Herman Cain's New 9-0-9 Latest Campaign Clarification

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Herman Cain announced revisions to his 9-9-9 plan Friday in Detroit, resulting in a new 9-0-9 for those too poor to pay income taxes.

[Check out our editorial cartoons on the GOP.]

With his recent rise in the polls. Cain's 9-9-9 plan, which would implement a 9 percent national sales tax, 9 percent personal income tax and 9 percent corporate business tax, has undergone increased scrutiny and faced criticism for its potential effect on the poor.

In his revised plan, Cain said that people who now do not earn enough to pay income tax would pay nothing in income tax under his revised plan. "If you are at or below the poverty level, your plan isn't 9-9-9 it is 9-0-9," Cain said. "Say amen y'all. 9-0-9."

During the press conference, Cain said this and his "opportunity" zone exceptions, which would allow businesses in area's with high unemployment to receive additional tax breaksto the plan were always in the works, but that he waited to unveil them as a way to "get people used to the whole concept."

The new plan, however, is a red flag to some GOP insiders who say this is just the latest in a week filled with explanations.

"He has qualities that appeal to people, he's charismatic, but he doesn't know what he doesn't know and that is going to hurt him in this campaign," said Matt Mackowiak, a GOP campaign operative. "What appealed about 999 was its simplicity. Now that he needs to describe it in detail, it makes it less simple and makes him look like he didn't know what he was doing in the first place."

[See a collection of political cartoons on the economy.]

This isn't the first time Cain had been forced to backtrack. Cain announced at a campaign rally in Tennessee last weekend that he would build a 20-foot border fence that would be electrified in places.

"It's going to have barbed wire on the top. It's going to be electrified. And there's going to be a sign on the other side saying, 'It will kill you — Warning'," Cain said.

The next morning, Cain appeared on Meet the Press and said he was just joking, but by Monday again recanted and apologized for his comments, meanwhile telling reporters he still thought a border fence was a good idea.

"He just doesn't seem ready for prime time," Mackowiak says.

Cain again stumbled Tuesday night during the CNN debate when he said he'd never negotiate with terrorists when just hours before he said he'd consider negotiating with al Qaeda.

"I misspoke," Cain told CNN host Anderson Cooper following the debate in Las Vegas. "Because I didn't, you know, things are moving so fast, I misspoke. I would not do that, I simply would not do that."

Mackowiak says it's obvious that Cain isn't prepared for the speed of this race.

"I really think the narrative here and the one taking hold with Cain is that he's just not ready for this and he's going to start to lose supporters if he keeps this up."

Home, Architecture and Furniture

Traveling Info

Read More

Why Obama's No Truman and Cain's No Eisenhower

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Herman Cain is dreaming if he thinks the public will make him president and Barack Obama's plan of repeating Harry S. Truman's come-from-behind 1948 victory is fatally flawed, says political expert Larry Sabato.

The University of Virgnia's political pundit's latest "Crystal Ball" drives a stake into both Obama's and Cain's presidential hopes.

First Obama, who appears to be copying Truman's campaign against a "do-nothing Congress." Writing for Sabato's Crystal Ball, Dartmouth College government professor Brendan Nyhan says that conventional reporting credits that campaign against the GOP Congress for Truman's victory.

[See political cartoons about President Obama.]

But those reporters are wrong, he adds. "Unfortunately, the dramatic narrative of Truman's victory doesn't hold up to scrutiny," Instead, says Nyhan, Truman's "comeback was fueled by sizzling growth in the year before the election." Revised figures show that the economy was growing at a 6.8 percent rate. Current growth is 1.5 percent.

"This well-timed surge in economic growth is likely to have played an important role in the success of Truman's campaign," says Nyhan.

He adds that economic growth could change, though even the White House isn't predicting any major uptick. "Obama could enjoy an unexpected surge in growth that would propel him to re-election. But in its absence, he will face a much more difficult path to re-election than Truman did," says Nyhan.

