Posted on 10/17/2011 11:08:56 AM PDT by RockyMtnMan
“Although since Cain actually does NOT have a detailed plan, or even much of a plan at all, I’m not sure what exactly is taxed and not taxed under the Cain tax proposal, except what he tells us from time to time.”
Actually he has the only plan that throws out the present status quo plan of failure and replaces it.
The 999 plan is dominating the political conversation and Cain now leads Romney in most national polls and in several state polls, including Iowa.
“With a national sales tax every products tax rate will be at the whim of the next Congress. Think about it. “
You should think about it...because that is the case in every election with or without the Cain Plan.
“Let’s hear an argument from Herman Cain himself that he wrote last November.”
I know you are not a liberal but you just used a liberal media tactic. You took Cain’s words out of context...here is what he said in entirety for those who have the time to discern truth from your fiction:
Don’t be VAT stupid
November 21, 2010
By Herman Cain
There’s one message from the 2010 elections that many so-called policy makers, political elites and analysts did not hear. Namely, the American people are not as uninformed and stupid as they think we are.
President Obama’s Debt Commission and the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Debt Reduction Task Force have both floated its ideas for reducing our nation’s runaway national debt. As CNNMoney.com reports, both sets of ideas echo each other in broad strokes. And both sets of ideas could confuse and confound the leaves off a tree.
These ideas are a long way from becoming law, but they are generating, as intended, much discussion about the merits of each idea.
The worst idea is a proposed national sales tax, which is a disguised VAT (value added tax) on top of everything we already pay in federal taxes.
Here are three of the biggest reasons the national retail sales tax is the worst idea on the table.
First, we have a spending problem in Washington, D.C. not a revenue problem. The Commission claims their goal is to reduce the deficits by $4 trillion over the next decade. The task force says its plan would save $6 trillion by 2020. It’s sort of like dueling promises that would never happen, because when has a proposed cut in Washington D.C. ever produced the intended savings over 10 years? Never!
Even worse is reason number two: In every country that has established a VAT with the promise of reducing their national debt, the VAT has eventually gone up or expanded on top of the existing tax structure. After discovering many of the tax grenades in the recently passed health care deform bill, which is already driving costs up and access down, it would be real easy for an overzealous bureaucrat to insert the language in the legislation “national retail and wholesale” tax.
For the liberal naysayers who say that would not happen, you lose! Just look at the Social Security system, Medicare and Medicaid. Over the years since their inception, taxes have gone up, benefits have gone down and they are still on a path of insolvency.
Both the Commission and the Task Force say very little about how costs would be contained, because that’s the real big bodacious problem. Even if their plans could achieve their stated goals over the next 10 years, the current administration and Congress have increased spending nearly $4 trillion in the last two years. And the only hope that it will slow down is the new change of control in the House of Representatives.
Giving the administration and Congress another tool to tax us and confuse us is like giving an alcoholic a key to the liquor store with no supervision, only to discover that he locks the door after he is safely inside.
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 third reason the national retail sales tax on top of all the taxes we already pay is a bad idea, is that there is already proposed legislation that replaces all of the federal taxes we pay. It replaces all current revenue. It supercharges our national economic growth, and puts the power of taxation back into the hands of the people who spend their money.
It’s called the Fair Tax. It’s as easy to understand as ABC!
That’s the problem. It’s fair. It is simple and understandable. But the politicians and bureaucrats do not want to give people more control of their own money. That’s why even though the legislation has been introduced in every session of Congress since 1999, it has not advanced.
People are not stupid. Maybe they will hear us in 2012.
My wife likes Cain but, the 9-9-9 plan has turned her off.
The thought of a 9% Nat’l sales tax is the killer.
Her logic is 9% Nat’l + 8% State, no deal.
I could likely sway her with logic but it points out a huge problem for Cain.
Plus the MSM is doing their best to discredit 9-9-9 and its author.
IMO the best thing Cain could do is to say something along the lines of..
‘I like my 9-9-9 plan because we must have a new tax code but I’m willing to listen to other ideas.’
I’ve got problems with the Fair Tax so that’s a non-starter for me.
But it's not the sales tax that is like VAT, it's the corporate tax that is like VAT. The corporate tax is on the revenue of each company that sells, whether to an end user or another company. That revenue isn't just profit, because almost every business deduction has been eliminated, so there aren't any real expenses being subtracted, just the cost of the goods purchased, which were already taxe by the business selling them.
There isn't enough of a plan published to know exactly how this corporate tax is structured, or a corporation buying goods avoids the end-user sales tax, or if they even can. If they can't, you can see how the tax spirals out of countrol (if every business pays 9% on 100% of all the parts that go into their manufacturing, and pays 9% on all the equipment they buy to do their manufacturing, and then they pay 9% on the new profit they get when they sell, and the next buyer pays 9% sales tax again, etc.).
But at it's base, given the elimination of deductions, it is pretty certain that the entire cost of an item will have been taxed, in bits and pieces, at the 9% corporate rate. The guy that pulls the raw material out of the ground, not being able to deduct the wages of the workers or the depreciation of their assets, pretty much pay 9% on their entire sale. The next guy probably doesn't have to count the cost of materials, but they also pay 9% on all their "added value". Hence the charge that it looks like a value Added tax.
The National Review explicitly calls the plan out on this -- that it has both a VAT, AND a Sales Tax, meaning it has the worst of both worlds. I certainly disagree with those who claim there is an 18% VAT, but I can see the argument that it's a 9% corporate VAT and a 9% user sales tax. IN any case, it's equivalent to paying 18% on the entire value of the item, because the corporations don't get deductions (we don't know if they get any or not, the plan isn't in place yet).
What I know for certain is that Cain doesn't think his plan is the best idea. I know that because under his vision, the 9-9-9 plan is temporary, an will be replaced with the FairTax. So he obviously thinks Fairtax is better than 9-9-9. I agree, although I don't like Fairtax either.
This reminds me of a football team that has 10 winning seasons under the same coach, and then loses one year and the owner claims that the problem is the coach and a new coach will fix it. Clearly, the previous 10 years show the coach isn't the reason they suddenly started losing. Maybe a better coach would do even better, but the problem that caused the losing season is something else, and replacing the coach won't fix that.
“Like I said, it was Cain in this very article that said it was OK to call it a vat:”
You are misrepresenting on a good day or lying on a bad day.
and the lie exposed:...
“The 9-9-9 plan is a really an 18 percent value-added tax plus a 9 percent income tax. Cain...Response: That’s an argument? That some might be able to give it a disagreeable label?...I don’t care what people call it”
So, Cain’s sarcasm by saying, “that’s an argument?...I don’t care what they call is beyond your ability to comprehend?”
lmao Charles....you Romney people are really desperate. You should get a room with Joe Scarborough.
“The National Review explicitly calls the plan out on this — that it has both a VAT, AND a Sales Tax, meaning it has the worst of both worlds.”
Yes, the NR if firmly entrenched in the Romney camp as well and their analysis in faulty. It is not a VAT. That is a clear lie. There argument that the corporate tax is also a VAT is also ridiculous, since the corporate tax rate is much lower. This will allow the small and medium sized companies who can’t hide beyond 100 Tax Attorneys pay much less in taxes.
I’ll side with Reagan economic advisor Art Laffer who knows a thing or two about turning bad economies around, who prefers Cain’s 999 Plan.
1) How’s he going to get around the Constitutional issues (the Sixteenth Amendment authorizing Congress to tax income and no amendment authorizing Congress to tax sales)?
2) A sales tax has looked better to many than an income tax because, among other things, supposedly it would be a one-time-only tax for something, less wasteful than having to file income tax every year, and less intrusive than having the IRS policing your income or returns. However, many critics say that the 9% sales tax will apply through the entire supply chain, taxing the same thing over and over again as value is added and as it moves from producer through distribution and retail. What’s in here to guarantee only retail sales are taxed?
3) If somehow he’s able to get around the Constitutional issues and the value-added issues, you've got another problem - the "tyranny of the status quo" which takes over about 100 days after the new guy is in office. Why not just get a bill passed immediately after taking office that features time-phased implementation such as: 1) immediately lowering both income and sales taxes to 9% as proposed (NO OTHER TAXES) and 2) mandating BOTH a gradually and complete phase-out of income tax while creating and phasing in a sales tax? Otherwise he risks getting us bogged down midstream with a sales tax without having passed a bill abolishing the income tax - a Socialists dream.
4) He needs spending cut plans to sell a huge and essential tax cut. He might want to take a page out of Reagan's book and hire the best business minds to come to DC and noodle this and then come up with a sound proposal - shouldn't be difficult to see tremendous slashes in pure government waste.
I hope Mr. Cain is listening and can make necessary adjustments to his proposals even if it means adjusting the catchy phrase “999” itself. The point is tax cuts are most essential, followed by huge cut in government spending, and let's not forget to ABOLISH OBAMACARE.
I don’t think Hillary is a factor in any way. As I have said before, women are the majority of registered voters and no person shall sit in the oval office without the vote of American women. If American women wanted Hillary Clinton for president she would already be president. I cannot even imagine a credible way to refute that statement.
Has something changed in the past four years to make Hillary more attractive as a presidential candidate?
The noob is history: “This account has been banned or suspended.”
Watch the videos and pay attention to what Cain says, at least you will then know what he claims to be proposing. The “news media” are deliberately distorting what Cain is saying. I am not here to argue for or against Herman Cain’s plan, I am just saying that you must listen to Cain and ignore what people are claiming that Cain said. Herman Cain says that social security and retirement plans will NOT be taxed under his plan.
The interview with David Gregory was a disgraceful attempt to distort the Herman Cain message. First it starts with a summary of the opinion of “experts” who claim the the Cain plan would be ON TOP OF existing taxes! This is so absurd that I cannot imagine anyone believing it. Cain would have to literally be an idiot to run as a CONSERVATIVE Republican candidate for president on a platform of piling a huge set of new taxes ON TOP OF what we already have. The idea that someone would try to sell that idea shows just how bad the political climate is now. It gets worse when they then go on to say that under Cain’s plans “the poor would pay more and the wealthy would pay less”. If they were right about adding this on top of the existing tax code the poor would indeed pay more but it would be idiotic to think that more taxes added on would mean the rich pay less than they do now!
Herman Cain is human and imperfect and his plans will be imperfect as all human plans are but there is a huge amount of lying going on to try to discredit Herman Cain, don’t believe it.
“The problem is that people who have SAVED money did so under the old income/payroll tax rates. When you spend money you previously saved, you will now get hit with a new 9% tax that you didn’t before, but you don’t get any of the “savings” from the 9% income tax. You DO get savings from the drop in corporate tax rates, but it’s not enough to offset the 9% sales tax.” <<
I assume that these are your words because you are against a national sales tax. I don’t like it too much either except for the fact that EVERYONE pays it but answer me this: Doesn’t inflation bring about the very same problem? The money I have in the bank today will be worth a lot less two years from now under the present system. Isn’t there a chance that with a booming economy (that the 999 plan will stir up) inflation will be kept in check?
They were the words of the person that I was quoting.
Check the links.
Too bad they can’t seem to do it to the rest of the attack trolls.
There is so much false crappola being posted here about Cain...
This attack Cain Troll had been on FR a little over a month, and basically every reply he posted was an attack on Cain. He had posted a lot of attack Cain bs replies.
I’m not a Romney person. I’m not a Perry person. I don’t know who I’m supporting yet. But it ain’t Romney, and one of my big problems with Cain is that he would support Romney over Perry.
Do you agree? If it is between Perry and Romney, will you support Mitt Romney?
Given how nice Cain is to Romney, I don’t see how you could think ANY Mitt supporter would be saying anything bad about Cain. Right now, Cain is the best thing to happen to Romney in a while. Cain is the least likely to get elected, the least likely to have the money to launch an effective campaign, is the most likely to be nice to Romney while Romney tries to win the nomination, the most likely to pick ROmney as VP if he happens to win.
If Cain can keep Perry down, Romney will be ecstatic.
Probably a party shill.
A reduction in taxes will not guarantee an equal reduction in prices.
Think again pal, there is no national sales tax and the federales can't stick their noses there currently.
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.