GOP Debate Live (sorta) Blog


This is a debate with a focus on economics. Herman Cain will share center stage with Mitt Romney. This is the first debate since Cain moved up into contender status.

Big questions for the night:

1. Will Perry get his shit together?

2. Will Cain solidify his status?

3. Will the audience cheer or boo inappropriately?

The fun starts at 8 pm eastern (5 pm out here on the left coast)

I’m not going to try to keep up with every question and answer. I can’t watch, type and drink all at the same time.


Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

77 Responses to GOP Debate Live (sorta) Blog

  1. I started drinking an hour ago. I’m just about in the right condition to see these idiots.

  2. Is this thing even on the boob tube?

  3. imustprotest says:

    Yeah? What channel. All the news is running the Iran/assassination plot.

  4. Question to Hunstman
    Regain industrial base. Two things to be done
    1 Maintain strong commitment to entrepreneurship
    2 Need competitive marketplace

  5. Question to Gingrich Medicare- end of life spending is it wasteful?
    Blah blah blah blah- Govt should not be making medical decisions. He is carrying on about the recommendation to eliminate PSA testing

  6. To Bachman
    Big problem with Medicare- it costs too much- must fix the problem- keep Medicare for our seniors- No political appointees deciding medical issues

  7. Lola-at-Large says:

    wow, it’s a roundtable. Interesting…

  8. They are giving Romney the majority of the time so far. He is a long winded gasbag.

  9. Lola-at-Large says:

    I’ve got a post scheduled for 10:00. Just an FYI…

  10. myiq2xu says:

    Perry is full of shit.

    There was a president who raised taxes and cut spending.

    Today is his 36th wedding anniversary.

  11. myiq2xu says:

    Here comes the 999 pinata

  12. Lola-at-Large says:

    Cain: No tax on used goods. That’s good.

  13. myiq2xu says:

    A VAT is a sales tax

  14. She did NOT just say that! The 999 plan turned upside down the devil is in the details?

  15. On his sales tax- does that mean I pay his 9 plus PA’s 6? So I will be paying 15% sales tax?

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      Good question.

    • Mary says:

      That’s pretty much what it means, unless the states are willing to lower their own sales taxes. I don’t see much chance of that.

      • Mary says:

        Except—I think—you won’t be paying the 15% or 25% income tax……the 9% , federally, is not in addition to, but in place of.

        • Mary- they just brought up a good point- NH has no sales tax at all- people from MA often go over the border to buy. No way do they want a sales tax.
          If the 9% replaces that is one thing- but I do not see how the Feds can force states to give up a major revenue source.

        • Mary says:

          I think you’re right….the choice to lower would have to be voluntary by the states.

          But that 9% replaces the federal income tax, which, even in the lowest of 15% (ok, O% is clearly better), you’re paying less, in the long run.

          Say, you pay 6%in PA, plus 9% federally, putting you at a total 15%. The old way, it’s 6% plus 15 or 25%, taking you to 21 or 40%, depending on your bracket. But you will pay it up front, in every purchase you make. That’s how I’m understanding it, for now.

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          Mary, the whole system of 999 replaces our entire tax system. There would still be a 9% tax on income, and that’s what would replace the payroll tax. The sales tax would be additional.

        • What I am thinking is that I will be paying 9% federal income tax. Plus 3.2% PA income tax. Plus 9% fed sales and 6% PA sales.
          Take Louisiana- they already have 9% sales tax. Add 9% fed sales tax and they then have 18% just in sales tax.
          MA personal income tax is over 6% I believe, plus MA sales tax.
          Guess I need to get more information on the 999 plan.

        • 1539days says:

          Canada has sales taxes on the 15% range from 3 different taxes.

          I’m not sure what happens to the 47% of people who currently pay no income taxes. It would be in increase in revenue if they all had to pay 9% sales tax.

        • votermom says:

          Basically you would pay 9% on everything you earn, and another 9% on everything you spend on new goods.

          Can you imagine how the car dealers would howl?
          What about houses – do you pay 9% on new construction and nothing on existing homes?
          And the mortgage deduction — I can’t imagine that would stay on a flat tax.
          I am very skeptical if this plan would ever get through congress.

        • Mary says:

          Thanks, Lola!

          Ok, so, assume I live in PA. I will pay 6% state sales tax, 9% federal sales tax, 9% income tax, but no payroll taxes are deducted from my paycheck. That’s 24%, total.

          Before, I paid 6% state sales tax, 15-25% federal income tax , PLUS payroll tax deductions out of my paycheck.
          Assuming I’m in the 25% tax bracket, that’s a total of 31% taxes paid, without even including payroll taxes out of your paycheck.

          Big picture, you’re better off.

          The other 9% in the 999 is corporate, which sounds low, but as I understand, they’ll get no loopy deductions.

          It’s almost like a flat tax—fair across the board.

          I’m not advocating or pushing; just calculating. 🙂

        • yttik says:

          State sales tax is deductible from federal taxes. I pay 8.9% state sales tax. Under Cain’s idea, I’d only have to pay .1% in federal taxes.

          I think I like him.

        • 1539days says:

          A plan that fundamentally different is hard to score. Reducing the corporate income tax to 9% would help the smaller existing business who didn’t figure out how to pay 0% (like GE) yet. I would only support a national sales tax if the income tax was made illegal. It’s just too tempting to charge both.

