I want to like Cain, but he is dangerously wrong about the bank bailouts, the Federal Reserve, and a national sales tax that isn’t dependent upon repealing the national INCOME tax (he wants BOTH, for Pete’s sake! That’s conservative???). Is he better than Romney, Perry, Huntsman, and Gingrich? Absolutely. Is he better than Bachman or Santorum? I’m not so sure.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/280000/cain-v-romney-jonah-goldberg

Yeah they are all piling on. 

I agree with Quartermaster below.  999 is just a starting point of discussion.  It is not going to pass through Congress without being read and modified (who do you think Herman Cain is, Barack Obama?). 

It is a conservative plan, but I agree it needs review and work.  I like the vision of it though. 

Does is matter if he thinks an income and a sales tax coexisting is a good thing?  I agree that Congress is unlikely to pass it, but what does this say about his judgment?

But what are you suggesting is the proper judgment (or policy)? Keeping the existing tax frameworks but lowering rates, wherever politically feasible?

That’s better than the status-quo, but the existing tax frameworks are products of piecemeal socioeconomic planning under the postwar “progressive” Social Democratic “consensus,” which is no longer sustainable.

If nothing else, 9-9-9 signals that Cain understands the underlying, deeper problems inherent in those existing frameworks. I’d prefer that he address those problems and perhaps not be in such a hurry to roll out a catchy-sounding plan (or “fix”), but at least it’s a start.    

If nothing else, 9-9-9 signals that Cain understands the underlying, deeper problems inherent in those existing frameworks.

Yes, but that hardly makes him unique.  However, he’s proposing something that looks even worse than what we have. 

Worse than the current system?

Have you looked at the gawd-awful system we have now?

A boot to the head would be better.

I’ll happily take a new system where in the future there may well be negative consequences over the current system where there are Lots Of Negative Consequences Right Now That Are Horrible.

The notion that 9-9-9 is to be rejected based on what later Congresses would do afterwards strikes me as spurious. Such would be true of any piece of legislation.

The best way to deal with the tax system is a constitutional amendment that would make a progressive tax unconstitutional. Everybody pays the same flat rate, regardless of income. The only variation should be in business and corporate taxes which should never be more, but can be substantially less, than the rate for individual income. It can even be eliminated altogether if there should ever come a time when that would be feasible and practical.

Moreover, make it possible where a person who is in business for themselves but who files his taxes as an individual can take advantage of the lower business rate, merely by having an accountant verify through check stubs and/or purchase receipts that he is a private business.

This would encourage more people to go into business for themselves, and many of them would hire people.

Finally, do away with the death tax, and substitute capital gains taxes for a 7% sales tax on the sale of stocks.

Finally, eliminate all deductions, refunds, and loopholes, on business and individuals. Raise minimum wage to 10.94 an hour as a means to encourage support from middle-income and low-wage earners who would no longer be getting refunds. But at the same time, eliminate most regulations, at a target of 70% reduction. Then start gradually reducing and outright eliminating government employees and cabinet department agencies, and some cabinet departments themselves. Let the states do their own regulations, with a bare minimum of federal oversight to discourage bribery of state officials. Otherwise, when there is a problem (like if somebody gets stupid and dumps toxic chemicals in lakes and rivers) let the courts deal with them.

The business/corporate tax should be 14%/
The individual tax should be 21%
No sales tax at all, except for the 7% on sale of stock in place of capital gains.

I call it my 7-14-21 Plan.

And yeah, it is kind of based on Numerology, so eat me, Althouse.

matt, I share some of your reservations about 9-9-9, but logically the first step is admitting (being aware) that we have a problem, right?

I agree, we need to talk about the regulatory state. Guys like Romney and Perry complain about particular regulations, but are quite comfortable with corporate welfare. They believe that it’s the government’s job to incentivize economic development. 

As you know, the regulatory state is intertwined with the tax systems. Federal, state, and local governments use both tax breaks and regulatory relaxation, often in tandem, as “carrots” in an effort to incentive economic development (a form of picking winners). Likewise, they use the regulatory stick not only to “protect the public interest,” but also as a tool for pounding down economic “losers.”

Unfortunately, the government is terrible at picking winners and losers. Cain appears to understand that, but I’m not so sure that Perry or Romney do. 

Btw, to what extent is Perry responsible for the tax policies in Texas?

Haha you’re right I never thought of that.

When you throw off repealing the 16th Amendment as just another step in the process, you should probably be careful who you call a fool.

The R word:  revenue.  999 doesn’t raise as much as we have already, and we are already at a deficit so large it threatens our future prosperity.

So all you 999 backers are cool with adding at least $200 billion per year to the deficit, until and unless the promised “boom” kicks in?

Or have you just not thought it through that far yet?

@ScaryMatt there is no law that states all numbers have to stay the same. If they change it, why couldn’t it be 10-11-12?

Pop culture, so-called, for long has propagandized that the black man is superior to all, is white people’s savior and benevolent, all-wise, really cool ruler.  Americans yearn for that notion to be true.  They want to experience the black man, deeply.  For “the black man” to be their deus ex machina.  To take care of them.  To satisfy them, fill and gratify their yearning.  So pop culture, so-called, long inculcates in the minds of white people.

They want to experience the black man, deeply.

That’s what she said.

Practice your non sequiturs much?

Hey, can I just ascribe to you the motivations of the Nazis and end this thread here?  I just pulled that out of the air, just like you did.