TPP wrote: Did I miss something, does ANY of the other canidates, HAVE ANY other plan as of yet...
Perry said at the last debate, "Part of it will be out Tuesday." Did I miss it? Then another part will come out later, than another part later, (sounds just like oblama, "Trust me, mine's better than anybodies. Just pass the bill.")
Did I miss Anybodies? ANY Plan... Please fill me in.
But you can't just throw out any willy nilly plan that has a catchy phrase but doesn't make sense and will be used against us in a general election as hurting the poor and seniors and will get Obama re-elected. Heck anyone can throw out a plan. Perry's energy job creating plan makes the most sense to me so far. And he is meeting with several economic advisors and talking with Paul Ryan about his economic plan which is set to be announced next week. I love Paul Ryans economic plan of lowering all taxes and getting rid of the death tax and lowering corporate and capital gains taxes too. I hope Perry grabs on to a good portion of that.
Cain has most to gain, lose at Las Vegas debate, say GOP strategists
“The national media spotlight is now squarely trained on him and the moderators and viewing audience will be looking for the gravitas necessary for a President,” he said. “GOP voters who are clearly starting to warm up to him as well as those large swaths of undecideds will be watching closely and waiting for him to demonstrate more nuanced policy depth on both the economy and foreign affairs.”
But, Dunagan went on, “if he doesn’t accomplish that, it could be a bad night for Mr. Cain.”
“For some the bloom is off the rose as more and more people are scrutinizing his policy positions including his 9-9-9 plan,” long-time Republican consultant Diana Banister told TheDC, also noting that Cain showed some weakness on foreign policy during his Sunday interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “How Herman handles it will be important, but in his poised style he is rarely moved off his game.”
Other than Cain, Banister says that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum could gain if they continue to deliver solid debate performances.
“Because of their performances in these debates,” she said, Gingrich and Santorum “seem to be gradually and methodically rising in the polls and gaining momentum.”
For everyone who thinks Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan is good. Just look at an independent analysis of his 9-9-9- plan by The Tax Policy Center. It shows Cain's plan would increase taxes on 84 percent of U.S. households, hitting low- and medium-income households the hardest. The analysis shows that households making $10,000 to $20,000 would see whopping tax increases averaging $2,705! An increase of nearly 950 percent. While the wealthiest would Americans would see a decrease.
Their report looks at all three of Cain's taxes; the 9% income tax, the 9% business tax, and the 9% national sales tax.
In summary, if you make under $200K, you'll see a net tax increase on average. Over $200K you'll see a tax decrease. Again, this takes all three taxes into consideration.
If he sticks to this plan, he'll just keep getting hammered on it. From what I've heard his main suggestion to cut your taxes with his plan is to buy used goods. But what would that do to job creation?
Their report looks at all three of Cain's taxes; the 9% income tax, the 9% business tax, and the 9% national sales tax.
In summary, if you make under $200K, you'll see a net tax increase on average. Over $200K you'll see a tax decrease. Again, this takes all three taxes into consideration.
If he sticks to this plan, he'll just keep getting hammered on it. From what I've heard his main suggestion to cut your taxes with his plan is to buy used goods. But what would that do to job creation?
Which is it? The new taxes will bankrupt those under 200K or it won't produce enough revenue? If hundreds of millions of Americans are paying more taxes, it looks like it would increase revenue for the treasury.
Irony? Could Herman Cain(R) be the mastermind behind the largest tax revenue increase in decades?
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Cain's Stimulating '9-9-9' Tax Reform
A new sales tax could be raised in the future—but so can any other tax. And the low marginal rates would jump-start the economy.
By (*)ARTHUR B. LAFFER
It used to be that the sole purpose of the tax code was to raise the necessary funds to run government. But in today's world the tax mandate has many more facets. These include income redistribution, encouraging favored industries, and discouraging unfavorable behavior.
To make matters worse there are millions and millions of taxpayers who are highly motivated to reduce their tax liabilities. And, as those taxpayers finagle and connive to find ways around the tax code, government responds by propagating new rules, new interpretations of the code, and new taxes in a never-ending chase. In the process, we create ever-more arcane tax codes that do a poor job of achieving any of their mandates.
Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain's now famous "9-9-9" plan is his explicit proposal to right the wrongs of our federal tax code. He proposes a 9% flat-rate personal income tax with no deductions except for donations to charity; a 9% flat-rate tax on net business profits; and a new 9% national tax on retail sales.
Mr. Cain's 9-9-9 plan was designed to be what economists call "static revenue neutral," which means that if people didn't change what they do under his plan, total tax revenues would be the same as they are under our current tax code. I believe his plan would indeed be static revenue neutral, and with the boost it would give to economic growth it would bring in even more revenue than expected.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204346104576637310315367804.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
*Arthur Betz Laffer ( /ˈlæfər/;[1] born August 14, 1940) is an American economist who first gained prominence during the Reagan administration as a member of Reagan's Economic Policy Advisory Board (1981–1989). Laffer is best known for the Laffer curve, an illustration of the theory that there exists some tax rate between 0% and 100% that will result in maximum tax revenue for governments. He is the author and co-author of many books and newspaper articles, including Supply Side Economics: Financial Decision-Making for the 80s. Laffer is Policy Co-Chairman (with Lawrence "Larry" Kudlow) of the Free Enterprise Fund.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Laffer
Which is it? The new taxes will bankrupt those under 200K or it won't produce enough revenue? If hundreds of millions of Americans are paying more taxes, it looks like it would increase revenue for the treasury.