        • Mary 24% plus the 3% Pa income tax- so 27%. And still have SS and Medicare taken out. So in Pa we might break about even.
          States that have high income and sales tax like MA- those people are going to end up paying more I think.
          9 + 9 plus MA 6% sales and 6% income – 30% plus medicare and SS. Plus the much higher cost of living in MA.
          This is getting interesting.

        • yttik- it is deductible if you itemize right? What about those of us who do not have enough to take the itemized deductions?
          And Cain I thought was talking about throwing out the whole tax code- wonder if he wants to do away with itemization and deductions?

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          PMM, FICA and Medicare taxes go away under 999. All the old Federal tax code is out.

        • Lola- thanks for the info. But if FICA and Medicare go away- what happens to Social Security and Medicare?
          And if he is throwing out the tax code- which I do think needs to be simplified- are all the current deductions and exemptions being thrown out as well?
          Obviously I have to go read this 999 plan.

        • votermom says:

          PMM, on that guardian live blog upthread, it said that Cain’s 999 plan is temporary, to be replaced by a national 30% sales tax (aka Fair Tax).
          No idea if that’s true, maybe you will see when you read about it.

          http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/12/gop-presidential-debate-live?newsfeed=true

        • Mary says:

          Proud: Under 999, you’ll pay the 27%, but won’t have payroll taxes deducted from your check.

  16. yttik says:

    “I can’t watch, type and drink all at the same time.”

    Of course not. That kind of multi-tasking requires a woman.

  17. myiq2xu says:

    I’ve had all I can take.

    The rest of you are on your own

  18. I am going to have to go read this 999 thing. No payroll tax? So people are to save 9% every paycheck and mail it in in April? No FICA or Medicare? How are SS and Medicare funded? I just did a quick look and the plan on his website is not really fleshed out- but it does say most deductions go away.
    Got to study! Something is not right. If the Feds are not withholding that 9%- the burden is on people to save that money every week. More business for the banks. And a HUGE loss in the interest the govt collects on that withholding all year.

    • WMCB says:

      My understanding is that there would still be withholding, but the 9% would replace the current payroll tax (even the employer portion) which is roughly 15%.

      I don’t have a big problem with the 999 thing IF there were a few adjustments made (exempting food, for instance). You could do a very few progressive brackets on just the income tax part and still not have it be too complex, I’d bet – it just doesn’t make for a snappy slogan to say 4-6-9-12…9-9 plan. 😀

      The one thing that I do like about consumption taxes, so long as they are not too high, is that it makes everyone pay – even illegal aliens, tourists, drug lords, and all the underground economy. Exempting used goods makes thrifty folks happy, and is good for recycling/repurposing/reusing.

      And I do like that he is at least talking about getting rid of the complicated monstrosity we have now, which is seriously FUBAR. I like the idea of a simple, straightforward loophole-free tax system that has no choice but to remain transparent, just by virtue of its simplicity. And he seems like the kind of guy who would be open to practical suggestions for refining his plan later.

      I’m grateful that Cain is making it a part of the conversation, at any rate.

      • Erica says:

        IRS simplification? Sounds good. Anything to help Tim Geitner not mess up on Turbotax is a step in the right direction.

  19. bemused_leftist says:

    I doubt anything will really get rid of IRS. All those accountants would have to get productive jobs.

  20. DandyTiger says:

    God that sucked donkey doo.

    Here’s my analysis: We’re done. It’s Romney. End of story.

  21. WMCB says:

    Commenter at VodkaPundit’s drunk blog summed up nicely re Romney:

    seen this guy, last time around. locked in with 25% on the party. looking at the polls, and he still has the same 25%.

    for him to have a chance to win, he needs to stand on four horses, bachmann, cain, perry, and paul, and keep any of the horses from pulling out to 30%. He has to pull this off for the next three months, and then recalibrate, after the first primary wave.

    basically, he has no chance. his supporters versus the people who will be sure to pick any one but him, puts him behind at least 5pts, but probably 10.

    didn’t watch the whole thing, but i think cain held his own. having perry turn in another deer in the headlights performance was probably the single biggest factor on tomorrow’s polls.

    I disagree with “Romney has no chance”, though I agree with the assessment of the dynamics of the race now. Romney is the likely nominee, because of those anti-romney “horses”, only Cain is realistically still in it.

    If Cain had money and backing, he’d probably be a bigger threat. And there’s still a slight chance he pulls it off. No one else has a shot at Romney. Perry needed not just to not embarrass himself, but do WELL, and he didn’t. He’s toast, barring a miracle (and yeah, those are possible in politics when you have deep pockets.)

    But Cain cannot keep up with Romney over a long, grinding primary with no dough. Romney can keep his head down, and wait for Cain to run out of money.

    At any rate, it’s a two-man race now IMO, advantage Mittens, with Perry a distant third.

  22. myiq2xu says:

    John Hinderaker:

    Herman Cain was very good. He took incoming fire tonight because of his standing in the polls, but he gave at least as good as he got. What is striking to me about Cain’s candidacy is the fact that he battles on even terms with the other candidates. He isn’t the black candidate, like Barack Obama. The rationale of his candidacy isn’t his skin color, it is his proposals for the economy–proposals that are well grounded because of his life spent with great success in the private sector. His role in this campaign is transgressive, to borrow a word that leftists love.

Comments are closed.