% of the population not currently paying income taxes will contribute 18% more than they used to.

I see it as a small reduction in my tax burden and a redistribution of the cost to be an American across the board, even to those who are illegal aliens and are sucking the life out of our country.

[TheOldLady]

Click the Pic               Thank you, JoeProBono

Harriet Bakes Gingerbread Snails for Gary

Follow the Exciting Adventures of Gary the Snail!

Abolish FReepathons
Go Monthly

Planning to donate at least $10? You can sponsor
one or more New Monthly Donors for no additional cost
FReepmail TheOldLady

[JohnKinAK]

You’re right there is no sense in even trying to reform the current 35% business tax, 35% income tax, the 15% Social Security & FICA tax plus all the other mics federal taxes out there.. Let’s just keep it the way it is, afterall if we change it the Dems could one day gain control of both Houses and the Presidency and just change it back.

Good Grief.

[DTxAg]

Point me to the last Presidential candidate who WON the White House running on a platform of increasing taxes on seniors, average families, “the poor”, small businesses, etc. And consider that Obama will likely be running on his tax plan of increasing taxes on millionaires.

[DTxAg]

I think it’s pretty obvious you and I have the same basic goals and agree on the same fundamentals. We may not agree on which is exactly the right path to get us where we need to go but we don’t have to. I also think we have the same concerns about the candidates and their vision and plans. Thanks for the discussion, I enjoyed it.

Same to you, PY.

[SoJoCo]

You know why you can’t? ‘Cus there isn’t one. Go read the damned thing before you spout non-sense.

I did, and for the life of me I can't find the part that allows it. It is a given that unless otherwise stated a simple majority is all that's needed to pass a law or accomplish an act. That's why only a majority vote in the House is needed to impeach someone but a supermajority is needed to remove them from office, because the Constitution specifies the 2/3rds vote for removal by the Senate but is silent on what is required by the House.

Now, perhaps you might like to reread the Constitution for your self and point out where the Constitution allows what you say it allows?