Posted on 10/01/2011 3:37:24 PM PDT by JOHN W K
Phase 1 - 9-9-9
•Current circumstances call for bolder action.
•The Phase 1 Enhanced Plan incorporates the features of Phase One and gets us a step closer to Phase two.
•I call on the Super Committee to pass the Phase 1 Enhanced Plan along with their spending cut package.
•The Phase 1 Enhanced Plan unites Flat Tax supporters with Fair tax supporters.
•Achieves the broadest possible tax base along with the lowest possible rate of 9%.
•It ends the Payroll Tax completely – a permanent holiday!
•Zero capital gains tax
•Ends the Death Tax.
•Eliminates double taxation of dividends
•Business Flat Tax – 9%
◦Gross income less all investments, all purchases from other businesses and all dividends paid to shareholders.
◦Empowerment Zones will offer additional deductions for payroll employed in the zone.
•Individual Flat Tax – 9%.
◦Gross income less charitable deductions.
◦Empowerment Zones will offer additional deductions for those living and/or working in the zone.
•National Sales Tax – 9%.
◦This gets the Fair Tax off the sidelines and into the game.
Phase 2 – The Fair Tax
•Amidst a backdrop of the economic boom created by the Phase 1 Enhanced Plan, I will begin the process of educating the American people on the benefits of continuing the next step to the Fair Tax.
•The Fair Tax would ultimately replace individual and corporate income taxes.
•It would make it possible to end the IRS as we know it.
•The Fair Tax makes our exported goods and services the most competitively internationally than any other tax system.
Phase 1 Enhanced Plan – Summary
•Unites all tax payers so we all pay income taxes and no one pays payroll taxes
•Provides the least incentive to evade taxes and the fewest opportunities to do so
•Lifts a $430 billion dead-weight burden on the economy due to compliance, enforcement, collection, etc.
•Is fair, neutral, transparent, and efficient
•Ends nearly all deductions and special interest favors
•Ends all payroll taxes
•Ends the Death Tax •Features zero tax on capital gains and repatriated profits
•Lowest marginal rates on production
•Allows immediate expensing of business investments
•Eliminates double taxation of dividends
•Increases capital formation. Capital per worker drives productivity and wage growth
•Capital formation will aid capital availability for small businesses
•Features a platform to launch properly structured Empowerment Zones to revitalize our inner cities
•We all know the Fed has tripled the money supply since 2008. They have been printing money out of thin air to finance the Obama spending machine. While true Fed reform that restores sound money may have to wait for my election, the best thing we can do now is to pursue policies that increase the DEMAND for dollars to help mitigate the risks associated with the increase in the supply.
•Pro-growth economic policies equal a strong dollar policy
Maybe it’s because I’m a woman and I’ve done 100% of the shopping for my family for two decades, but prices do fluctuate.
I’ve seen the price of chicken skyrocket up to $1.89 a pound, then dive down to $0.69 a pound within a six month period. I’ve seen coffee go up and down. In 1987, the price of a name-brand pair of jeans was $50. Today? $50.
The price of electronics are known so well for dropping, that it’s normal to wait a year or three after new technology for everyone to jump on board.
Last year I spent $6.00 on OP brand white t-shirts at walmart. The night before last I spent $4.88 on the same t-shirts.
I pay a flat-rate of $50 a month for my cell phone, unlimited calling and text. That was impossible just four years ago.
I remember when we thought we’d never see gas drop below a dollar a gallon again (it had been years), then it did. And it stayed there for many months.
Yes. Prices go up and down. Markets fluctuate. The law of supply and demand does work.
From Herman Cains own website:
Phase 1 - 9-9-9 Current circumstances call for bolder action. The Phase 1 Enhanced Plan incorporates the features of Phase One and gets us a step closer to Phase two. I call on the Super Committee to pass the Phase 1 Enhanced Plan along with their spending cut package.
Where I live, I only see reduced prices in the flyers when they go on sale. Next thing I know the regular price is up another $1. I truly have not seen true price reduction.
1. You need to destroy the existing tax code because it is no longer concerned with providing funds to operate the Federal Government. The loopholes are unbelievable. Its use to ensure reelection of various Congressional Critters is even worse, And some how, I am not sure how, its use as a social engineering device is worse than the first two factors I mentioned combined.
2. Tax revenue needs to be linked to some economic factors. Otherwise you recreate our present budgeting system that has an automatic 8 % annual increase. That's what 4 times inflation? When was the last time you had an 8 % raise? If the economy goes up taxes go up - okay that seems reasonable. When the economy goes down taxes go up too. “Lucy, you got some explaining to do”!
3. With nearly half the total population not paying income taxes there is something seriously wrong. Responsibility (paying taxes) is no longer linked to anything. When this happens the probability for a violent change of governmental directions goes way up - Russia 1918 and Germany in the late 1920s come to mind.
The tax code will be changed, for better or worse. My only question is will it be done peacefully or not?
IMHO the “Super Committee” Is a travesty of American governance.
It should not even exist let alone be called upon for favors.
Our Government with all of its gridlock was designed to move slowly and it was designed to represent the people, not the “Super committee”
Is Anyone here represented by the “Super Committee”?
I am ashamed of the republicans that would even give the super committee credence let alone be a part of it.
I am shutting the EFF up now because I admire Herman Cain, but he has some questions to answer.
I am ashamed of the republicans that would even give the super committee credence let alone be a part of it.
***************
Amen. I loved what Newt said about that stupid idea.
The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money
Once these words are added to our Constitution, Congress is forced into making the transition to laying and collecting imposts and duties, (taxes at our water‘s edge) and internal excise taxes on “judiciously selected“ articles of consumption, with an emergency tax that can be apportioned among the states if shortfalls arise, and, the ugly head of income taxation will have been laid to rest!
Herrman Cain was a unknown nobody in politics until he started carrying the “fairtax” banner. as soon as Mr. Cain was catapulted into the presidential lime light because of the fairtax crowds loyal support, he dropped the fairtax and jumped to the dark side, and now promotes what the Washington Establishment has been trying to get since the 1980s ___ an across the board consumption tax [national sales tax, valued added tax, fairtax, etc] while keeping alive income taxes!
JWK
Health care by consent of the governed (Article 5) our amendment process --- tyranny by a PROGRESSIVE majority vote in Congress!
Double Taxation? How is not wanting to pay taxes twice for the same thing Liberal.
9% income tax + 9% consumption tax is double taxation. Slightly uncon.
Same people 2 taxes. No thanks.
“WTF is an empowerment zone?”
guess you forgot when Reagan and Jack Kemp first introduced the idea
Wha...? An income tax and a consumption tax constitute an unconstitutional double tax? What sort of nonsense is that?
JWK
“The apportionment of representation and taxation by the same scale is just; it removes the objection, that, while Virginia paid one sixth part of the expenses of the Union [under the Articles of Confederation], she had no more weight in public counsels than Delaware, which paid but a very small portion” 3 Elliot‘s 41
JWK
“…a national revenue must be obtained; but the system must be such a one, that, while it secures the object of revenue it shall not be oppressive to our constituents.”___ Madison, during the creation of our Nation’s first revenue raising Act
JWK
“…..with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities“. Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address
This rule of apportionment,which precludes the class warfare game now being played upon us by our folks in Washington, is articulated in several of our State Ratification documents, e.g.. see Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New Hampshire; June 21, 1788
Fourthly That Congress do not lay direct Taxes but when the money arising from Impost, Excise and their other resources are insufficient for the Publick Exigencies; nor then, untill Congress shall have first made a Requisition upon the States, to Assess, Levy, & pay their respective proportions, of such requisitions agreeably to the Census fixed in the said Constitution in such way & manner as the Legislature of the State shall think best and in such Case if any State shall neglect, then Congress may Assess & Levy such States proportion together with the Interest thereon at the rate of six per Cent per Annum from the Time of payment prescribed in such requisition-
Now, let us take a look at the founder’s clear intentions for any general tax laid among the States:
Pinckney addressing the S.C. ratification convention with regard to the rule of apportionment says:
“With regard to the general government imposing internal taxes upon us, he contended that it was absolutely necessary they should have such a power: requisitions had been in vain tried every year since the ratification of the old Confederation, and not a single state had paid the quota required of her. The general government could not abuse this power, and favor one state and oppress another, as each state was to be taxed only in proportion to its representation“__ 4 Elliot‘s, S.C., 305-6
Also see: “The proportion of taxes are fixed by the number of inhabitants, and not regulated by the extent of the territory, or fertility of soil” 3 Elliot`s, 243, “Each state will know, from its population, its proportion of any general tax” Mr. George Nicholas, during the ratification debates of our Constitution
And, Mr. Madison goes on to remark about Congress’s “general power of taxation” that, "they will be limited to fix the proportion of each State, and they must raise it in the most convenient and satisfactory manner to the public." 3 Elliot‘s, 255
And then there is Mr. PENDLETON‘S comment which goes directly to the evil of democracy being corrected by the rule of apportionment:
“The apportionment of representation and taxation by the same scale is just; it removes the objection, that, while Virginia paid one sixth part of the expenses of the Union [under the Articles of Confederation], she had no more weight in public counsels than Delaware, which paid but a very small portion” 3 Elliot‘s 41
Finally, the most fundamental rule of constitutional law is to carry out the intentions of those who framed and ratified the Constitution. This rule is stated as follows:
“The fundamental principle of constitutional construction is that effect must be given to the intent of the framers of the organic law and of the people adopting it. This is the polestar in the construction of constitutions, all other principles of construction are only rules or guides to aid in the determination of the intention of the constitution’s framers.”--- numerous citations omitted, Vol.16 American Jurisprudence, 2d Constitutional law (1992 edition), pages 418-19, Par. 92. Intent of framers and adopters as controlling
Herman Cain's national sales tax would deny to the people of those states who pay the lion's share under it their representation in Congress proportionately equal to their contribution!
Our founding fathers understood the importance of tying both representation and taxation by the same standard and they commanded by our Constitution, representation with proportional obligation, or, one vote one dollar if and when Congress ever found it necessary to enter the States and collect a tax directly from the people. And it is this part of the rule of apportionment (one vote one dollar) which pinko progressives hate with a passion because it would discourage the Congressional Delegations of those states with large pinko Congressional Delegations such as New York, California, Pennsylvania, etc., from using their large representation in Congress to recklessly spend money from the federal treasury, and it does this by requiring them to return home with a bill in their hand for their State to pay whenever Congress spends more than is brought in from imposts, duties and miscellaneous excise taxes. Progressives just love their one man one vote part of the Constitution, but when it comes time for that one vote one dollar part of our Constitution to be enforced they run and hide and pretend our Constitution does not mean what our founders intended it to mean.
JWK
"On every question of construction [of the Constitution], carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."--Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The Complete Jefferson, p. 322.
JWK
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.