-
Obama’s Solar Smoot-Hawley
December 22, 2011 | 138 comments
-
Back to the 1930s
November 29, 2011 | 275 comments
-
Herman, We Hardly Knew Ye
November 4, 2011 | 388 comments
-
What the Heck, Let’s Tax the Rich
October 4, 2011 | 70 comments
-
The Moocher’s Credo
September 26, 2011 | 168 comments
Another Perspective
The Missing Piece of 9-9-9
Herman Cain’s plan is all fine and good, but a national sales tax won’t wash. So what will replace that component?
(Page 2 of 2)
Output —- Tax Levy —- Current Price —- Total Revenue
Coal: —- 1 billion tons $165/ton
—- $70/ton —-
$165 billion
Oil: —- 6.6 billion barrels $23/bbl
—- $85/bbl
—- $150
billion
Gas —- 2.2 trillion cubic ft $3/mcf
—- $5/mcf —-
$65 billion
TOTAL: $380 billion
The big impact is on coal, where the price would more than triple. About 92 percent of our coal is used for electricity, meaning that’s where it would be felt. Fuel makes up 77 percent of the costs of coal generation and we get 45 of our electricity from coal. That means the overall impact would be a 130 percent rise in electrical rates across the country. Now that may seem ridiculously unbearable to households and industry but don’t forget this is being coupled with a reduction of both personal and corporate taxes to less than one-third their present level.
The impacts on oil and gas would not be as severe. The tax would raise today’s oil prices from $85 a barrel to $108, but that’s where they were six months ago. There are 42 gallons to a barrel, which means the increase at the pump would be 55 cents a gallon. For natural gas the price would only rise from $5 to $8 per thousand cubic feet. It was $11 a few years ago. Consumers would hardly notice the difference.
The result would be to move us rapidly out of coal and into other means of generating electricity. But this is what we’re doing anyway, only under the ham-handed direction of the EPA. Solar, nuclear, and wind generation of electricity would suddenly become very economical and Solyndra subsidies could become a thing of the past. Gas prices would nudge people into fuel-efficient and electric cars while the government just sat back and watched. Foreign oil dependency would decline. Of course tax revenues would diminish as all these changes took place, but by that time Congress may have discovered some success in reducing spending. At least this would dispel MIchele Bachmann’s concern that tapping another area of taxation would be a new way of expanding the government.
There is one more thing. A carbon tax, coupled with 9 percent personal and corporate income tax rates, could possibly win the support of liberals and Democrats. This is important. Even if Republicans score a resounding victory in 2012, they’re not going to have a filibuster-proof Senate majority. Any effort to reduce or level tax rates will be met by a wall of opposition and we’ll be back to the same old stalemate. But if Democrats are willing to sign on to a carbon tax — after all, they’ve been crying for it for the past four years — then we might achieve a bi-partisan success.
Well, this is all highly speculative. But it’s something to keep in mind as Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 proposal gains ground in the public debate.
About the Author
Green Lantern is the pen-name of an East Coast writer.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (101) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Green Lantern
More Articles From Another Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/10/13/the-missing-piece-of-9-9-9
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Negro X| 10.13.11 @ 6:23AM
Sorry moron boy but coal and coal are used by more than just 100 eneterprises, you fail to realize that many industries use it for other than energy producing. You have shown youself to be a RINO interloper .
Jack in Wi.| 10.13.11 @ 7:16AM
Cain is Mr. TARP, Mr. Federal Reserve, Mr. Alan Greenspan, as as great Fed Chairman, Mr. National sales tax, Mr. endless war, and Mr. liar about auditing the Fed. Stick a fork in Herman he is done.
David W| 10.13.11 @ 10:02AM
jeez, come up with rational arguments one way or the other or just shut the heck up. Good grief, no wonder this country is so screwed up with "sound bite people" like you.
Moe Blotz| 10.14.11 @ 4:21AM
Why tax the carbon content of petroleum as it is extracted from the ground if that carbon is not converted to energy via combustion? Petroleum is used for thousands of other products other than petrol,diesel,and home heating oil. How much more will fertiliser,plastic, and makeup cost under a carbon tax scheme?
POST American| 10.13.11 @ 6:37AM
--'All fine and good?' ---HUH????
This man is a full-blown, on board,
brought in, Globalist-RED China
sellout and TREASON OP former
serving director of the ILLEGAL,
TREASONOUS, foreign owned,
USURY mongering, EUGENICS
fostering -----
---------------'FEDERAL' RESERVE!------------------
-----------Close to 90% of the American public
is now demanding an AUDIT, prosecution and
END of the FED.
The best laid FAKE OPS of Soros et al
can NOT stop the tide.
---------GET with the DE-program.
-------------HUAC meets NUREMBERG--------------
-------------------------is coming-------------------------
---------------------CASE CLOSED-----------------------
--------------------or, rather, about to be 'opened'.
Mimi| 10.13.11 @ 6:41AM
We have a choice....there are 8 primary candidates! No matter how you twist it I see no answer except maybe the FAIR TAX !
The Bush tax cuts WILL come to an end.
Lets...find out what the other candidates have come up with concerning the income tax!!
Harry the Horrible| 10.13.11 @ 9:50AM
The 999 plan is actually precursor to the Fair Tax. Cain is a supporter of the Fair Tax.
Ken (Old Texican)| 10.13.11 @ 7:13AM
Mr. Lantern,
The sales tax could be crafted to leave out food and "adequate shelter"taxes.
Chuck Bartok | 10.17.11 @ 4:19AM
I believe you are correct.
That modification makes SENSE!
At least MR. Cain does not rely on Focus groups to make his decision for him!
Brian Mc| 10.13.11 @ 7:22AM
Since nobody would lift a finger if they could not make a profit, all taxes invariably lead to the consumer at some point. Shove them back as far as possible and stay out of my wallet. The government has no right to know how much I make.
John Barleycorn| 10.13.11 @ 7:23AM
Just when I think AmSpec has finally increased their shrinking cadre of decent columnists, GL goes and spews bile about a carbon tax, because this would be somehow better than a sales tax. A carbon tax is simply a sales tax by proxy, and not only does it tend to discourage productive activities by the parties directly taxed, the actual costs are passed along to the consumer and hidden from them in the price of the goods and services provided. Yes, that's brilliant. Then the pols can freely jack up the carbon tax rate knowing full well it will be passed along, with the ire of the voters directed against those passing the costs along, rather than themselves. A win-win for them.
Let's look at another point - that of the combined sales tax rates. Admittedly in some locales this would push the rate to near 20%. However, this would have the benefit of sharpening the voters' attention whenever ANY jurisdiction proposes a sales tax increase. Everyone seems to understand the need to have the government raise revenue for executing the powers we the people have granted it, but no one seems to like the idea of that need staring them in the face in the form of a line item on their receipt from the store. I, for one, think its a great idea. Then, every time you hear about some stupid government spending program, like studying shrimp on treadmills or how to make pigs less stinky, you can look at that receipt and ask yourself why the government would need to raise that rate.
Pecos Pete| 10.13.11 @ 8:57AM
JB: Exactly. Good comment.
Governments have to tax for their revenue. Politicians will move heaven and earth to hide the amount of taxes. I could support a national sales tax (with NO income taxes) if for no other reason than that people would see the total amount of tax every time they buy something.
JohnK| 10.13.11 @ 10:34AM
John and Pete, you both have it right. I would add that by repealing the 16th amendment (the income tax), no one would ever have to file a personal tax return again. A national consumption tax that replaces all others is the best answer. We just need to educate more people of the benefits.
SpiralArchitect| 10.13.11 @ 4:55PM
How many people get refunds in excess of what they pay in taxes.
These are to be considered believers in doing away with the current system?
These same people are to prefer a tax system where they will pay taxes w/o chance of return?
These select people are not small in number & would be a better group to have on your side than in opposition.
Why do so many people think to repeal a Constitutioanl Amend. is a simple task?
There must be at least one other person out there that thinks the 9 9 9 plan is not a ridgid yet plyable and open to adjustments for aplicability.
Seriously, how many people think everyhting these candidates say now is what they will do upon being elected to office? Oh, because they said so, right. Sounds like a lot more hope & change to me.
USSAlabama| 10.13.11 @ 1:42PM
I'm paying 15% sales tax right now on anything I walk into a store to buy -- whether its the corner drug store or the grocery store.
I sure as hell am not going to support 9% on top of that!
And BTW Herman hasn't said repeal the 16th has he? Carbon tax? Are you kidding?
Michael Tomlinson| 10.13.11 @ 2:30PM
USS AL:
Nor will the majority of Americans. IF Cain were the nominee this would spell the death knell of the GOP in 2012 and a resurgent "tax cutting" Obama and Democrat party covering themselves in the mantle of Reagan against the tax raising Republicans. Cain's supporters need to look beyond the public persona and discover the reality.
USSAlabama| 10.13.11 @ 11:10PM
I'm with you, Michael.
SinkingCalifornia| 10.16.11 @ 1:46AM
Amen!
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 10.13.11 @ 4:35PM
You're also paying corporate taxes.. Remember, corporations don't pay taxes, they pass along costs to consumers in the form of higher prices.
Intelligent Design| 10.13.11 @ 7:40AM
It's almost time for Congress to vote on the Fair Tax (www.fairtax.org), which would completely eliminate the federal income tax system, eliminate the IRS, and result in unprecedented economic growth. There would be no payroll withholding tax, no separate Social Security tax, no taxes on capital gains, interest, or dividends, no AMT, no estate tax, no corporate income taxes, no complicated IRA, Roth and 401-K rules, and no federal income tax returns. About 60,000 pages of IRS regulations would go straight into the trash can.
Revenue would be obtained from one simple national sales tax levied on new goods (not used) and virtually all services. This sales tax, estimated at 23%, would be collected using existing state mechanisms (most states have a sales tax) and forwarded to the U.S. Treasury. The tax would not be added on at the point of sale, but would be embedded in prices. There would be no loopholes ---- illegal immigrants, drug dealers, other crooks, and tourists would all help pay for our federal government. Fair Tax legislation has actually been introduced in both the House and Senate in prior years, but it has not received sufficient support from the old, corrupt Congress. It should be possible to pass this legislation in the House, and also in the Senate after more Democrats there are throw in the garbage truck by voters in 2012.
The Fair Tax is the single most effective step Congress can take to restore freedom and create truly astounding economic growth. This would lead to a massive reduction in the national debt, assuming that federal spending is also drastically cut.
How many Americans are in favor of ending the federal income tax system and the IRS? Who would be opposed?
The web site: www.fairtax.org provides details. Please note, this is not a "flat" tax, nor is it a "VAT". The IRS would be history. I can hear someone saying right now that it would be regressive. Wrong. Look at the web site for information about the "prebate" system included in the proposed legislation.
Pecos Pete| 10.13.11 @ 9:03AM
ID: You wrote, "The tax would not be added on at the point of sale, but would be embedded in prices. "
I don't understand how that would work. Is your statement correct?
A national sales tax should NOT be embedded in prices. It should be added on at the time of sale, just like local government sales taxes.
If people could see the total of taxes they are paying then we might make some headway in controlling spending.
Intelligent Design| 10.13.11 @ 1:31PM
That's my understanding of how the embedded tax would work. The taxes that manufactures and service providers pay are currently embedded in their price structure. Here is an excerpt from the Fair Tax web site, which may help:
"FairTax would be great for families and for economy
Saturday, January 26, 2008
By: Steve C. Barry
Who among us would not like to have the IRS abolished?
Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee's win in Iowa has brought an innovative proposal to do just that to the attention of the American electorate. The proposal, called the FairTax, involves eliminating income tax, Social Security tax, capital gains tax, death tax and any other kind of tax in favor of a flat-rate consumption tax or sales tax.
By eliminating all taxes but a flat sales tax, we would also be eliminating the embedded taxes that we pay for with each product that we buy. Experts estimate that 22 percent of the cost of each item we buy covers the embedded taxes.
Competition in the free market will bring prices down to reflect a lack of corporate taxes and other taxes that manufacturers have to pay. The proposed rate of the FairTax is 23 percent, so with the embedded taxes eliminated, it would be a wash.
The FairTax would also widen the base of taxpayers. Because anyone who consumes goods would pay taxes, people who previously failed to report their incomes would begin paying their fair share of taxes. This would include illegal aliens and underground industries such as pornography, drugs and gambling.
In order to make a sales tax fair for those near the poverty level who spend a higher percentage of their incomes on consumption, the government would send a rebate to every household of legal residents to cover the amount of sales tax that is paid by families at the poverty level.
Let's recap: Take off the embedded tax, add the FairTax, and our prices would basically stay the same, employees would receive their entire checks with no federal withholding. Think of our purchasing power. The economy would boom like never before. The stock market would be off the charts."
Michael Tomlinson| 10.13.11 @ 2:39PM
Amen! A hidden tax is a tax Democrats will raise and blame the increase in prices on "evil" businesses and "greedy" corporations. A two tier flat tax now would be better while the nation studied and debated a Fair Tax.
Occam's Tool| 10.13.11 @ 8:47PM
Isn't the corporate income tax currently 35% right now? Knock down the cost of things by 20 or so percent as you drop the corporate tax to 9% and then tax it an additional 9% as a national sales tax.
I'm sorry, but that would not create a 27% tax on most people like some idiot lefties say. We start off right now with a 35% sales tax paid by all, and Federal gas taxes, which I assume would be eliminated with the 9% sales tax.
I have a feeling that we would do better on the Pizza plan for 999.
SinkingCalifornia| 10.16.11 @ 2:20AM
A reduced income tax should induce increased production (and so a supply side price reduction) until marginal profits = 0, in theory. But the VAT or sales tax would increase product price. So who knows?
But, as Michael Tomlinson suggests, the most important question is whether the 999 proposal would lead to a landslide Democratic victory. Because we don't want to get snowed in this particular election.
R Martin| 10.13.11 @ 8:40AM
It would make more sense and be more productive if Mr. Lantern and some commenters focused their intellect on reducing the need for new taxes rather than suggesting ways to impose additional ones.
A carbon tax gives credence to the leftist claim that carbon is bad and should, therefore, be a non starter with readers of this site. Australia, with an ultra left government, has just imposed a carbon tax and the country is in political turmoil because of it.
A national sales tax, VAT or whatever proponents want to name it will always be the thin edge of the wedge for future tax gouging by spendthrift governments sure to follow. VAT has been institutionalized in Europe, raised regularly, and yet the continent is a fiscal mess.
The lesson is that revenues will always be insufficient for the spending goals of almost all politicians. The answer has to be to limit those goals with limits on the revenue available. Focus on costs, not revenues.
John Navratil| 10.13.11 @ 8:55AM
Green Lantern,
A tax on carbon is a tax on production. A sales tax, for all its problems, is a tax on consumption. I'll take the latter.
POST American| 10.13.11 @ 9:01AM
---Since the creation of the ILLEGAL
private USURY operation, our FAKE
'Federal Reserve' and its FAKE, debt
serf generating and servicing 'economy'
--we've been maneuveed into 2 unprecedented
World Wars ----multiple depressions,
-----enmeshments with a succession of
genocidal (also bankster sourced) regimes
-----and the loss of 96% of the TRUE value
of the US dollar.
NOTE, they love paradoxes to shepherd
forward their agendas ---ie World Wars to
promote world government
---Sexual 'Liberation' to destroy gender,
destroy culture and eliminate the 'useless eaters'
---'Humanism' to DE-humanize
-----------------------SO CLEVER------------------------
PattyMor| 10.13.11 @ 9:02AM
The focus needs to be on the spending, not new methods of separating people from their money.
We need a a devolution of power back to the States. Cut, Cap, and Balance is a good start. But there are oh so many uselfess, wasteful programs and so little time.
So let's concentrate on electing the most conservative candidate than can win the primaries. And, it isn't Mr. Big Government, Mittens Romney, of Romneycare fame.
Pecos Pete| 10.13.11 @ 9:14AM
Patty, you and R Martin (above) are correct. The problem is spending. For now, we must elect conservatives to Congress, and the presidency.
After that we can start to fix the tax system.
The income tax must be terminated as it is nothing more than a class warfare taxation system. Of course, those who benefit from NOT paying income taxes will fight tooth and nail to retain the current federal tax system.
Can you imagine the teeth grinding by CPAs, tax attorneys, lobbyists (corporations), non profit organizations and welfare recipients ... if everyone had to pay taxes to the federal government without loopholes, etc.?
Occam's Tool| 10.13.11 @ 8:49PM
Paying taxes in New Zealand was a breeze. The amount was too damn high (39.5% on all income over $60,000, plus a sales tax of 13.5%), but the actual paying was a breeze. Paying 18% on those two components when I am paying 35% now, plus reducing the tax on corporations so that could lower prices and increase my retirement savings is a no-brainer. I'm in the Cain camp.
POST American| 10.13.11 @ 9:02AM
-----And CAIN is one of them, and now
'representing' conservative indignation.
Timothy L. Pennell| 10.13.11 @ 9:05AM
I don't understand why people don't get it, when it comes to Taxing these Big Businesses.
What would you rather have? People WORKING, bringing home a Paycheck, going out to Dinner, or the Movies, Buying Houses and Cars and paying Income and Sales Taxes and, NOT being on Welfare, and Medicaid? Or, would you rather get as much money as you can from these Sons of Bitches, and their Rich CEOs?
I ask, because, you can't have BOTH. Nobody ever got a Golden Egg, AFTER they had Killed the Golden Goose.
Why is this so difficult for some people?(Democrats)
Charge them 9%, and they will beat a path to your door.
Charge them a lot? Well.......I think you already know, what that brings.
None of the above.
Pecos Pete| 10.13.11 @ 9:19AM
Mr. Green Lantern: You gotta be kidding. Yes?
Well, at least we are talking about doing something to replace the income tax system.
Chris| 10.13.11 @ 9:27AM
If you eliminate all the taxes except 9%, wouldn’t the cost of goods plummet? All taxes would be gone, gas tax, capital gains, any hidden taxes on production, such as energy. That savings would be passed on to everyone, especially the poor. So, wouldn’t the 9-9-9 plan benefit everyone in the long run?
Sean| 10.13.11 @ 9:28AM
Cain is clueless on economics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....r_embedded
Bill| 10.13.11 @ 9:31AM
NO NATIONAL SALES TAX WITHOUT A REPEAL OF THE SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT AND A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT OUTLAWING THE INCOME TAX!!!
Clint| 10.13.11 @ 9:51AM
Damned Straight.
9-9-9 Is A Non-Starter.
Conservatives Won't Allow Big Government To Have Both A National Sales Tax & An Income Tax.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.
Michael Tomlinson| 10.13.11 @ 9:35AM
The “Godfather” has a deal voters can and will refuse. Cain’s 9-9-9 monstrosity falls apart not just because of the regressive sales tax, but when he erroneously claims worker’s portion of the payroll tax is 15.3%. That’s correct for the self-employed, but not those who are hired employees. Their portion of the payroll tax is 7.65% and anyone who thinks the employers are going pick up Cain’s 9% or increase wages are fools. Wilma at Wal-Mart is going to pay the 9% out of her paycheck just like she does the 7.65%. The good news for the company they can pocket the 7.65% they save. Those who criticize this as a break for business, but a tax increase for workers are correct. (With the temporary cut in payroll taxes the payroll tax is 4.2% so Obama is going to claim Cain wants to raise working class taxes by 5% and technically he’ll be right).
Obama is going to have a heyday IF Cain is the nominee correctly declaring Cain wants to raise taxes (which he does) on the portion of the tax base that only contributes in payroll taxes. But it will get worse for them and the middle-class, because he wants to levy a regressive sales tax on the purchase of food, medicine, gasoline, clothes, new cars, new homes (new home construction and the housing market destroyed by Obama will be obliterated by Cain).
Herman Cain will be the new Herbert Hoover for an economy reeling from 4 years of Obama’s malfeasance. Not only that, but he’s going to scuttle our Congressional chances too unless Republican candidate repudiate the Party's standard bearer and they will, but the damage may be done with Cain at the top of the ticket.
We need tax reform, but not this slapped together marketing gimmick. The Domino’s $9.99 pizza deal is better than the “Godfathers.”
chuck| 10.13.11 @ 9:56PM
You're kidding me, aren't you? Do you really believe that the employees don't pay both halves of the FICA taxes? Are you really that stupid? The cost of your employment is what what it costs your employer, which includes your pay, your benefits, plus the cost of all taxes, including the employer half of FICA and unemployment taxes. Just because you don't actually see it in your check, doesn't mean your not paying it. If it costs your employer, you pay for it in reduced wages.
Trust me on this, I'm an employer!
Chuck Bartok | 10.17.11 @ 4:28AM
Thanks for being honest.
I believe the same as you..If I didn't pay all the Taxes required and other "Hidden" cost managing regulations, I would have gladly shared with employees.
Taking fair and honest care of employees pays huge dividend as any TRULY successful business person knows.
George S| 10.13.11 @ 9:43AM
Pick up a history book and see the story about a tax placed on tea. Now that was a great idea, was it not, to tax something everyone uses? One could not avoid paying the tax so it was a sure-fire way of raising revenue. Now the smart thinking says tax carbon -- everybody consumes it in one form or another. But why stop there? Why not have the IRS require every citizen to blow into a spirometer so that a carbon tax can be "fairly" levied. In the future, it would be that much easier if we need to raise even more revenue: our fair share of oxygen can then be taxed. If you think that is silly because you cannot tax something that occurs naturally, then how can a tax be levied on a piece of earth called a 'tax lot'?
Given the chance, government will always find a way to take money out of your pocket. A sales tax at the federal level is no exception. The purpose of a federal government was to regulate commerce so that interstate economic wars would not HAMPER the flow of commerce. Placing a federal sales tax would do exactly that. Bad idea in 1773, bad idea today.
Stefan Stackhouse| 10.13.11 @ 9:49AM
It amazes me that so many people are apparently in love with a 15.3% payroll tax that they would consider that preferable to a 9% sales tax. Worried about congress raising the rate? Well, guess what, they have done that repeatedly with the payroll tax, and it is only a matter of time before they do it again to fix social security and medicare. How does a 20% payroll tax sound to you?
Reagan said that if you want less of something, you tax it. We tax employment, so we're getting less of it. We don't tax consumption, so we get more of that - instead of saving and investment.
Yes, a 9% national sales tax on top of state sales taxes will be a burden, and there probably will be some evasion. However, if you want to shift our economy from one that is consumption-based (and thus custom-tailored for leftist Keynesian fiscal policies) to one that emphasizes saving and investment (and thus really grows), how else are you going to do it?
George S| 10.13.11 @ 10:16AM
You are assuming a static economy. If we consume less, we produce or import less. How does that grow an economy? All you have to do is look at Europe over the past 50 years to see how a consumption tax does not grow an economy. (while paying nothing for defense to boot). An economy only grows when labor is exchanged. But the precondition must be that the producers are free to cater to the needs and wants of the people.
John Navratil| 10.13.11 @ 11:27AM
George S,
The benefit of a consumption tax is that people can avoid it in tight times and government gets the message through reduced receipts. It is easier to save when inputs are not taxed so those who defer consumption provide the benefit of reduced interest rates for capital.
Europe doesn't have a sales tax (collected once at retail), but a VAT taxing all points of production. It is most certainly a tax on production, not consumption. They also have high income tax rates.
George S| 10.13.11 @ 7:48PM
John,
No problem with a consumption tax provided we repeal the 16th. The best feature of a consumption tax is that government cannot redistribute wealth since everyone pays at point of use. Also, it is time consuming to collect and, like you said, people directly control the tax receipts to the treasury. Which is why the Progressives wanted (and got) a federal income tax in the first place.
But since we have a progressive tax code in place, it will be economic suicide to impose a VAT or flat (fair) tax on top of all the income, excise, property, sales, FICA, and medicare taxes that we are already drowning in. Cain has to drop that 999 stuff unless he uses that as the reason to take the plunge and begin the process of repealing the 16th Amendment.
Michael Tomlinson| 10.13.11 @ 2:58PM
Currently 70% of our economy is based on conumption. Cain's 9-9-9 has the potential of sending a massive shockwave through an economy already damaged by Obama. This will compound the problems in the housing market, manufacturing, employment and deficits.
This is not a well thought out plan. Despite Cain's implying time and again it has been well thought out the WSJ now quotes him as saying it is a "work in progress." Cain is making things up as he goes. This amateur hour akin to what the Democrats gave us in late 70's and 3 years ago.
Being "likable and affable" isn't going to win the Presidency or reverse the Obama ravages to our nation. He can make a good speech and he has obvious marketing skill to make people believe he agrees with them, but the country bought that "bill of goods" in 2008 and look where that got us.
While Jon Huntsman was joking about it sounding like a pizza deal it really is. Domino's Pizza had and may still have a $9.99 pizza deal. It's a better buy than what Herman Cain's selling.
http://online.wsj.com/article/.....08356.html
Clint| 10.13.11 @ 9:56AM
It Ain't Gonna Happen.
9-9-9 Is A Non-Starter Orchestrated By Cain's Guru, His Former FED Buddy & Now TARP Recipient Wells Fargo Division Guy, Rich Lowrie.
Conservatives Will Not Allow Big Government To Have A National Sales Tax & An Income Tax.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here.
Conserdude| 10.13.11 @ 10:01AM
Interesting. A national sales tax indeed is fraught with problems. If you combine this carbon tax with more domestic energy production, the price-hike from the tax would be nullified from higher supply effects that put downward pressure on the price.
al| 10.13.11 @ 10:03AM
anyone who thinks a 9% sales tax would stay at 9% is delusional. this is one camels nose under the tent you never want to see.
bsjy| 10.13.11 @ 10:36AM
I am willing to trade a lot of things for simplicity and clarity. I doubt anyone today can calculate the full impact of our current tax structure, but I am open to the idea that, revlieved of FICA and with a simple 9% corporate tax, employers would raise workers' incomes such that they can afford to pay the consumption tax.
Rich people consume more than poor people, so a consumption tax will hit the rich. 9-9-9 is in my mind less about the rates than about the move to a simple structure. Based on what I have heard from Neal Boortz, the FairTax is anything but simple and I would not favor its adoption. If the tax rate is simple, people can react to the level of taxation and we can shrink the government if the cost is too high. We cannot currently show people the cost of government because so much of it is indirect and embedded.
Intelligent Design| 10.13.11 @ 12:12PM
The Fair Tax is extremely simple compared to the current federal income tax system, which involves something like 60,000 pages of regulations. The entire federal income tax system would be history, replaced by a simple national sales tax on new goods (not used) and most services. There would be no need for individuals to file income tax returns.
Nick| 10.13.11 @ 10:47AM
Mr. Terrell,
Where did you find this guy with the man-child pseudonym Green Lantern, at Mother Jones or The Nation?
Fire him, forthwith!
Nick| 10.13.11 @ 10:51AM
Oops! Mr. Tyrrell.
My apologies, typing on auto-pilot this morning without much proof-reading!
Walking Horse| 10.13.11 @ 10:50AM
We now have conclusive proof that "Green Lantern" is a nom de plume of a east coast writer.
More directly .. Jumpin' Jeezus on a pogo stick!!! What did you sprinkle on top of your Post Toasties, GL? You carp about a national sales tax, and have the gall to propose in its place the mother of all control freak wet dreams?? The last damned thing we need is more industrial policy from the knuckleheads in DC. A sales tax with a rate that could only be raised if 2/3 of both House and Senate concur seems less risky than giving Congress the right to tax "carbon" at the source.
It is also monumentally stupid to give anyone any reason to think conservatives accept any of the presumptions of the Holy Church of Anthropogenic Global Warming.
Damn. With friends like this, who needs enemies?
d clowes| 10.13.11 @ 10:50AM
still would amount to social engineering, picking winners, etc. i thought you were a free market kind of guy?
Hall Enger| 10.13.11 @ 11:09AM
I like Cain in general, but the 9-9-9 is not well thought out, and making such a massive change to the tax laws is not appropriate with the economy in the shape it is.
One problem with 9-9-9 is that it is a very regressive tax relative to what we have now, and it will result in a massive tax increase for the lower economic brackets. We don't need that now!
Any such major change in tax law will have a slew of unintended consequences. The present tax laws shape the economy in many unpredictable ways. I am all for tax law changes when the economy is doing pretty well, but not now -- we may not be able to stand the unintended consequences. In the past, the economy hummed along quite well with tax laws even more onerous than we have now.
What is needed now is permanent changes to the regulatory burdens, and elimination of the blocks to industrial activity -- such as odious so-called "Clean Air" regs, blocks to the exploitation of our vast energy resources, and subsidizing uneconomic enterprises.
Ruebacca| 10.13.11 @ 11:29AM
Our tax system is a huge burden on our exports. The income tax, raises the cost of our exports. The authors carbon tax does the same thing.
We need to shift taxation to the point of sale of goods and services. That will lower the cost of goods produced here but not consumed here. Plus it will tax the cheep imports without being a trade barrier.
Keith D. Rodebush | 10.13.11 @ 11:40AM
One of the problems with your analysis is that you accept that the tax would reduce coal usage, but you don't recognize that this would mean less tax collected so the total would fall short of needed revenue which of course means that gubmint would have to find something else to tax which they are experts at...and on and on and on....
fmm| 10.13.11 @ 11:41AM
Everything depends on the price of energy. Taxing energy at a high rate is a non-starter. Change 9-9-9 to 13.5-13.5 and you have a winner.
Not a Fuzzy Math Teacher| 10.13.11 @ 11:49AM
Mr. Green Lantern :
Check your work. I believe you misoverestimated the tax revenue on gas by a factor of 10.
Dave| 10.13.11 @ 12:11PM
Yet another flop who opposes a national sales tax because...
Exactly.
LoveToCompete| 10.13.11 @ 12:31PM
Crazy! Crazy! My electric bill this summer for one month was $400.00. If you think I can afford more you are......
LMADster | 10.13.11 @ 12:50PM
'fess up Green Lantern! You stole this idea from the book "Let's make a Deal: A Hail Mary Pass to Get America Off the Bench and Back in the Game", didn't you.
The book's LMAD plan does indeed use a carbon tax not to OFFSET but to REPLACE taxes on production, labor and investment.
Here's how.
For starters, the LMAD plan buys off Liberals with a $600 billion CARBON TAX to fight global warming. It also adds fully-funded healthcare for every American, a public option health insurance entity, and the implementation of consumption-based tax schemes that are frequently advocated by Liberals such as a “salt-sugar-fat tax” and a value-added tax. The LMAD plan even grants overnight amnesty of 10 million illegal aliens. These are all long-sought ideological goals favored by Liberals that will never, ever pass otherwise.
Then, LMAD buys off Conservatives with a strict balanced budget and a limit on the size of government as a percentage of GDP. It also permanently ends future illegal immigration, adds tort reform and completely replaces all taxes on production, labor, saving and investment with the new carbon tax, the value-added tax and the salt-sugar-fat tax favored by Liberals. The LMAD plan even removes the burden of healthcare expenses from corporate balance sheets by ending America’s reliance on employer-provided health insurance. These are all long-sought ideological goals favored by Conservatives that will never, ever pass otherwise.
With LMAD, Liberals can breathe easier knowing that global warming is finally being addressed, that every American has adequate healthcare and that energy, consumption, waste and affluenza are appropriately taxed.
Conservatives can fire their guns in the air to celebrate that the budget is permanently balanced, the size of government is held in check, and those anti-growth taxes and business-borne healthcare costs that are killing American exports and penalizing work, savings and investment are forever ended.
Both sides will appreciate that the LMAD deal is a potent GDP-growth accelerant that puts the United States firmly in the China/India economic growth league. The country will be transformed from a debt-ridden, gluttonous net-importer afflicted with high structural unemployment, unaffordable healthcare costs and scant economic prospects to a lean, efficient, export juggernaut that creates millions of new, higher-income jobs and hosts an increasing number of world class companies that choose to relocate to the only country on the planet that doesn’t tax production or labor. With healthcare costs finally contained and economic growth unleashed, Medicare and Social Security will be made solvent without the need to impose politically painful benefit cuts.
LMAD is more than just a carbon tax: Healthcare-for-All? It’s in there. Balanced budget? It’s in there. Carbon tax? It’s in there. Rational taxation? Amnesty? Border Security? Limited government? Social Security and Medicare solvency? It’s all in there; it’s all paid for and it’s all scalable and optimized for economic growth.
Blog: letsmakeadeal-thebook.com/
Ron| 10.13.11 @ 1:06PM
One question...When has the Fed actually backed off on a tax it instituted? Ever?
Once a tax is in place, it either stays or grows...If there is going to be a national sales tax, kill the PIT. if he wants a flat income tax, or a fair tax, forget the national sales tax.
I am not an economist, did not play one on TV, nor did I stay at Holiday Inn last night (since I cannot afford a vacation from work), so to me, I see an 18% tax on me...A 9% income Tax and a 9% Sales tax...that seems higher than what i pay now, which, with my one child and being married, is around 15%, even with local sales taxes. So how is Mr. Cain's plan better? Is it because it requires sacrifice and even distribution? Sounds like NerObama's spiel to me...unless it is true and is going to hit the 50% that does not pay any taxes now.
Michael Tomlinson| 10.13.11 @ 1:31PM
Ron you see it clearly without your judgment being clouded by the mere promise of a fair tax and being seduced by political marketing. This is what will happen in the general election and it will lead to the defeat of the GOP.
Even though it will hit those that only payroll tax it is a tax increase on them and the middle-class. The country will not accept that during the current economic times. Reforming the tax system is going to take a more strategic view than a campaign gimmick borrowed from Domino Pizza.
Casey Abell| 10.13.11 @ 1:32PM
Yeah, the national sales tax is a killer, but Green Lantern's carbon tax is no better. Got an idea. Don't raise taxes on anybody!
Yeah, I know it's a radical concept. But with the economy fragile, to say the least, we don't need gigantic tax overhauls that will hit a lot of people hard.
Anyway, we're talking about things which will never happen. If anybody seriously thinks Cain could win the general election after a thorough working-over of that national sales tax, they're kidding themselves. He's well behind Obama already and a brand new spanking way for the feds to take our money ain't gonna help him catch up.
http://www.realclearpolitics.c.....dates.html
A Adams| 10.13.11 @ 1:35PM
Ron Paul Calls Out Herman Cain For Lie Over Fed Audit During GOP Debate
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....06228.html
Cain Thinks the Fed Missing $9 Trillion Unimportant
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/201.....important/
Herman Cain made it clear tonight in his answer to Ron Paul’s question about auditing the Federal Reserve that he simply doesn’t think it’s important.
In 2009, the Federal Reserve admitted it could not account for $9 trillion. This is not a misprint. It wasn’t $9 million. Not $9 billion. $9 TRILLION.
This was just like Enron:
"As chair of the compensation committee, Cain also saw fit to dole out $30 million in bonuses, not including stock options, to the top five execs at Aquila in 2002, with the company's stock plummeting. A month after the Kansas City Star reported on the hefty bonuses in July 2002, the company laid off 500 employees, and the losses to employees holding company stock had reached hundreds of millions of dollars."
cicero| 10.13.11 @ 2:02PM
Cain's seems to be the only concrete tax proposal on the table, other than the Dem's standard proposal to raise them again to pay for more programs. Sure, it has flaws. But, it is a point from which to start an intelligent discussion. Take the 9-9-9, and rescind the 16th Amendment. Cap the 9-9-9, so that it cannot be raised without a supermajority vote of both houses. Let the states keeep all of their gas taxes.
Let the debate begin. The only ideas right now are on the conservative side. Leet's not blow this thing by denigrating everyone of our guys' ideas just because we don't wholly agree with them in their totallity.
TrueBlue| 10.13.11 @ 2:32PM
It would have to be done as a Constitutional Amendment, not as a law, those are too easily changed. It would have to be written to require another Constitutional Amendment in order to modify it, not just a supermajority.
That said, Mr. Cain needs to explain the idea, in complete detail, outside the debate setting. He needs to take the time to do an entire presentation similar to the ones Paul Ryan did for his Medicare reform suggestions. Take all the questions the other candidates have thrown at him in the debates and answer them completely without a timer to get in the way. Debates are nothing but soundbite after soundbite.
CalMark| 10.13.11 @ 2:29PM
Is this a joke? A CARBON tax?
And who, pray tell, would enforce it? Same problems as with a national sales tax. Actually, it's the same exact thing under a slightly different banner.
Go back and try again.
TrueBlue| 10.13.11 @ 2:29PM
I wouldn't support a "carbon tax" simply because it's too openly manipulated. First it'd be industry, then they'd start taxing people for breathing since we exhale CO2.
Hana Noca| 10.13.11 @ 2:53PM
A carbon tax would be both regressive and harmful to domestic manufacturing. If the goal is to raise $380 billion, then impose a 20% duty on all imports. The US imports $2 trillion per year, the 20% duty would generate $400 billion. Of course playing with any numbers on the revenue side is meaningless until the elephant in the room, spending, is addressed.
Michael Tomlinson| 10.13.11 @ 3:08PM
A better deal than the "Godfather's."
Dominos Pizza $9.99 5-topping Large Pizza
(May 2011 ad)
AmericanEagle| 10.13.11 @ 3:22PM
The author blithely says that a national sales tax "is a non-starter", and then goes on from there. A 9% national sales tax may not wash, but a 3 or 4% rate may wash and it is the only way to get the bottom 50% of income earners who pay no income taxes to pay some of the tab, not to mention foreigners - legal and illegal - drug dealers, tax cheaters, etc.
The best part of Herman Cain's plan is throwing out the current 72,536 page tax code which is a cruel fraud and an ugly monument to political whim. An honest, apolitical tax code should not take more than the 2 pages Cain would shoot for.
mister b| 10.13.11 @ 4:02PM
Call it an energy tax instead of a carbon tax.
Mr. Cain thinks like an economist and a businessman not like a legislator. There is nothing that prevents future politicians from raising the rates at will. A 2/3rds majority requirement to change it would never pass. When was the last time 2/3rds of congress agreed on anything?
A national sales tax is imperfect at BEST and would cause a boom in the gray/underground economy. A 7-9% state sales tax is bad enough. A 16-18% combined fed/state sales tax would cause a lot of people to starting buying stuff out of the back of some guy's car.
Personally I would like to see all individual federal taxes eliminated and instead allow the fed to send a bill for services to each state. This would force politicians to fight for the lowest possible bill for their state instead of how much pork they bring home. States can choose whichever method they want to raise the money for the bill. Flat tax, fair tax, progressive tax, bake sale, whatever.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 10.13.11 @ 4:24PM
Art Laffer just endorsed the 9-9-9 plan as a huge improvement over the current tax code.
How ya like them apples?
CalMark| 10.13.11 @ 6:33PM
Reagan was sometimes wrong, too.
PhilTheCapitalistPig| 10.13.11 @ 4:25PM
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46828
David T| 10.13.11 @ 4:30PM
Newt Gingrich has proposed a 12.5% corporate tax and an optional 15% flat tax for individuals, both endorsed by Art Laffer. See Peter Ferrara's article in AmSpec 5/18/11: http://spectator.org/archives/.....overy-plan
Kingofthenet| 10.13.11 @ 5:23PM
I think Herman is having FLASHBACKS to his Pizza Days, i think he launched his 9-9-9 plan in response to Domino's 5-5-5 Deal.
Alan Brooks| 10.13.11 @ 5:58PM
Must have been all that LSD Cain took when he hung out with the Black Panthers.
CalMark| 10.13.11 @ 6:33PM
Your post is beneath contempt.
bluecollarbytes| 10.13.11 @ 7:31PM
how many ways are there to evade the real problem- runaway spending?
today I thought I heard John McCain on the radio (no Tivo) claim 'we need to Reform or Replace Obamascare. So the mediocre have already staked out their resistance to any meaningful change.
how can Cain fight the mediocrity that exists within the Republican Party? That would be his biggest obstacle in any Cain presidency.
Jim| 10.13.11 @ 7:57PM
Who is this idiot and why is he hiding? CARBON TAX? Stupid is as stupid does. Why don't you show yourself so that I can banish from my computer forever. How did you EVER get to publish on the American Spectator? Are you a secret OWS operative? Go away and don't come back. We aren't interested.
jgo| 10.13.11 @ 8:33PM
"national sales tax is a non-starter"
What!? You wouldn't have any federal inspectors at all, and very few auditors. Why? Because the states would tax retail sales and the federal government would tax the states. The states would collect the retail sales taxes, using their current staffs and processes, and send along their proportion, based on population or retail sales -- I don't care which -- to the federal government.
Of course, I'd also much prefer totally eliminating income extortion, because of the massive privacy violations it requires. If you're an honest person, the feral federal government shouldn't even know you exist, unless and until your local militia company is called up for national service when we're being invaded.
John II| 10.13.11 @ 10:01PM
"Well, this is all highly speculative."
Yes, but not THAT speculative. Your whole philosophy of taxation reduces to one principle: Screw the consumer, who's too dumb to notice.
Cain's going in the right direction, but not quite far enough. There should be no income tax and therefore no "corporate tax" at all. The adjustments in a VAT would have to be calibrated minutely and carefully, and controlled tightly by laws designed by good and thoughtful people, but we have the technology for all that, if not always the people.
You've missed the moral dimension of it all, Greenie--but your silly nom de internet cries out that you are indeed a child of your times.
And now back to "Fall of the Roman Empire" (1964), in which the honest hero (Stephen Boyd) and the long-suffering heroine (Sophia Loren) are hopelessly misfitted to their degenerate culture, so that they finally leave for . . . somewhere. That's the weakest link in the plot. In any event, Alec Guinness plays a plausible Marcus Aurelius, and things don't turn out too well for him either.
Buzz B| 10.13.11 @ 10:05PM
I would never consider 9-9-9 as currently presented. But if the sales tax were replaced with a carbon tax, I could get on board. Anything to put a price on carbon.
Why is it we get our revenue from things that are good for society, like working (income tax), creating jobs (corp tax), buying and selling things (sales tax), and owning property (property tax). We'd be well-served to instead tax things that actually cost society money ... without even considering climate change, the National Academies estimate the hidden societal costs of burning fossil fuel amounts to $120 billion per year. We need to internalize those societal costs.
Allen Johnson| 10.13.11 @ 10:50PM
I strongly support the writer's suggestion for a Carbon Tax. Some of this could be a "fee and dividend" tax that would rebate collected tax revenue to every adult U.S. citizen on an equal basis. This "game rule" applied to the market would then encourage energy conservation, an important national security issue in many ways.
Second, let's face it. Fossil fuels are in finite supply. They are a patrimony of future generations, too. Resource depletion should be taxed.
Which leads to my third point. Namely, "full cost accounting." Everything should pay its way, that is, internalized. Pollution externalizes costs onto those whose health suffers, or who have to clean up the mess. And carbon-based fuels (especially coal) do pollute. I lay this out as a moral challenge. Tax pollution and depletion. Do not tax productive labor.
Buzz B| 10.14.11 @ 7:26AM
I agree with you Mr. Johnson. Time to reboot that debate.
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/.....r-1336262/
http://www.roanoke.com/editori...../wb/298749
POST American| 10.13.11 @ 10:59PM
--------------------BOTTOM LINE----------------------
DROP the CAIN.
AUDIT, and ABOLISH the FED.
PROSECUTE the network behind the
4 decades underway Globalist-RED China
set up, sellout, TREASON an EUGENICS OP
(--ie RIIA/CFR and their spinoff, the
Trilateral Comm.).
Go after the juice behind even them,
the ULTRA RICH, TAX FREE, culture
subverting, EUGENICS mongering,
sovereignty destroying, TREASONOUS
---------------------NGOs------------------------
----------------------and--------------------------
----------------'bennie violent'------------------
------------------foundations--------------------.
G Freda| 10.13.11 @ 11:33PM
Cut all govt positions, salaries and expenses by 9 percent!
D Roamer | 10.14.11 @ 2:27AM
I find Mr. Cain's putting it all out there and his genuineness gives me a feeling I can trust this man.
His 999 plan I am hesitant so far, reading in comment earlier that Dr.Laffer likes the plan, I am surprised. So far, Mr. Cain has my interest, but I like Gov. Perry for his genuineness as well. I am not impressed with great speakers. We have a great slate this time, all would do fine as president.
Earle Belle| 10.14.11 @ 4:01AM
Federal Reserve insider unfit to lead economic recovery, charges Revolution PAC.
From his faulty recession predictions in 2008, to his support of TARP to his resistance to a Federal Reserve audit, GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain is unqualified to shepherd America to honest economic recovery, asserts Revolution PAC.
As conservatives, including Rep. Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich, rally for fiscal transparency, Cain – a former Kansas City Federal Reserve chairman – continues to dismiss the push for a thorough audit of the public-private agency. While Cain asserts in his new autobiography, “I don’t think you’re going to find anything to audit on the Federal Reserve,” Paul’s Domestic Monetary Policy subcommittee has overseen a GAO investigation of the Fed’s crisis response emergency lending that uncovered$16 trillion in emergency loans to foreign banks.
Cain’s pattern of misjudgment and obfuscation is not a recent phenomenon. Just one week before the economic collapse and subsequent banker bailouts in 2008, he went on the record to defend the strength of the financial markets and suggest an “imaginary recession.”
“He was completely clueless about the condition of the economy right up to the moment of collapse,” notes Revolution PAC Chairman Tom Woods.
Cain proceeded to wholeheartedly back, in big government liberal fashion, the controversial Troubled Asset Relief Program, which he deemed a “win-win for the taxpayer.” He flippantly argued, “The ownership by the taxpayers is going to be relatively small and nowhere near the amount needed to be called nationalization. So what’s the problem?”
“We need sweeping, systemic changes, carried out by a real supporter of the free market who sees the whole picture,” Woods urges, “not trivial tinkering by Herman Cain or his friend Mitt Romney, whom he endorsed in 2008.”
Woods continues, “Dr. Paul specifically warned in 2001 that Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve, whose NASDAQ bubble had just burst, were in the process of creating a housing bubble. That Ron Paul is the candidate best equipped to lead us back to economic prosperity is nearly undisputed.”
A recent Harris Poll revealed that Ron Paul would prevail over Barack Obama 51 percent to 49 percent in a general election race. Paul stands at 13 percent in New Hampshire, site of the first-in-the-nation primary.
Revolution PAC is bolstering Ron Paul’s consistent, constitutional message with targeted TV advertising campaigns complemented by billboards and radio ads in key primary states. Proceeds will support the airing of game-changing commercials, like the game-changing Plastic Men” in the months to come. Unlimited donations by individuals, businesses and organizations can be made to Revolution PAC.
Huffington Post Provides Proof That Herman Cain Lied At The GOP Debate
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....06228.html
Cain Also Thinks the Fed Missing $9 Trillion Is Unimportant
Herman Cain made it clear at the Bloomberg debate in his answer to Ron Paul’s question about auditing the Federal Reserve that he simply doesn’t think it’s important.
In 2009, the Federal Reserve admitted it could not account for $9 trillion. This is not a misprint. It wasn’t $9 million. Not $9 billion.
$9 trillion.
Does it have to get to $999 trillion, Mr. Cain, before you think the Federal Reserve issue is important?
Cain’s Favorite Fed Chairman: “Print More Money”
In the Bloomberg GOP Debate, Herman Cain said that Alan Greenspan was his favorite Federal Reserve Chairman. That the TARP-supporting, financial crisis-denying Cain would think Greenspan had a good head for economics should be no surprise, since he shows himself to speak like a true insider does.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?f.....ZUpZ_onC2k
ObamaCare Advisers Were Also RomneyCare Advisers
Writes James Antle at The American Spectator:
“Records show that Mitt Romney aides met a dozen times with the White House to discuss health care reform, according to reports that are sure to refocus attention on the similarities between Obamacare and Romneycare. The Massachusetts health care plan Romney signed into law was an inspiration for the federal legislation, signed by Barack Obama, that the Republican frontrunner has pledged to have repealed.
It’s worth noting that at least two of the aides, Jon Gruber and John McDonough, are liberal Democrats, the latter a former aide to the late Sen. Ted Kennedy. The Romney campaign has downplayed Gruber’s role in crafting the Massachusetts law. These facts could either be mitigating, since it isn’t shocking a Kennedy aide would visit the Obama White House, or one could argue it revealed the liberal imprimatur on the Massachusetts health care law even during the design phase.”
Earle Belle| 10.14.11 @ 4:03AM
http://www.revolutionpac.com/2.....ctober-18/
Cain/Paul on the Housing Bubble
Of course, there is no comparison. One was absolutely right and the other was absolutely wrong. No one is perfect and this is especially true of politicians, but to be so horribly wrong–even arrogantly wrong–about one of the worst financial crises in American history does not bode well for anyone seeking this nation’s highest office.
Would anyone hire Cain as an economic adviser? If not, then why would anyone hire him for president?
Video: Cain/Paul Comparison on the Housing Bubble
Once again, there is no comparison. Paul saw the crisis coming because he understood the economic factors that were creating it, particularly Federal Reserve interest rate policy. Cain did not see it coming because he still does not understand basic economic truths, hence his notion that Fed policy isn’t important or deserving of scrutiny. (Stunning comparison, must view!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?f.....n0EApd5wgw
Dan| 10.14.11 @ 2:53PM
Gee Whiz, whats going to prevent 9.9.9 becoming 20.20.20 at some point in the future ?
john dubose| 10.15.11 @ 2:16PM
In the end, it does not matter that much what the taxing scheme is. Over time, employers will simply pay what they have to to keep the people they want. Then they will pass the costs on in the price of their products. 999 would be an exercise in chaos and do no good.
The best thing to do is trim back a few of the dumbest rules and reduce overall spending. Then do NOTHING about the tax code.
That will give folks on the low end of things time to sort out where they stand and not get riped off by new rules costs that they did not see coming.
Johnimo| 10.15.11 @ 3:49PM
The best change, given the tax system currently in effect, is the flat income tax, with elimination of all but the personal exemption. Elimination of the taxes on dividends and capital gains, along with the reduction of useless regulation, will result in robust domestic investment and thus robust tax revenues. A 15% flat tax would make the US competitive with other countries and allow our economy to create the jobs needed for a healthy society.
Wayne| 10.16.11 @ 7:11AM
I have a much better idea. How about a 9 percent tariff on all imported goods. That would level the playing field and encourage more goods be produced in the US. Also it would not unfairly put the tax burden upon retirees, who have already been through the wringer with a life time of income taxes.
POST American| 10.18.11 @ 4:39AM
----------------BOTTOMLESS LINE--------------------
------------------HER--man CAIN-----------------------
-------------------------is the-------------------------------
---------------------ROT-child----------------------------
-------------------------FED--------------------------------
Do NOT be taken in!