Herman Cain's Tax Plan Brings SimCity to Real Life

[theultimateend]

it's fair

Implying a non-progressive tax rate is ever fair.

It is if you make no effort to think about it .

 

[LGC Pominator]

...and going on and on about how much they love Reagan, even when he wouldn't be electable as a democrat these days, given his tax rates and the deals he made with middle eastern groups that will go unnamed.

You mean unelectable as a Republican, right? Even so, although he wasn't the sort of conservative modern neo-cons like to think that he ws, his policies still managed to screw America over something chronic...

http://newsjunkiepost.com/2011/02/06/the-disastrous-legacy-of-ronald-reagan-in-charts/

you are right on with the neo con point, but I did mean unelectable as a democrat, because the political spectrum in the US has shifted so far right, if he were running for president now, he would probably be considered too much of a "lefty loon", which sucks really, but that just seems to be the way that the country is headed

Thanks for the link by the way, that is some interesting reading.

 

[nutral]

9,9,9 seems a little low. Here in the netherlands the tax rate is 10% for businesses, 33% to 52% for individuals, 6% on fundamental items and 19% on "luxury" items.

 

[geK0]

I may hate Herman Cain, but I have to admit this is pretty funny.


It would be awesome if he made a political ad similar to this...

<youtube=AVl8vfev4L8&ob=av3e>

Damn it..... ninjad
But yea..... you better damn well vote for Herriman, he can summon tornados and giant lizard monsters.

 

[Atmos Duality]

That's how republicans practice running a country. They play SimCity 4.

I kid, I kid. Don't want to turn this into political debate thread.

Anyway, I find this amusing as well. But doesn't 9 percent seem a little high for some people?

Heh. Actually, I think they would do a better job if they DID treat it like SimCity.

 

[vxicepickxv]

...and going on and on about how much they love Reagan, even when he wouldn't be electable as a democrat these days, given his tax rates and the deals he made with middle eastern groups that will go unnamed.

You mean unelectable as a Republican, right? Even so, although he wasn't the sort of conservative modern neo-cons like to think that he ws, his policies still managed to screw America over something chronic...

http://newsjunkiepost.com/2011/02/06/the-disastrous-legacy-of-ronald-reagan-in-charts/

you are right on with the neo con point, but I did mean unelectable as a democrat, because the political spectrum in the US has shifted so far right, if he were running for president now, he would probably be considered too much of a "lefty loon", which sucks really, but that just seems to be the way that the country is headed

Thanks for the link by the way, that is some interesting reading.

Maybe I should run trying to use the exact same policies as Reagan, and see how far I get.

 

[LGC Pominator]

...and going on and on about how much they love Reagan, even when he wouldn't be electable as a democrat these days, given his tax rates and the deals he made with middle eastern groups that will go unnamed.

You mean unelectable as a Republican, right? Even so, although he wasn't the sort of conservative modern neo-cons like to think that he ws, his policies still managed to screw America over something chronic...

http://newsjunkiepost.com/2011/02/06/the-disastrous-legacy-of-ronald-reagan-in-charts/

you are right on with the neo con point, but I did mean unelectable as a democrat, because the political spectrum in the US has shifted so far right, if he were running for president now, he would probably be considered too much of a "lefty loon", which sucks really, but that just seems to be the way that the country is headed

Thanks for the link by the way, that is some interesting reading.

Maybe I should run trying to use the exact same policies as Reagan, and see how far I get.

well seeing as how all republicans CLAIM to be doing that exact thing, I would like to see someone go up and bring up each of his policies and when you (inescapably) get shouted down, you just say "what?! thats what Ray gun did!)

 

[GonzoGamer]

Further proof that republicans have no understanding of good economics. It's bad enough that they trumpet the supposed "virtues" of an outdated and thoroughly flawed economic model, but now some idiot became the front-runner in that circus. Not the 1st time, considering the existence of Donald Trump.

They actually have a very good understanding of good economics... just only for the wealthy and large corporations. So this makes sense when you consider that Cain is a wealthy guy with a large corporation. But if you're not a millionaire, you're fucked. Yet I'm sure he's been able to convince a lot of the people who would get screwed by it, that it's the greatest idea ever.
Republicans (before Regan) used to have a good understanding of economics but now it seems that they just have a good understanding of how to oppose everything democrats say.

All this proves is that Cain would make a decent Virtual president.

 

[chadachada123]

Flat tax isn't exactly fair when the poor spend most of there money on necessities (food, housing, electricity, water, etc) while for the wealthy the percent of income spent on necessities is a much lower percent. On top of that unless every single tax deduction is removed the wealthy wouldn't have to pay as high a percentage in tax because they can shuffle there money in things to create tax breaks while again your poorer person would be stuck with most of there income going into things that do not generate tax deductions.

Flat Tax is not the idea of simplifying it so everybody pays an equal part so much as its eliminating tax brackets so the rich pay less.

Who says that the flat tax can't be exempt on food and certain other things?

That's how Michigan does its 6% sales tax. It doesn't tax food, but DOES tax serviced food (like McDonalds). Additionally, we could create exemptions for the poor for other necessities.

I think that flat taxes (with stipulations) are far better than the current system, and makes the rich actually pay for what they use, if done correctly, while not harming the poor. Besides, 9% is way cheaper than the current tax rate.

 

[chadachada123]

9,9,9 seems a little low. Here in the netherlands the tax rate is 10% for businesses, 33% to 52% for individuals, 6% on fundamental items and 19% on "luxury" items.

Doesn't your taxing include things like health insurance/coverage and a billion other things that are handled "free market" in the US?

 

[Vankraken]

Flat tax isn't exactly fair when the poor spend most of there money on necessities (food, housing, electricity, water, etc) while for the wealthy the percent of income spent on necessities is a much lower percent. On top of that unless every single tax deduction is removed the wealthy wouldn't have to pay as high a percentage in tax because they can shuffle there money in things to create tax breaks while again your poorer person would be stuck with most of there income going into things that do not generate tax deductions.

Flat Tax is not the idea of simplifying it so everybody pays an equal part so much as its eliminating tax brackets so the rich pay less.

Who says that the flat tax can't be exempt on food and certain other things?

That's how Michigan does its 6% sales tax. It doesn't tax food, but DOES tax serviced food (like McDonalds). Additionally, we could create exemptions for the poor for other necessities.

I think that flat taxes (with stipulations) are far better than the current system, and makes the rich actually pay for what they use, if done correctly, while not harming the poor. Besides, 9% is way cheaper than the current tax rate.

The problem is flat tax =/= tax without deductions. The rich already put there money into stocks, bonds, property, etc, that allows them to claim deductions and avoid the full tax % for there income where as the poor spend there money on the utilities, home, food, and standard consumer goods which unless you have a mortgage doesn't result in tax deductions. Flat tax just gives the top a lesser "burden" instead of the current system that scales the rate up with higher income (poor scaling imo).

What your saying would be nice (the part about not taxing groceries) but the problem is that is not what they are trying to introduce but instead just do away with tax brackets so everybody pays the same % (before deductions). Note that you said 9% is way cheaper than the current tax rate and think about how that benefits the rich more than the poor.