That’s so poor people will have some “skin in the game”, right?
It is my understanding that the lowest rate possible for those who actually pay income tax is 10% ($8,500 and lower annual income). 15% is between $8,501 and $34,000. 25% is between $34,501 and $83,600.
Then you also eliminate payroll taxes.
I’ll put together a scenario later this evening when I have time.
The difference isn’t as significant to lower incomes as you think, but I’ll yield any of those arguments until I can put forth the math to back it up.
Show me one company that has posted a record profit and currently has no job openings. One.
Anytime you utilize a tax rate that is the same no matter what you make, you’re obviously going to have a bigger impact on some than others, primarily lower incomes.
The interesting point here is to find out HOW MUCH a person in a lower income bracket would have to spend before the 9-9-9 plan would cause him or her to pay more than the current system. That’s what I’m going to detail later tonight when I have time.
That’s so everyone puts forth an effort to get America back on it’s feet.
Because the wealthy pay too much tax, and the poor pay too little?
The 9% income tax on the poorest 50% will hardly make up for the regression of the 9% sales tax, since (at least according to GOP dogma) the poorest 50% of Americans already pay only 0% in income tax. Don’t know (or particularly care) about Cain plan details, but with lower income taxes and no payroll taxes, revenue will presumably drop significantly. (I guess that doesn’t matter much, since we’ll be shutting down the Department of Education, Department of Waste, etc.)
I guess the thinking is that indolent Welfare Mamas now begging for better schools will “see the light” if they “have skin in the game,” i.e. see the price of toothpaste rise from $1.99 to $2.18.
I think I summed all the GOP ideas up pretty well when I wrote “these Republicans must come from a parallel universe.”
Cite?
Yet here you are.
Uh oh, did a light bulb just go off? Cain also proposes cutting government spending. The 9-9-9 plan will generate around $300 billion less for the Federal budget.
It’s more so to spur economic growth and new employment, but, spin it how you want.
Well, since it’s safe to assume you’ll not be voting Republican we can agree to disagree and see who is standing November 7, 2012 (hopefully).
Today’s taxes are already at the lowest level in generations; hence
**
**
Thirteen months and change until the Day of Doom.
I fear you may win your hope:
[Quote=H. L. Mencken]
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.
[/QUOTE]
That’s no excuse for why they shouldn’t be lowered even more. That’s like saying, “Gas mileage has never been better” when someone details the plans of Ford wanting to increase the average MPG for sedans.
I think that’s why Dave Weigel recommended that they nominate Texas State Representative Tan Parker:
Damn smart to lower already record-breaking low taxes when you’re waist high in deficit. Wonder how balanced were the US under the last Republican President with this kind of nonsense.
So logic would dictate that you cut from the budget as well or is that too good of an idea?
You can not cut your way out of the deficits. The math does not work.
Besides austerity programs are an economic death spiral. Once you institute them , you exacerbate all that is hurting the economy and do nothing about what could help it.
These programs stifle demand. the engine of the economy. Cutting jobs , services and programs will put less money in the pockets of consumers. It will harm the lower classes while not touching the wealthy. The program is mere sophistry. It sounds logical if you don’t think about it. It is not only wrong, but dangerous.
So you’re going to omit any part of the 9-9-9 plan and simply equate one portion of his solutions to why none of this will work?
Cool, I finally get to do this:
Nice strawman, or is it cherry picking?
There’s a Hermann Cain thread a couple down. How about this gets talked about there?
Keep this thread for the joke from Texas. The deluded guy who thinks a party steeped in racism will vote for a black guy is right here.
In that thread you can explain how 9-9-9 is nothing but piss-poor marketing. Almost up there with “no longer than three pages” followed by ‘obviously when I said three I didn’t really mean three’.
-Joe
Oh you!
Yes, how dare one use a candidates own words against him. That’s like unfair and stuff.
Perry, the guy this thread is about, seems to have similar problems.
-Joe
That reminds me, my co-worker just told me he was so hungry he could eat a horse. Time to call him on his bullshit, literal or not!
Well, well, well… Look who just got smart: you, Republicans! Looks like they’re inching toward Romney, growing wise to the fact that Yosemite Sam can’t win. What can we do to shift things back? I’ll campaign for Perry if I must.
Go, Perry, go!
Anyone see this?