U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-16-2011, 07:03 PM
JRR
 
Location: Middle Tennessee
3,679 posts, read 2,228,572 times
Reputation: 5230

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robyn55 View Post
Actually the fast mouse clicks would - if a gain - be a short term capital gain - and subject to ordinary income tax rates (not long term capital gains tax rates). Robyn
Per Cain's website for the 9-9-9 plan, it just says zero tax on capital gains. It doesn't differentiate between long term and short term capital gains, as is done under our present tax code.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-16-2011, 08:51 PM
 
4,086 posts, read 6,421,963 times
Reputation: 4181
Herman Cain has a few secrets in his plan. For instance there is the VAT, value added tax, which would be a tax on raw materials. The cost of the VAT would certainly be passed along to the consumer. The bottom line of 9-9-9 is that it shifts the bulk of tax burden to those who can least afford it. For who pay no taxes or are able to deduct their taxes the 9-9-9 would mean a direct increase in living cost of at least 9% but then tack on the VAT. In states where the state sales tax is high, like TN @ 9.5%, tack on another 9% fed tax and the hidden VAT and you probably would be paying 25% for every item you buy. Many seniors are not keeping up with the current inflation. How would they possibly manage with this Herman Cain Tax the Poor Plan?

Mrs. Perry said, "when you hear 9-9-9 you'd better dial 9-1-1. Bachman said something like, 9-9-9 is 6-6-6 upside down and you can bet the devil is in the details. While I don't normally agree with Bachman I believe she described the Herman Cain plan simply and to the point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2011, 10:26 PM
 
9,200 posts, read 9,280,929 times
Reputation: 28823
Quote:
Food should not be taxed.
I think a reasonable sales tax on food is appropriate. There are people who choose to have large families which is not a particularly good choice in today's world. However, the way the tax system is set up they can avoid most of the federal income tax and state income taxes by declaring large numbers of dependents and so forth. The property taxes that they pay are seldom anything approaching what is necessary to pay the cost of educating 4,5, or 6 children. This burden ends up falling on couples without children and single people who own property in the area.

This issue was debated in my state once and I have always remembered one man who stated "that's about the only tax some of these families pay". That man was right and as long as big families skate by without paying some portion of the expenses they are responsible for they will have little incentive to change their behavior.

I think a good tax system is based on more than one principle. I think people with high incomes should pay the most. However, another principle is that everyone ought to have pay something and that's particularly true of poor couples who choose to impose the burden of educating their large families on society at large. It also doesn't change the fact that government has to tax something. We can make arguments that medicines we need to sustain life, clothing we need to keep us warm, or homes which keep us sheltered from the elements shouldn't be taxed. However, eventually there would be no way to collect tax revenue.

I doubt anyone in my state has gone hungry because of the meager 3% sales tax on food. Nine percent, on the other hand? That's too much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 06:30 AM
 
16,437 posts, read 19,145,278 times
Reputation: 9518
Quote:
Originally Posted by old_cold View Post
No income....so won't save on a lower tax rate.
Social Security would be income. Many rich people are able to shield income from taxes. The only way to successfully tax the rich is with a consumption (sales) tax. They would have to pay to play. Forget income tax entirely and have a VAT on everything, no exceptions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 08:08 AM
 
Location: The Triad (NC)
28,500 posts, read 62,217,072 times
Reputation: 32187
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
I think a reasonable sales tax on food is appropriate.
This has come up over the years when state sales tax adjustments have been at issue.
I always thought that a reasonable compromise was to distinguish between kinds...
the raw and whole staples compared to the packaged products.

Flour, sugar, butter, eggs, milk... no tax.
Duncan Hines Cake Mix... tax.
Fully baked cake at bakery... big tax

Noodles, butter, cheese, milk... no tax
Kraft Mac & Cheese... tax
Scooped up at the grocery store "salad bar"... big tax

And so forth

Quote:
I doubt anyone in my state has gone hungry because of the meager 3% sales tax on food.
Nine percent, on the other hand? That's too much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 08:47 AM
 
144 posts, read 287,055 times
Reputation: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowbill View Post
Maybe the 47% of our population who do not pay taxes will start contributing.
Yes, I agree but only if the top 1% are made to pay the 47% a living wage. The 47% do not pay income taxes because they don't have any money left to feed themselves after paying payroll and sale taxes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 10:24 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,745 posts, read 4,220,203 times
Reputation: 6866
Unlike most of the posters, I believe that I would actually pay less taxes under the 9-9-9 plan. As for the 9-9-9 plan itself, it is but one part of Cain's overall tax plan. See, Cain 999 plan: Road to a Fair Tax - Oct. 17, 2011

Not that any of this matters... There is no way his plan, even with the inevitable tweaks, would be implemented.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 10:54 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
21,541 posts, read 44,039,638 times
Reputation: 15150
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
I always thought that a reasonable compromise was to distinguish between kinds... the raw and whole staples compared to the packaged products.

Flour, sugar, butter, eggs, milk... no tax.
Duncan Hines Cake Mix... tax.
Fully baked cake at bakery... big tax

Noodles, butter, cheese, milk... no tax
Kraft Mac & Cheese... tax
Scooped up at the grocery store "salad bar"... big tax

And so forth
I could live with this because I don't buy any of the items subject to tax. Hot items at the organic food deli I use is taxed. Prepackaged salads are not. I buy those because it cuts down on storage and waste. If salads were taxed, I might start stocking the ingredients. Will say if junk food, snacks, soda were taxed, that would be fine with me. Again, those are not items I ever buy. They lack nutritional value to begin with and can be unhealthy. In that case, people pay to play.

Don't agree with the rationale that food should be taxed so those with big families presently not paying tax are forced to pay something. This punishes everyone else who lives responsibly. Better approach is the one quoted above.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 11:11 AM
 
Location: Ponte Vedra Beach FL
14,628 posts, read 17,938,980 times
Reputation: 6716
Quote:
Originally Posted by stockproipi View Post
Yes, I agree but only if the top 1% are made to pay the 47% a living wage. The 47% do not pay income taxes because they don't have any money left to feed themselves after paying payroll and sale taxes.
Are you implying that all employers are in the top 1%? And - if not - should employers who make different amounts of money be required to pay their employees different amounts of money depending on how much the employer earns? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

And - in any event - employers who have customers tend to pass their costs on to customers.

BTW - are you in favor of the new proposed 25% mandatory tip law in San Francisco?

Finally - not all people who pay no income tax are poor - at least as I define poor:

Nearly 22% of those making between $50,000 and $75,000 end up with no federal income tax liability or negative liability as do 9% of households with incomes between $75,000 and $100,000.

47% of households owe no tax - and their ranks are growing - Sep. 30, 2009

Robyn
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 11:27 AM
 
Location: The Triad (NC)
28,500 posts, read 62,217,072 times
Reputation: 32187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robyn55 View Post
Are you implying that all employers are in the top 1%?
I doubt that was the intended implication.

The likely implication, and one I've made before, is about the lack of investment by the 1%
using the retained earnings hoard they control which activity will/could produce meaningful employment
for more and better compensation for the marginally employed... so they can all pay taxes too.

Quote:
...Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
Very little does when inelegant statements get re-phrased by others...
rather than asking for clarification and waiting for that.

hth
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top