Beware of the Huckabee/Herman Cain fairtax trap!

[The Rabbi]

*Both* need to be abolished...

And replaced with what? The government that relied mainly in tariff income to fund the government is gone. We could not fund the military adequately just on that.

 

[The T]

*Both* need to be abolished...

And replaced with what? The government that relied mainly in tariff income to fund the government is gone. We could not fund the military adequately just on that.

Sure we can. Merchants would continue to do what they do NOW...but the beauty? NO IRS to pay to support...the Revenues would skyrocket.

(And I am talking about FAIRTAX)...

 

[johnwk]

*Both* need to be abolished...

And replaced with what? The government that relied mainly in tariff income to fund the government is gone. We could not fund the military adequately just on that.

Our Constitution’s original tax plan grants power to Congress to raise existing levels of revenue! Keep in mind that if imposts and duties at our water’s edge do not provide sufficient revenue, Congress also has the authority to lay internal excise taxes on specifically chosen articles of consumption. And if that is insufficient to meet Congress’ expenditures, any shortfall is to be made up by laying the apportioned tax among the States. But the last tax mentioned, as you must fully be aware of, creates a very real moment of accountability for each States’ Congressional Delegation who must then return home with a bill in hand for their Governor and State’s Legislature to deal with. The accountability created under the founder’s apportioned tax would encourage Congress to shrink the size of the federal government and live within the means brought in from imposts, duties and miscellaneous internal excise taxes.

I know our progressive crowd hates our Constitution’s original tax plan, especially the rule of apportionment for any general tax laid among the states. And this is why our progressive crowd worked so feverishly to get the 16th Amendment adopted which is now used by Congress to enslave America’s businesses, industries, and even used to plunder our productive citizen’s paychecks which is then redistributed to those not gainfully employed, who in turn are expected to use their vote to keep the plundering going by re-electing those who use government force to steal what business and labor has produced.

Why there is such an aversion to our Constitution’s original tax plan is hard to imagine, especially since it is based upon principles which do not change with the passage of time, e.g., the apportioned tax to be laid if Congress spends more than is brought in from imposts, duties and miscellaneous excise taxes which immediately addresses deficits should they occur, and does so in a manner which creates a very real movement of accountability for each State’s Congressional Delegation when the must return home with a bill in hand for their State’s Governor and Legislature to deal with ___ the rule of apportionment whenever any general tax is laid among the states ties taxation and representation by the same standard and creates a fair-share formula in the wording of our Constitution


NOTE: our founder’s fair share formula to extinguish a deficit is :

States’ population

---------------------------- X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE’S SHARE

Total U.S. Population



And let us not forget taxing at our water’s edge as a first means to fill our national treasury which not only has foreigners filling our national treasury for the privilege of doing business on American soil, but provides the means to adopt an America first policy through taxes and trade
In addition, let us not ignore the importance that restricting Congress to raising its internal revenue from taxes on judiciously selected articles of consumption, not only does the market place limit the amount of tax on each article selected, but when Congress is compelled to raising its internal revenue by taxing consumption as mentioned, it becomes in Congress’ best interest to encourage a healthy and vibrant economy which in turn leads to a productive consumption and thus a healthy flow of revenue into the federal treasury.

Principles! We need to keep in mind the principles underlying our founder’s plan, and how they proved to pave the way for American to become the most prosperous and powerful nation on the planet, when they were followed.

The fact is, by the year 1835, under our constitution’s original tax plan, America was manufacturing everything from steam powered ships, to clothing spun and woven by powered machinery and the national debt [which included part of the revolutionary war debt] was completely extinguished and Congress enjoyed a surplus in the federal treasury from tariffs, duties, and customs. And so, by an Act of Congress in June of 1836 all surplus revenue in excess of $ 5,000,000 was decided to be distributed among the states, and eventually a total of $28,000,000 was distributed among the states by the rule of apportionment in the nature of interest free loans to the states to be recalled if and when Congress decided to make such a recall. Why do so many willingly ignore the wisdom of our founding fathers?

But what is so disturbing to me now is, there is not one member of Congress, nor any news media such as FoxNews, or any of our “conservative” radio talk show hosts talking about or defending our Constitution’s original tax plan and how it encouraged Congress to adopt policies to advance America’s prosperity and her own best interests. Who among the following list has ever taken the time to discuss our Constitution’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as our founders intended it to operate? Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Schnitt, Mark Levin, Dennis Prager, Bill O'rielly, Mike Gallagher, Lee Rodgers, Neal Boortz. Tammy Bruce, Monica Crowley, Herman Cain …. WHO?

