• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

LA Times Cites Conservative Sounding Liberal Org to Combat Cain's 9 9 9 Plan

J Adams

J Adams

New member
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
42
Reaction score
32
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
LA Times Story Analysis finds Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan would raise taxes for most

Citizens for Tax Justice Analysis of Cain's 9 9 9 plan (It's a whopping 2 pages long). Where did your numbers come from CTJ?

The LA Times is not a trusted resource. They cite an analysis completed by Citizens for tax Justice in this story. I'm surprised they linked to it on the web. Most won't click to find out who did the analysis.

What do Citizens for Tax Justice stand for? They sound like they might be conservative.

Nope. Read on.

Our Mission (Citizens for Tax Justice)
Citizens for Tax Justice, founded in 1979, is a 501 (c)(4) public interest research and advocacy organization focusing on federal, state and local tax policies and their impact upon our nation. CTJ's mission is to give ordinary people a greater voice in the development of tax laws. Against the armies of special interest lobbyists for corporations and the wealthy, CTJ fights for:

-Fair taxes for middle and low-income families
-Requiring the wealthy to pay their fair share
-Closing corporate tax loopholes
-Adequately funding important government services
-Reducing the federal debt
-Taxation that minimizes distortion of economic markets

Yes it's a liberal organization

Steve Wamhoff one of the two people cited for this "analysis" used to work for these other liberal groups:

Coalition on Human Needs
Center for Community Change

Is this a deliberate attempt to undermine Cain's plan because they don't want Cain running against Obama?
 
obvious Child said:
Do you actually think that the plan won't increase taxes on most people?

Can you do basic math?
Click to expand...

Nice try. Why don't you explain to me how it does and don't quote this bogus analysis.
 
LA times has never been solely against Herman Cain like Washington Post. Washington Post clearly had an agenda against Herman Cain. In fact Washington Post has stopped focusing on Herman Cain, which is a sign that the left is less scared of Herman Cain right now.

I said earlier that Herman Cain needs to modify his 999 plan so it becomes progressive and he need to move the focus on other issues than 999. He failed to do that in Tuesday's debate.

Why is LA times criticizing the plan? Not because they don't want Herman Cain to win, but because they want to make the Republican Party look inhumane. Pretending to use a conservative source, gives them more credibility.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
Pre-emptively attacking the source is amusing. What you have not done is actually counter the content of the report.

You should also be aware that they are not the only ones making the claim: PolitiFact | Herman Cain says the 9-9-9 plan does not raise taxes on those making the least

When multiple sources are making a claim, you might better actually be able to counter the claim with actual facts.
Click to expand...

First of all I will point out neither your post nor Obvious Child’s post address the question I posed:

Is this a deliberate attempt to undermine Cain's plan because they don't want Cain running against Obama?

You both have done a decent job at redefining the parameters of the debate. I will also point out that you both additionally used a tactic common to liberals whereby you belittle or besmirch the person against whom you are arguing.

For example:

“Can you do basic math?” implies I am stupid.

“Preemptively attacking the source is amusing” is dismissive of the actual question posed and implies there is no substance for argument on this point.

I neither defend nor oppose Cain’s 9-9-9 plan in my assertion. I only point out that the Organization, Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ), is a liberal organization and the analysis is used by the LA Times piece.

I will be happy to discuss the CTJ analysis and the Tax policy Center’s (TPC) analysis cited in the Politifact article you linked to.
The CTJ makes the following faulty assumption:

(Companies would have no incentive to retain unreinvested earnings, since they could avoid the “business tax” by paying those earnings out as dividends.) In other words, the nine percent “business flat tax” under Cain’s plan actually seems to be a payroll tax. Of course, such a payroll tax would affect low- and middle-income people far more than the corporate income tax it would replace….
Click to expand...

This statement assumes the only thing business would do is pay out dividends, but business is in the business of making and increasing profits. One way you do that is expand operations. Expanding operations, usually involves the creation of jobs and opportunities for employee promotions (higher wages). Businesses may wish to retain unreinvested earnings for future expansion that is not prudent now but planned down the road. They may also wish to retain unreinvested earnings to meet other costs of doing business that are cyclical. The CTJ assumption is narrow-minded (perhaps purposefully).

In addition, the elimination of payroll taxes in Cain’s 9-9-9 plan also means the elimination of the behind the scenes payroll taxes an employer pays. The employee never sees this tax but it is there. The elimination of payroll taxes may open the door for employers to further incentivize employees via higher wages which would offset any tax increases on low and middle income earners. CTJ makes no mention of this.