As for Cain, Sabato's Crystal Ball political analyst Kyle Kondik says history shows the former Godfather's Pizza boss doesn't stand a chance.

[See photos of 2012 GOP hopefuls on the campaign trail]

"Will the Republican Party—especially in light of Chris Christie's decision not to run—opt for Cain, who has never held public office, and who lost his only prior election (a 2004 GOP U.S. Senate primary in Georgia)? Almost certainly not. A Cain nomination would be an aberration of historic proportions: American political parties typically don't nominate people without previous office holding experience for president," he says.

Kondik notes that while major parties have chosen non-politicians as their nominees, most have been military men. "Needless to say, Herman Cain is not Dwight D. Eisenhower," he says.

[Read: Herman Cain is Booming, But Many GOPers Are Leery of a Bust.]

But Kondik notes that this primary season has been zany. "Perhaps the good showings by the non-politician politicians in senatorial and gubernatorial races were precursors to the biggest upset winner in American presidential history. Or perhaps Cain, like [Donald] Trump before him, will come crashing back to Earth by the time the real voting starts."

Home, Architecture and Furniture

Traveling Info

Read More

Why Herman Cain's Economic Plan Has Merit

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

He's a fringe candidate with controversial views on Muslims and a soft spot for the Chilean retirement system. But Herman Cain also has a few economic ideas that are arguably better than those of his GOP rivals.

Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and most other Republican presidential candidates basically follow the conservative script when it comes to economic policy: Cut taxes, cut regulations, cut government spending and watch prosperity flower. Cain's ideas are radical by comparison. There's probably no chance they'd ever pass—in a Cain administration, or anybody else's—but they shouldn't be flippantly dismissed, either. It seems obvious that we need some new ideas for how to recharge the economy, and the former pizza-chain CEO has a few clever ones.

[See 11 things wrong with Congress.]

Cain calls his program the 9 – 9 – 9 plan. In theory, it's pleasingly simple. He'd scrap the current income tax system and impose a 9 percent flat tax on everybody, while cutting the corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 9 percent and imposing a national sales tax of – can you guess? – 9 percent on most goods. Cain says his scheme would free up capital, boost production and create jobs, while raising roughly the same amount of revenue the government takes in now. The fact-checking Web site Politifact thinks Cain's revenue estimate may be a bit low, but is generally plausible.

In practice, of course, there would be all sorts of problems with Cain's plan. Liberals would howl about working-class people paying taxes at the same rate as the wealthy and about Cain's complete exemption for capital gains. Conservatives hate the idea of a national sales tax because it would generate a huge new pool of money for the government to spend and because France has one. And upending so many entrenched tax shelters would cause paroxysms among the lobbyists who have worked so hard to ensure favored treatment for their clients. One can imagine they might resist.

Still, Cain is on to something. I can't vouch for his numbers and he's sketchy about many specifics. But he has highlighted a few principles that ought to be explored if policymakers in Washington ever get around to fixing the overcomplicated tax code or making America more competitive. Such as:

Emphasizing saving over spending. Cain's national sales tax, which would be similar to the value-added tax some economists favor, would obviously make stuff more expensive. So people would probably buy less. That might sound like a bad idea, since more than two-thirds of U.S. GDP comes from consumer spending. But if people spend less they save more, and more national savings could provide a powerful economic boost in the long run.

[See Rick Perry's 4 economic vulnerabilities.]

A bigger nest egg would obviously help many families improve their finances, pay down debt and prepare better for downturns. A higher savings rate would also generate more investment, since the money has to go somewhere; even if you put it in the bank, the bank lends most of it out. Assuming that banks learned the hard lessons of the last few years about taking appropriate risks when lending, more investment could be one of the key things that shakes the economy out of its torpor and generates the kind of growth we need. There's also a cultural element to our spending addiction, and it's not hard to imagine that American society might become a bit more productive if we shopped less.

