Posted on 10/23/2011 4:57:25 PM PDT by JOHN W K
In November of 2010 in Don’t be VAT stupid Herman Cain writes:
``A national retail sales tax on top of all the confusing and unfair taxes we have today is insane! It gives the out-of-control bureaucrats and politicians in denial one more tool to lie, deceive, manipulate and destroy this country.``
The fact is, Herman is now proposing a new tax, a national retail sales tax, in addition to taxing corporate profits and incomes, and also would tax the wages working people earn. Herman Cain essentially admitted in the above mentioned article his existing plan is ``insane!`` So, why do so many “conservatives” support this Washington Establishment Hobson’s Choice candidate whose mission is to give another taxing power to Congress with which to ``lie, deceive, manipulate and destroy this country``?
And why is it that our ``conservative`` talk show hosts give this former federal reserve bank chairman, a Washington Establishment insider, a pass on his ``opportunity zones`` which attack our free market system? Why do they not object to Mr. Cain proposing to give preferential treatment under law that would relieve residents living in his designated “opportunity zones” a duty to contribute an equal tax burden as those not within his designated zones? Is this proposed preference of commerce not in defiance of our founder’s intentions when they added the following words to our Constitution? “No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear or pay Duties in another.”
Why is it that our “conservative” talk show hosts are silent in connection with Herman Cain’s proposed assumption of power to enter the various united States to enforce unequal law and meddle in each State’s internal commerce when such activity defies the very words of our founder‘s intentions which are summarized as follows? “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.
The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State”.
Has FoxNews, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Schnitt, Mark Levin, Dennis Prager, Bill O'rielly, Mike Gallagher, Lee Rodgers, Neal Boortz, Doc Thompson, Tammy Bruce, Monica Crowley, or any talk show questioned Herman Cain’s proposed assumption of powers which is very similar to that of Obama’s Solyndra type “green deals” which were hatched to plunder the American Taxpayer’s federal treasury and loot it of BILLIONS OF DOLLARS?
And why is it than none of the above “conservative” media personalities are concerned that a power to “designate” geographical areas within each of the various united States to be an “opportunity zone” invites political partisanship of the most dangerous kind in that a democrat president, as exhibited by the Obama Administration, will use such power to reward friends and punish political enemies? I thought Rush Limbaugh was the fountain of all political knowledge and would see through this Washington Establishment’s cooked up scheme to enlarge its blackmailing powers over the States [e.g., federal highway funds and the Establishment’s No Child Left Behind Act] and further enslave the defenders of a free market system. And these complaints do not even take into account how Herman Cain’s proposal feeds the class warfare game which our folks in Washington have learned to play to perfection with their good-cop bad-cop routine which is engaged in by the leadership of both political parties, and done so in concert!
And finally, where is Mark Levin who continually informs us of the virtues of federalism who seems to have closed his eyes to a wolf in sheep’s clothing whose mission is admittedly designed to further erode the defined and limited powers of our federal government as summarized by our very own Supreme Court shortly after our Constitution’s Tenth Amendment was adopted to preserve and protect the virtues of federalism?
“The government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by an ordinary act.
Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.
If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law: if the latter part be true, then written constitutions are absurd attempts, on the part of the people, to limit a power in its own nature illimitable.
Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void.” ____ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)
JWK
"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law, 1858.
Of course it is. That's why Cain is proposing not to put a National Sales Tax on top of all the confusing and unfair taxes we have today but to eliminate all of the confusing and unfair taxes we have today and replace all of them with a simple 999 tax.
Is that so hard to understand?
One of the things I have not yet heard asked or explained about the national sales tax leg of 999 is this...
WHO Will be collecting the tax???
If retailers will be expected to figure, collect, and pay the 9% sales tax, then a lot (not all) of the concerns about the new system are valid.
BUT... If manufacturers will be paying the tax, based upon reported sales, then what we have is more like a 18 - 9 - 0 plan. Much of the concern over taxes being increased goes away, because manufacturers already pay far more than 18% tax on income and the cost of goods sold.
What people would see is the overall price of goods drop (because the existing tax code is gone), and a little notice on their price tag saying that the cost of their item includes a 9% NST. The retailer adds to that the local/state sales tax as usual, and the end cost to consumers is LESS THAN WHAT THEY PAY NOW!.
