Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Norquist: 9-9-9 Isn't a Tax Hike. But...
Slate ^ | Oct. 12, 2011 | David Weigel

Posted on 10/12/2011 7:03:13 PM PDT by LonelyCon

"Now," says Norquist, "There are two or three problems with the Fair Tax." (That's the national sales tax, a replacement for all income and FICA taxes, that Cain has long supported -- it's the eventual goal of 9-9-9.) "Because there is a transition period of some length with any tax phase-in, the fear that people have about the sales tax is that, at some point, Democrats win the House or the Presidency, and you get stuck with both the income tax and the new sales tax. Under 9-9-9 they deliberately set up a time period where you have three taxes. They say they are doing what some of us have feared could happen. Even if you say the income tax is going away, there's a chance of getting both."

Second problem: The sales tax has proven to be a "political loser" when torn apart in the heat of a campaign.

Third problem: "Let's say you're 20 years old. You don't care what tax you pay -- you haven't paid any yet. But if I'm 65, I've spent my whole life paying income taxes. I'm about to stop paying them. What's the benefit to me if you bring on a sales tax? Thanks -- you've just made every retired person's pension 33 percent less valuable."

(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 999; cain; norquist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last
This is my only problem with Cain right now. I do not like the idea of a national sales tax at all.
1 posted on 10/12/2011 7:03:18 PM PDT by LonelyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

Are you worried about how it effects you personally, or the country generally?


2 posted on 10/12/2011 7:06:45 PM PDT by Repeal The 17th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th
I would gladly pay a 9% GST in exchange for a MTR of 9%.
3 posted on 10/12/2011 7:09:12 PM PDT by Perdogg (I will support any Republican candidate against 0bama in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

You can buy used stuff and save a ton!


4 posted on 10/12/2011 7:12:05 PM PDT by refermech
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

I’d like to see the calculation behind the “33% less valuable” claim. Either way, seniors, you’re gonna have to re-equilibrate your perspective. Medicare and SS are destroying the country. They must be reformed.


5 posted on 10/12/2011 7:12:05 PM PDT by Flightdeck (If you hear me yell "Eject, Eject, Eject!" the last two will be echos...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th

For the country generally. It’s all too easy to raise a sales tax. If you raise people’s income tax, they see a giant change on April 15 and they get pissed. But if you just raise the sales tax a half a percent or so every couple of years, no one cares. “Just a few pennies or dollars more on every little purchase, what’s the big deal, right?”, most people think if they notice the change at all.


6 posted on 10/12/2011 7:14:29 PM PDT by LonelyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: refermech
You can buy used stuff and save a ton!

What a great idea for creating jobs! Why hasn't any candidate run with your slogan?
7 posted on 10/12/2011 7:17:26 PM PDT by LonelyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

The sales tax in Texas now is about 400% of what they swore it would never go above to when it was instituted.


8 posted on 10/12/2011 7:19:54 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

I suppose if congress included in the bill to require a 3/4 majority to raise the tax and a simple majority to lower the tax that you would still oppose?


9 posted on 10/12/2011 7:20:35 PM PDT by Repeal The 17th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

All these “older tax payers” are sickening in how they feel that they should have nothing cut or made more difficult on them since they’ve been paying taxes all there life. I’m in my mid twenties and have been paying medicare and social security taxes for 9 years. I’ll never see a penny of that money and its all going to fund these liabilities.

Privatize social security, eliminate Medicare. Implement Cain’s plan!


10 posted on 10/12/2011 7:26:56 PM PDT by JosephMama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

Why not put out some projections of taxes paid now against what Cain is proposing at various incomes and let the voters have a look?


11 posted on 10/12/2011 7:30:01 PM PDT by reefdiver ("Let His day's be few And another takes His office")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th
I suppose if congress included in the bill to require a 3/4 majority to raise the tax and a simple majority to lower the tax that you would still oppose?