Like any major policy shift, altering the tax code to deter spending and encourage saving would be controversial and disruptive. Cain doesn't say anything about taxing services, which are a big part of the economy that shouldn't be overlooked. With any kind of national sales tax, there would probably have to be exemptions for food and staples. Many people would argue that a national sales tax should be progressive, so that the poor don't pay a disproportionate amount. But the basic idea has strong merit and the details ought to be negotiable.

Encouraging work and industry. Lower taxes on workers and businesses would in effect raise the return on work and on the risk required to start and run a company. So more people would be likely to do both. This basic principle should not be confused with trickle-down economics, which is the dubious idea that simply cutting taxes will leave people and companies with more money to spend, which will ultimately help create jobs and boost growth. In a closed economic system it might work that way, but if your taxes go down and you use the savings to buy a Lexus made in Japan or an iPad made in China, you're helping create overseas jobs; the impact on the U.S. economy is highly diluted. And companies don't hire workers just because they have extra cash; they might be more inclined to buy equipment (which could be made anywhere), raise the dividend paid to shareholders, or simply hold the money for a rainy day, as many companies are doing now.

[See why federal government trumps the states.]

Enriching the incentive to work or run a company in the United States, however, would have a more direct impact on the U.S. economy. The problem with many tax-cut proposals isn't low taxes; it's the huge cut in government spending that would usually have to accompany them, since most advocates of tax cuts don't suggest ways to replace lost government revenue. But Cain's national sales tax would provide cover for cuts to personal and corporate income tax rates and allow expensive programs like Social Security and Medicare to keep functioning normally. Again, there are many complexities, and Cain's math probably isn't bulletproof. But the principle of higher consumption taxes paired with lower income taxes is a sound one.

Simplicity. I don't know if Cain meant to mimic dollar-store discounts by calling his plan 9 – 9 – 9, but it does have an agreeable ring—and it hints at a bargain. In fact, my brain wants to call it Nine Ninety-Nine, like the price of an off-brand pair of sneakers or last year's version of Madden Football. Sure, it's gimmicky, but everybody knows we need a far simpler tax system that's not gamed in favor of those who can afford to hire accountants, tax attorneys and lobbyists to work all the loopholes. So what's wrong with the populist appeal of a tax code that sounds like a two-for-one pizza special?

[See 8 things missing from Obama's debt plan.]

In fact, the complexity of so many things about the economy—globalization, overlapping layers of regulation, financial engineering, the new Netflix video-rental plans—must certainly be one of the factors depressing confidence and stoking cynicism. Politicians exploit the information overload of the digital era by firing barrage after barrage of maybe-true claims that are too time-consuming or convoluted to check out. Many people feel overwhelmed, powerless and angry. Meanwhile, everybody knows that complexity is often a shield for graft, deceit and other shenanigans. A tax code that ordinary people can easily understand would in itself be a confidence-booster.

Cain will probably step off the national stage soon, as Republicans choose a more prominent candidate to face off against President Obama. But whoever wins might want to study the 9 – 9 – 9 plan. There are a lot worse ideas, including some that might ultimately make it into the official GOP platform.

Twitter: @rickjnewman

Home, Architecture and Furniture

Traveling Info

Read More

Will Gingrich's 'Contract with America' for 2012 Beat Cain's Plan, Romney's?

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is the latest Man With the Plan in the 2012 GOP contest. Today, he submitted his "21st Century Contract with America" to join former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's 59-point jobs plan and former Godfather's Pizza magnate Herman Cain's 999 economic plan as the latest attempt to differentiate a candidate as the one with the idea to best take the nation into the future.

The electorate is "so concerned about the long-term direction of this economy, they want someone who they think can fix it," says Republican pollster David Winston, who worked for Gingrich when he was speaker. He says the candidates are asking themselves, "What's that compelling idea that says to the electorate: You should be president?" he explains. "I think that's what [Gingrich] would like to be able to present; I think that's what all the Republican candidates would ultimately like to present."

