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 10-14-2011, 03:49 AM
 
Location: Florida
19,819 posts, read 19,910,927 times
Reputation: 23222

Advertisements

Regardless that I hope he won't get the nomination and/or wouldn't get elecetd if he does aqnd don't believe he could get this implimented if all of that comes to be, there is always a chance.
Many retired persons of moderate and lower incomes would end up getting hurt with this plan.
No income....so won't save on a lower tax rate.
Few capital gains to speak of, if any...so won't save there.
But will end up paying 9% more for everything we spend.
Ouch.
Does this apply to you/the retired people you know?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-14-2011, 07:14 AM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ > Raleigh, NC
15,078 posts, read 19,024,811 times
Reputation: 24192
I'm not saying that I disagree or agree with you opinion on Cain or 9-9-9.

But I am always shocked when people vote based on what is best for THEM, rather than what is best for their COUNTRY overall.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2011, 07:29 AM
 
Location: Pennsylvania
16,357 posts, read 10,346,234 times
Reputation: 28522
you must be shocked a lot. 'Me' seems to be the priority rather than 'us'.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2011, 08:53 AM
 
Location: The Triad (NC)
28,502 posts, read 62,199,370 times
Reputation: 32187
Quote:
Originally Posted by old_cold View Post
Many retired persons of moderate and lower incomes would end up getting hurt with this plan.
Don't kid yourself..
EVERYONE except the highest will get hurt under his plan.

Quote:
No income....so won't save on a lower tax rate.
Few capital gains to speak of, if any...so won't save there.
But will end up paying 9% more for everything we spend.
Don't forget the upfront hurt:
the 9% he wants assessed on assets/portfolios.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WaPo
In other words, while on paper Cain is promising a tax cut, in reality tens of millions of lower-income Americans would face tax increases. People in high tax brackets 28 percent and higher would likely see big tax cuts. (As part of his plan, Cain would also eliminate estate taxes and capital gains taxes, which, again, mostly affect higher-income people with stock and real estate investments.)
Do some more reading... source
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2011, 09:48 AM
 
Location: WA
5,396 posts, read 21,401,588 times
Reputation: 5898
Our tax system must be totally restructured as it has been rigged by politicians for many years and is now a huge mess of patches that does not service the population well.

What ever is implemented will not be the same as first proposed so I would not sweat the impact of the 9-9-9 plan but rather be thankful there is a conversation on the issue.

The real problem for many of us is that we have finances that are built around our crazy current system. I am all for doing something better and just hope that changes will not have a serious negative impact on any segment of us.

But we will adjust as we always have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2011, 11:08 AM
GLS
 
1,985 posts, read 4,848,058 times
Reputation: 2408
Quote:
Originally Posted by old_cold View Post
Regardless that I hope he won't get the nomination and/or wouldn't get elecetd if he does aqnd don't believe he could get this implimented if all of that comes to be, there is always a chance.
Many retired persons of moderate and lower incomes would end up getting hurt with this plan.
No income....so won't save on a lower tax rate.
Few capital gains to speak of, if any...so won't save there.
But will end up paying 9% more for everything we spend.
Ouch.
Does this apply to you/the retired people you know?
At least the 47% of citizens who pay ZERO income tax would pay something.
Isn't that a step in the right direction of defining "fair share"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2011, 12:20 PM
 
Location: The Triad (NC)
28,502 posts, read 62,199,370 times
Reputation: 32187
Quote:
Originally Posted by GLS View Post
Isn't that a step in the right direction of defining "fair share"?
The intention of it may well be...
the problem is where that paved road usually leads.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2011, 12:26 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles area
14,018 posts, read 17,744,100 times
Reputation: 32304
Default It's all relative!

Quote:
Originally Posted by GLS View Post
At least the 47% of citizens who pay ZERO income tax would pay something.
Isn't that a step in the right direction of defining "fair share"?
I agree with your sentiment in a general way, as I find it pretty scary that so many people pay no federal income tax at all. However, I continue to balk at the idea of a flat tax on income. Wouldn't nine percent be unfairly heavy on some couple with two children who live in a major metro area (where the jobs are) and who make a combined family income of, say, $45,000 a year, especially when the millionaires would be paying the same nine percent?

Another counter-argument (I believe already made in this thread) is that the working poor do pay sales taxes, Social Security payroll taxes, and property taxes (through their rent if not directly). The sales tax issue is a mixed bag, as a few states do not have sales tax at all and other states vary in what is exempt from it. For example, California is a high sales tax state, but all food items are exempt (in stores, not in restaurants). I find this counter-argument rather weak, because I agree with your general sentiment that it would be desirable for more people to have skin in the game. More people should be contributors to society rather than leeches off society.

And the rich should indeed pay more, percentage-wise. I think the current maximum federal income tax rate of 35% gives the rich a little too much of a free ride. The middle class is paying about 16%, give or take, and they make orders of magnitude less than the rich. Lord, let's not get started about what is "rich". There was a thread about that recently in the Business Forum and people argued that point for page after page after page. One person argued that a family income of $250,000 per year in a major city was "getting by", and I argued back that he was spoiled. There is no possible meeting of the minds about something like that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2011, 12:41 PM
GLS
 
1,985 posts, read 4,848,058 times
Reputation: 2408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider View Post
I agree with your sentiment in a general way, as I find it pretty scary that so many people pay no federal income tax at all. However, I continue to balk at the idea of a flat tax on income. Wouldn't nine percent be unfairly heavy on some couple with two children who live in a major metro area (where the jobs are) and who make a combined family income of, say, $45,000 a year, especially when the millionaires would be paying the same nine percent?

Another counter-argument (I believe already made in this thread) is that the working poor do pay sales taxes, Social Security payroll taxes, and property taxes (through their rent if not directly). The sales tax issue is a mixed bag, as a few states do not have sales tax at all and other states vary in what is exempt from it. For example, California is a high sales tax state, but all food items are exempt (in stores, not in restaurants). I find this counter-argument rather weak, because I agree with your general sentiment that it would be desirable for more people to have skin in the game. More people should be contributors to society rather than leeches off society.

And the rich should indeed pay more, percentage-wise. I think the current maximum federal income tax rate of 35% gives the rich a little too much of a free ride. The middle class is paying about 16%, give or take, and they make orders of magnitude less than the rich. Lord, let's not get started about what is "rich". There was a thread about that recently in the Business Forum and people argued that point for page after page after page. One person argued that a family income of $250,000 per year in a major city was "getting by", and I argued back that he was spoiled. There is no possible meeting of the minds about something like that.
I appreciate your points about taxes other than income tax, and your examples of inequities between income brackets. However, I have little hope of us developing a "fair" income tax system when almost half of the people voting have a vested interest in continuing to pay nothing. Just so I don't come off as argumentative, I particularly agree with the last sentence in your post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2011, 12:54 PM
 
48,516 posts, read 83,955,483 times
Reputation: 18050
Quote:
Originally Posted by PAhippo View Post
you must be shocked a lot. 'Me' seems to be the priority rather than 'us'.
I agree in that the system itself of taxation is all about the me rather than us. In fact other than this and similar proposals all I see is more shift to let the so called rich pay more and more.What is the let the rich pay other than let him pay my share;really.
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