Cain’s plan takes the invisible “Sneak-Attaxes” at all levels of production, and consolidates and shrinks them to a single visible tax at the point of sale.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A BUSINESS TAX!....
It ALL ends up being passed on to the consumer.
We would be outraged if we knew how much tax we are actually paying to the federal government... especially those who think they are paying no tax at all.
I understand what you’re saying but the existing tax code is an income tax. It is much higher than what Herman is now suggesting though. In his article Herman did not say an income tax in a smaller form was okay. He only said abolishing the income tax, which is what the fair tax does, was appropriate.
Understand that I am not disrespecting Herman on this; it’s just that it’s not clear. It is obvious that the idea of keeping the income tax is something new to Herman for him to offer at this time.
Try actually READING what Cain said, not just put your own emotion based spin on it. 9-9-9 replaces, it does not add to, the existing tax code.
It was a violation of our Constitution then, and it is a violation of our Constitution now!
JWK
Somebody agues like a liberal, and that’s sad :(
What part of “on top of” do you not understand? Got to laugh at your post right out of the gate.
Somebody agues like a liberal, and that’s sad :(
John - get out read more.
You assign “establishment” connections for Mr Cain due to what was his one time in the gulag of government policy - the Federal Reserve, at a location - the regional Federal Reserve Bank in Kansas City, far removed from the power center in Washington, and the controlling Federal Reserve Bank in New York, and a position for which he was selected because of his knowledge and successful experience in business and industry in the Midwest - he understood the banking needs and issues in the region. Actually, Mr Cain’s lifetime experience places him farther removed from the Washington establishment than just about all the GOP candidates, with the possible exception of Ms Bachman. Is she who you are shilling for?
That’s as much time as I can give to responding to your rant; not that a whole lot more couldn’t be said - it could.
John - get out read more.
You assign “establishment” connections for Mr Cain due to what was his one time in the gulag of government policy - the Federal Reserve, at a location - the regional Federal Reserve Bank in Kansas City, far removed from the power center in Washington, and the controlling Federal Reserve Bank in New York, and a position for which he was selected because of his knowledge and successful experience in business and industry in the Midwest - he understood the banking needs and issues in the region. Actually, Mr Cain’s lifetime experience places him farther removed from the Washington establishment than just about all the GOP candidates, with the possible exception of Ms Bachman. Is she who you are shilling for?
That’s as much time as I can give to responding to your rant; not that a whole lot more couldn’t be said - it could.
What a steaming load of ::censored::
I’m sorry but your claim to know what the Founder intended based on nothing but your own opinions is absurd.
Did you read the various quotes I provided?
JWK
In your very 1st line, you demonstrate you have NO idea what is in 9-9-9.
Your level of arrogant ignorance is simply inexcusable in a supposed adult mind. The very 1st line of the article you wrote proves the rest of what you wrote pure idiocy.
Rather then try to defend the indefensible, try actually learning about 9-9-9 rather then write such ignorant drivel as this.
What so many detractors of Cain's plan fail to realize, is that it's politically impossible for Congress to raise a tax rate that affects EVERYONE.
That is one of the beauties of the 9% flat income tax portion. It's virtually untouchable by Congress. Same with the 9% sales tax. You can't raise it for just some of the people, while leaving your friends unaffected.
Those two pillars of Cain's tax plan strip the power to punish or reward certain constituencies from Congress forever. It completely tilts the balance of power back toward The People, which cannot be seen as anything but a vast improvement in the way our system of government operates.
I am not being emotional and my words stand by themselves. I have given just shy of $100 to Herman. You appear to be the emotional one here.
That's ok, just scrape it off your shoe.
The Constitution was amended as it was designed to be to allow for an income tax. I can see an argument for the same to happen for a national sales tax, but if you’re suggesting that we go back to a pre-1913 tax system, you’re dreaming.
It will NEVER happen.
Are you saying you are content to accept and live under what "progressives" imposed upon us in 1913?
Join the fight and start promoting the 32 word plan:
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
JWK
We are here today and gone tomorrow, but what is most important is what we do in between, and is what our children will inherit and remember us by.
“Which candidate are you trolling for here?”
I’m guessing Obama.
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.