• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Advocates of the 9-9-9 explain how this graphic appears "fair"

A

Acanthus

Lifer
EM2Hd.jpg


This looks to me like the people that need help will pay substantially more, and the people that don't need help need a graph an order of magnitude larger in size to display their increase in income.
 
gevorg said:
The top 1% will get away from these taxes using loopholes and private CPAs.
Click to expand...

If that's true, close the loopholes?

I just don't get how this is even an issue in politics.

Of course we can debate all day about how the money is spent, ethical dilemmas, and other crap like that... but basic logic can tell you why regressive taxation is a bad idea.
 
i wish they would just eliminate the income tax and enact a federal sales tax. that way, EVERYONE pays based on what they buy. u buy more, u pay more taxes. even if youre an illegal alien you would be paying taxes.
 
gevorg said:
The top 1% will get away from these taxes using loopholes and private CPAs.
Click to expand...

You're mis-reading the chart. It shows people at the top getting a huge tax BREAK, not an increase. There'e nothing to 'get away from" for the weathy in 9-9-9.
 
wirednuts said:
i wish they would just eliminate the income tax and enact a federal sales tax. that way, EVERYONE pays based on what they buy. u buy more, u pay more taxes. even if youre an illegal alien you would be paying taxes.
Click to expand...

Same here. Problem is the crying of "well the poor have to use a greater percentage of their income to buy stuff, so their tax burden is greater". Solution: quite buying so much crap.
 
wirednuts said:
i wish they would just eliminate the income tax and enact a federal sales tax. that way, EVERYONE pays based on what they buy. u buy more, u pay more taxes. even if youre an illegal alien you would be paying taxes.
Click to expand...

We have that experiment going in the states, and it's extremely regressive.
 
CPA said:
Same here. Problem is the crying of "well the poor have to use a greater percentage of their income to buy stuff, so their tax burden is greater". Solution: quite buying so much crap.
Click to expand...

But then you are leaving taxing/spending to personal choices and we can't have people making their own choices.
 
wirednuts said:
i wish they would just eliminate the income tax and enact a federal sales tax. that way, EVERYONE pays based on what they buy. u buy more, u pay more taxes. even if youre an illegal alien you would be paying taxes.
Click to expand...

I like this.

<--"flaming nujob librul"
 
CPA said:
Same here. Problem is the crying of "well the poor have to use a greater percentage of their income to buy stuff, so their tax burden is greater". Solution: quite buying so much crap.
Click to expand...

Right, if you're dirt poor you should be saving your money, not spending it. Oh wait...
 
CPA said:
Same here. Problem is the crying of "well the poor have to use a greater percentage of their income to buy stuff, so their tax burden is greater". Solution: quite buying so much crap.
Click to expand...
You can't really stop buying food and gas, and you can't stop paying your bills, right?
 
Face/palm!! What will the bottom 50&#37; quit spending their money on? Food, housing, transportation, education, what?
 
CPA said:
Same here. Problem is the crying of "well the poor have to use a greater percentage of their income to buy stuff, so their tax burden is greater". Solution: quite buying so much crap.
Click to expand...


Well, then you run into the problem of what to tax and what not to tax. A state sales tax is usually fairly minimal in most cases, but as in this case add on another 9&#37; and you end up with something of 16-20%, depending on state, for every item. Then it becomes more significant. You only come out ahead in this if you make more than $34,501 a year and your tax bracket goes to 25%. Usually people in these levels end up spending every bit they earn, and of course with deductions may not pay fed income at all. So yes, a flat tax like that would be more burdensome.
 
Last edited:
CPA said:
Same here. Problem is the crying of "well the poor have to use a greater percentage of their income to buy stuff, so their tax burden is greater". Solution: quite buying so much crap.
Click to expand...

Considering our economy is based almost entirely off of "people buying so much crap" it might not be a good idea to stave off the idea of them doing so.
 
The flat sales tax concept is almost as stupid as this 9-9-9 idea.

The bottom 50&#37; of the population of the U.S. controls approximately 2.4% of the total wealth and income.
The top 1% controls approximately 43%.
The effective total tax rate of the bottom 1% (that includes income, sales, property, excise, estate, capital gains and is people making under about $34k a year) is approximately 6.7% or almost 3 times their share of the wealth.
The effective total tax rate of the top 1% is about 21%, or less than half their total share of wealth.
The top 400 earners, pay an effective tax rate of under 17% or almost the exact same rate that I pay at my income level.

Under both a flat sales tax and this 9-9-9 plan, the taxes paid by the lower 50% go up, while the taxes of the top 1% go significantly down. In addition, because the top 1% control almost 20 times the assets of the bottom 50%, the tax revenue generated by a sales tax will actually plummet. So basically, if you want to fuck over the poor while making the rich richer, while at the same time driving the US further and further into debt, then you should support either a flat tax or Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan.

However if you're not a fucking idiot, you should discount both these retarded ideas.
 
CPA said:
Same here. Problem is the crying of "well the poor have to use a greater percentage of their income to buy stuff, so their tax burden is greater". Solution: quite buying so much crap.
Click to expand...
Of course, under this plan, the rich will lobby to exclude taxes on stock purchases, real estate purchase, business expenses, etc. Too bad poor people, if you only had more money.
 
her209 said:
Of course, under this plan, the rich will lobby to exclude taxes on stock purchases, real estate purchase, business expenses, etc. Too bad poor people, if you only had more money.
Click to expand...

I don't know about real estate, but I'm positive that they'd not have stock purchases taxed.
 
i thought the whole reason the left had sand in their collective vag's is because the rich need to "repay society for the opportunity"....... do the bottom 50&#37; not receive the exact same opportunity? it's like going to safeway and if you're rich the sandwich costs $50 but if you're poor it's free? how does that make sense, it's the same sandwich!
 
Lithium381 said:
i thought the whole reason the left had sand in their collective vag's is because the rich need to "repay society for the opportunity"....... do the bottom 50% not receive the exact same opportunity? it's like going to safeway and if you're rich the sandwich costs $50 but if you're poor it's free? how does that make sense, it's the same sandwich!
Click to expand...

So then everyone should pay the exact same "dollar" amount then...

3.5 trillion divided by 130 million workers = $26,923.08 per person this year. That's only fair, right?
 
Acanthus said:
Advocates of the 9-9-9 explain how this graphic appears "fair"

This looks to me like the people that need help will pay substantially more, and the people that don't need help need a graph an order of magnitude larger in size to display their increase in income.
Click to expand...

You know what - show me WHO is advocating for the 9-9-9 plan first.

It doesn't even matter. Even if the unthinkable happens, Cain wins the Presidency and the Tea Party Republicans win the majority in the House and supermajority in the Senate, the 9-9-9 plan will not being enacted.
 
cubby1223 said:
You know what - show me WHO is advocating for the 9-9-9 plan first.

It doesn't even matter. Even if the unthinkable happens, Cain wins the Presidency and the Tea Party Republicans win the majority in the House and supermajority in the Senate, the 9-9-9 plan will not being enacted.
Click to expand...

I agree with that but there is support for this plan, especially among the rich. Forbes and the likes are all for it. Larry Cudlow nearly soiled himself with excitement on CNBC over the possibility of this plan being enacted and pulling the US economy to enormous highs, lol.
 
shira said:
You're mis-reading the chart. It shows people at the top getting a huge tax BREAK, not an increase. There'e nothing to 'get away from" for the weathy in 9-9-9.
Click to expand...

I wonder how much the wealthy actually pays now considering all the loopholes out there...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top