That's a procedural impossibility. One Congress cannot restrict the actions of a future Congress. All a future Congress would have to do to raise taxes would be to, by simple majority, repeal the 3/4 requirement and then, by simple majority, raise the tax. The only way to restrict the action of Congress is by constitutional amendment.
12 posted on 10/12/2011 7:36:08 PM PDT by LonelyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

I am also of the belief that a national sales tax would require a constitutional amendment.


13 posted on 10/12/2011 7:41:23 PM PDT by Repeal The 17th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th
I am also of the belief that a national sales tax would require a constitutional amendment.

I'd want the 9-9-9 to be in the constitution to prevent it from becoming 12-12-12. After the next Republican president, the pendulum will shift back to the Dems at some point.

14 posted on 10/12/2011 7:43:34 PM PDT by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
I'd want the 9-9-9 to be in the constitution to prevent it from becoming 12-12-12.

And that is a recipe for absolute disaster. When WWIII breaks out and the government needs money to build ships and buy bullets and whatever else, do you really want to wait on a constitutional amendment to raise taxes to pay for the war? What if some of the state legislatures are filled with appeasers and refuse to vote for a tax increase because they know they can stop the war that way. Sorry, but I think that's a really dumb idea.
15 posted on 10/12/2011 7:55:41 PM PDT by LonelyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: refermech

I’ve been buying used stuff and saving a ton for years...but some people are too brainwashed into “needing” new stuff to try it for themselves. I do believe that I will still need to purchase new toilet paper, though...a tradeoff I am willing to make in exchange for having much more take home pay with which to purchase it.


16 posted on 10/12/2011 7:59:11 PM PDT by stefanbatory (Insert witty tagline here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

Pardon my ignorance because i haven’t read up on 9-9-9 but is the 9% national sales tax in ADDITION to state sales tax? or does it replace it?


17 posted on 10/12/2011 8:00:31 PM PDT by annelizly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: refermech
You can buy used stuff and save a ton!

The price of used stuff will go up. Have you tried to buy a used car lately?

18 posted on 10/12/2011 8:00:31 PM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon
What's the benefit to me if you bring on a sales tax? Thanks -- you've just made every retired person's pension 33 percent less valuable."

Okay so we drop the sales tax, and settle on 9-9, abolish social security and medicare. :-)

19 posted on 10/12/2011 8:01:53 PM PDT by Rightwing Conspiratr1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

Simple - you put 9-9-9 in the Constitution but include a provision that says it can be temporarily raised in times of national emergency by a 2/3 or 3/4 vote of both houses of Congress.


20 posted on 10/12/2011 8:02:58 PM PDT by RightFighter (It was all for nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: annelizly

9-9-9 has nothing to do with state sales taxes or state income taxes. We live in a federal system; each state sets its own sales taxes and income taxes.


21 posted on 10/12/2011 8:05:21 PM PDT by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon
If you raise people’s income tax, they see a giant change on April 15 and they get pissed.

Bullcrap.

If people had to pull out the checkbook and pay it all at once, you would have a point. But when it is "withheld", you never even feel it. Having it felt at the point of purchase would be more painful than it is right now.

In fact, most people get all excited about "a big tax refund!", like they haven't been screwed out of interest when the government took and held too much from them.

22 posted on 10/12/2011 8:12:38 PM PDT by Anitius Severinus Boethius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon
Photobucket
23 posted on 10/12/2011 8:16:40 PM PDT by FatherofFive (Islam is evil and must be eradicated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annelizly

It’s on TOP of the state, city, county, local, etc sales taxes. Some locations, people could end up paying 20% sales tax on their purchases.


24 posted on 10/12/2011 8:17:48 PM PDT by MissouriConservative (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon
I would like to see the income tax totally repealed BEFORE instituting any form of the flat, or fair tax.

Insofar as Cain's 9-9-9 plan and Michelle Bachmann's remark about turning it upside-down (quite a gaff from the Congresswoman), here's the one who wears the 6-6-6...

OBAMA666
25 posted on 10/12/2011 8:18:10 PM PDT by FrankR (What you resist...PERSISTS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon
But if I'm 65, I've spent my whole life paying income taxes. I'm about to stop paying them. What's the benefit to me if you bring on a sales tax? Thanks -- you've just made every retired person's pension 33 percent less valuable."

Duh! This is something I've been saying. And seniors vote. Just wait until they find out Cain wants these people, who have been taxed all their lives, on their earnings, their investments, their savings, that now Cain wants them to pony up again--30% more! Yeah right!

9-9-9 is absolutely toxic. The sooner WE accept that, the better. I know it's nice to chug kool-aid and tell yourself Cain is the One, since Palin isn't the One, and last time Fred Thompson wasn't the One. It's easy to deny reality. But reality will win in the end. Better to face it square on.

26 posted on 10/12/2011 8:22:40 PM PDT by Huck (NO FEDERAL SALES TAX -- UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: refermech
You can buy used stuff and save a ton!

If the cost of new stuff goes up 30%, why wouldn't sellers of used stuff raise their prices? Hmmmmm?

How about this? Instead of living in your fantasy world of unicorns and moonbeams, show me a place where a 30% consumption tax is in place and working.

27 posted on 10/12/2011 8:24:13 PM PDT by Huck (NO FEDERAL SALES TAX -- UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Anitius Severinus Boethius

I agree. A much simpler, less controversial way to deal with taxation is to make everyone do what I do: pay quarterly taxes. Let everyone keep all their earnings, and then write a check four times a year. That will set the table for real reform. And that’s for ALL fed taxes, including entitlement taxes.


28 posted on 10/12/2011 8:26:29 PM PDT by Huck (NO FEDERAL SALES TAX -- UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Rightwing Conspiratr1

That’s a plan! (It would actual turn things around)


29 posted on 10/12/2011 8:28:02 PM PDT by achilles2000 ("I'll agree to save the whales as long as we can deport the liberals")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

Cain should not have come out with a specific plan because the vast majority won’t understand it and sure as hell won’t get a real explanation from the MSM


30 posted on 10/12/2011 8:36:52 PM PDT by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

It’s a question of what kind of country and economy and standard of living they would like their grandchildren to have.

Our current system shackles both domestic production and domestic capital formation.

By favoring foreign production of goods and imports with impoverishing huge trade imbalances, we have created a vicious circle of eroding our domestic manufacturing base and enabling capital formation in foreign countries, which then is recycled through ownership and credit interests by foreign entities in our businesses and government.

Our high borrowing and consumption and abysmal savings rates is precipitating a collapse in living standard and an inability to fund future pension and healthcare costs.

If they care at all about their grandchildren, they will work to create a new system which creates domestic jobs and incentivizes savings and capital formation.


31 posted on 10/12/2011 8:39:07 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annelizly

In other words, it’s in ADDITION to state sales taxes. And this is a “conservative” touting this nonsense.


32 posted on 10/12/2011 8:44:00 PM PDT by Huck (NO FEDERAL SALES TAX -- UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

If that is your reason for not liking the FairTax, then you are flawed in your thinking.

The income tax has been increased little by little incrementally after each of the 5 major tax reforms since 1913. The rate creeps up and if it doesn’t then inflation moves more people into higher brackets which accomplishes the same thing as moving rates up.

So the income tax is deceptive, smoke and mirrors. And yes some people can be ticked off when they see their taxes go up but the tax policymakers can manipulate which groups get hit and which don’t, setting groups against each other.

According to the proposed FairTax legislation, the rate must be voted on each year by Congress. It will be there for all to see and yes Congress can raise it a little at a time but it will be for all to see, Congress won’t be able target certain groups, it’s much fairer that way.


