December 16, 2011 | 8 comments
December 15, 2011 | 3 comments
December 15, 2011 | 0 comments
December 14, 2011 | 39 comments
December 14, 2011 | 4 comments
In response to some of his GOP opponents criticisms that his 9-9-9 tax plan would penalize the poor, Herman Cain has included a provision for his plan that would eliminate the income tax component of the plan for those at or below the poverty level. In other words, for low-income people the plan is a 9-0-9 plan.
Although the 9-9-9/9-0-9 is an improvement over the original 9-9-9, there are a few remaining problems. Phil Klein notes that cutting income taxes for poor folks means a loss of revenue (meaning that rates will likely have to rise to raise the revenue Cain wants) and a loss of simplicity, which was the 9-9-9’s key selling point.
Those are just details, though. For the campaign trail, the larger issue might be that its effects on the poor were only one problem with the 9-9-9 plan. There are many more that Cain hasn’t addressed. Now that he’s addressed one objection, Cain may have committed himself to spending a lot of time revising and defending his plan, when he could be better served focusing on other campaign issues.
Update: See Quin Hillyer’s response.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?