Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan is a disaster!!

reply to post by seabag


Right now is not the time for 9-9-9 or the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax is something I would like to see in the future. The first step is just turning the economy around and helping with jobs. We have to get on solid ground. 9-9-9 would be horrible and we need a President that can turn things around.

The last two Presidents had wanted Big Change and we got Obamacare and two wars. I hope the next President just does a good job.

reply to post by Matrix Rising
Again, on an emotional level, I see your point. Really.
And those making x dollars might feel the crunch.

But they should. I'll go there. I'll say it. If taxes are goin to be paid, then all should pay. This arbitrary line between rich and poor just divides us. We all have a stake in this country. We all should "pony up" "chip in".

To use a common argument; we all drive on the roads, we all may use 9-11, we all may need fire department rescue.

We ALL should pay.

reply to post by beezzer


I can't agree with that in total because it's not reasonable to hurt poor people because of a purist ideology. We're talking about people who sometimes are eating a hotmeal with their family because of a welfare check. Or a baby getting cereal and milk because of Wic or a person has a stroke and goes through rehabilitation and gets great care because of medicare.

At the end of the day 9-9-9 would hurt poor people and that's not reasonable in my opinion.

The problem we face is big government not helping poor people. We have a 14 trillion dollar GDP with over 14 trillion in debt. If we just had 8 trillion in debt we wouldn't have these problems. You simply cut spending and put a law in place that says Congress can't spend over 70% of GDP without 90% of the House and Senate. All this government spending is hurting America not helping poor people get a hot meal.

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
reply to post by seabag

 

Right now is not the time for 9-9-9 or the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax is something I would like to see in the future. The first step is just turning the economy around and helping with jobs. We have to get on solid ground. 9-9-9 would be horrible and we need a President that can turn things around.

The last two Presidents had wanted Big Change and we got Obamacare and two wars. I hope the next President just does a good job.

I have to respectfully disagree. Now IS the time for change. We can't be scared of change just because the last two screwed up. We just need to know exactly what the change is and work out the details before we send him/her to DC. 

IMO the only way we're going to turn the economy around is by righting the wrongs of the past 12 years (and beyond). How do you create solid ground on the current foundation? We have the intrusive Patriot Act, a corrupt welfare system, a corrupt justice system, a broken tax system, a corrupt Fed Reserve, a horrible health care plan, etc, etc...and the list goes on. The next President must address these issues to get things on track. Until the people who create jobs have the security of knowing roughly how the economic landscape will look over the next 3 years there will be no new jobs. More of the same isn't going to do it. 

reply to post by seabag


We don't need big change. We need change and a good President can do these things without coming in with a grand plan to change America. First, we need to get on solid ground and began reducing the scope and size of Government, repealing Obamacare and working on entitlement reform.

Like I said, the last 2 Presidents ruined the Country with Big Change. Clinton was just President and we had a good economy and he said the era of Big Government is over. Bush brought Big Government back and Obama made it worse. Bush with his Big Change in Foreign Policy and Obama with Obamacare.

I just want a President to be President. He/She will be a human being and their ideology isn't perfect. Just come in and do the job. America doesn't need big change just a President that will control an out of control Congress when it comes to spending and will help us be competetive in a global economy. Please no mor big change for at least 8 years and let's get on our feet.

Originally posted by Matrix Rising


1. Go to a Fair Tax where people keep all of their money and just pay a sales tax which would be revenue neutral.
2. Cut spending
3. Stop Government from spending money for S.S.
4. Pass a law that says Government can't spend more than 70% of GDP withouth 90% of the House and Senate.

Cain's plan is a disaster waiting to happen.

I have heard this discussed and can explain Cain's position. Cain WANTS the Fair Tax--he's been a supporter of it for years. But he thinks we need to do something RIGHT AWAY, and the FairTax is years away from implementation.

If the minute he got elected he began working on passing the Fair Tax, it would still take years for it to be passed. The 9-9-9 plan would be an interim plan that could be implemented right away without Constitutional amendment, would be attractive to grow businesses and jump-start the economy, and would also get us used to the idea of a consumption tax. 9-9-9 is a baby step toward the FairTax, which is, of course, a complete consumption tax.

I think it is a smart plan.

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by Matrix Rising

1. Go to a Fair Tax where people keep all of their money and just pay a sales tax which would be revenue neutral.
2. Cut spending
3. Stop Government from spending money for S.S.
4. Pass a law that says Government can't spend more than 70% of GDP

I could get behind the Fair Tax. Which candidate is proposing the Fair Tax though? Ron Paul? If I only have a choice between business as usual or 9-9-9 then I'd go with 9-9-9.

