When asked about Obama's so called Economic Plan , Cain had this to say:“Can I be blunt? That’s a lie,” Cain said, before the sound of his voice began to rise noticeably higher. “You’re not supposed to call the president a liar. Well if you’re not supposed to call the president a liar, he shouldn’t tell a lie. If it’s not class warfare, it’s highway robbery. He wants us to believe it’s not class warfare, oh okay, it’s not class warfare. Pick my pockets, because that’s what he’s doing!”
Hmm, now I suppose the Left will be calling Cain a racist.
“I have to tell people because I get so worked up . . . . I’m listening to all this bullshit that he’s talking about, ‘fairness’ and ‘balanced approach’ to get this economy going.”In his speech he explained how he would handle the situation using his 9-9-9 plan.
It would replace the current tax code with three flat, nine-percent federal taxes on income, consumption and business.
I have a little problem with this plan especially the consumption tax. It sounds too much like a VAT plan, Value Added Tax Plan which is found in many European countries. Here is an example of such a plan and what perhaps Cain's 999 plan entails in his tax on consumption. VAT is basically a consumption tax or a Federal sales tax depending on who is naming it. I have already questioned the Fair Tax, which is similar, and how it would effect the already struggling housing market by placing a tax on home purchases. Under the 999 plan that would add $ 18,000 UPFRONT to a $200K home purchase.
It would add $1800 up front to the purchase of a $20K automobile.
It just doesn't make a lot of sense that you would want to add a tax on to an already struggling economy.
On a lesser expensive item but yet one has to add this to ALL purchases it works like this.
Pretend you want to buy a pen for $1.50 in both the United States and Germany. The US has a 10% sales tax and Germany has a 10% VAT.
In the US, the transaction would look like this:
The manufacturer pays $1.00 for the raw materials, certifying it is not a final consumer.
The manufacturer charges the retailer $1.20, checking that the retailer is not a consumer, leaving the same profit of $0.20.
The retailer charges the consumer $1.65 ($1.50 + $1.50×10%) and pays the government $0.15, leaving the same profit of $0.30.
Total revenue to US government is $0.15.
In Germany, the transaction goes as follows:
The manufacturer pays $1.10 ($1 + $1×10%) for the raw materials, and the seller of the raw materials pays the government $0.10.
The manufacturer charges the retailer $1.32 ($1.20 + $1.20×10%) and pays the Government $0.02 ($0.12 minus $0.10), leaving the same profit of $0.20.
The retailer charges the consumer $1.65 ($1.50 + $1.50×10%) and pays the government $0.03 ($0.15 minus $0.12), leaving the profit of $0.30 (1.65-1.32-.03).
Total revenue to German government is $0.15.
In both cases the final consumer pays the same price of $1.65 and the government collects their cut of $0.15
He spoke about the "crisis" mentality in America and came down hard on both Republicans and Democrats for not first recognizing the problem for what it is and solving it instead of trying to solve a multitude of problems within the main problem and not having a clear solution for anything. At least that is my take on what he was saying.
His continued message since declaring his candidacy has been:
"We have an economic crisis. We've got an energy crisis. We've got an immigration crisis. We've got a foggy, foreign policy crisis. We've got a national security crisis. We've got a moral crisis. And the worst crisis we have is a severe deficiency of leadership crisis."On that he is totally correct and many other crisis have been manufactured by this administration. Remember "Never let a good crisis go to waste?" It is clear that this administration is taking advanatage of these crisis for political gain and Herman Cain recognizes this and calls it like it is.
His fiery speech in Flordia and his performance in the debate gave him a victory in the Straw Poll which was a much needed boost for Cain if he is to continue in the race for the Republican nomination. Whether he can achieve this remains to be seen.
His direct answers in the debate showed that he is more interested in the country and getting his message of how he would solve the crisis to the voters than a oneupmanship on the other candidates. Not once did I hear him say, "let me address what so and so said first." He answer his questions in a straightforward manner and I found it refreshing.
This is the first debate in which all the candidates have been given a question to answer directly and IMO all the others failed when they went off track to attack or put their own agenda in the forefront instead of just answering the question presented.
If you noted , few of the candidates had any rebuttal to Cain's answers. Something that slipped by the panel and the talking heads afterward.
Will this give Cain the needed boost to obtain the nomination or is it just a flash in the pan?