999 and it not producing enough revenue.

pineinthegrass wrote: 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.

yes thanks for addressing that. He has said it it ON TOP OF the .18 gas tax already. That does not go away. And he has stressed ONLY on NEW items not used. As we have said, he really needs to clear things up but if these are true as he said they are, it will greatly hurt the economy and manufacturing.

OK, I ran the federal tax numbers for a mother making $20K with two children.

If she is not married, she'd file as head of household. She would only owe $66 in taxes. However, she qualifies for a $2000 child tax credit and a $4283 earned income credit. You get both of these even if you owe no taxes. So she ends up with a $6217 "refund". If she were married, they'd owe no taxes but still get a $7036 "refund".

If you assume she paid 15.3% in Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes (that's both her portion plus the employer's portion), she paid a total of $3060. So her net "refund" would be $3157.

With Cain's plan she would get no child credit nor an earned income credit. She wouldn't have to pay payroll tax. But she would have to pay 9% income tax which comes to $1800.

So with Cain's plan instead of getting $3157 back, she owes $1800. That's a net increase to her of $4957 which is a huge increase for someone making $20K.

And I'm calculating this the way Cain suggests. He assumes the employer portion of Social Security and Medicare come directly from your paycheck. I don't think this is a correct assumption. If the employer didn't have to pay it, I agree your salary would go up some, but not the full amount.

pineinthegrass wrote: OK, I ran the federal tax numbers for a mother making $20K with two children.

If she is not married, she'd file as head of household. She would only owe $66 in taxes. However, she qualifies for a $2000 child tax credit and a $4283 earned income credit. You get both of these even if you owe no taxes. So she ends up with a $6217 "refund". If she were married, they'd owe no taxes but still get a $7036 "refund".

If you assume she paid 15.3% in Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes (that's both her portion plus the employer's portion), she paid a total of $3060. So her net "refund" would be $3157.

With Cain's plan she would get no child credit nor an earned income credit. She wouldn't have to pay payroll tax. But she would have to pay 9% income tax which comes to $1800.

So with Cain's plan instead of getting $3157 back, she owes $1800. That's a net increase to her of $4957 which is a huge increase for someone making $20K.

And I'm calculating this the way Cain suggests. He assumes the employer portion of Social Security and Medicare come directly from your paycheck. I don't think this is a correct assumption. If the employer didn't have to pay it, I agree your salary would go up some, but not the full amount.

According to your calculations, they would have to get a raise to about $25500 in order to get the $23,157 that she is making now. That is a raise of about 28%. That is NOT going to happen. This scenario will have people losing money and paying a lot more as the lower income. This plan has to be fixed. People are pointing out holes in it from every direction.

And TPP and Neptune, I am not against Cain. I really would like him. But this plan will fail. I am just trying to get input from you guys as to what you think of it and answers to the scenarios brought up. I appreciate what you wrtoe Printsmith but a couple things according to what Cain has said are not correct. So how will this work?

I saw this post in the comments on the right-wing Daily Caller and thought I'd share. It was a discussion about whether Herman Cain knows what a neoconservative is:

"A hardcore conservative doesn't praise the great bubble-blower, Alan Greenspan, support TARP, or support Romney(care) as Cain did in '08. You are a complete sucker.

In fact, Cain is a liberal neocon EXACTLY like bush.....He named neocons as the foreign policy experts he admires, numbnuts.....He is in close alignment with OBAMA as far as his economic philosophy.

999 could very well be just as socialistic as Obamacare. Anyone who wants to bring in a system where the federal government tracks all sales is a pinko scumbag. Gee what happened to free trade? Small businesses are now operating in the black market, because they don't want to lose sales by jacking all their prices up 9 percent....There's also nothing keeping it from becoming 10-10-10, 15-15-15, etc."

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/17/cain- ... z1b5xUII1f

The Viking wrote: And TPP and Neptune, I am not against Cain. I really would like him. But this plan will fail. I am just trying to get input from you guys as to what you think of it and answers to the scenarios brought up. I appreciate what you wrtoe Printsmith but a couple things according to what Cain has said are not correct. So how will this work?

IMO, picking nits about this plan right now is an exercise in masturbation. It might be fun , but nothing comes of it.

The bottom line is that he is in favor of major simplification and reform.


In a nut shell it is a plan that calls for a tsunami of tax code simplification. If he wins the details of the plan will depend on the size of his landslide, how many more r's he sweeps into the house and senate and how afraid of him they are.

neptunechimney wrote:

The Viking wrote: And TPP and Neptune, I am not against Cain. I really would like him. But this plan will fail. I am just trying to get input from you guys as to what you think of it and answers to the scenarios brought up. I appreciate what you wrtoe Printsmith but a couple things according to what Cain has said are not correct. So how will this work?

IMO, picking nits about this plan right now is an exercise in masturbation. It might be fun , but nothing comes of it.

The bottom line is that he is in favor of major simplification and reform.


In a nut shell it is a plan that calls for a tsunami of tax code simplification. If he wins the details of the plan will depend on the size of his landslide, how many more r's he sweeps into the house and senate and how afraid of him they are.

What better time to nit pick his plan than right now? If it is examined, and found to be something that would be bad for this country, then why not express that sentiment now? There are many running for office who are for major simplification and reform of the tax code, though they have not made it the center point of their campaign. If this plan is flawed, then maybe Cain is too, as a candidate. He certainly has bet the farm on 999....yet has not excelled in other areas during the debates.

archer wrote:

neptunechimney wrote: [IMO, picking nits about this plan right now is an exercise in masturbation. It might be fun , but nothing comes of it.

What better time to nit pick his plan than right now? .

Knock yourself out, I think I will go shopping for a pocket rocket.

archer wrote: [yet has not excelled in other areas during the debates.

Yep, that explains his lousy poling.

neptunechimney wrote:

The Viking wrote: And TPP and Neptune, I am not against Cain. I really would like him. But this plan will fail. I am just trying to get input from you guys as to what you think of it and answers to the scenarios brought up. I appreciate what you wrtoe Printsmith but a couple things according to what Cain has said are not correct. So how will this work?

IMO, picking nits about this plan right now is an exercise in masturbation. It might be fun , but nothing comes of it.

The bottom line is that he is in favor of major simplification and reform.


In a nut shell it is a plan that calls for a tsunami of tax code simplification. If he wins the details of the plan will depend on the size of his landslide, how many more r's he sweeps into the house and senate and how afraid of him they are.

So you would support someone to run against Obama whose plan may be totally picked apart leaving him with nothing and Obama in for another 4 years? Would you rather find out the details now or let Obama find them out in the General election? Sorry but that doesn't make sense to me.