Thoughts on Cain?

[Kreutz]

Cain is IIRC the only one in the pack who would be a "citizen statesmen"; the rest of them are career politicians.

By and by, anyone else get the impression the Romney-bot 3000(now with simulated emotions!) just wants to win so he can finally stick "President" on his resume?

[seeknulfind]

Forget about Cain's stance on gun control. It is irrelevant.

Look at his tax plan. That is an abomination. It may be even worse than 0'care. '

First of all once a tax is instituted it rarely goes away. A national sales tax should NEVER make it to the table.

Second, it does not now, nor does it ever make any sense to tax business. This ticks people off because they think for some reason this is not "fair". What is not fair is letting folks think that business pays taxes. They do not. They never will. People pay tax.

Finally the whole 999 thing attempts to be simple but it is not. It's a bad idea. Want simple? What's wrong with a straight flat tax on income?

Thanks for the info on Cain's history with the Fed. This changes my entire view of him. As folks march on Wall Street, the Fed sits on the sidelines watching with a smirk.

Who prints the money in this country? The Fed.

Who controls the money supply? The Fed. If you want do see an interesting correlation sometime you might want to compare the stock market against the money supply (M1).

Interest rates? The Fed.

Let me ask you about this whole real estate scam that crashed our economy around our ears - who profited? The banks. The banks never really "lost" a nickel because they make their profit up front and if the deal goes sour, they keep the underlying property. Who controls the banks? Yep. The Fed.

Cain's Fed ties comfort me not at all.

And this brings me right back to where I always seem to end up these days. It matters not one whit who is elected President. As long as Washington continues to be controlled by the same strings, does it matter what puppet is on stage?

One more thought - it also doesn't matter whether the conspiracy theorists are right or not. It doesn't matter if the "strings" are controlled by a group, and individual or the environment. It doesn't matter if the corruption is intentional or not. What does matter is it keeps getting worse and it is not likely to stop until everything comes crashing down.

Andy

[VBshooter]

My thoughts on Cain......He's a loser. cannot win and has started to pull the damn race card when convenient lately when convenient.. We;ve seen that before haven't we,,,,,, He's attacked Rick Perry over some camp he owns or rents or other nonsense... He needs to shut up,get out of the way, shove his 9% sales tax and let another candidate proceed....

[dorminWS]

He's a former Federal Reserve chairman. The system owns him. He's no white knight (no pun intended). His rather muddled statements on guns indicate he's of the same mold as a northeastern Republican, which is to say, no better than neutral and usually mildly hostile.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGb9Fu-c ... r_embedded

Didn't come across as a "muddled statement" on guns to me. Definitely not neutral or hostile.

As for him being part of the Federal Reserve, if you don't understand how our current economic problems have been created and inflamed by the Fed, then I guess it can look like a positive.

quote]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I do not understand. This amounts to what our friend Gunderwood would call an ad hominem attack. We on this forum would do well to avoid them and stick together; as there are too few of us as it is. The Fed certainly has some things to answer for, but it is not the root of all our economic problems by a long shot. But I will not call you uninformed, simplistic, or simple-minded (as you inferred that I was). I will simply observe that I consider myself to be reasonably well informed, better educated than most, and that I disagree with you.

[dorminWS]

He's a former Federal Reserve chairman. The system owns him. He's no white knight (no pun intended). His rather muddled statements on guns indicate he's of the same mold as a northeastern Republican, which is to say, no better than neutral and usually mildly hostile.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGb9Fu-c ... r_embedded

Didn't come across as a "muddled statement" on guns to me. Definitely not neutral or hostile.

I don't do video, so I'll assume that's some kind of pro-gun statement. Which is nice, I guess, but before he had a media spotlight on him he was not making friendly noises. Even Obama says he's pro-Second Amendment. Politicians are politicians, look at their deeds not their words - and if they have no deeds, like Cain, look at what they said before they got famous.

As for him being part of the Federal Reserve, if you don't understand how our current economic problems have been created and inflamed by the Fed, then I guess it can look like a positive.

Cain's about like Romney, but he's more given to say what his audience wants to hear. In that respect, he makes a good politician. He thinks he has a chance now, so he's going to say whatever he can to ingratiate himself to the party base. He's probably being set up for an ugly fall.

[SHMIV]

I like Cain, on the whole. The main thing that I like about him is that he is not a career politician or a lawyer. Also, the man has proven to be a productive member of society. When he took control of Godfathers Pizza, it was a failing company. Under his supervision, the company flourished. That indicates that he understands finances and economy. It also indicates that he probably has the ability to listen to his advisers, and make informed decisions. I recall reading a biography on him a while back; if I remember right, he came from humble beginnings and worked hard to get where he is, as opposed to having things handed out to him. And, purely as a bonus, he is an excellent way to throw a giant finger to the race-baiters.

[Diomed]

snip

My statement was not an ad hominem. Had I intended it to be such, I would have said "Dormin, you're a dupe and a fool": that is an ad hominem.

If you want to misconstrue what I say, or get on a high horse over trivialities, by all means do so; I indulge in that myself. People tend to tune it out though.

[dorminWS]

snip

My statement was not an ad hominem. Had I intended it to be such, I would have said "Dormin, you're a dupe and a fool": that is an ad hominem.

If you want to misconstrue what I say, or get on a high horse over trivialities, by all means do so; I indulge in that myself. People tend to tune it out though.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I find that the problem with low horses is that your feet drag the ground and wear your shoes out.

[TheGodfather]

SQUIRREL!!!

[Diomed]

I find that the problem with low horses is that your feet drag the ground and wear your shoes out.

But nobody expects low horses, so they always aim high and miss.

[Kreutz]

No one seems to have mentioned, what happens when 9/9/9 becomes 10/10/10 in a few years, then 11/11/11, then 12/12/12, etc.?

[dorminWS]

No one seems to have mentioned, what happens when 9/9/9 becomes 10/10/10 in a few years, then 11/11/11, then 12/12/12, etc.?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Valid point. But it applies to all taxation systems. Same thing happened with the income tax. Problem is that when the economy is expanding and tax revenues go up, the damned government increases its spending to use up all the extra loot; but when the economy contracts or revenues fall off for any reason, they continue to spend at prosperity-induced levels; resulting in deficits or tax increases or both. Works sort of like a bumper jack - ratchets up government's share of GDP one notch at a time. B@stards won't be satisfied untill they're taking it all; and maybe not even when.

What we need to do is pass a constitutional amendment to cap government spending at a certain percentage (well below the current level) of GDP and make tax increases require a supermajority vote and have an automatic mandatory sunset on them.

[TheGodfather]

Valid point. But it applies to all taxation systems. Same thing happened with the income tax. Problem is that when the economy is expanding and tax revenues go up, the damned government increases its spending to use up all the extra loot; but when the economy contracts or revenues fall off for any reason, they continue to spend at prosperity-induced levels; resulting in deficits or tax increases or both. Works sort of like a bumper jack - ratchets up government's share of GDP one notch at a time. B@stards won't be satisfied untill they're taking it all; and maybe not even when.

What we need to do is pass a constitutional amendment to cap government spending at a certain percentage (well below the current level) of GDP and make tax increases require a supermajority vote and have an automatic mandatory sunset on them.

One thing everyone needs to remember is that with the 9-9-9 plan, EVERYONE is paying taxes. That means that if any politician tries to raise taxes, they will anger everybody and be voted out very swiftly. You'd be suprised how quickly some people's votes can change when it's their wallets that get hit.

[dorminWS]

Valid point. But it applies to all taxation systems. Same thing happened with the income tax. Problem is that when the economy is expanding and tax revenues go up, the damned government increases its spending to use up all the extra loot; but when the economy contracts or revenues fall off for any reason, they continue to spend at prosperity-induced levels; resulting in deficits or tax increases or both. Works sort of like a bumper jack - ratchets up government's share of GDP one notch at a time. B@stards won't be satisfied untill they're taking it all; and maybe not even when.

What we need to do is pass a constitutional amendment to cap government spending at a certain percentage (well below the current level) of GDP and make tax increases require a supermajority vote and have an automatic mandatory sunset on them.

One thing everyone needs to remember is that with the 9-9-9 plan, EVERYONE is paying taxes. That means that if any politician tries to raise taxes, they will anger everybody and be voted out very swiftly. You'd be suprised how quickly some people's votes can change when it's their wallets that get hit.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You're right, of course. But I just don't trust the Great Unwashed to look after their own best interests. Particularly not if they're on some kind of dole; even if they must pay taxes. I think we still need to cap government spending at a percent of GDP - even if we did have a 9-9-9-type system.

[TheGodfather]

[Kreutz]

I submitted a new campaign slogan to the Cain campaign but they never replied.

Herman Cain 2012: Where da White Wimminz At?

Well, I think it was a good one.

[TheGodfather]

Just got home after auditioning for a Herman Cain campaign commercial. I don't feel like I did my best, but I still hope one of my clips get chosen.

[Jakeiscrazy]

I submitted a new campaign slogan to the Cain campaign but they never replied.

Herman Cain 2012: Where da White Wimminz At?

Well, I think it was a good one.

New tax plan, set up tool roads in the middle of the desert?

[Kreutz]

I submitted a new campaign slogan to the Cain campaign but they never replied.

Herman Cain 2012: Where da White Wimminz At?

Well, I think it was a good one.

New tax plan, set up tool roads in the middle of the desert?

I love this guy!