Herman Cain: A Wannabe President Wants T o Raise your Taxes…

  as is the usual Republican way in order to pay for even more tax breaks for the wealthy.

   ABC News says that Cain’s 999 plan would up the taxes on the middles class and the poor. That should come as no surprise to anyone.

ABC News DESTROYS Cain's 999 plan Shows it doubles taxes on Middle Class

by Lefty Coaster      Wed Oct 12, 2011

Overshadowing the quibbles from the Right this new ABC analysis of Cain's ultra regressive 999 tax plan, broadcast  on the Network News tonight should sink Herman Cain's Presidential campaign more quickly than just about anything I can think of.

9-9-9 Plan Would Almost Double Taxes on Middle Class

By Ben Forer
Oct 12, 2011 6:19pm

Cain developed the plan with the help of a little known accountant from Cleveland named Rich Lowrie.

However, a much longer list of economists say Cain’s plan would be a tax hike for the lower middle class and a tax windfall for the wealthy.

If you have a family of four with an income of just under $50,000, they would pay more under the Cain plan. Currently, they are taxed at just less than 7 percent and pay $3,400 in income tax. Under Cain’s plan, they would be taxed at 9 percent or pay $4,500.

That’s $1,100 more.

Although the family would save almost $4,000 in Social Security taxes, it would have to give up the child tax credit of $4,000. Furthermore, it would pay an additional national sales tax of 9 percent on everything purchased, including groceries and clothes, which totals about $2,000.

That means under the Cain plan that family would be almost doubling its taxes, going from $3,400 to $6,500.

Well not quite double but a hefty 9i% increase in taxes for a typical Middle Class family under Cain's 999 tax plan.

So if the Middle Class is a big loser under Cain's 999 tax plan who would the big winners be? Wealthy Elites that's who. Duh!

The poor would be made to pay more under Cain's 999 tax plan too to pay for his huge tax cuts on huge incomes.

Cain's 9-9-9 plan: Good for the rich, bad for the poor

The changes in income taxes would turn away from the progressive tax policy that's shaped U.S. policy for a century, based on the principle that the wealthier people are, the more they can afford to pay in taxes to the society that's enriched them.

"The plan could be expected to raise substantial amounts of revenue, but does so largely by skewing downwards the distribution of tax burdens," said a new analysis of the Cain plan this week by Edward D. Kleinbard, a professor of tax law at the University of Southern California. He's also a former chief of staff at the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, which analyzes all tax legislation for Congress. "The 9-9-9 Plan would materially raise the tax burden on many low- and middle-income taxpayers."

Others agree.

"It's regressive, relative to what we have now," said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, a joint effort of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution, center-left policy-research centers. "It would raise taxes for people at the bottom and lower taxes at the top end."

Essentially Cain's proposition to voters is just a more radical version of the entire Republican Party's efforts to keep taxes on the wealthy low by making everybody else pay more.

Technorati Tags: Herman Cain,ABC News,999,Republicans,Current Events,An American Gothic

#OWS Driving Conservatives Crazier

 

Occupy Wall Street roundup, Day 25

By Hunter for Daily Kos      Tue Oct 11, 2011

 

Pay to the order of John Paulson (@elliottjustin/twitpic)

Reactions from conservatives and the financial sector are picking up, perhaps because they realize this thing isn't just going away on its own. Significantly, much of the reaction falls into the "delusional, possibly insane" category, which perhaps speaks to a wee bit of panic in the upper echelons. Or maybe they've just lost the ability to come up with any responses to anything that aren't delusional and/or insane.

Among the Occupy-related events, punditry, and other things-of-note for today:

• Today Occupy Wall Street protestors marched to the homes of some of New York City's wealthiest people leaving giant "checks" made out for $5 billion, the amount of state money that will be lost when New York's "millionaire's tax" expires at the end of the year. The targets were Rupert Murdoch, David Koch, hedge fund manager John Paulson, and JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon. Wait, Murdoch and Koch live in New York City—an ultraliberal den of high taxes so very oppressive to the wealthy that even conservative stalwart Rush Limbaugh turned tail and ran, rather than pay his share? I don't know if I'm impressed by their apparent courage in the face of such rampant liberalism, or just surprised that they're rich enough to live literally anywhere on the planet, and yet they still chose New York. Huh.
• John Paulson, meanwhile, says, "Instead of vilifying our most successful businesses, we should be supporting them and encouraging them to remain in New York City and continue to grow." (Note: John Paulson is not related to ex-Treasury Secretary-slash-ex-Goldman-Sachs-CEO Hank Paulson. Also note the giddy praise of the reporter in that piece, relating how some wealthy financial speculators are finally saying "what many are thinking." Sheesh.)
• The situation in Boston continues to be among the most tense, nationally. Last night, over 100 protestors were arrested. A first-hand account can be found here. Boston Mayor Tom Menino exclaimed, "I will not tolerate civil disobedience in the city of Boston," which sounds like satire until you realize he was serious. I guess we just don't like tea parties like we used to?
• Eric Cantor continues to be confused about the protests. While no longer quite willing to call the protestors a "mob," he still doesn't like them. You see, the tea partiers were protesting the government, but Occupy Wall Street is "pitting one part of our country against another":

  “The ire from the tea party’s standpoint is at Washington,” Cantor said. “It is about the government and its policies, and how that affects this country.”

  “Do you not see the government as representing the people?” [Politico's David Rogers] asked.

  “Sure, it’s of the people,” Cantor responded. “But we’re in an elected position and trying to lead, to solve problems. I don’t believe that our role is to inflame a division between different parts and sectors of American society.”

  If it doesn't make sense to you, just remember that Eric Cantor has made a political career out of making no sense at all on issues of taxes, economics, government and public opinion.

• Rush Limbaugh, on the other hand, says the protests are a plot against the Jews. Wait, what? Aside from being nonsensical (see: Cantor), I think it also means he's stealing Glenn Beck's only remaining schtick ... so I eagerly await that lawsuit.
• Conservative fundraiser and consultant Nathan Wurtzel, on the other-other-hand, keeps it classy:

  

• It turns out conservative mostly-ex-wunderkind James O'Keefe, who is on probation and lives with his parents, was indeed in Liberty Plaza yesterday in order to edit together a film about (I think?) how those crazy hippies in the park are really just all money-hungry or something. A rather lackluster effort; I'm not sure what about that made O'Keefe think it was worth the possible probation violation.
• Rounding out crackpot conservative reactions to Occupy Wall Street day: my God, David Brooks is an idiot. Still, if you had told me that Brooks would write a column linking the Occupy Wall Street protests to the need for a third party that would pursue all of his great conservative ideas like cutting corporate taxes, etc., I never would have believed you. No, I would have said: it's just too stupid. Dean Baker responds here.
• A Ben & Jerry's flavor coming soon? Nope, not quite. Just photoshop. Good name, though.

Technorati Tags: #OWS,Occupy Wall Street,Conservatives,Wall Street,Current Events,An American Gothic