Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (635576)	11/10/2011 6:53:56 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583339

Under a flat tax scheme, Buffett would be paying 9% on all his income. You are woefully uninformed...buffett would see a huge tax cut by the numbers alone and the very poor a significant increase...you do know that Cain's plan exempts all cap gains from taxation...his presentation of the before and after tax burden of the typical family of 4 at $50K/year is WAY off the mark... But the bottom line is this. You hate a flat tax. You see the rich getting richer and wonder why they shouldn't be paying more than they already do. WTF are you talking about? I AM WONDERING WHY THEY SHOULD BE PAYING LESS? Am I to assume that you support this buffoon? Only problem is that if you really think about it, a sharp progressive tax curve is one of the reasons why the rich is indeed getting richer. So the last 30 years are what? A fantasy? And you'll figure this out once you realize that an income tax is NOT a wealth tax, but a tax on the accumulation of wealth. What???? Are you living in an information bubble? The richer have NEVER been richer...let me know when income tax starts to threaten their wealth OK? Al

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (635576)	11/10/2011 7:10:06 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1583339

The fundamental problem is that the Left cannot accept that it is okay for Buffett to not pay more, even if everyone comes out better as well. We must PUNISH the wealthy. We cannot tolerate wealthy people. It is not enough to merely help everyone out.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (635576)	11/10/2011 7:15:37 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Respond to of 1583339

>> He would also be paying 9% more in all his living expenses. While he would pay a higher total sales tax, I think it is likely he, like everyone else, would end up paying LESS for living expenses, since all the income taxes intrinsic to the price of goods and services would be eliminated. Still, the net tax collections from him would be higher under Cain's proposed plan, I'm pretty sure. He would be paying the 9% retail sales tax on what he spends and a flat 9% personal tax on ordinary income. And just as it now is, he would pay nothing on his unrealized capital gains (which almost all of his are). What is indeterminate is how the corporate income tax would affect him, because the business tax under Cain's plan is NOT an income tax. It is computed as follows: Gross income less all purchases from other U.S. located businesses, all capital investment, and net exports. Thus, salaries paid to employees (including officers) are not deductible against the 9% tax, but depreciable equipment is totally deductible (which will encourage investment in a massive way). But we can't determine how this might affect Cain's unrealized capital gains. The tax plan is brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. Unfortunately, the media are too f*ng stupid to understand it and therefore to convey it to taxpayers.