Cain's 9 9 9. People's Thoughts?

[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
tedro, nice thoughtful analysis

The discussions I have read about his plan is that sales tax is regressive (the poor pay a greater amount of their wages/discretionary income in taxes than the rich - pretty straight forward) and Cain said he had a plan to help reduce the burden on the poor. That said, then the loss in revenue (either as a reduced rate for those between X income or in coupons paid back) would mean that his plan would not garner the amount promised.

So, it is not quite there yet. I generally would like to see simpler tax laws, which should mean less loopholes and greater prosecution of tax cheats, but sales taxes are not the ‘fairest’ way.
[/quote]

It only impacts the lower class if they rely on retail sales. If they learn to grwo food, and barter a consumption tax is the best type of tax.

Damn I was hoping you posted Cains workout plan (lol seriously).

Its already giving me a wicked idea though,
9 sets of 9 reps of 9 exercises (for 9 days in a row)!

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
It only impacts the lower class if they rely on retail sales. If they learn to grwo food, and barter a consumption tax is the best type of tax.[/quote]

So you want people to go back to growing their own food and bartering for their necessities in order to offset the increased tax burden brought on by this plan, if it were put into effect? Do you think the average poor or even middle class family living in a major urban center has the resources or training or time to raise livestock?

Say what you want about the current state of our currency and agricultural industry, I think you’d find people would prefer the inherent ease and efficiency of our current system to a return to bartering and subsistence farming.

Honestly, it sounds like you’re advocating for a Great Leap Forward but in reverse. What exactly makes you think such as undertaking would be preferable to (or even feasible in) our current system? Also, do you think that plans such as these, which are regressive and place a heavier tax burden on the poor and middle classes than on the elite, will eventually lead to even greater wealth inequality and all the problems that entails?

Polls show Herman Cain as the frontrunner, and things are going his way. Now, he has agreed to a ?modified Lincoln-Douglas?-style debate with Newt Gingrich, where Cain has little to gain and a lot to lose.

On November 5, Gingrich and Cain will go mano-a-mano in a debate about entitlement reform, with no moderator and only a timekeeper from the Texas Tea Party Patriots. ?It will be divided into parts, one for each major entitlement ? Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid ? with each candidate detailing their arguments,? says Bill O?Sullivan, the treasurer of the group. Obviously, the candidates will find ways to bring up other issues if they believe it to be advantageous.

Here you go, Sloth. Didn’t you call exactly this about a week ago?

MSNBC Analyst: GOP Sees Herman Cain as a ‘Black Man Who Knows His Place’
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/msnbc-analyst-herman-cain-black-man-who-knows-his-place_604145.html

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am not sure but I think the majority of people think because the wealthy pay no taxes means no one pays taxes. I believe that if the wealthy pay no taxes , it means the poor and the middle class pay MORE taxes . I think that is good , if you are not smart enough to be extremely wealthy , you should pay a penalty :)[/quote]
[/quote]

oh so clever , and original too, wait I have something to say " Your stupidity astounds me :)"

[quote]anonfactor wrote:

[quote]apbt55 wrote:
It only impacts the lower class if they rely on retail sales. If they learn to grwo food, and barter a consumption tax is the best type of tax.[/quote]

So you want people to go back to growing their own food and bartering for their necessities in order to offset the increased tax burden brought on by this plan, if it were put into effect? Do you think the average poor or even middle class family living in a major urban center has the resources or training or time to raise livestock?

Say what you want about the current state of our currency and agricultural industry, I think you’d find people would prefer the inherent ease and efficiency of our current system to a return to bartering and subsistence farming.

Honestly, it sounds like you’re advocating for a Great Leap Forward but in reverse. What exactly makes you think such as undertaking would be preferable to (or even feasible in) our current system? Also, do you think that plans such as these, which are regressive and place a heavier tax burden on the poor and middle classes than on the elite, will eventually lead to even greater wealth inequality and all the problems that entails?[/quote]

It is not regressive, it is flat, standardized. People have become so inidated with this nonesense it becomes hard to see the difference. if everyone pays the same percent, they are in fact app being impacted “equally”. It is not right to punish someone for making more.

All I was getting at with the statement on being self sufficient is to not rely on someone else. Especially if they are relying on the government to take from someone else in order to provide for them. And you seriously think being able to provide your own food, energy, sustainable heat and other such things is regressive. I think being dependent on someone else to provide your necessities is regressive. In fact I think it is idiotic and if it is the life you choose, don’t complain to me or try to take what is mine when your system breaks and you can’t get what you need from your provider.

See I work in pharma industry, and have sacrificed to buy land with an old house. And have slowly turned back into a permiculture, self sustainable farm. I work before and after work, to make sure my wife can be home with our kids, to make sure they have what they need and get to see what real environmently friendly is.

But I do not endorse Herman Cains plan, I do not support taxing both on both the income and consumption levels. I think that is morally bankrupt to do, and nothing in the government is transitionary or temporary, especially if it gets their hands into your money.

The only proper way to tax would be a flat consumption tax on retail. No corporate, no income, and no not everyone needs to start their own farm. But this would bring support back to local farms, and food supplies, local business. Stronger support for local business who usually operate in a community friendly and environmentaly friendly way is usually a good thing.

Completely reduce the size of government and the ability of groups to lobby and get inequal legislation in place.

I am not an advocate for the current system. I don’t believe ti is right to force the middle class and taxpayer to subsidize ivery facet of life for the rest. When you hide the real cost people don’t realize what they are doing. And you think the stuff you buy is expensive, you have no idea if you had to pay what it really cost and didn’t the government forcing price controls or subsidizing it.

all at the expense of the taxpayers. Yes a real fair system.

He’s going to have bigger problems than his tax plan.

[quote]Sloth wrote:

He’s going to have bigger problems than his tax plan.[/quote]

Before I even open that link, I hope the guy had sex with was at least older than 18…

What !?!

Women?

That settles it, he is a RHINO.

He did not even have sex with them.

If he had, with both at once, while snorting cocaine, that would be a solid Republican sex scandal.

I am not claiming to be smarter than Cain but why was he not ready for this ? Is he that stupid ?

Third worker says harassed by Cain
http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-third-worker-says-harassed-cain-195748722.html

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am not claiming to be smarter than Cain but why was he not ready for this ? Is he that stupid ?[/quote]How precisely do you propose he should have demonstrated this here readiness? By declaring his candidacy with the P.S. of “Oh yeah, I have sexually harassed my co-workers?”.

Are they all lyin? Maybe, but I doubt it.

Apparently, accepting a no gracefully is a lost art…

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am not claiming to be smarter than Cain but why was he not ready for this ? Is he that stupid ?[/quote]How precisely do you propose he should have demonstrated this here readiness? By declaring his candidacy with the P.S. of “Oh yeah, I have sexually harassed my co-workers?”.

Are they all lyin? Maybe, but I doubt it.
[/quote]

Having a statement prepared, he had to know it was a possibility that this would come up, he scrambled like "Where did this come from "

I personally believe this is not the criteria that some one should be vetted for our Presidency and I also believe it came from the Republican wing that could not stomach a black Republican nominee.

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

I also believe it came from the Republican wing that could not stomach a black Republican nominee.[/quote]

It could very well have been leaked through the efforts of one of his competitors or their supporters. They are competing after all. But your completely out of touch comment about Republicans not being able to stomach a black Republican nominee…It WAS right-wing republicans giving him his frontrunner status. The only people who’ve explicitly shown/spoke of disgust regarding a black Republican are liberals. That is a fact. Don’t just make stuff up that is so completely detached from what’s actually been said and done, and by whom. Before this scandal, the man was on his way as a serious possibility (the frontrunner), thanks TO the right wing. It was the left who couldn’t stomach his black republican self-identification.