Cain

[Mike Raburn]

I am ALL about Cain!

I am glad others are too!

"WE" need more options.

I think Cain ran a business or two,,,,,,am I wrong?

CAIN!

[fletchtb]

Cain is/was CEO of Godfathers Pizza which is apparently a large chain in the south.

[Chris Santee]

Cain on CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2011/10/04/red-chair-herman-cain.cnn

[petefitz]

I like Cain too, but I see 9-9-9 becoming 20-20-20 when Dems get back in charge!

[al brodeur]

since he was in business he should be aware of how to incorporate a( poison pill) if the 9-9-9 gets modified IE congress loses its pay,health bennies
according to a bio I received he once headed up-Pillsbury"s Burger King div and  took them to black ink in about 14 months then he was asked to take over the Godfather pizza div
which he made profitable and then bought them out but before this he was in theFederal reserve system #2 in the midwest and also was a mathematical analyst doing rockets and artillery for the Navy he does not come across as the village idiot, and I have not seen but believe that his school records are available along with fellow students who knew him

[Chris Santee]

correct, correct and correct, Al.

Here's Cain on his 9-9-9 plan in the Wall Street Journal:

http://online.wsj.com/video/herman-cain-explains-his-9-9-9-plan/C0F27595-4101-4E21-83A0-A65A8C53D4F0.html

[Chris Santee]

Zogby Poll:
http://www.zogby.com/news/2011/10/06/ibope-zogby-poll-cain-expands-lead-over-gop-field-leads-obama-46-44/

[Thor]

That is good stuff Chris. Glad to see it! A reasonable man, who is not a career politician, and appears to be positioning himself well. Probably the best thing about him is that he knows what he doesn't know and readily admits it, and surrounds himself with people who can help. Calls it like he sees it. And after reading farther into that poll, it appears that over 50% of the people polled are just plain tired of this knucklehead that is sitting in the chair currently and think it is time for him to find other employment. Both Cain and Romney would beat him today if the elections were today. The downside is that the elections are a year off, and alot can change in that time. Hell POTUS and his criminal cronies could do just about anything in that time to better his chances. Just like the program they were "running" in an attempt to prove that our 2nd ammendment rights should be curtailed because all of us legal gunowners were selling weapons to Mexican drug cartels.

[mirjo]

I'm all for sane candidates with a sensible plan, he appears to be one at this point. I fear that like the current admin, whatever good intentions he may have will get cut down in the "D.C. Combine" and cast aside. What goes on there is toxic partisan crap that doesn't bode well for anyone inside or outside.

Regardless of how my republican pals here on the forum hate on Obama, I have to believe that he took office with good intentions, like others before him and has been hog tied by the BS of DC, rendering him somewhat ineffective. No president or candidate is ever going to please everyone all the time; however, he has been a disappointment, along with the entire congress. The Federal Government as a whole has been nothing but ridiculous since before the last election cycle began. The talk has been the same going back decades, for those who don't recall past elections. The odds of seeing a change in the way things are taxed are pretty slim. It would be good if a political outsider could get in to Washington and be effective, but Cain is right about the media. They will thwart him anyway possible by putting the negative spin on things. With 24/7 coverage and everyone tuned in every which way, it doesn't take long for a negative vibe to go a long way.

My only issue with his message was Wall Street not being a problem. I agree the protesters may not have a clear cause or message, but really? Wall Street didn't help create the huge mess we have with the housing bubble? Is that all a lie? Honestly? I'm sure I have read some credible magazine articles regarding that crisis, so to hear this now, just seems a little like more Corporate/DC smoke and mirrors. The consensus is generally that the American public is dumb & forgetful enough that after a few years they will forget all about this and business as usual. (sadly it's mostly true)

I keep hearing this Republican message that capitalism isn't the problem, it's the people's fault they don't have jobs or something like that--neither of which makes any sense. There are a lot of places much worse than here and many without jobs/foreclosures. When you're sitting in an OK spot it's easy to look at others  and say how they shouldn't have done this or that, not be so stupid, whatever. It's also easy for people to be duped--the elderly are all the time by scammers. Not everyone is  on the same intelligence field when the ball is in play. Some people are easily sold a line of crap by companies wanting to make a buck. This is obvious because of the number of people who fell for the no down payment or pay only interest mortgage scams that got us here. If you're all well versed in home finance, I applaud you. I'm not--it makes my head spin, but I am smart enough to research these things and know enough about it to know why it makes my head spin. Many people are not so lucky as you (or I for that matter)

There are two distinct very partisan messages out there that seem to go like this:  "Don't blame me because I have a lot of money, I earned it! Go get your own. If you tax my big pile of money, I won't have any to create jobs with" (R)

Not everyone is going to own General Mills, Microsoft, or Exxon, but how long can this argument be used without something showing for it?

"The top 1% of earners aren't paying their fair share of taxes, the middle class is carrying the burden for the entire country. People are suffering and can't make ends meet." (D)

There are hidden taxes/fees in everything. I've heard/read more than once that under Reagan (who seems to be a Republican God now) that taxes on the super wealthy were much higher in his Admin. (??)

So which is it? Who's right? Are they both right? I came across this video and I think this woman is right.

http://youtu.be/htX2usfqMEs

I'm all for people making profits, getting rich, taking what they need etc., but not being greedy. No man is an island. We often forget that. How many of us ever really consider that our personal accomplishments are the result of the combined efforts of many? Not the least of which being our families? But even more than that, as we bicker about (enter Ed's latest Obama slur-name)/liberal mindsets/all things republican good & pragmatic-democrat bad & wasteful...do we ever really consider that we are not alone that collectively we're in the same sinking/floating boat? If not for the guy who maintains the roads year round or the person who harvests/manufactures our coffee et-al would any of us achieve our goals, from getting out of bed to getting where we need to go and all in between on that road to achieving that promotion, award, new client, whatever?

A little heavy for the politics of this forum, I know, but I want everyone to think about it this election season. And listen to what this woman is saying. While it's a political campaign message, I don't feel it's a message simply for politics.

Peace, Be well.

[mkr]

Cain answered my question in this response.

http://www.northstarwriters.com/2011/10/16/9-responses-to-9-false-attacks-on-the-9-9-9-plan/

[Thor]

Obama had control of the White House, the House and the Senate for his first two years and still couldn't get things done. But he still tries to push his socialist agenda on us. Obama, Reid, Pelosi and the rest of the Dems and the left MSM are all for the "Occupy Wall Street" movement, even with the Democratic Socialist Party and the Communist Party of America standing with them. Not sure what anyone else reads into that, but it concerns me.

In regards to previous comments about successful folks personal accomplishments, being assisted by other people. Yes I am pretty sure that anyone who runs a small business or a large business recognizes the effect that others have on their business. But we also pay for those services. We pay taxes for the school, taxes to have roads and ifrastructure maintained, we pay the airlines to get us to the meetings on time, we pay for accountants and lawyers, etc.... so the point (as well as Elizabeth Warren's point) is null and void. We even pay for the coffee we consume, as crazy as it sounds!

Yes we are all in the same boat, but, the boat making progress is dependent on how many people are providing propulsion, through continuous effort, not acting as sea anchors.

[trussell]

Thanks for the link Mary Kay, I especially like his response to #8:

"Claim 8: Some people (like Herman Cain) who may live off capital gains, would pay no income taxes. Is that fair? Response: First, one of the benefits of the 9-9-9 plan is that, even if someone doesn’t pay much or any of one of the taxes, he or she is still likely affected by the other two. More to the point, though, everyone has the same opportunity to work hard, earn capital and put that capital at risk. Whatever I have earned has come from hard work, good decisions (and some bad ones), a willingness to take risks and a constant honing of strategy. Nothing is stopping anyone else from doing the same thing. I realize many are being told there are no opportunities available to them, but that is not true and I wish people – for their own sakes – would stop listening to such doom and gloom and come to understand all the opportunity that truly exists, and learn how to access it."

[mirjo]

I keep trying to understand where this pervasive attitude comes from that all people have to do is work hard to prosper, the sun will shine where it normally doesn't AND stock dividends will magically sprout out your arse???!!!

Apparently no one here or in any Republican's world has ever known someone (or yourselves) who had to make ends meet on $20-$25K/year or less. This 9-9-9 tax proposal on the surface may seem possibly reasonable, but is it really? Yeah, I've read the stuff about 'what the other side will say' and I have to ask again about the workers earning barely enough to get by. The attitude that it's their own fault seems flawed and is dubious, given the "answer to number 8." Tell that low wage earner about all his glorious opportunities: What are they? He can earn a degree to get a higher paying job? Learn a trade to get a better job? Or simply go get a different job?

Here's the flaw in that thought, as noble as it may sound: takes money to go to school, any school. If you're making $25K/yr you likely don't have any to spare. Student loans aren't going to be enough to completely cover some tuitions. How much debt do you want to incur in an unstable job market? Can he just go get a different job? Sure, but the next hurdle is will he get hired. Companies seem reluctant to  want to train people and want to hire those with previous experience or an education in a certain field. As things become more technically advanced, I see this as being a bigger concern. So I don't think Mr. Cain's rosy picture of opportunity is painted on the right canvas.  they have to spend

Talk to a Wal-Mart employee or anyone who works full time making a none-livable wage how it feels to be in their shoes. The land of opportunity is supposed to be for everyone to have the chance to succeed at something of their choosing. What's missing here is not the desire or drive, but the opportunity. I don't have enough math/economic skills to understand all the jargon and double talk, but I know enough simple everyday stuff to understand that a flat tax will hit a lower income harder than a higher one. Paying out 20% on a $25K income is a much harder hit for that family than paying out that same 20% on the family making 50, 80, or 100K even though their 20% would be larger figure, their 80% balance is also larger and much easier to get by on.

Everything is corrupt and broken with our government and the political parties have people arguing pointlessly. There doesn't appear to be any good will left in the country unless something catastrophic happens.The Wall Street banks took this country for a ride a few years ago, it's still on its collective knees and I hear these candidates say things like "Don't blame Wall Street, that was so 2008. It's your fault you haven't gotten anywhere."     Including the much lauded Mr. Cain. I can't comprehend the arrogance of it.

There are a lot of snarky comments about the socialist system and how too many people are getting too much and what not. Thor you've commented on how Obama didn't get anything done in the first two years, while I'm not entirely sure what it is you were expecting to happen, what has and hasn't taken place is this (which no one here ever says anything about): Obama did allow the Bush tax cuts to continue, something the Republican party has repeatedly harped on "Cutting taxes will create jobs!"
That move alone should have caused some job growth if that statement were true, wouldn't that be the logical expectation? I don't know why the things he tried to do didn't work. One economist will say you need to do one thing to get out of a recession another says you need to do the opposite. There are obviously at least two schools of thought and likely dozens more on the matter. Do you know the answer?  I certainly don't.

Many here seem to support not raising taxes on the wealthiest people in the top 1% and seem to ignore the widening gap between those at the bottom and those at the top, buy into the idea that this is totally acceptable, because for some reason you seem to believe that those who are apparently less fortunate than yourselves are against the free market and capitalism, which isn't the case. I don't get it. I really don't.  Perhaps there is some connection I'm just not making or getting. I wish someone would explain it, because unless you're all secretly Billionaires, I don't get how you support a group that  continues to gain at the expense of everyone & everything else, when in fact their tax rate was higher 20 years ago or more and the country wasn't this bad off. Or didn't seem to be anyway.

Thor--I don't know who you are, I respect your difference of opinion from mine; however, your last comments make no sense. I have to assume you missed the point of what Elizabeth Warren was saying. You re-iterated it, but didn't seem to grasp it. The point is exactly that--we've all paid for this stuff that we all use to do what we do. No man is an island. Go ahead build a company, be a huge success, make all the money you can. Take all you need for yourself (no one begrudges anyone that) then tend to the others coming up behind you.

That's humanity, that's how it should be, that's likely the way it used to be when companies cared about employees, trained them, treated them well, gave and received loyalty. People felt confident in their employer, were valued, developed a bonded trust, and stayed for a lifetime. Rarely does an 18 year old get a job and stay there until retirement anymore. You can blame the employee, but I don't think that's where the problem lies in many cases. I think politics and greed are the root of the problems we face everywhere in this country. If big business wasn't in bed with Washington politicians, I think the American public would fare much better.

The social problems you complain about go beyond politics, it's a real and pervasive problem on several levels. There is the fact that people are so poor as to need public assistance and there is the problem of fraud and the entitlement mindset, which I think (I hope) is what your issue is with it all.

I  haven't paid enough attention to the Wall Street protesters to be able to comment on them, but I will say that it's America and protesters don't bother me, it's a right we have as citizens of this country (so far), but the seeming lack of humanity and disconnect with average people coming from the Republicans, that concerns me.

It's more than concerning actually, it's down right scary.

[Thor]

Mirjo,

     I didn't miss yours or Elizabeth Warrens' point. It is just that I disagree with both of you completely. This country was not founded on Socialist principles or Communist principles. We don't need the government to tell us what to do. We need them out of our lives. But you want Socialism. Therefore, I disagree with you.

[Chris Santee]

as to mirjo's statement:
"My only issue with his message was Wall Street not being a problem. I agree the protesters may not have a clear cause or message, but really? Wall Street didn't help create the huge mess we have with the housing bubble? Is that all a lie? Honestly? I'm sure I have read some credible magazine articles regarding that crisis, so to hear this now, just seems a little like more Corporate/DC smoke and mirrors."

Sorry to bust your "credible" magazines, but take a look at this NYTimes article from 1999:
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html

Bush warned of Fannie & Freddie in his 2004 Inaugural Address. Does anybody remember that ?
The media was much too smart for that "dummy".