9-9-9

Discussion in 'Economics' started by chaosclarity, Oct 14, 2011.

  1. BSAM

    BSAM

    Huh?
     
    #81     Oct 15, 2011
  2. a person making minimum wage now pays no federal income taxes. If they spend everything they make Cain would have them now pay 18% minus the payroll tax.

    $7.20/hr times 40/wk times 52/year is $14976 18% is $2695.68, That's going to help balance the budget? Ask anybody making minimum wage if 2k is a big deal to them.
     
    #82     Oct 15, 2011
  3. BSAM

    BSAM

    Should people live in the country for free?
     
    #83     Oct 15, 2011
  4. ask them if they want to donate $2000 to help pay for wine at a state dinner for the Prime Minister of China.
     
    #84     Oct 15, 2011
  5. jprad

    jprad

    Just because someone says an idea like 9-9-9 is stupid doesn't mean they're for the status quo.
     
    #85     Oct 15, 2011
  6. BSAM

    BSAM

    I'm not saying 999 is perfect.
    What is your solution?
     
    #86     Oct 15, 2011
  7. it's bad enough the way it is now. People who get tax refunds loan the United States government money interest free while they are paying interest on their credit cards.
     
    #87     Oct 15, 2011
  8. jprad

    jprad

    I already posted it earlier, pay attention.
     
    #88     Oct 15, 2011
  9. Wallet

    Wallet

    And the best argument for scraping all income/ss/med tax and going to a general new retail/service sales tax only; exempting, prescription drugs and whole foods. I don't see minimum wage earners going out and buying a 30K new car.

    Their basic foods, prescriptions and purchases on used goods would be tax free.
     
    #89     Oct 15, 2011
  10. hayman

    hayman

    What I fail to hear any of these "pro-growth" strategies offer, is to ONLY provide Corp Tax cuts, if Corps create jobs in the U.S. In other words, create an American job, get a tax credit. Don't create a job in the U.S., no tax credit given. I don't hear anyone echoing this. To me, all these "pro-growth" strategies being offered, are great for economies outside the U.S., and of course, great for Wall Street.

    As an Independent, and trying to be objective about this as possible, I only see these offered "pro-growth" strategies being helpful to Corporations' bottom line; i.e., helping the shareholder only. If jobs are created as a result of these strategies, then that's a bonus, in their eyes. They really don't give a rats ass about creating jobs first -- they want the stock market to continue its ascent, to help line their pockets further. That is the main objective.

    Global companies like GE, which does 60 % of its biz overseas, would love a carte-blanche Corporate Tax Cut. That way they can continue to build more factories in Brazil, with their extra savings. Will this effect the bottom line for GE ? Sure will. Will it create more jobs ? Sure will, in Brazil. There may be some ripple-effect back to the U.S. with parts supplies and such, but the bottom line here is GE's stock will surge, and economies outside the U.S. will prosper. Now what if we said, we'll only cut your tax rate proportional to the # of American jobs you create ? You don't create American jobs, you'll continue to pay the prevailing Corp rate. Now doesn't this seem more like a "pro-growth" (that is, a U.S. pro-growth) strategy ?
     
    #90     Oct 15, 2011