[Political cartoons on the 2012 GOP candidates.]

The plan is 26 pages detailing how Gingrich would repeal and replace the healthcare overhaul law he calls Obamacare, cut taxes and reform the Federal Reserve, tap into America's natural energy resources, reform entitlements, loosen regulations, give more power to the states, and more.

Gingrich's original 1994 Contract with America helped earn the Republicans a majority in Congress, but will the new plan from the candidate with a "smartest man in the room" reputation make the difference?

Winston says, "We'll see."

Republican strategist Luis Alvarado of Los Angeles-based Latino Political Consulting doesn't think it will. "I am quite certain that it is a very well-thought-out, good plan," he says, "but I don't think it's going to be enough to bring him back to contention."

[Is Newt Gingrich 2012 Campaign Back on Upswing?]

Alvarado says Gingrich tends to come across as too academic. "We already have one president who is academic, that is Barack Obama," he says. "The last thing we want is another academic in the White House, and that's the way the party sees him. He's too intellectual, too academic."

The plan is already getting support from Tea Party Nation founder Judson Phillips, who came out in support of Gingrich earlier this week. Phillips likes the plan's framework, but his favorite part is a line at the end that suggests Gingrich plans to ask state and local leaders for advice in hashing out the details. "That's kind of a novel idea from one of our leaders or somebody who wants to be a leader actually listening to us," he says. "As opposed to most of the time just sitting around, letting us talk, and then going off and doing whatever else they want to do."

Gingrich campaign spokesman R.C. Hammond is confident in the plan, and believes his candidate is "offering big leadership with big solutions that are on a scale that no other campaign or candidate dares to match," he says. Hammond describes the plan not as an end in itself, but as "the beginning of a year-long conversation about what the next president [meaning Gingrich] will do to lead the country," he says, adding that Gingrich would "probably be the first president in history known as 'President Newt' instead of 'President Last Name.'"

View the original article here

Peliculas Online

Read More

Why Herman Cain's Economic Plan Has Merit

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

He's a fringe candidate with controversial views on Muslims and a soft spot for the Chilean retirement system. But Herman Cain also has a few economic ideas that are arguably better than those of his GOP rivals.

Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and most other Republican presidential candidates basically follow the conservative script when it comes to economic policy: Cut taxes, cut regulations, cut government spending and watch prosperity flower. Cain's ideas are radical by comparison. There's probably no chance they'd ever pass—in a Cain administration, or anybody else's—but they shouldn't be flippantly dismissed, either. It seems obvious that we need some new ideas for how to recharge the economy, and the former pizza-chain CEO has a few clever ones.

[See 11 things wrong with Congress.]

Cain calls his program the 9 – 9 – 9 plan. In theory, it's pleasingly simple. He'd scrap the current income tax system and impose a 9 percent flat tax on everybody, while cutting the corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 9 percent and imposing a national sales tax of – can you guess? – 9 percent on most goods. Cain says his scheme would free up capital, boost production and create jobs, while raising roughly the same amount of revenue the government takes in now. The fact-checking Web site Politifact thinks Cain's revenue estimate may be a bit low, but is generally plausible.

In practice, of course, there would be all sorts of problems with Cain's plan. Liberals would howl about working-class people paying taxes at the same rate as the wealthy and about Cain's complete exemption for capital gains. Conservatives hate the idea of a national sales tax because it would generate a huge new pool of money for the government to spend and because France has one. And upending so many entrenched tax shelters would cause paroxysms among the lobbyists who have worked so hard to ensure favored treatment for their clients. One can imagine they might resist.

Still, Cain is on to something. I can't vouch for his numbers and he's sketchy about many specifics. But he has highlighted a few principles that ought to be explored if policymakers in Washington ever get around to fixing the overcomplicated tax code or making America more competitive. Such as:

Emphasizing saving over spending. Cain's national sales tax, which would be similar to the value-added tax some economists favor, would obviously make stuff more expensive. So people would probably buy less. That might sound like a bad idea, since more than two-thirds of U.S. GDP comes from consumer spending. But if people spend less they save more, and more national savings could provide a powerful economic boost in the long run.