33 posted on 10/12/2011 8:55:00 PM PDT by Hostage (The revolution needs a spark. The Constitution is dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

I don’t either but the country started out with sales and excise, duty taxes. Never an income tax..so any big reduction in that is a very good thing.


34 posted on 10/12/2011 8:58:13 PM PDT by fabian (" And a new day will dawn for those who stand long, and the forests will echo with laughter")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

Norquist would much rather have shariah and have YOU paying jizya. Anything he says is suspect.


35 posted on 10/12/2011 8:59:19 PM PDT by MestaMachine (obama kills)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th

1-2-3 on 9-9-9

1. It’s great economically OVERALL.
Art Laffer endorsed it. It will cut tax complaince dramatically and make USA more competitive.
2. It will have winners and losers.
For working taxpayers with middle or upper incomes - a plus.
For retirees who are done making money - a minus.
3. If there are millions of losers in the low-income retirees category ... it WILL NOT PASS. Santorum may be right. It will be demagogued to death.


36 posted on 10/12/2011 9:12:10 PM PDT by WOSG (“Legion of Acceptibility”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

I learned a long time ago never to put any credence in the words of a guy named Grover.


37 posted on 10/12/2011 9:19:53 PM PDT by Antoninus (Take the pledge: I will not vote for Mitt Romney under any circumstances. EVER.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightFighter
Simple - you put 9-9-9 in the Constitution but include a provision that says it can be temporarily raised in times of national emergency by a 2/3 or 3/4 vote of both houses of Congress.

Sorry, I know you're enthusiastic and trying to make this work, but I just don't think it could. First of all, we don't have 2/3 of Congress and certainly not 3/4 of states willing to put this into the Constitution. Even if we did, how would you define a national emergency? War, terror attack, depression, natural disaster, government shutdown, general strike? Would it have to affect the whole nation or just part of it? Who would decide what constitutes a national emergency? And what is temporary? Two weeks, four years, the duration of the emergency? And who decides that? These are not the types of things constitutions are made for. They are made to create a system of government, not to actually do the governing and set policy (i.e. tax rates).
38 posted on 10/12/2011 9:56:55 PM PDT by LonelyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

FUGN!

YOu fat pig at the trough of real Americans.

You and your College Republican brethern are pond scum.

GTH.


39 posted on 10/12/2011 10:10:38 PM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome
You and your College Republican brethern are pond scum.

Herman Cain talks about the College Republicans
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh0E3B9sU1Q
40 posted on 10/12/2011 10:30:16 PM PDT by LonelyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

so you like the income tax?

I agree that we should only have one or the other, and if given the choice, I prefer the voluntary sales tax.

Income taxes are servitude.


41 posted on 10/12/2011 10:34:08 PM PDT by Retired Greyhound (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon; All
I direct you to the text of the Cut, Cap & Balance Balanced Budget Amendment:

Article--

Section 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year, unless two-thirds of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a specific excess of outlays over receipts by a roll call vote.

Section 2. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed 18 percent of the gross domestic product of the United States for the calendar year ending before the beginning of such fiscal year, unless two-thirds of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a specific amount in excess of such 18 percent by a roll call vote.

Section 3. Prior to each fiscal year, the President shall transmit to the Congress a proposed budget for the United States Government for that fiscal year in which--
(1) total outlays do not exceed total receipts; and
(2) total outlays do not exceed 18 percent of the gross domestic product of the United States for the calendar year ending before the beginning of such fiscal year.

Section 4. Any bill that imposes a new tax or increases the statutory rate of any tax or the aggregate amount of revenue may pass only by a two-thirds majority of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress by a roll call vote. For the purpose of determining any increase in revenue under this section, there shall be excluded any increase resulting from the lowering of the statutory rate of any tax.

Section 5. The limit on the debt of the United States shall not be increased, unless three-fifths of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress shall provide for such an increase by a roll call vote.

Section 6. The Congress may waive the provisions of sections 1, 2, 3, and 5 of this article for any fiscal year in which a declaration of war against a nation-state is in effect and in which a majority of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress shall provide for a specific excess by a roll call vote.

Section 7. The Congress may waive the provisions of sections 1, 2, 3, and 5 of this article in any fiscal year in which the United States is engaged in a military conflict that causes an imminent and serious military threat to national security and is so declared by three-fifths of the duly chosen and sworn Members of each House of Congress by a roll call vote. Such suspension must identify and be limited to the specific excess of outlays for that fiscal year made necessary by the identified military conflict.

Section 8. No court of the United States or of any State shall order any increase in revenue to enforce this article.

Section 9. Total receipts shall include all receipts of the United States Government except those derived from borrowing. Total outlays shall include all outlays of the United States Government except those for repayment of debt principal.

Section 10. The Congress shall have power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation, which may rely on estimates of outlays, receipts, and gross domestic product.

Section 11. This article shall take effect beginning with the fifth fiscal year beginning after its ratification.'.


42 posted on 10/12/2011 10:40:08 PM PDT by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

And how far did that proposed amendment get? Dead in committee, that’s where. Not even to the floor, much less out to the states.

Know who the first person to propose a balanced budget amendment was? Thomas Jefferson. I’m not holding my breath for one to pass anytime in the next few centuries.


43 posted on 10/12/2011 10:50:18 PM PDT by LonelyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

You have a lot of company! The tax on food is especially onerous. Cain’s recent rise in the polls is the only reason anyone is paying attention.


44 posted on 10/13/2011 4:05:40 AM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Huck
And this is a “conservative” touting this nonsense.

And the Tea Party is buying it hook, line and sinker.

Go figure. Sigh...

45 posted on 10/13/2011 4:16:44 AM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon
I do not like the idea of a national sales tax at all.

But you would then support a complicated code that lets GE pay NO taxes?

46 posted on 10/13/2011 4:28:40 AM PDT by ThePatriotsFlag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

The beauty of a national sales tax is that one can’t “soak the rich”. Everyone pays for the services we all share. It’s Zero’s “fair” on steroids.

Art Laffer just endorsed 9-9-9. Supply side economics work.


47 posted on 10/13/2011 4:32:56 AM PDT by GatorGirl (Herman Cain 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Huck

Earnings: Under 9-9-9 their income tax will go down to 9%. As it stands now they pay their tax rate as well as payroll taxes, which would be eliminated.

Investments: Capital Gains tax will be zero. Right now they are taxed.

Savings: Not taxed under 9-9-9 or currently.

Yes they will have to pay 9% sales tax. But the savings from the cut in taxes on earnings and investments will more than make up for it for the vast majority of people.

They will also be buying goods on which corporate taxes of only 9% have been applied, as opposed to 35%. Price competition will be much more prevalent.

And, of course, they can always buy used!!


48 posted on 10/13/2011 4:40:02 AM PDT by GatorGirl (Herman Cain 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

You’re certainly a pessimist, aren’t you? A national emergency is anything that 3/4 of Congress says it is. Temporary could be defined by the amendment - as a first stab at it, I’d say that the increase could not extend beyond six months without re-authorization by 3/4 of Congress. That way, the Congress would be forced to continue to re-visit the rate increase, and go on record in support or opposition. Whatever problems you have with this, it would be far, far better than today’s system where rates can be raised at any time permanently by 50% + 1.


49 posted on 10/13/2011 9:56:54 AM PDT by RightFighter (It was all for nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: LonelyCon

richlowrie Rich Lowrie
Sales tax won’t raise prices! Its a REPLACEMENT tax, not an add on tax. It replaces taxes already embedded in prices. Marginal costs go down

http://twitter.com/#!/richlowrie


50 posted on 10/13/2011 10:00:26 AM PDT by Fred (But we are never going to survive unless we get a little crazy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson