Now that’s funny.
The problem with article is it ignores that fact that in exchange for 9% sales tax you get flat rate of 9%. That would offset a 20% tax on a car.
I think he missed the point - 9 percent would replace ALL other taxes, if I’m understanding Cain - so the city/state/fed would each get 3 percent, right?
Folks, NEVER support any legislation that calls for a simultaneous federal income tax with a federal sales tax.
That is the proverbial camel’s nose under the tent.
You’ll find even leftists supporting this. They’ll take a massive reduction in taxes in order to get this through.
Why?
Because after Cain leaves office, they will turn 9-9-9 into 19-19-19 then 29-29-29.
And remember those three numbers get added together and passed down the food chain to the consumer.
I like Cain the most of all the candidates. And I like the idea of a federal sales tax REPLACING the federal income tax and reducing taxes wherever possible, 9-9-9 is a really, really bad idea.
ML/NJ
uh uh to the tax and this person’s solution, which is bouncing off of one to another.
nope
Why would we want to tamp down demand? Things grow and demand more. We want to grow and expand not die off.
I dont think the 999 plan has legs. too expensive and intrusive. I want less governemtn not more.
He lost me at the carbon (the building block of physical life) tax.
Our founders would have put these envirowackos in the nut house.
Actually, it’s not that bad an idea.
He openly states that the carbon tax is just to raise revenue in lieu of a sales tax. Nothing undrhanded there.
And while energy costs would definetely surge, he’s right that they would be offset by the reductions in corporate and personal taxes.
Let’s face it folks, the money has to come from somewhere...
Of course politically it’s a non-starter anyway - mainly because of the kind of reactions you’ll see here.
Much better to shout “something must be done” I guess than to actually consider what that might be.
Kinda like the OWS people that way...
TOTAL: $380 billion from a carbon tax? How about a 9% cut in federal spending instead?
I like Cain, but he needs to prove he is more than a one trick pony. The answer to every question can’t be 9-9-9.
Lie #1. It doesn't mention the “empowerment zone” ghetto tax deductions at who knows how much of a rate. It doesn't treat everyone equally.
It also claims everyone will save 15% off their personal tax bill from eliminating the payroll taxes. That is less than truthful because half of that is a savings to business, and there is nothing to say that it will be passed on to employees.
The 9% sales tax is a major turd in the punch bowl for the average Joe.
There is nothing in the plan on his website that says it wont be charged on used items or on services. That would be a major hit to consumers.
Savings would lose 9% of their value instantly. ( Taxed twice).
Seniors get hosed big time by having SS income taxed at the full 9%, even those just scraping by.
It has zero chance of ever passing and once you take that away, what the hell is left of Mr 999 ?
The “Cain train” is the fast track to the Romney nomination.
The writer’s name is Green Lantern and it wants a carbon tax? People are getting too hung up on the 3 numbers Herman Cain is using instead of looking at this as 3 separate taxes. As long as there is a Constitutional amendment that prohibits raising the consumer tax with dropping the income tax equally, I don’t see a problem with the eventual transition from one to the other. A carbon tax is just plain evil. If green energy can’t stand on it’s own, it can wait until the day that it really is a viable source of energy. Taxing other sources of energy beyond what we can afford will only make that energy more affordable to other countries who don’t buy into the green movement.
Cain needs to focus more on who he is and how he thinks instead of his plan.
When he sells himself, he wins.
Selling his plan is costing him more than he knows.
The primary concepts behind the plan is what is important... simple and TRANSPARENT.
I don’t support the NST either... but I don’t think we should discard Cain because of an aspect of his plan we KNOW won’t get passed.
How about that tax from the Spanish-American war?
I can see great resistance in his future.
OK, I stopped reading at carbon tax.
But I don’t like the 9,9,9 plan because the next time the dems are incontrol, it will be the 50,50,50 plan.
I have long been an advocate of the Fair Tax. I still support it. I despise income taxes, and I am not alone. The Founders did as well. That’s why it took a constitutional amendment to implement an income tax.
I believe in repealing the income tax. I will support any lawful, sane American who wants to repeal the income tax. It is such a tool for manipulation of social and economic outcomes, and such a tool for attacking freedoms, and such a tool for creating class conflict, that I can only agree with the Founders. An income tax has such a potential for true evil that it never should be considered by anyone at all.
A sales tax, on the other hand, can also be manipulated. Tax exemption cards and numbers can be handed out, and constituencies can be rewarded by use of exemptions. What’s much harder, though, is finely tuning these exemptions. Application must be made for them individually, approval must be approved and granted, and finally, the approval must be forwarded to the beneficiary.
What a rational sales tax does, though, is to establish a rational level of taxation. It is easily seen and easily applied and easily collected. It also has a broader tax base that ethically includes all Americans and exempts no one. This is everyone’s nation, and everyone should have to participate in funding it as well as benefiting from it.
What is the rational step to achieve a national sales tax? Adherents to the old system will NOT give up their income made on servicing that old cumbersome system.
It is first the implementation of a flat tax with a target of gradually removing deductions and loopholes to zero.
During this period, a drive for a constitutional amendment must be initiated that will simultaneously (1) repeal the 16th amendment income tax, (2) prohibit any legislative income tax, and (3) institute a national sales tax that is limited to raising no more than X% of the gross national product.
Once enacted, the old is gone and the new has come.
If there is one commodity that could bear the entire sales tax by itself it might be gasoline/diesel. There are a limited number of fuel stations, there is a complex production process, and there is a need for fuel. All these would make it easy to implement and collect.
It would also have to raise some 2 trillion dollars a year.
Using the follow assumptions and numbers:
An american household uses approximately 1200 gallons a year. There are approximately 100,000,000 households. That equals about 120 billion gallons used each year in fuel use.
We need to raise 2. trillion dollars a year to fund the government. That’s about $17 a gallon for fuel on top of the current $4 a gallon. All of your ONLY your FEDERAL taxes would be 21 dollars a gallon at the pump.
$400 for a fill-up.
I’m sure that wouldn’t change driving habits. Tell the Amish to start a buggy factory now.
I wasn't going to bother to read the whole thing till I read your comment. Yikes!
A carbon tax might be "revenue-neutral" from the government's standpoint, but it would be devastating for the economy. A tax on carbon emissions would instantly cause the write-down of trillions of dollars of industrial capital in the United States.
Production would be reduced and, in some cases, moved out of the country. Layoffs would ensue.
The supposed return of the proceeds to consumers wouldn't matter much if there weren't anything to buy. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.
Watch Australia to see how a revenue-neutral carbon tax plays out. They just passed one. Of course, the government may fall because of it before it's implemented.
Herman Cain has started a conversation about what new VAT taxes the government should impose. Real conservative /s