[See Rick Perry's 4 economic vulnerabilities.]

A bigger nest egg would obviously help many families improve their finances, pay down debt and prepare better for downturns. A higher savings rate would also generate more investment, since the money has to go somewhere; even if you put it in the bank, the bank lends most of it out. Assuming that banks learned the hard lessons of the last few years about taking appropriate risks when lending, more investment could be one of the key things that shakes the economy out of its torpor and generates the kind of growth we need. There's also a cultural element to our spending addiction, and it's not hard to imagine that American society might become a bit more productive if we shopped less.

Like any major policy shift, altering the tax code to deter spending and encourage saving would be controversial and disruptive. Cain doesn't say anything about taxing services, which are a big part of the economy that shouldn't be overlooked. With any kind of national sales tax, there would probably have to be exemptions for food and staples. Many people would argue that a national sales tax should be progressive, so that the poor don't pay a disproportionate amount. But the basic idea has strong merit and the details ought to be negotiable.

Encouraging work and industry. Lower taxes on workers and businesses would in effect raise the return on work and on the risk required to start and run a company. So more people would be likely to do both. This basic principle should not be confused with trickle-down economics, which is the dubious idea that simply cutting taxes will leave people and companies with more money to spend, which will ultimately help create jobs and boost growth. In a closed economic system it might work that way, but if your taxes go down and you use the savings to buy a Lexus made in Japan or an iPad made in China, you're helping create overseas jobs; the impact on the U.S. economy is highly diluted. And companies don't hire workers just because they have extra cash; they might be more inclined to buy equipment (which could be made anywhere), raise the dividend paid to shareholders, or simply hold the money for a rainy day, as many companies are doing now.

[See why federal government trumps the states.]

Enriching the incentive to work or run a company in the United States, however, would have a more direct impact on the U.S. economy. The problem with many tax-cut proposals isn't low taxes; it's the huge cut in government spending that would usually have to accompany them, since most advocates of tax cuts don't suggest ways to replace lost government revenue. But Cain's national sales tax would provide cover for cuts to personal and corporate income tax rates and allow expensive programs like Social Security and Medicare to keep functioning normally. Again, there are many complexities, and Cain's math probably isn't bulletproof. But the principle of higher consumption taxes paired with lower income taxes is a sound one.

Simplicity. I don't know if Cain meant to mimic dollar-store discounts by calling his plan 9 – 9 – 9, but it does have an agreeable ring—and it hints at a bargain. In fact, my brain wants to call it Nine Ninety-Nine, like the price of an off-brand pair of sneakers or last year's version of Madden Football. Sure, it's gimmicky, but everybody knows we need a far simpler tax system that's not gamed in favor of those who can afford to hire accountants, tax attorneys and lobbyists to work all the loopholes. So what's wrong with the populist appeal of a tax code that sounds like a two-for-one pizza special?

[See 8 things missing from Obama's debt plan.]

In fact, the complexity of so many things about the economy—globalization, overlapping layers of regulation, financial engineering, the new Netflix video-rental plans—must certainly be one of the factors depressing confidence and stoking cynicism. Politicians exploit the information overload of the digital era by firing barrage after barrage of maybe-true claims that are too time-consuming or convoluted to check out. Many people feel overwhelmed, powerless and angry. Meanwhile, everybody knows that complexity is often a shield for graft, deceit and other shenanigans. A tax code that ordinary people can easily understand would in itself be a confidence-booster.

Cain will probably step off the national stage soon, as Republicans choose a more prominent candidate to face off against President Obama. But whoever wins might want to study the 9 – 9 – 9 plan. There are a lot worse ideas, including some that might ultimately make it into the official GOP platform.

Twitter: @rickjnewman

View the original article here

Peliculas Online

Read More