Cain! See the post I made above this one.

Here's a video you can watch about 9-9-9: foxnewsinsider.com...’s-999-plan-really-work/

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
reply to post by beezzer

 

I can't agree with that in total because it's not reasonable to hurt poor people because of a purist ideology.

The problem we face is big government not helping poor people. All this government spending is hurting America not helping poor people get a hot meal.

edit on 28-9-2011 by Matrix Rising because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-9-2011 by Matrix Rising because: (no reason given)

Now we're onto a different subject, but since you brought it up...Our problem is not that our BIG GOVERNMENT isn't "helping poor people". It is precisely that welfare mentality that led to growth of government, the bulk of the government's over-spending, and all of the burdensome, unpractical programs we have today that are bankrupting the country (FDR's New Deal, social security, medicare, medicaid, Obamacare, etc). Socialism doesn't work and that's a big reason we're at this point!

I agree the size and scope of government needs to be drastically reduced but the government shouldn't be in the business of "helping poor people" in the fashion it does now, much less "helping" even more of them. We need REAL reform in those areas so we can "help" a lot of those people get back to work to provide for themselves. There are certain circumstances where people need assistance but that is a small minority of the population (such as the mentally retard et al).

This is the land of opportunity. That's not a cliche...its the truth. If it wasn't then people wouldn't be risking their lives to get here. Many of the so-called "poor" are in that situation by their own doing. I don't think those people deserve government assistance, they deserve to go to work like the rest of us. You can't tell me that a lot of the "poor" aren't that way because of the choices they made in life that led them to those circumstances....and I'm not talking about people who have been laid off during the recession(s). I'm talking about the millions who haven't worked in years because they choose to collect the cheese instead of putting on their work boots. We have to stop this government charity...that's what churches, family, friends, private sector charities and community groups are for.

I'm in favor of less rather than more federal bureaucracy, but assuming that we cannot completely avoid federal taxation, I prefer a consumption tax and nothing else. That being said, there are a couple of issues that spring to mind which could prove problematic under such a system.

1) The Federal Government would become extremely suspicious of the underground economy. This could lead to less freedom, invasive government measures, etc. I could see the Feds eventually implementing "estimated consumption taxes" for people whose purchases don't seem to match up with their lifestyle.

2) Seems like a gateway to introduce a national identification card. This card would track all purchases, making it easier to implement the "estimated tax" when necessary. Also, the poor, working poor, etc. would still likely receive tax breaks, and this system would be implemented to make it easier on them. "No need to save receipts, every purchase you make is on file in D.C."

I'm sure there are other drawbacks. I do believe that a consumption tax is MUCH fairer and will stimulate the economy. I just don't anticipate the Federal Government ceding oversight and control any time soon.

Here's the link to the proposed 999 Plan..

www.hermancain.com...

It appears to be an interesting transition from the cuts to the current tax code, to a blend of fair/flat and ultimately ending with simply a flat tax?..

Seems to be a realistic approach for Tax reform, as long as it is coupled with the severe reduction/ elimination of those federal fees and the agencies associated with them.... (check your phone bill, electric bill, airline tix etc to see those) it could be a good start, though more details would be appreciated, hopefully the spark of interest in Cain will afford much more airtime in upcoming debates to see if this guy is the real deal.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Matrix Rising

 

Why should it matter what a person makes?

It's a fair tax, meaning that it is equal for all.

Unless you think people who make more should be punished??????

Well what about the class warfare thingy???
Aren't we suppose to attack the rich?
---------

The 9-9-9 plan has a few problems but at least Herman Cain has a plan!
The other candidates speak in meaningless generalities.
That's why Michelle Bachmann is toast.

You know what is a disaster? Our current economy and current tax codes. I will listen to any new plan.

No we don't need big change. What really gets me about the American people is that they give these politicians fuel to put us in debt with this BIG CHANGE nonsense. We turn small problems into big problems because Americans and politicians talk about big change and turn everything into a crisis.

We don't need an overhaul of the system and big change, we just need a good President who will get us on solid ground. Big change got us into the mess we're in. Clinton didn't give us big change and we had a good economy and it was during the Clinton administration that I started my business.

Bush wanted big change and turned everything into a crisis and we got Tarp and 2 wars. Obama gave us big change and we got stimulus packages and Obamacare.

