[Vision2020] Cold Pizza from Herm Cain

Tue Oct 18 13:47:30 PDT 2011

I disagree with the vast majority of your points, but it's moot.... if
after all that you say that a "fair tax would be one that didn't tax a
worker [earned income] until after $30k (no exceptions)", then we're
closer to being on the same page, even if for different opinions.  

If that's a compromise I had to make to get a flat-tax system in place?
I would be for it... (I would swap out the arbitrary $30k minimum to
something keyed to the accepted poverty line, but that's just me).

I would only counter that "printing more money to pay the debts" being
any sort of "fair" viable solution... in fact, it's not really a
solution at all, since inflation is the result/symptom of a market
condition, not an actual tool that can be wielded at will.  (You can't
really surgically raise or lower inflation as you wish, you can only
witness the effects OF inflation and try to respond to it).  

It's funny to hear news pundits confidently saying that "inflation is
just a tax on the wealthy" (as if they truly know or understand what
they're talking about)... but that's such a tiny part of it.  With
inflation EVERYONE gets hurt... from the devaluation of the currency and
cost of rising goods.... right through to the increase in interest rates
necessary to put the brakes on the problem in the first place.

Using inflation as a tool to "pay government debts" is like saying
something like... I dunno... "If I pull my shoe strings hard enough
while standing, I can levitate".

Jay

From: Donovan Arnold [mailto:donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 9:56 PM
To: Jay Borden; Tom Hansen
Cc: Vision 2020
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Cold Pizza from Herm Cain

Jay,

A flat tax is not fair. It is a regressive tax. People closer to the
poverty line cannot afford to pay 9% tax on everything. Wealthy people
can. Wealthy people also control the means of production and wages.
Which means they can just raise prices on goods and services and lower
wages to cover their cut in pay. 

It also isn't fair because the majority of tax dollars are used to
support the wealthy. The government subsidies labor costs and business
losses. Most government city services are used to protect the wealthy
property owners property. 

It also isn't necessary or productive to tax the bottom 80% of the
population 9% on everything. When 90% of the wealth is in the hands of
10% of the population, it makes since to get 95% of the taxes from that
population. 

A fair tax would be one that didn't tax a worker on their first $30,000
earned, and did a flat tax on everything else, with no exceptions. 

Another fair way to pay government debts would be to print the money to
pay debts. This would cause inflation taking it more from the wealthy
and less from those with little wealth or who are in debt.  

Or maybe a combination of the two. 

Donovan Arnold

From: Jay Borden <jborden at datawedge.com>
To: Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com>
Cc: Vision 2020 <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 1:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Cold Pizza from Herm Cain

Am I?  I don't remember using any of those words.  Perhaps if you
stopped rolling your eyes long enough to actually read what I wrote, you
would notice I never said anything like "it is ok to screw over the
little guy"... (or maybe I should be using more capital letters for
better visuals in my writings).

I'll try again.  

We have a tax code that is riddled with exceptions, deductions,
loopholes, political favors, and eons of heavy-hitting sideline
influence.  

People are crying for "transparency"... a flat tax system is pretty
transparent.  And so long as it STAYS that way, it would be politically
difficult to start the ball rolling to create such a tax code of
exceptions again.  (Note I use the word "difficult", not "impossible").
The first time a lobbying organization sways a politician to say "I
propose a bill to change the 9% to '9% except in the case of diabetic
left-handed dentists', you would have a backlash of opposition (and a
noticeably silent population of obese left-handed dentists on the
issue).  That's transparency. 

People are crying for "fair"... a flat tax system in three different
categories seems pretty fair.  

You would pay federal taxes on income, sales, and businesses would pay
9% of their earnings.  That seems pretty fair.

It even addresses the "fairness relative to income" argument that I keep
hearing (where the definition of "fair" actually translates to "if you
have more you pay more...").  

Anyone who consumes pays the 9% sales tax... Anyone who earns (business
or individual) pays the 9% income tax.  

If you're rich?  You're probably going to get taxed in all three areas.

If you're poor?  You're probably going to pay the 9% consumption tax and
are less concerned about a 9% tax on your business earnings.

Now... it could be (legitimately) argued that the 9% business earnings
tax would probably just be passed on to the customer in the forms of
higher prices/goods, and therefore the "effective" tax rate would be
higher for consumers.  For that reason (to keep it *fair*), it might be
better to have a 9-9-9 be in the form of income, sales, and capital
gains (dropping the *business* tax rate down to 0%)... 

For the "double-taxation" arguments?  (State + Federal now gives a
doubled up sales/income tax?)  We're already double-taxed.  We already
pay a state income tax and a federal income tax.  If you're Oregon and
you still don't want to charge a state sales tax?  Fine... don't do
it... that's a state decision.  If you're Washington and you don't want
to charge a state income tax?  Fine... don't do it... that's a state
decision.  

Again, I don't know if 9-9-9 is a "magic number combo"... but in
*principal* this plan addresses the primary bullet points of "fair" and
"transparent"... 

Jay

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Hansen [mailto:thansen at moscow.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 10:51 AM
To: Jay Borden
Cc: lfalen; Art Deco; Vision 2020
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Cold Pizza from Herm Cain

Apparently what Mr. Borden is suggesting is that it is ok to screw over
the little guy as long as it is done in the open?

Seeya round town, Moscow.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

"Honest and true,
As the morning star.
Vote for just two,
Ament and Lamar."

On Oct 17, 2011, at 10:22 AM, "Jay Borden" <jborden at datawedge.com>
wrote:

> I frankly don't have the numbers and haven't done much reading or
> research to know whether 9-9-9 is good or bad, so I have to "punt" on
> specifics.
> 
> But I do find it interesting in an era where the folks screaming
> "transparency" and "fair" as the solution to the nation's woes
suddenly
> recoil in horror when a tax plan emerges that is perhaps the MOST
> transparent and fair we have seen in recent generations.
> 
> If folks were truly interested in "fair" and "transparency", then I
> would expect the counter arguments to be more along the lines of
"9-9-9
> won't work, but 11-11-11 will" (or something to that effect).
> 
> 
> Jay
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
> [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of lfalen
> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 9:58 AM
> To: Art Deco; Vision 2020
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Cold Pizza from Herm Cain
> 
> I do not like the 9-9-9 program either, but I do not see how it can be
> called regressive. The rich buy more and therefore would pay more
taxes.
> Roger
> -----Original message-----
> From: "Art Deco" deco at moscow.com
> Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 16:43:44 -0700
> To: "Vision 2020" Vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: [Vision2020] Cold Pizza from Herm Cain
> 
>> 
>> October 13, 2011, 8:30 pm 
>> Cold Pizza from Herm Cain
>> By TIMOTHY EGAN
>> 
>> Timothy Egan on American politics and life, as seen from the West.
>> 

=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
              http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20111018/061439e3/attachment-0001.html>