999 and it not producing enough revenue.

The Viking wrote: Also what happens in two year or 4 or 6 if the Dems take over all houses and think that 9% is not enough and need more revenue? What if they vote to raise the federal tax back up to 36% for the top end and 15% at the bottom but leave the 9% sales (VAT) tax in place? that just tokes everyones taxes WAY up. Watch at the 4:40 mark and it shows how they thry promised never to go above 10% and it went up to 77%. The VAT does not work and is almost impossible to get rid of.

This isn't a party specific problem Viking, what if after the Republicans have been in office for a while, and the promised cuts haven't done the trick, and they are out of money......well what's wrong with a 12,12,12 plan....and on and on it goes.

And this chart shows where things stand with money at the end of Sept.

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/PresidentialMoneyOct2011.bmp

archer wrote:

The Viking wrote: Also what happens in two year or 4 or 6 if the Dems take over all houses and think that 9% is not enough and need more revenue? What if they vote to raise the federal tax back up to 36% for the top end and 15% at the bottom but leave the 9% sales (VAT) tax in place? that just tokes everyones taxes WAY up. Watch at the 4:40 mark and it shows how they thry promised never to go above 10% and it went up to 77%. The VAT does not work and is almost impossible to get rid of.

This isn't a party specific problem Viking, what if after the Republicans have been in office for a while, and the promised cuts haven't done the trick, and they are out of money......well what's wrong with a 12,12,12 plan....and on and on it goes.

My point was raising taxes and keeping the VAT tax. Raising taxes IS a Dem issue. Not talking about spending. That is a totally different issue than this 999 plan.

The Viking wrote:

archer wrote:

The Viking wrote: Also what happens in two year or 4 or 6 if the Dems take over all houses and think that 9% is not enough and need more revenue? What if they vote to raise the federal tax back up to 36% for the top end and 15% at the bottom but leave the 9% sales (VAT) tax in place? that just tokes everyones taxes WAY up. Watch at the 4:40 mark and it shows how they thry promised never to go above 10% and it went up to 77%. The VAT does not work and is almost impossible to get rid of.

This isn't a party specific problem Viking, what if after the Republicans have been in office for a while, and the promised cuts haven't done the trick, and they are out of money......well what's wrong with a 12,12,12 plan....and on and on it goes.

My point was raising taxes and keeping the VAT tax. Raising taxes IS a Dem issue. Not talking about spending. That is a totally different issue than this 999 plan.

different issue, yes, but not unrelated. If the 999 plan doesn't bring in enough revenue, and there are no more places to cut......what then? I doubt the Republicans or Democrats would go back to the old tax code, they would just start tweaking the 999 plan....and that wouldn't be pretty.

It's all pretty academic really....Even if Cain was elected, and he had a Republican congress.....would that congress really pass such a plan? Would Republicans actually do that? If they did I think the riots in the streets would make occupy wall street look like a child's picnic, and Dems would be back in power the next election.

BTW....your chart is very telling. I guess the claims that Democrats are so disappointed in Obama that they won't support him this election are a bit overblown.

archer wrote: BTW....your chart is very telling. I guess the claims that Democrats are so disappointed in Obama that they won't support him this election are a bit overblown.

Not really. He has been raising for a long time adding to his coffers. And if you add up all the R's they are about equal and many only started raising money in the last 6 months or so. You will always have fools wishing to part with their money giving it to someone who has benefited the most from large corporations and wall street and has helped them stay unemployed.

archer wrote:

The Viking wrote:

archer wrote:

The Viking wrote: Also what happens in two year or 4 or 6 if the Dems take over all houses and think that 9% is not enough and need more revenue? What if they vote to raise the federal tax back up to 36% for the top end and 15% at the bottom but leave the 9% sales (VAT) tax in place? that just tokes everyones taxes WAY up. Watch at the 4:40 mark and it shows how they thry promised never to go above 10% and it went up to 77%. The VAT does not work and is almost impossible to get rid of.

This isn't a party specific problem Viking, what if after the Republicans have been in office for a while, and the promised cuts haven't done the trick, and they are out of money......well what's wrong with a 12,12,12 plan....and on and on it goes.

My point was raising taxes and keeping the VAT tax. Raising taxes IS a Dem issue. Not talking about spending. That is a totally different issue than this 999 plan.

different issue, yes, but not unrelated. If the 999 plan doesn't bring in enough revenue, and there are no more places to cut......what then? I doubt the Republicans or Democrats would go back to the old tax code, they would just start tweaking the 999 plan....and that wouldn't be pretty.

It's all pretty academic really....Even if Cain was elected, and he had a Republican congress.....would that congress really pass such a plan? Would Republicans actually do that? If they did I think the riots in the streets would make occupy wall street look like a child's picnic, and Dems would be back in power the next election.

Nope. Not a chance it would pass. Most everyone is saying that . Unless the people who vote for it don't meind being voted out the next election. And that is every 2 years for the House. No way would it pass.

The Viking wrote: For once we agree. I really like Cain and admire his acomplishments. But this plan is an epic FAIL! And he can't just change his mind. There is nowhere to go with this if it shows it encourages NOT to buy anything NEW. The Dems, the poor, the 47% not paying taxes, the manufacturing industry will ALL vote against him.

I think your starting premise is flawed Viking. The tax would be on what you purchase. If you purchase a used car, it is a new purchase for you and would be subject to the tax just as if you were buying a new car. It would be less in taxes to purchase used instead of new because the used car has a lower purchase price, but that is already the case with regards to state taxes and I haven't heard of anyone who isn't buying a new car because the higher sticker price results in more state taxes being paid.

With regards to the fuel, yes, it would be taxed at 9% instead of, not in addition to, the current $0.18 per gallon. The tax you pay would go up as the cost of fuel rises instead of remaining constant as it is now, but it would also go down when the price of fuel fell instead of remaining constant as it does now. The trucking companies, in addition to the current fuel tax, also pay an excise tax on all the tires they buy, a yearly excise tax on the vehicles that travel the roads and a purchase excise tax on the tractors and trailers they buy to replace aging equipment. All of those taxes go out the window along with the current $0.244 per gallon of fuel tax on the diesel they use. There is an excise tax on home heating oil and off road diesel as well, both of which would disappear. The electricity you use and the natural gas also have excise taxes which would go away, as would the excise tax on coal. The 9% sales tax would not be in addition to the taxes you currently are paying, it would replace all of those taxes that are currently on the books.

In your earlier example of the lady earning $20K a year you forgot, or perhaps simply overlooked, the 7.65% privilege to be employed tax that she pays on her income to support the SS and Medicare benefits for those that are currently retired. You would have to either add those taxes back into her income since they would go away if your $20K was her take home pay or subtract 7.65% of the $20K figure ($1530 a year) before you start figuring how the 9-9-9 plan would impact her current budget. Remember, the point is that 47% of citizens pay no income taxes - those 47% are still paying the privilege to be employed tax, and so are their employers. Eliminating the privilege to be employed/have employee taxes amounts to over 15%. That is over 6% more than the 9% income tax that Cain is proposing. The situation that Cain is describing increases the pay of everyone over 15% according to the interviews and debates I have heard, presumably because the employer is going to be giving the employee the share of their wages that the employer is now paying to the federal government as part of the plan. If he is figuring on people getting a 15% increase in their pay through the elimination of the payroll taxes, then it must be part of the plan that the businesses be required to pass onto the employee the matching percentage of their wages that is currently being paid to the federal government.

I have said for a long time that if the citizens had to pay their taxes monthly or quarterly by writing a check to the federal government instead of having them removed from their wages before they saw a dime of the fruits of their own efforts and hidden in the cost of the goods they are buying there would be a tax revolution in this country. You want transparency in government? Cain's 9-9-9 plan is the most transparent means of taxing the citizens to provide federal revenues that this nation has seen in well over 100 years. It gives everyone some skin in the game, treats each and every citizen the same way. There is not currently a consequence to those who are getting a larger refund check than they paid in taxes to begin with to vote for someone who wants to tax everyone else to give them greater benefits courtesy of the federal government.

As one person recently put it to me, the current tax code is a means of robbing Peter to pay Paul. We have too many Pauls at the moment - individual and corporate.

PS, you are incorrect in your first two assumptions.

As Viking stated, Cain's national sales tax applies to the purchace of new items, not used items. It would not apply to a used car.

And Cain has said he will not eliminate federal excise taxes. So that 18 cents a gallon federal gas tax will not go away with his plan.

Also, the lady making $20K would get a tax refund due to the earned income tax credit. If she has two kids, it will be several thousand dollars. Cain would take that away. I run it through my tax program to see what it would be.

I don't agree with this part of your argument PS. I think if the 999 plan was implemented, it would reduce the price of NEW goods because lowered tax rate for producers would result in a lower cost per unit. Now some will say that the producers will just keep that extra income instead of lowering prices, but that would only happen if there was no competition. If one car manufacturer out of 5 decided to lower prices by 10% because there tax burden went from 35% to 9%, they would still make more money even if their sales did not increase. If they were the only company that lowered their prices, they would get a huge increase in sales which would force the other companies to follow suit....and customers would get lower prices to counter the 9% tax.

Used cars would be harder to sell unless they fell in price by at least 9%. They would have to exempt used products from the tax, otherwise anyone who owns a vehicle would instantly realize a 9% loss in value.