Posted on 10/10/2011 6:46:18 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
There is a difference between “defending” a concept and becoming “defensive”.
That’s under currently-configured markets though, no? So, for instance, if 9-9-9 became the law of the land, we’d likely have business flooding back into the country due to our newly-minted low taxes. I’d have to imagine that it would generate a lot more than the current convoluted, BS system in place.
Ah those pesky DETAILS.
RE: There is a difference between “defending” a concept and becoming “defensive”.
Yes I know, but I’m not allowed to change the title.
Taxes?
BS!
Not owed; not needed!!!!!
http://www.devvy.com/notax.html
Maybe...let ‘em have a bake sale now and then...but watch ‘em verrrry closely!
Just Plain Dick
Semper Watching!
Remember what Cong David Crockettsaid...
RE: That’s under currently-configured markets though, no?
YEP, that’s my feeling. What these guys are doing is STATIC scoring, failing to take into account incentives that motivate consumer and business behavior.
They did it with Kennedy, Reagan and Bush II as well.
It is not a practical solution and will expand the tax base for future periods among other things.
Cain needs to handle this by saying it is a general outline proposal for discussion purposes with Congress which is where tax legislation originates. Point is we need to do something to insure a reduced level of taxation on profits from transactions that create economic growth and jobs.
Real problem is to get control of spending.
You can't afford to get into specifics about general tax legislation in the context of a political campaign. You can say, deduct dividends; or reduce the effective rate on cap gains; but you can't talk about restructuring the tax system other than in general terms because when you do, you will get picked part on the technical detail.
9-9-9 will get through Congress?? Yeh right. It’s nothing more than a concept. Why not 888? Why not 10-10-10?? Why not 10-9-8???
$300 Billion short? So, a $300 Billion dollar tax cut, to boot. I like this plan more and more...
And current revenues are well over a trillion dollars short of current expenditures. So where will Cain cut $1.5 trillion to $2 trillion in spending to balance the budget?
I wonder if it’s prudent for a candidate in a primary election — especially a candidate so new on the political scene — to tie himself so tightly to a specific economic proposal.
The fact that he has done so, is, in my opinion, a side-effect of his inexperience in electoral politics.
I’m not saying the idea itself is a bad one. It does sound good to me and sounds like it could be one of many ways to stimulate economic growth in this country. But simply eliminating the capital gains tax might be a more direct way, and whatever the way, Cain has basically wrapped himself in this plan so tightly as to leave himself no room for amended ideas on the subject.
Again, inexperience hurts. We’re looking at it in action.
That’s a bi *IF* current system would be scrapped. It still is problematic when you have a 9% sales tax tacked on to state and local sales taxes. It will add up every time people purchase anything. I already pay almost 9% state and local taxes. That would mean paying 18 cents for every dollar spent going to taxes.
“Cain needs to handle this by saying it is a general outline proposal for discussion purposes with Congress which is where tax legislation originates.”
I’m concerned that he won’t, and it’ll become an albatross around his neck.
As I said before, only with constitutional amendment (limiting sales tax to no more than 9%). Otherwise, it would soon be 20%
What the heck are those “Empowerment Zones” shown on the upper right of the second page?
If that is another way to redistribute income, or to treat one class of the unemployed more favorably than another, I want no part of it.
I’m willing to try something different from someone who has experience in business. What we’ve got certainly isn’t working. We’ve tried the Community Organizer; and all we got was divisive “community organizing”.
The media and the GOP establishment seems to be pushing Romney, Huntsman and to some degree Perry at this point; although the media will do an about-face if they’re nominated. It’s doubtful either of them can beat Obama. They’re studiously trying to ignore Herman Cain. A REAL, successful black man who doesn’t toe the “victim” line scares them to death. Just like they attacked and slandered Sarah Palin. A REAL, successful woman who doesn’t toe the Democrat feminazi line scares them to death.
Even though they changed the assumptions to arrive at this number, they act like it’s a BAD thing to have to cut spending. LOL
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.