Herman Cain leads by 20 points!

Newtons Bit said:
Amazingly enough, Clinton was able to get the Republicans to compromise on many different things. He was an effective leader.

Obama? He's a broken record. Obama wants to raise taxes, the Republicans say, "no", and then they agree on something else. Then Obama wants to raise taxes again, the Republicans say, "the answer is still no" and it's the Republicans fault. Maybe if Obama could come up with something new he could get something. But the moral is quite simple: good leaders aren't broken records. It's like asking a woman to marry you over and over again, then blaming her for not saying yes.
Click to expand...

Maybe the Republicans shouldn't keep moving the topic to problems where higher taxes would be needed to solve it then. Or come up with their own workable solutions.

"We need to fix the deficit!" Ok, if that is the goal that's important we'll have to make cuts and raise some taxes that are very low right now as well as fix the tax code. "NO TAXES!"

"Instead, we need to create jobs!" Well then we'll have to implement these programs and maybe hire people to fix this infrastructure that's falling apart...

"BUT THAT WILL LEAD TO MORE DEFICIT OR TAXES!11!!"

But yeah, it's Obama who keeps bringing up taxes.
 
tyr_13 said:
Maybe the Republicans shouldn't keep moving the topic to problems where higher taxes would be needed to solve it then. Or come up with their own workable solutions.

"We need to fix the deficit!" Ok, if that is the goal that's important we'll have to make cuts and raise some taxes that are very low right now as well as fix the tax code. "NO TAXES!"

"Instead, we need to create jobs!" Well then we'll have to implement these programs and maybe hire people to fix this infrastructure that's falling apart...

"BUT THAT WILL LEAD TO MORE DEFICIT OR TAXES!11!!"

But yeah, it's Obama who keeps bringing up taxes.
Click to expand...

It was Obama's idea to raise taxes to pay for part of his new stimulus, even though Republicans have repeatedly stated "no new taxes".
 
Newtons Bit said:
It was Obama's idea to raise taxes to pay for part of his new stimulus, even though Republicans have repeatedly stated "no new taxes".
Click to expand...

Increasing taxes on people who can easily afford it isn't a problem. I don't see why you think it would be.

It IS the Republicans who are freaking out over our national deficit in the middle of a recession. Personally I don't think we should worry about it until we get ourselves out of our current mess. Of course, the Republicans are largely responsible for our current deficit mess, Reagon, Bush, and Bush did a lot of "don't tax, do spend" policies, which have been harmful.

Of course, I note the Republicans don't have any halfway decent plans to combat any of our current problems. They seem to be a lot more interested in maneuvering for elections than in helping the country.
 
Neally said:
No heinous crimes, just killing a US citizen. What a great testament to the Nobel Peace Prize winner!
Click to expand...
Cops kill US citizens all the time. When a person, regardless of citizenship, is dangerous enough, a decision may have to be made to do this. Would you begrudge the President the same level of authority as any cop has?
 
Newtons Bit said:
Not quite. The marginal tax rate for money earned above $34,500/year is 25%. However if you make exactly $34,500/year then your effective tax rate is 13.8% of all income. People making $34,500/year could end up paying more in taxes under Cain's plan than under the current system.
Click to expand...

Right, a small mistake. Halfway up the bracket your tax percentage is over 18%, however. So anyone making over 59k or over is paying less taxes. Again, this is the vast majority of the income tax revenue.

Again, this is a fantasy world where no one saves any money and it is all spent on things subject to sales tax. It's a pretty unrealistic exaggeration of Cain's plan.

Add to that no capital gains tax, and revenue goes down further.

So less revenue, and the people with less money taking more a hit financially. It's an idiotic plan.
 
Tricky said:
Cops kill US citizens all the time. When a person, regardless of citizenship, is dangerous enough, a decision may have to be made to do this. Would you begrudge the President the same level of authority as any cop has?
Click to expand...

A police officer shoots if someone's life is in imminent danger. The DoJ spent weeks (or longer) putting together legal justification to kill al-Awlaki. That doesn't strike me as imminent danger.
 
Newtons Bit said:
Is there some part of the rest of your post where you admit the first paragraph is a straw man or otherwise part of a legitimate argument? No? I didn't think so.
Click to expand...

In context the first paragraph is a small side note. So let's try not to quote things out of context, yes?
 
Drachasor said:
Increasing taxes on people who can easily afford it isn't a problem...... .
Click to expand...
Thanks for the unilateral and arrogant opinion on other people's lives.

I'm glad we have you to solve problems for people. You can just take their money away and then they don't have all the problems that money causes.

It's all so very simple.

Drachasor said:
Right, a small mistake. .....
Click to expand...
Add to that the other mistake I noted and your post was nothing but mistakes.
 
Last edited:
mhaze said:
Thanks for the unilateral and arrogant opinion on other people's lives.
Click to expand...

It's a fact. They did just fine in the 90s and earlier with much, much higher tax rates.

mhaze said:
I'm glad we have you to solve problems for people. You can just take their money away and then they don't have all the problems that money causes.
Click to expand...

Strawman. If the top 1% even have a 50% marginal tax, they are still filthy rich. No one is proposing to take "[all] their money way"
 
Drachasor said:
In context the first paragraph is a small side note. So let's try not to quote things out of context, yes?
Click to expand...

You could try going with "oh sorry, my bad" instead of trying the ridiculous argument that quoting an entire paragraph is "out of context". :rolleyes:
 
Newtons Bit said:
You could try going with "oh sorry, my bad" instead of trying the ridiculous argument that quoting an entire paragraph is "out of context". :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I'm sorry you think a lone sentence carries with it all the contents it needs no matter what, and didn't bother responding to the rest of my post. "My bad."
 
Drachasor said:
I'm sorry you think a lone sentence carries with it all the contents it needs no matter what, and didn't bother responding to the rest of my post. "My bad."
Click to expand...

Your posts are rather factually challenged in this thread: it was two sentences. Hmm... that gives me a good idea for a forum community thread, "In this thread, be factually challenged!"
 
Newtons Bit said:
Your posts are rather factually challenged in this thread: it was two sentences. Hmm... that gives me a good idea for a forum community thread, "In this thread, be factually challenged!"
Click to expand...

Careful. Don't you know there is the Cain hash-tag for that? It's, "#Idonthavefactstobackthisup", and is from a great quote from Cain himself.

For example, I could say, "Smores are a propaganda lie spread by the leftists to encourage gay, inter-racial marriage," and it would be alright, as long as I put the hash-tag #Idonthavefactstobackthisup after it.
 
Newtons Bit said:
Your posts are rather factually challenged in this thread: it was two sentences. Hmm... that gives me a good idea for a forum community thread, "In this thread, be factually challenged!"
Click to expand...

You inflate small mistakes into large mistakes.

Yes, I was a bit off regarding my analysis of Cain's 999 plan, but the difference is not actually significant. The plan would not provide nearly enough funds to cover our current spending. It amounts to a tax increase on the poor, ANOTHER tax decrease on the rich, a disincentive to buy goods, and is generally completely irresponsible.

Rather than address any of that, you just talk about how I made an error with the marginal tax rate. On the whole my analysis was correct.

Similarly, on the whole my other comment was correct, but you seem intent on nitpicking my posts rather than respond to the larger substance of them.
 
Drachasor said:
Cain's 999 plan acts as a disincentive to buy goods,
Click to expand...

Yes, but only in the long term. Once the plan's start date is announced, people who were planning on buying new cars or major appliances in a year or two will buy them now instead. People will move up their vacation plans. Think of the boost to the economy.



I make the little joke
 
Last edited:
Ladewig said:
Yes, but only in the long term. Once the plan's start date is announced, people who were planning on buying new cars or major appliances in a year or two will buy them now instead. People will move up their vacation plans. Think of the boost to the economy.



I make the little joke
Click to expand...
Oooh....maybe you've stumbled onto Cain's plan to turn the economy around. Get the boost from threatening higher tax rates, and then nix the idea after the economy's turned around from everyone spending oodles!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom