Abolish the 16th Amendment and return power to the people

[MaggieMae]

Well, you may think that if you wish, but Karl Marx says differently. In the Communist Manifesto, Marx says the following relating to the characteristics of the "advanced" (ie socialist) state:



In deciding whom to believe in describing the socialist system, you or Marx, I believe Marx.

I can understand why this would be a popular excerpt on rightist websites, but unfortunately, there are several problems.

Firstly, the term "income tax" is a mistranslation; Marx uses the term "steuer," which merely meant "tax" or "taxation," and does not specify an income tax.

Secondly, I didn't claim that progressive taxation couldn't be an element of "socialism"; I merely claimed that taxation as currently used was just as effectively a stabilizer component of capitalism, and considering the role of the diminishing rate of marginal utility (which always seems to be neglected by rightists on Internet forums; did Hazlitt not cover it?), and the complementary role of welfare in maintaining the physical efficiency of the workforce, progressive taxation functions as an especially beneficial agent of stabilization.

Thirdly, your comment about "the socialist system" indicates that you believe that the only form of socialism that exists is Marxism, which is similarly fallacious. For instance, we could consider anarchists like Mikhail Bakunin, who find their groundings in a form of libertarian socialism separate from Marxism. As he writes in his 1871 manuscript Statism and Anarchy:

We have already expressed several times our deep aversion to the theory of Lassalle and Marx, which recommends to the workers, if not as a final ideal at least as the next immediate goal, the founding of a people’s state, which according to their interpretation will be nothing but “the proletariat elevated to the status of the governing class.”

It's also necessary to consider market socialists who oppose an ultimate establishment of any communist economic framework and prefer to retain wages and competitive enterprise, though they favor some form of collectivization of the means of production.

I congratulate you sir, you have the most intellectual deflections I've seen. Nearly as comprehensible as Thorsten Veblen. However, it is, at bottom, a deflection.

I don't know about what might be on right wing blogs. I got my quote from here:
The Communist Manifesto

The reason I said you are deflecting is because my original post said only that a progressive income tax was A feature of a socialist system. I went on to say that it does not mean we have a socialist system, but that it was feature of one.

You said that was a "mere fallacy." So actually you did claim that it couldn't be a part of the system because that's all I claimed it was. So despite all the smoke you blow about umpteen different varieties of socialism that need to be considered, in final analysis, I was right in what I said.

Thanks for playing though.

While Bush was in power there were all sorts of side-by-side comparisons of his would-be totalitarian government to fascism that evolved into major conspiracy theories. This one got the most attention, but just as the Communist Manifesto shouldn't be used as YOUR guidebook to today's politics on the left, the attempted scare tactic of potential fascism by trying to portrary George W. Bush as another Mussolini were equally as lame.

The 14 Characteristics of Fascism, by Lawrence Britt, Spring 2003

The enormous diversity of our social structure in this country DEMANDS that there be SOME order to it, or chaos ensues. The middle ground, of course, is liberal capitalism or conservative socialism. They both mean the same thing but are a far cry from Marxism or fascism.

 

[code1211]

Now why do you think it is okay to abolish some amendments, yet not others?

That's kind of a stupid question. Each amendment is different. Maybe you agree with one but disagree with another. Good examples are prohibition and slavery. If we abolish the income tax, what does that have to do with those other two amendments?

Anyways, please don't ask stupid questions that get us off topic. The goal is to abolish the income tax. Are you for or against and why?
Don't just ask a dumb fuck question like you did. Totally distracting. Its why politics are annoying. Stop asking 3rd grade questions.

I am not against any type of taxation that supports a fair and just government that does not aspire to grow beyond any rational bounds. Sadly, our government does just this.

I am against a form of taxation that allows fully half of the populace to not pay taxes as ours does. I don't think that the single working mother of two should pay the same dollars as Bill Gates, but she should pay something. Even one dollar. Something.

I don't think the Feds should have so much money that they send some back to the states. That flow should be reversed so the people in Washington are behodling to the states instead of the way it is now.

Our entire tax code is an exercise in social engineering and class warfare. At some point, the people with the money are going to stop pulling the wagon and those riding for free are going to wonder why the ride has stopped.

Will the riders be blamed for riding for so long or will the pullers be blamed for quitting?