Herman Cain: Tax Poor People’s Food To Finance Tax Break

LadyJazzer wrote: Well, we know that Arkansas' food sales tax is only 1.5% That doesn't exactly approach 9% does it? The fact that some states already have a food tax, just means that a federal sales tax will be added on top of it. Good thinking. Let's make sure the poor have to pay even more on their food.

Talk about "misrepresentation"....

Your post shows that you have a total disregard for integrity. If your view is only supported by misrepresentation and lies then you are as happy as a dung beetle. That tells us that your opinions are based upon egocentric urges and nothing else.

That tells us that you have no concept of the difference between state taxes and federal taxes and that a 9% flat tax on society will, as usual, hurt the poor more than the rich. If we just take Arkansas (from your list) as an example, if the rate is 9% federal on top of 1.5% state, then the poor will be paying 10.5% taxes on food. And what part of that is misrepresentation?

Let us know when you have a better grasp of economics.

I know the difference between Federal and state taxes. I have not discussed ecomonics.
You obviously overlooked Conservative Voice's bluffing statement that only two states have a tax upon food. Or you excuse it because he is another liberal.

Here is his statement:

Only two states, Mississippi and Alabama, charge sales tax on food.

So, instead of dealing with the issue that the 9% sales tax will break the poor, you want to obsess over the fact that someone got the number of states with food taxes wrong? (Uh, the title of the thread is: "Herman Cain: Tax Poor People’s Food To Finance Tax Break"...)

Got it... Let me know when you've got something better than gotcha-politics to talk about. So far, all you're doing is the ol' deflection b.s.

Arlen wrote: I know the difference between Federal and state taxes. I have not discussed ecomonics.
You obviously overlooked Conservative Voice's bluffing statement that only two states have a tax upon food. Or you excuse it because he is another liberal.

Here is his statement:

Only two states, Mississippi and Alabama, charge sales tax on food.

Hey Sherlock. It wasn't MY statement. It was from the article I linked to, which you would have known if you had bothered to click on the link.

If you had bothered to read the article and click on the link for that statement you would have found:

"Two states continue to apply their sales tax fully to food purchased for home consumption without providing any offsetting relief for low- and moderate-income families. They are Alabama and Mississippi."

Source: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=1230

But instead you chose to cop an attitude calling my posting from the article a "bluffing statement" (whatever that is). Next time, investigate a little before criticizing something you're ignorant of.

I read the post to decide whether or not clicking on the link is a worthwhile project. Whenever I find gross misstatements, then I proceed no further.

Did you, or did you not post that "Only two states, Mississippi and Alabama, charge sales tax on food." If you understood this article to say this, then YOU are the one who is no detective. If you posted that statement with full knowledge of its untruthfullness, then you must admit that you lied.

Why do you liberals blame me? You are the ones who have a problem with the facts.

I posted several paragraphs from the article, one of which ended with the statement. But the link to the rest of the article followed that.

Once again (I said it before): It's not MY statement. I quoted from the article. The article had that particular sentence hyperlinked to the government page I posted above. If you didn't click on the link you wouldn't have seen it.

And that statement in the article invalidates the truth of the article. The article is fatally flawed by misstatements of fact. In other words: LIES

Or do we just ignore that and except the premise of the article?

There's no premise to accept:

""Two states continue to apply their sales tax fully to food purchased for home consumption without providing any offsetting relief for low- and moderate-income families. They are Alabama and Mississippi."

Is not a misstatement of fact. It is a fact, according to the government.

Hyperlinking to the source is no different than putting an asterisk and listing the source at the bottom.

You liberals have absolutely no love of the truth.