Why 9-9-9 Doesn’t Look so Good-Good-Good
If repetition is the key to success, Herman Cain succeeded by mentioning his “9-9-9″ economic plan 24 times at Tuesday’s GOP Presidential Debate. No matter the question, Cain’s “9-9-9″ economic plan was the answer. But political brand awareness doesn’t tell us anything about the actual feasibility of the plan or the moral impact it would have on struggling Americans. Unfortunately for Cain, the results of those analyses are in and they don’t look good.
Eliminating the existing tax code in favor of a 9 percent flat tax on corporate income, 9 percent personal income tax and 9 percent national sales tax, Cain’s plan radically shifts the tax code in favor of the rich at the expense of the poor — harming the most vulnerable by creating new taxes on basic goods like groceries and clothing, while delivering savings to the wealthiest by abolishing the capital gains tax and rescinding progressive tax rates. Cain defended his attack on the poor during an interview Wednesday morning with George Stephanopoulos:
Like Paul Ryan’s 2012 budget proposal, Cain’s “9-9-9″ plan is yet another thinly veiled attempt to favor wealthy individuals and corporations while further destroying the economic well-being of working and middle-class Americans. Despite Cain’s assertion that people will support “9-9-9″, consistent polling finds broad support for progressive taxes and opposition to tax plans that favor a small portion of privileged Americans.