Amercan people are accomplices to these crooked politicians because they turn mere men into saviours of America with there big ideological plans that will bring more ruin.

This is why I support Mitt Romney. They say he's the safe choice and that's what I want. I want safe and for someone to go in and just do the job instead of these grand ideological plans.

I'm still not seeing enough detail to come to any conclusions about this plan.

One thing that comes to mind, right off the bat, is the shift from a federal income tax to a national sales tax.

If we take some imaginary number, say 27%, much of which is currently refunded by the federal government at the end of the year for the lowest wage earners, and turn 1/3 of that into a non-refundable national sales tax instead, wouldn't that, in effect, become a massive tax increase for the poorest folks who will never get that back?

Originally posted by JacKatMtn
Here's the link to the proposed 999 Plan..

www.hermancain.com...

It appears to be an interesting transition from the cuts to the current tax code, to a blend of fair/flat and ultimately ending with simply a flat tax?..

Seems to be a realistic approach for Tax reform, as long as it is coupled with the severe reduction/ elimination of those federal fees and the agencies associated with them.... (check your phone bill, electric bill, airline tix etc to see those) it could be a good start, though more details would be appreciated, hopefully the spark of interest in Cain will afford much more airtime in upcoming debates to see if this guy is the real deal.

Thanks for the 9-9-9 link. Now it makes sense.
It would be better if the economy was stable before making the big switch to 9-9-9.
-------
I would make it 10/10/10 so we could have a little extra cash to buy back all of the
promissory notes piled up over at Social Security.

reply to post by Eurisko2012


I agree, any attempt to overhaul the current system should be phased in.. that way the transition is smoother and they can really start to eliminate the unnecessary agencies, eliminate the redundant programs, and start to get used to working with a realistic, transparent and ethical approach to handling their responsibilities to the folks who pay their salaries..

I just hope that people don't forget that in order for any real change to occur, it has to include throwing the lifer Capitol Hill out on their colllective rear ends..

A President cannot accomplish this on his own.

now we KNOW there is at least 2 rigged candidates with connections to the bankers/NWO/Bilderberg/the cabal. whatever you want to call it

man they really stack the deck don't they

the stock market bottomed at 666 in 2009 as well

herman cain using the 999 plan is no coincidence

guy is former fed reserve board member, totally connected

and rick perry, well we know his story

Originally posted by Matrix Rising

This would hurt the Country because it's regressive. It would hurt poor people the most. If you make $300,000 a year, you love 9-9-9. You go from .33 percent to .105 percent. You would actually be paying less to the Government than the person making $30,000 a year. We don't have a revenue problem but a spending problem.

1. Go to a Fair Tax where people keep all of their money and just pay a sales tax which would be revenue neutral.
2. Cut spending
3. Stop Government from spending money for S.S.
4. Pass a law that says Government can't spend more than 70% of GDP withouth 90% of the House and Senate.

I agree with this. I pay sales tax on things I purchase. ( that's why i like to buy online, no state sales tax) Most years i don't pay the IRS because i do not make enough to qualify ( for various reasons, loopholes, etc,) I have no kids to raise and live comfortably. though modestly. If some guy tells me at the end of the year i'm suddenly going to be forced to give up 9% of all my earnings they are going to be SOL. I don't save much money unless I want or need something I have budgeted for. I do NOT like to give this out of control government money to spend nilly willy. My Mom likes Cain. She's a republican. I do not think she has thought this plan through. She doesn't have the Internet to learn these in's and outs.

Originally posted by beezzer
We ALL should pay.

Not really.

Taxation and representation should go hand in hand. Taxation should be heavier on those that the government favors. Wall Streeters, large multi-national corporations, illegal immigrants, welfare recipients, minority students (I was one of them once), government worker unions, unions in general.....

I belong to the middle class, the class that pays out of its nose but sees none of the benefits (illegal immigrants can drive on the same roads as me and get the same protection from our military). No bailouts and no foodstamps, just the bill.

Herman Cain's plan is a disaster. I liked the guy until he came up with it. The only true fair tax is the Fair Tax.

9 percent sales tax hurts the poor and middle class unless there is a pre-bate included. 9 percent corporate tax is idiotic, no corporation should pay taxes if the shareholders are getting taxed as well. Corporate tax is just a protection for favored corporations who get away with it (GE).

As for an equal income tax across the board, no until the system equally benefits me.