The same argument about increased wages can be made against the TPC analysis, they don’t consider this. In addition they state the following:

“The Cain campaign documents also contain some discussion of deductions for empowerment zones that might relieve some of the tax burden on low wage workers. We have not received any details of these provisions and thus cannot estimate them. If such relief were to be provided, it could relieve some of the burden at the low end of the income distribution, but would reduce the net revenue raised by the proposal.”
Click to expand...

So while it was not my goal to specifically point out the shaky assumptions by these analyses, I am happy to do it. The CTJ and TPC analyses come to different conclusions based on their individual assumptions. I suspect the CTJ has more political motivation to make assumptions that would return an analysis in favor of their core constituency. Like I said, I am neither trying to defend nor oppose the 9-9-9 plan. I merely asked the question, which I’ll ask again, “Is this a deliberate attempt to undermine Cain's plan because they don't want Cain running against Obama?”
 
Everyone who earns income should pay income taxes.
 
Reg said:
Everyone who earns income should pay income taxes.
Click to expand...

Yep. I thought raising taxes was a positive. :shrug:

This is why main stream news have been marginalized and dismissed. Any legit paper should disclose the position of the groups they quote and use for sources.
 
from JAdams

Is this a deliberate attempt to undermine Cain's plan because they don't want Cain running against Obama?
Click to expand...


For most progressives like myself, that would be a dream come true. If I can't get Sarah to run and win the nomination, the pizzaman is the next best thing.
 
J Adams said:
LA Times Story Analysis finds Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan would raise taxes for most

Citizens for Tax Justice Analysis of Cain's 9 9 9 plan (It's a whopping 2 pages long). Where did your numbers come from CTJ?

The LA Times is not a trusted resource. They cite an analysis completed by Citizens for tax Justice in this story. I'm surprised they linked to it on the web. Most won't click to find out who did the analysis.

What do Citizens for Tax Justice stand for? They sound like they might be conservative.

Nope. Read on.

Our Mission (Citizens for Tax Justice)
Citizens for Tax Justice, founded in 1979, is a 501 (c)(4) public interest research and advocacy organization focusing on federal, state and local tax policies and their impact upon our nation. CTJ's mission is to give ordinary people a greater voice in the development of tax laws. Against the armies of special interest lobbyists for corporations and the wealthy, CTJ fights for:

-Fair taxes for middle and low-income families
-Requiring the wealthy to pay their fair share
-Closing corporate tax loopholes
-Adequately funding important government services
-Reducing the federal debt
-Taxation that minimizes distortion of economic markets

Yes it's a liberal organization

Steve Wamhoff one of the two people cited for this "analysis" used to work for these other liberal groups:

Coalition on Human Needs
Center for Community Change

Is this a deliberate attempt to undermine Cain's plan because they don't want Cain running against Obama?
Click to expand...

Dude, there are plenty of nonpartisan groups and analysts who have done a perfectly fine a job of "undermining" Cain's plan.
 
StillBallin75 said:
Dude, there are plenty of nonpartisan groups and analysts who have done just a fine a job of "undermining" Cain's plan.
Click to expand...

No man, it's a conspiracy man. It's all about teh libruls trying to hold Cain down man. The fact it is clear from doing the math that it's a tax break for most of the wealthy, and a tax increase for most of the poor, that is just irrelevant man. Don't question or analyze, or you will be a part of the problem man.
 
J Adams said:
Nice try. Why don't you explain to me how it does and don't quote this bogus analysis.
Click to expand...

Let's see. Around 47% of the population doesn't pay income tax. Of that 47%, most of them pay payroll tax. Some pay sales tax.

You take away the current system and levy a gross tax of 9% on income and a 9% sales tax on people who were paying 3% of their earned income in payroll and tops maybe another 3% in sales, there's absolutely no way that they won't be paying more tax.
 
obvious Child said:
Let's see. Around 47% of the population doesn't pay income tax. Of that 47%, most of them pay payroll tax. Some pay sales tax.

You take away the current system and levy a gross tax of 9% on income and a 9% sales tax on people who were paying 3% of their earned income in payroll and tops maybe another 3% in sales, there's absolutely no way that they won't be paying more tax.
Click to expand...
Not correct, people pay 15.3% in payroll tax.
 
One thing I can't help but point out is that Cain was one of the people on stage at one of the debates (forget which one) where they were asked if they were given $10 in spending cuts for every $1 of tax increases would they take that deal.

They all raised their hands in opposition... which on top of all their pledges not to raise taxes on anyone and all those members of congress who signed pledges not to raise taxes on anyone...

This plan would raise taxes on the poorest people...

So

A) Cain was lying when he raised his hands.
B) It'll never pass a congress who signed said pledges
C) 9% rise on the poorest people is not class warfare. 4% rise on the wealthiest Americans. Classwarfare.

Got it.
 
obvious Child said:
Actually it's 6.3% I believe that the moment. Employers wouldn't add that back to your pay if they didn't have to pay it.

So 6.3 + 3 < 18%.
Click to expand...
Poor peope are paying for the employers part as well. They are paying for the payroll tax through higher prices.
 
Camlon said:
Poor peope are paying for the employers part as well. They are paying for the payroll tax through higher prices.
Click to expand...

That's true for virtually any tax though. Not exactly a great argument.

It's pretty much indisputable by people who can do math that Cain's plan will raise taxes on most people.

Granted, we DO need to raise revenue and everyone should pay, what I find wrong is that Cain is basically lying about it not raising taxes. Furthermore, by allowing those who pay the most large tax cuts, and reducing many of them to near zero, we're going to have a MASSIVE budget deficit. You think it's bad now...just you wait.
 
Last edited:
obvious Child said:
That's true for virtually any tax though. Not exactly a great argument.

It's pretty much indisputable by people who can do math that Cain's plan will raise taxes on most people.

Granted, we DO need to raise revenue and everyone should pay, what I find wrong is that Cain is basically lying about it not raising taxes. Furthermore, by allowing those who pay the most large tax cuts, and reducing many of them to near zero, we're going to have a MASSIVE budget deficit. You think it's bad now...just you wait.
Click to expand...
I don't support his 999 without modification to make it more progressive. I'm just pointing out that your math is off.
 
Camlon said:
Poor peope are paying for the employers part as well. They are paying for the payroll tax through higher prices.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of taxes and costs of doing business included in the price of the products we buy that are directly related to the current tax code. If the current code is removed and replaced with the 9 9 9 plan, the taxes are much more transparent. The free market would cause prices to be adjusted downward and wages to be adjusted upward. Maybe I missed it, but I did not see this concept discussed or accounted for in any analysis against the 9-9-9 plan I have looked at so far.

I realize many of you will not accept that a change in the tax code will result in changes in price and wage since many of you don't believe in the free market.

To go back to the original premise of this thread I'll just add that the organization that actually supplied the numbers to Citizens for Tax Justice is called the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP). ITEP claims to be non-partisan, as so many organization do these days, but recieves funding in part from these liberal sources:

Open Society Institute - i.e. George Soros
Tides Foundation

Both these organizations are so leftist by the way, that I doubt they would give money to any organizations other than ones who pumped out propoganda they agreed with.

Redress wrote:
No man, it's a conspiracy man. It's all about teh libruls trying to hold Cain down man. The fact it is clear from doing the math that it's a tax break for most of the wealthy, and a tax increase for most of the poor, that is just irrelevant man. Don't question or analyze, or you will be a part of the problem man.
Click to expand...

con·spir·a·cy   
/kənˈspɪrəsi/ Show Spelled[kuhn-spir-uh-see] Show IPAnoun, plural -cies.1.the act of conspiring. 2.an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3.a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government. 4.Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
5.any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.
Click to expand...

It fits the definition.
 
J Adams said:
There are a lot of taxes and costs of doing business included in the price of the products we buy that are directly related to the current tax code. If the current code is removed and replaced with the 9 9 9 plan, the taxes are much more transparent. The free market would cause prices to be adjusted downward and wages to be adjusted upward. Maybe I missed it, but I did not see this concept discussed or accounted for in any analysis against the 9-9-9 plan I have looked at so far.

I realize many of you will not accept that a change in the tax code will result in changes in price and wage since many of you don't believe in the free market.

To go back to the original premise of this thread I'll just add that the organization that actually supplied the numbers to Citizens for Tax Justice is called the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP). ITEP claims to be non-partisan, as so many organization do these days, but recieves funding in part from these liberal sources:

Open Society Institute - i.e. George Soros
Tides Foundation

Both these organizations are so leftist by the way, that I doubt they would give money to any organizations other than ones who pumped out propoganda they agreed with.

Redress wrote:


con·spir·a·cy   


It fits the definition.
Click to expand...

No, I do not believe the "free market", a thing of man, not god or nature, is the perfect, ultimate solution to the problem of divvying up the world and what it produces.

I have yet to see anybody explain how it wouldn't devolve into corporate feudalism in about ten minutes.

Please do tell what your burning bush spaketh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom