RE: The trouble with Herman Cain

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The trouble with Herman Cain

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 6:29:10 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Especially funny in light of the leftists "crash the tea party" websites vowing to infiltrate Tea Party protests with fake signs...

http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3163457

http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3321370

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

I find it amusing that a group of people benefiting from a program, started by the Democrats, which is very socialized in nature (yeah, I admit to that) were complaining about government keeping their hands off.

That's it, all bets are off...the dems have stolen the repubs playbook.

(in reply to Sanity)

Profile

Post #: 121

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 6:32:46 AM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

quote:

<snipped for brevity>

You CAN'T be fucking serious.. Sir Winston Churchill wasn't being 'Churchillian' or Churchilling Out' about ANYTHING to do with American Liberalism. He was talking about a formal party in the UK called the Liberal Party.
But I dunno, perhaps you've got some wealth of understanding that links the two movements together in some deeper way than there being a coincidence between the naming of a party in a kingdom and an ideological movement in an entirely different country. <snipped for brevity>

Requoted for TRUTH

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to SternSkipper)

Profile

Post #: 122

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 6:41:20 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

fairtax.org

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Newsflash Joe, try reading fairtax.org and get your facts straight. If you cannot follow simple reason that those with more money will spend more, and there for pay more taxes, nothing I can say will help that.

There was a comment about not producing revenue out of thin air, when in fact if you can get those that are not paying any taxes (unreported tips, criminals, etc.) you will in fact bring in tax revenue that was not being brought in before.

The very first thing I read at Fairtax.org was how a so-called 'fair tax' does what...how does it serve...ME !! So the inspiration for a so-called fair tax isn't about how it would benefit the budget or how it would benefit the country...it was all about me.

The one reason it will never pass unless it is purchased through the plutocracy by all of the 'free speech' [sic] profiteers have in the bank and can use to 'peaceably assemble' (lobby) for a redress of their grievances chief among them...I need to make more money, simple as that. The capitalist continuing grievance. So a so-called fair tax from fairtax.org is about greed, not the country's fiscal plight.

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)

Profile

Post #: 123

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 7:12:18 AM

OrionTheWolf

Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline

I don't want to derail this topic too much more, but could you message me the portion that you are referencing, so I can take a look at it again. I do not believe that the fairtax as proposed is perfect, but I feel it is better than what we have currently, especially if they had more items for exemption that are basic necessities.

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Profile

Post #: 124

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 8:05:12 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

I don't want to derail this topic too much more, but could you message me the portion that you are referencing, so I can take a look at it again. I do not believe that the fairtax as proposed is perfect, but I feel it is better than what we have currently, especially if they had more items for exemption that are basic necessities.

Well so far as I've heard and read, a big part of Cain's 'reform' is of course in our tax regime. Most of that reform of course suggests that the more businesses profit and the more profit they retain...the better off the country. Of course I bring it up because this OP is about Cain and his tax 'reform' as it is now again...serves only investors, not society at large.

Oh BTW, soon as I got to Fairtax.org. I saw a calculator beseeching me to do the math (my math) to see the difference in taxes. (my taxes)

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 5/23/2011 8:08:33 AM >

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)

Profile

Post #: 125

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 8:48:30 AM

flcouple2009

Posts: 2784
Joined: 1/8/2009
Status: offline

Question

A company moves its manufacturing overseas laying of the US workforce.
They now sell the goods they made with cheap labor back to us at a premium price.
As a reward we give them tax breaks and lower tax rates.

How exactly does that help "us"?

< Message edited by flcouple2009 -- 5/23/2011 8:51:29 AM >

_____________________________

Do you promise to funk, the whole funk, and nothing but the funk?

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Profile

Post #: 126

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 9:09:00 AM

OrionTheWolf

Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline

From my reading and study of the ideas in the fairtax, the reduction in manufaturers having reduced taxes would be incetive to create more manufacturing (GDP). The prebate offsets those that are at the poverty level, so the amount they get in prebate should equal or exceed the amount they would pay in federal tax, but those at the higher end would pay taxes on their excessive lifestyles and spending, without using loopholes. It would reduce the amount of government expense in the majority of the IRS, including the tax courts.

Since many people are only interested if it benefits them, the calculator is there so they can compute their own taxes.

We are a country of consumers, and a federal consumption tax, in place of an income tax looks like a better way. It is also an incentive to use money in savings, and investments, since you are only taxed if you spend at the retail level.

Like I said I believe there needs to be some tweaks in it, but the current system does not seem to work, is too wieldy in buearacratic power, and easily abused by those with the knowledge or means.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

I don't want to derail this topic too much more, but could you message me the portion that you are referencing, so I can take a look at it again. I do not believe that the fairtax as proposed is perfect, but I feel it is better than what we have currently, especially if they had more items for exemption that are basic necessities.

Well so far as I've heard and read, a big part of Cain's 'reform' is of course in our tax regime. Most of that reform of course suggests that the more businesses profit and the more profit they retain...the better off the country. Of course I bring it up because this OP is about Cain and his tax 'reform' as it is now again...serves only investors, not society at large.

Oh BTW, soon as I got to Fairtax.org. I saw a calculator beseeching me to do the math (my math) to see the difference in taxes. (my taxes)

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Profile

Post #: 127

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 11:44:11 AM

SternSkipper

Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline

quote:

So rather than read three pages by all of you, I just goggled the name. Got a good amount of information from just two sites: What he wants people to think and view AND What he DOESN'T want people to view.

I personally fee; that poor Mr. Cain is simply round 2 of the proud tradition of fielding disposable candidates that they know will be wiped out no later than run-up to the New Hampshire primary.
What people might want to do this time around is go and listen to the audio links @ POLIGU (which might be a little conservatively biased from the way they lay out issues that are a little more inflammatory in the "positions sections" and they seem to dig pretty deep on "controversies" with the Dems too. But that makes listening to the audio even more telling. The guy just doesn't carry himself as 'presidential' which to be quite frank is not an issue with me. But it has HISTORICALLY been a huge issue on election day. People listen for a year to a candidate and don't say a whole hell of a lot about a candidate, but when the curtain is pulled this is an emotional issue that just won't go away.
Anyway, have a listen to this guy in a forum he isn't calling the shots on, like his announcement speech and decide for yourself:

http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/rep_bios.php?rep_id=98516477

(in reply to joether)

Profile

Post #: 128

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 12:09:26 PM

joether

Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
Newsflash Joe, try reading fairtax.org and get your facts straight. If you cannot follow simple reason that those with more money will spend more, and there for pay more taxes, nothing I can say will help that.

You just dont get it, OrionTheWolf. The post that I slammed you on, was related to you slamming someone else for not stating what the fair tax crap was...exactly. You bashed them and said something to the effect of 'just go to this site'. To which I bashed you for ALSO not giving an accurate, well-defined defination in your post. I also noted (if you had actually read the post), that I've viewed dozens of varients of the fair tax concept around the web. Most of them (if not all) are from tiny and petty little sites that hold very little economic knowledge to examine the finer aspect of taxes and how it affects the whole 'money system' that is currently in play in the USA. I could wager most of them never took a college level macro-economics course before writing their varient too.

quote:

ORIGINAL:
There was a comment about not producing revenue out of thin air, when in fact if you can get those that are not paying any taxes (unreported tips, criminals, etc.) you will in fact bring in tax revenue that was not being brought in before.

Really? The Fair Tax will get all those people not paying taxes right now? How about GE, OrionTheWolf? If we total up all the people you say this Fair Tax will 'nail' (sluts of hire, pimps, criminals, unreported tips, etc) and compare that to the amount of taxes GE avoided paying this year, which is higher? GE had a reported $5.3 BILLION dollars in profit, but didnt pay a cent to the IRS. In fact, there are many companies that made huge profits this year, and didn't have to pay much at all to the IRS. There was a whole thread that chatted about this. Does your version of the 'fair tax' force a company like GE to pay its 'fair share' of taxes too. OrionTheWolf? If it does, your version will NEVER be approved of in Congress OR signed off by the President.

Did those 'sluts for hire', pimps, and unreported wages amount to $5.3 B-I-L-L-I-O-N dollars?

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)

Profile

Post #: 129

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 12:33:18 PM

joether

Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: flcouple2009
Question

A company moves its manufacturing overseas laying of the US workforce.
They now sell the goods they made with cheap labor back to us at a premium price.
As a reward we give them tax breaks and lower tax rates.

How exactly does that help "us"?

I believe the conservative answer is: If we are forced to buy American made stuff that costs more, than we are living in a socialist country! If I want cheap and the American worker cant lower their pay to $0.73/hour like they do in (insert 3rd world country name here), then we need to change the laws so they can be! The US Worker shouldn't be allowed collective bargaining rights or Unions to protect them; thats just liberals trying to turn our country in to a communistic state!
[/conservative answer]

The only manufacturing companies that should get a tax break are the ones that can prove the GRAND majority of their operation takes place in America AND they are paying those workers a good salary with benefits.

Go out to states like Ohio and drive down the roads once occupied by companies that shipped operations to another country. Then ask the folks there what they do for work....if any. That isn't the sad part, but alot of these folks keep voting Republican thinking those jobs will come back.....some day. I'm sure other parts of the midwest are like those towns in Ohio I saw last summer. They keep voting for Republicans that are allowing those companies to send operations over seas and get tax breaks for doing so.

(in reply to flcouple2009)

Profile

Post #: 130

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 1:30:22 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

The "fair tax" was cooked up by a couple of billionaires so they could pay less taxes. The guys pushing it dance around the central point quite a bit but the facts are in their documents, it would shift the tax burden down onto the middle class.

Unless you are vastly wealthy supporting the "Fair Tax" is supporting paying more in taxes so the mega rich can pay less.

(in reply to joether)

Profile

Post #: 131

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 1:41:29 PM

OrionTheWolf

Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

You just dont get it, OrionTheWolf.

Actually I do, but it seems that personal attacks are acceptable, and encouraged here, so....

quote:

The post that I slammed you on, was related to you slamming someone else for not stating what the fair tax crap was...exactly. You bashed them and said something to the effect of 'just go to this site'.

I am used to people use exaggeration in debates when they have no interest other than just to argue, or have fun. First we would need to know your definition of "bash". You can rereead my post where I commented that they did not give a very accurate description.

quote:

To which I bashed you for ALSO not giving an accurate, well-defined defination in your post.

This is why I gave the website on it, so anyone interested could do their own reading, since there is much more to it than a paragraph will hold. You see I directed people to where the information is, since it is lengthy in description, and their theoretical ideas.

quote:

I also noted (if you had actually read the post), that I've viewed dozens of varients of the fair tax concept around the web. Most of them (if not all) are from tiny and petty little sites that hold very little economic knowledge to examine the finer aspect of taxes and how it affects the whole 'money system' that is currently in play in the USA. I could wager most of them never took a college level macro-economics course before writing their varient too.

I did read your post, and it seemed rather than have knowledge of this specific plan, you assumed much and relied on your knowledge of other similar plans. Have you looked into Fair Tax to see who is involved, what their credentials are, or experience?

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL:
There was a comment about not producing revenue out of thin air, when in fact if you can get those that are not paying any taxes (unreported tips, criminals, etc.) you will in fact bring in tax revenue that was not being brought in before.

Really? The Fair Tax will get all those people not paying taxes right now?

Yes, those people I mentioned.

quote:

How about GE, OrionTheWolf? If we total up all the people you say this Fair Tax will 'nail' (sluts of hire, pimps, criminals, unreported tips, etc) and compare that to the amount of taxes GE avoided paying this year, which is higher?

Red herring, but it does have substance. The GE and corporate issues need to be addressed as well, not instead of.

quote:

GE had a reported $5.3 BILLION dollars in profit, but didnt pay a cent to the IRS. In fact, there are many companies that made huge profits this year, and didn't have to pay much at all to the IRS. There was a whole thread that chatted about this. Does your version of the 'fair tax' force a company like GE to pay its 'fair share' of taxes too. OrionTheWolf? If it does, your version will NEVER be approved of in Congress OR signed off by the President.

I don't have a version. If you want to know more about it, then read and educate yourself.

Your example is a good one of why the current taxing system needs to be replaced. I agree companies like GE and others should not get away with paying no taxes. Separate issue from individual taxes though, and both need to be addressed.

quote:

Did those 'sluts for hire', pimps, and unreported wages amount to $5.3 B-I-L-L-I-O-N dollars?

Red herring, but..... criminal enterprise is multi-billion dollar businesses, now add in all the unreported cash from clubs, resorts, illegal gambling, etc. and yes you have billions of dollars of unreported income. Edit: Actually the estimated unground cash non tax-reported area is about 1.5 trillion dollars.

Now if you would like to debate or discuss things in a non-derogatory way, I am happy to do so, but if you want to be imflammatory, and baiting, you can just go on ignore with a few others that are not adult enough to engage in intellectual discourse.

< Message edited by OrionTheWolf -- 5/23/2011 1:48:02 PM >

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to joether)

Profile

Post #: 132

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 1:46:42 PM

OrionTheWolf

Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_fairtax_four#regressive

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 133

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 2:13:53 PM

SilverMark

Posts: 3457
Joined: 5/9/2007
Status: offline

Running a retail corporation...the Fair Tax would scare me to death!

22% on goods sold would only mean, the consumer would bear a part of it being built into the price for it to be discounted. I think it might stifle a good portion of an econmy that is based on the selling of goods and services. Had it been in effect when America actually manufactured products it might be palatable, as is, no way.

_____________________________

If you have sex with a siamese twin, is it considered a threesome?

The trouble with ignorance is that it picks up confidence as it goes along.
- Arnold H. Glasow

It may be your sole purpose in life to simply serve as a warning to others!

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)

Profile

Post #: 134

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 2:21:14 PM

OrionTheWolf

Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline

You have to remember though the extra payroll tax the retailer has to pay now, already causes the items to be priced upward. Eliminating that allows the retailer to discount it.

Also, the tax is on purchased new items at the retail level, so all the product a manufacturer would buy to produce something would be excluded. The tax also does not apply to used items.

After implementation it would definately need to be tweaked.

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to SilverMark)

Profile

Post #: 135

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 2:26:43 PM

SternSkipper

Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline

quote:

Did those 'sluts for hire', pimps, and unreported wages amount to $5.3 B-I-L-L-I-O-N dollars?

He probably doesn't get it unless he sees Dr. Evil say it and then drills it into his ass with a GI-ANT LA-SER BEAM

Anyuway here's the flat facts GE laid off 35,000 in 2009!
And even with the smoke and mirrors fuzzy math shit of adding in jobs they 'didn't eliminate, they couldn't come up with 6k
folks, this isn't corporate welfare, it's corporate kidnapping

And make no mistake, they can throw all the wine and cheese parties for a democratic president, they will still throw MOST of their (allotted... and it will be MINISCULE compared to what they're making ) money in the hands of republicans. Cause they are the party that historically insured this great ROI for them.
Course, in the coming months, we'll see John Boner crying his fucking eyes out 'for the people' while he blackmails them and takes a higher spending ceiling.
Oh, and we'll have a whole slew of new tea partiers telling us they'll give the country back to the people. Shit, if they believed that for one fucking minute they wouldn't be part of the most flaccid organ in the political body, They'd actually be a separate party. Which they're not. Hell, if they had the balls to break away, I might even respect them. But they won't. And in a few cycles when the republicans cycle back into the whitehouse again, they will be long gone from our ears.
If someone promises you you aren't going to have to pay a price to fix things, they're lying, period

(in reply to joether)

Profile

Post #: 136

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 2:43:09 PM

OrionTheWolf

Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline

Who is he? If you look back, I admit the issue with GE and companies like them needs to be addressed. Yeah, it is corporate kidnapping, of our politicians. Remove the tax code as is, and the politicians no longer have something they can manipulate to gain more of that corporate backing.

Combine this with elimination of a corporation being a "person" and eliminate the campaign and PAC contributions.

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to SternSkipper)

Profile

Post #: 137

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 2:46:37 PM

SternSkipper

Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline

quote:

22% on goods sold would only mean, the consumer would bear a part of it being built into the price for it to be discounted. I think it might stifle a good portion of an econmy that is based on the selling of goods and services. Had it been in effect when America actually manufactured products it might be palatable, as is, no way.

Man, immagine that you buy a car (lets take an economy model at the low end of pricing say $20, 000 okay, so that means $4,400 and presuming the state isn't going their vig it's going to now be another $1,100 totalling $5500 extra before you can register your car. And presuming you get all your income back, big deal... you're an American. And the media is going to be working night and day figuring how to loot that extra money from your pay check. So you'll spend like a drunken sailor, and guess what? You won't have the money at the time to register your car cause that's the barrel they'll hold you over. While fair tax, if FAIRLY IMPLEMENTED WITHOUT LOOPHOLES FOR CORPORATIONS may appear fair, and even be so ethically, it probably won't work.
My vote is still out on a flat income tax.

(in reply to SilverMark)

Profile

Post #: 138

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 2:54:02 PM

OrionTheWolf

Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline

The website has the answers, and shows many of the examples to be incorrect. The added tax is added into the end selling price.

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to SternSkipper)

Profile

Post #: 139

RE: The trouble with Herman Cain - 5/23/2011 2:56:28 PM

SternSkipper

Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline

quote:

Requoted for TRUTH

Churchill was quite the character... he used this quote all too frequently "
I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat."

Sounds dynamic till you think about the fact that he was BORN to aristocracy and never really toiled and sis all his sweating in polo matches. And even more telling when you loo at who he was selling that line to and how his peers treated the Brittish non-affluent in his day, particularly while he grew up.
So in a broad sense, that's probably true what jethro there threw out.. he probably did think that if you weren't coveting your wealth and making sure it didn't fall into the hands of peasants by the time you were 40, you were stupid. And I'll bet he even sincerely agreed.

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 140