Home

This, from a Paulbot, backing a man who has NEVER accomplished a damned thing except talking.

Priceless...

As pointed out, this article is wrong on many fronts, and here is one more example. Dividends from C corporations are paid from after-tax profits; therefore, this description is misleading. Corporations would pay 9% on corporate profits, and so if dividend income is tax-exempt under the 999 plan - good. That income has already been taxed.

In the case of S corporations, shareholders can presently take distributions instead of salary/wages to try and avoid/minimize the amount of payroll taxes paid on the S corp's income. HOWEVER, the IRS has strict rules in place that require the owners of an S corporation to take a reasonable amount paid as a salary, on which payroll taxes must be paid. I see no reason why a similar requirement could not be worked into the 999 plan, which would require the owners to draw a reasonable amount of taxable income.

I had that thought but figured it had to be something stronger. The 12 pack might explain the (bathroom) breaks though. I figured it was checking the DU website for talking points.

Another one? I thought there was only 3? Are they multiplying? Why aren't his poll numbers then?

All I know is once upon a time Godfathers sold me a coupon book for a "good" deal on the regular pizza we had every week. Then they shut the doors and basicly told me to go ### off when I called. This was a planned scam before bankruptcy, so much for the good honest businessman.

If we have a national sales tax, like socialist europe, then give us the benefits.

You've got to put on your thinking cap a little tighter. If you lower the corporate tax rate let's say from 35% to 9%, the government would get less revenue if the same dollars were earned by company X. However, what happens every time its tried, company X, seeing a lower rate, will grow its company because now a 9%, or 15% or even a 20% rate is a "deal". So company X expands its business, hires more people and makes much more money! The government GETS MORE REVENUE, EVEN AT A LOWER RATE! It worked under JFK, Reagan, Clinton in '93 and "W".

What that before Cain took over or after? If you long for Europe, than watch BBC News and check out the events in Greece.

And there ya go !

No wonder this Country is so screwed up. Even some rifle loons really have a hard time thinking clearly.

You really are a clueless dolt! Business is vibrant, expanding and booming. The unemployment rate goes down, people have money and are spending it! Supply side economics works every time its tried? What's not to like?
Go back to your crack pipe!

Do try to follow along and I'll explain again how Cain's plan increases the cost of labor.

Right now an employer pays 7.65% in payroll taxes on the wages they pay employees. Under Cain's plan, the 7.65% is eliminated, but so is the tax deduction for wages paid. As it is now, for every $1,000 in wages paid the employer pays $76.50 in payroll taxes. Under Cain's plan the tax on that same $1,000 wage is $90.00 for an increase of $13.5. That increase in labor cost makes American labor less competitive, so an employer looking to create a new job has even more reason to create that job overseas even if the overall income tax rate under Cain's plan is less than what they pay now.

Under current law subchapter S corporation (most small businesses) pay ZERO income tax on net profits, but Cain's plan eliminates this distinction and taxes all corporations at 9%. The owners of a small business pay the 9% corporate tax, plus the 9% individual tax, plus the 9% sales tax, for a total rate of 27%. Many small businesses owners have a lower effective tax rate under the current system because of deductions. If you buy the argument that raising taxes on job creators is bad for the economy, then Cain's 999 plan is bad for the economy.

And yet you give the gov. more taxpayer dollars to waste and call me a "clueless dolt" ? What a [bleep]' asswhole !

I guess I'll have to put it in terms you can understand. Without the next generation of law abiding, well educated citizens there will be no one around to empty your bedpan.

On the likely naive assumption that you really do actually blame the CEO of a quater of a billion dollar company for your coupon book not being honored by your local store 20 years ago...... you know Godfathers are franchises right?

You have more conversations going than you are geared up to handle,so I'll overlook your condescending remark.[but only this one time , you understand]

The employee doesn't give a rat's ass what happens to the $$$ the company keeps.He is used to not being consulted about the company's money.Here is the point,so pay attention , THIS time:

Mr.50k employee/voter is being told he makes out OK under 999.So he looks at it like I just did and will come to the same conclusion that I did.If he has a working wife and no kids,maybe his 9% W.T. is less than he is paying now and coupled with his 7.65% "windfall",he accepts the 9% sales tax.

But if he is the sole wage earner and has lots of deductions under the present system , his paycheck shrinks and he has a new sales tax on top of it.

There will be no shortage of folks to do the math for them long before the first primary if they ain't inclined in that direction.

Working guy/voter.Got it?

It's OK, you've been more than clear. It's the government's job to pay/subsidize 'families' to have children. Because without that (it probably goes without saying) we won't reproduce. Believe me, I got it the first time, believe me. I just want everyone else to share in that wisdom. I remember the relief we felt when our son was born. After years of trying for that tax write off we were ROLLING in the money and have been ever since.
MacLorry, you've been found out sir. You are a hoot! You had me for a while though. Well done!

The employer keeps it or do you think Cain can enforce a government mandate that all employers must give all employees a 7.65% raise. If you do, then you should have no problem with the Obamacare individual mandate.

So you don't know the difference between the government's job and a government investment. Smart government invests in physical infrastructure and human capital, same as smart businesses do. Just because you don't get it doesn't mean anything more than you're dense in some places.

Curdog,
You are quick to give a theoretical with ZERO backup and you again COMPLETELY miss my point.
Let's pretend your 50k guy does in fact have so many deductions and exemptions and loss carryforwards and who all knows what, that he somehow got his affective rate below 18% and assume he spends every single dollar he has on taxable items (absurd I know but I'm trying to work with you here). WHAT HAPPENS TO THE COMPANY'S 'extra' money when all of his competitors have the same 'extra' money??? They want to be competitive remember? They want to offer the best price, built and provided by the best workers, at the best price?
Here are the options.
1) They keep it in payroll costs where it has always been (aka it goes to the employee)
2) They lower the price of their goods or services (aka it goes to the consumer aka the employee)so they increase sales and grow and hire more people....
3) They use it to expand to gain a competitive edge (aka they hire more employees).
4) The evil greedy company pockets it .... and their competitors do one of the above.
Now which of the above is it or do you have another scenario?

Keep putting it out there MacLorry. It's good to know what walks amongst us and what we are up against every election cycle. It's the gubmints job to... I want to make sure I have your latest marketing correct... "invest in human capital" (aka promote child birth in families). You can't make this stuff up.