Forum Post: A 9% Sales Tax Is Meaningless To The Rich
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 17, 2011, 1:14 a.m. EST by tubeinaredcircle
(3)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
because such a miniscule percentage of their money is actually used to purchase goods and services. The tax would dramatically and disproportionately affect the middle class and poor because nearly 100% of their annual income is actually spent.
This tax plan is very favourable to the rich (I assume you are talking Cains plan), when the overall revenue is significantly less and the average household will see an approx. 35% tax increase - the 1% are the ones benefitting.
I agree: FLAT IS NOT FAIR.
There is a misconception to think that if you earn twice as much you should only pay twice as much in taxes; definitely you can buy twice as many cars, and you can eat twice as much. But turn it the other way around: if you earn half as much, yes you can only half the car, and you can only afford half the gas to get to work (hopefully half the distance away) and half as many kids, and of course half the food. But look on the bad of you vitamin bottles, if you can afford vitamins. Does it say that if you earn half as much you only NEED half the nutrients?
999 sounds nice and simple, but unfortunately it is just that: too simple.
Herman Cain is proponent of Big Brothers Koch group:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/long-ties-to-koch-backed-americans-for-prosperity-are-foundation-of-cain-campaign/2011/10/16/gIQA6Qi9nL_story.html?hpid=z10
According to Herman Cain's plan, there would be no tax on the sale of used goods.
That means a used car would not be subject to such a tax.
Do so-called poor people have to have everything new? I doubt that is the case regardless of what tax system is in place.
So you advocate nearly 70% of the population to only purchase used goods to avoid the 9%? What effect do you think that might have on the economy? Should they buy used food as well?
I am not saying that.
Currently 47% of all tax filers pay no federal income tax. Many of them get a tax refund.
Our current tax system has turned into nothing but a welfare system. It needs to be changed.
Everyone must have some type of "skin" in the game. Everyone must pay something, even if it is a little bit.
No one should be getting refunds when paying nothing.
The system is broken. A new tax system must be created.
I don't care whether you make $1000 a year or $100 billion a year. Everyone needs to pay something.
So called poor people, also need new food. Or do you propose they eat the vomit and trickled-down excrement from the wealthy, such as Herman himself?
If used goods don't get taxed, then how can it be called the 9-9-9 plan? It should be the 9-9-9-0 plan.
[Removed]
Isnt sales tax for the state?
Just imagine the outbreak of shoplifting and theft his plan would induce lol
All economists say 999 will drastically lower taxes fore the rich while raising them for the lower and middle classes.
[Removed]
Your welcome. I have not read anywhere where an economist has said it will not raise taxes on the working and middle class. I also did my own math and got similar results as the economists that said it would raise the taxes on the lower classes.
[Removed]
You cite an opinion piece as your source? Are you serious?
"Cain’s plan would eliminate the 15.3 percent payroll tax" - Oh that is good....wait where are we getting money for SS and Medicare? Oh we are throwing those out. My mom will be happy. Now instead of paying $200 a month for supplement insurance, she will be paying $600 for private insurance. And then their is that $1000 she gets a month from SSI. She is 73 could we leave her alone? She already works 40 hours a week....at 73.
"Many economists believe the corporate income tax is borne primarily by workers because when the tax is high, corporations gradually move operations to other countries, leaving workers with fewer jobs at lower pay." - That is a lie both on many economists and that the corporate tax is going affect jobs or anything else. Corporate taxes have decreased since the 80s and the amount of jobs they outsource has went up. In fact Fortune 500 companies are the biggest welfare recipients. http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate_welfare/real_tax_rates_plummet.php
"Cain’s proposal for a 9 percent retail sales tax would target consumption" - A majority of consumption is done by the lower and middle classes. Having to pay 15.25% sales tax is going to make me seriously rethink my consumption.
Btw the same tax system can be found on Simcity4. Its probably where he got it since they are pretty much identical. Just because it works in a sims game doesnt mean it works in real life.
When you have some real material let me know. I am not wasting any more time with opinion pieces from the NYT.
[Removed]
You really do not know what a credible "source" is do you?
I really cant be arsed explaining all this to you.
[Removed]
Most rich people do not get their income from salaries. Most rich people also do not spend 100% of their income every year. This is where the inequality comes in.
[Removed]
What could be fairer though, everyone paying the same percentage? That is true equality that it seems everyone here wants? I don't get it. Ows wants equality when it benefits them, but not if it will cost them?
It's not fair if the rich game the "system" so that the workers are making subsistence wages while they're earning millions and they both have to pay the same taxes. If you're barely making enough to cover the cost of food, it's not fair for you to have to pay the same taxes as somebody who's making enough to buy a new Rolls Royce every week. Now, if the Job Craterers paid fair wages, then it would be fair. But they aren't paying fair wages. Not even close.
Fair is a very arbitrary word. People want equality, well this is equality. Everyone pays the same proportion of their income whether you make $10k per year or $10m. So let me get this right, OWS don't actually want equality, they want other people to pay more so they can pay less? I'm not trying to be inflammatory, but there is a real point here. What does the movement want? I'm desperately trying to understand.
Yes, "fair" is arbitrary and subjective but I've found that we all more or less know from the time we're about 2 years old (and possibly even younger) what's fair.
As for what OWS wants, that's sort of like asking what "The People" want. They want fairness in the system. Those who have lost homes unfairly don't want to be homeless. Those who have lost jobs unfairly want jobs. Those who unfairly have underpaying jobs, want fair paying jobs. Those who unfairly can't afford college want affordable college. etc.
I'm sure you get the point and of course I know you'll argue that your idea of fairness isn't the same as other peoples (or something to that effect) but I'm not trying to appeal to unreasonable people; I'm trying to appeal to normal, reasonable people.
Everyone wouldn't be paying the same percentage. The poor and middle class would feel the full weight of the 9%, because the majority of their income that is spent (nearly ALL of every pay check) would be subjected to it. A Bill Gates would have to spend about $3,000,000 per day (if he is still making a billion/year) before he feels the effects of the full 9%.
You have a certain obligation to pay tax, what does your spending habits have to do with your tax obligations. If you choose to spend it all, that's your choice. A lot of rich people spend all they make too. I really don't understand this movement.
Because people who aren't rich spend ALL of their fucking money just to SURVIVE you callous, smug, condescending idiot.
That's what spending habits have to do with it.
Imagine, in the 80s, Ronald Reagan and conservative economist Milton Friedman conceived the Earned Income Credit to motivate lower income people to take entry level employment. Most wound up paying zero income taxes but still paid other taxes like FICA.
Fast forward to 2011, smug, callous douchebags want to rob from the poor to give to the rich and pretend that they don't know most working stiffs spend ALL their money just doing food, clothing, shelter and transportation.
You are an aggressive fool. I'm asking a genuine question, which indirectly you have answered for me. You're insults are ridiculous and you need to find a hippie drum circle and work out your agression at your lack of intelligence there.
Again proving you're an idiot. "hippie drum circle" try to be original
I don't have to be original, if the moccasin fits, wear it.
Just out of interest and please don't think this is related to your writing style, but is there a 9% tax on anger management classes?
"You have to have an income first."
You ASS-ume too much, brother.
You must be one of the bright bulbs who visits the wearethe99percent tumblr, gets angry at the po' people and then comes here to act smug & superior or to throw insults.
You assume everyone on this forum is unemployed and/or in one of the situations you read about on tumblr.
You ASS-ume much too much.
You have to have an income first.
Is there one on de-smugging treatments or how about learning to have a soul?
Learning to have a soul should be tax-free for all you Randist sociopaths.
I'd voluteer to pay 10-10-10 if you all promise to attend the class.
Hippie drum circle included at no extra charge.
Robbing from the poor is the most inefficient way of getting rich. If i were to rob somebody wouldnt i rob the rich so i get more?
Ok, so then maybe they're just sadists. They want "skin in the game", sounds a little Hannibal Lechterish to me.
But actually. Robbing just one "poor" person might not be so profitable, however, what 999 really wants to do is make 99% of the population pay the taxes that the 1% should be paying.
So you know, robbing 200 million plus "poor" people is a lot more profitable than just robbing one poor person.
I agree, who robs the poor?
There are different types of income. If you make a ton off dividends it won't get taxed for example.
Don't be fooled, this would directly benefit the rich and not the rest of us.
Isn't a flat tax on all income whether it comes from dividends, wages, or man-whoring?
Everyone won't be paying the same percentage.
Most people with incomes under 80K a year or so spend 100% of their income, so they'll be taxed on 100% of their income, unlike the rich.
A sales tax also provides an incentive to save rather than spend on consumer goods. Not what we need right now.
Cut n paste doesn't count. Weak argument ignored.
But they will. If a rich man doesn't spend any money and a poor man doesn't spend any money, their tax is identical.
If they each spend 70% of their respective incomes on stuff, they will each pay 9% of 70% of their respective income. Or would a flat tax amount be fairer? Everyone give the government $10,000 for the right to live in the USA every year. ???
What's fair is that people who spend 1/3 of their time working and commuting back and forth to work be left with enough money to live above a subsistence level.
That's what fair is.