[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.