JWK

 

[blu]

We should have a flat tax, not a fair tax. Abolish the IRS, but have everyone pay the same percentage on "wages, monies earned," straight across the board, 13%.

I am confused... how do you account for that without the IRS? Who been be ensuring people are paying correctly?

 

[johnwk]

We should have a flat tax, not a fair tax. Abolish the IRS, but have everyone pay the same percentage on "wages, monies earned," straight across the board, 13%.

The Founders didn't wish Income taxed, and instead opted taxing Commerce...(As it should be...as it once was). That changed in 1913

And has been a tool of the Socialist manipulators ever since and that Includes the Federal Reserve.

You are correct about the Founders never intending to have the federal government laying taxes calculated from income.

The problem with a tax calculated from incomes is, the definition of what is and what is not taxable “income“. Prior to the adoption of the 16th Amendment and before the “victory tax” was laid during WWII, people pretty much understood and were in agreement with the definition of “income” as being a profit and/or gain and that all necessary expenses and outlays were deducted from gross receipts in order to arrive a taxable income. But the definition of income as it was understood during the adoption of the 16th Amendment has been distorted by folks in government, especially by our Courts, beyond its original understand and to such a degree that it is now used to extract a tax in such a manner as to create winners and losers with out reference to profits and/or gains.


JWK

 

[The T]

We should have a flat tax, not a fair tax. Abolish the IRS, but have everyone pay the same percentage on "wages, monies earned," straight across the board, 13%.

The Founders didn't wish Income taxed, and instead opted taxing Commerce...(As it should be...as it once was). That changed in 1913

And has been a tool of the Socialist manipulators ever since and that Includes the Federal Reserve.

You are correct about the Founders never intending to have the federal government laying taxes calculated from income.

The problem with a tax calculated from incomes is, the definition of what is and what is not taxable “income“. Prior to the adoption of the 16th Amendment and before the “victory tax” was laid during WWII, people pretty much understood and were in agreement with the definition of “income” as being a profit and/or gain and that all necessary expenses and outlays were deducted from gross receipts in order to arrive a taxable income. But the definition of income as it was understood during the adoption of the 16th Amendment has been distorted by folks in government, especially by our Courts, beyond its original understand and to such a degree that it is now used to extract a tax in such a manner as to create winners and losers with out reference to profits and/or gains.


JWK

In other words be *USED* by politicians to manipulate the populace all for the *sole purpose* of their power over us.

That's the only reason the 16th was passed. Those that swore to uphold and defend the Constitution...changed it for the GAIN of the ELITES.

 

[johnwk]

We should have a flat tax, not a fair tax. Abolish the IRS, but have everyone pay the same percentage on "wages, monies earned," straight across the board, 13%.

A tax calculated from wages and the earnings realized by our productive members of society is a tax under which government force is intentionally used in a fashion which penalizes and punishes our productive members of society for being productive while it rewards the unproductive members of society by allowing them to escape from shouldering an equal burden in supporting the functions of our federal government.

There was a time in our country when even the unemployed were expected and required to contribute their fair share in meeting the expenses of government. A wonderful example of this principle is exhibited in the public laws of Maryland’s Dorchester County, under which all able bodied residents of the county above twenty and under fifty years of age were “compelled to labor two days at least in every year in repairing the roads of said county, with the privilege, however, of furnishing a substitute or paying to the road supervisors seventy-five cents for each day such person may be summoned to labor, the money thus paid to be expended in repairing the roads.”

And the law went on to indicate that “anyone neglecting or refusing to perform such labor, or to provide a substitute, or to pay seventy-five cents per day for each and every day he may be summoned to work, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon trial and conviction before a Justice of the Peace, shall be fined seventy-five cents for each day`s delinquency and costs, and shall stand committed until the fine and costs are paid.”___ SEE SHORT vs. STATE OF MARYLAND, decided February 27th, 1895, upholding the law and not violating (a) the 13th or 14th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, or (b) the 40th section of Art. 3 of the Constitution of Maryland.

In addition to the tax upon wages earned when people sell the property they have in their labor, such a tax is founded upon the object of slavery. Is not the object of slavery to gain possession of the property which Blacks had in their labor?

I suggest you study taxing consumption as our founding fathers intended, which appears to be the least oppressive and flexible enough to omit taxing the necessities of life so as to not unduly burden the poor. Hamilton explains taxes on consumption as follows:



”__ may be compared to a fluid, which will in time find its level with the means of paying them. The amount to be contributed by each citizen will in a degree be by his own option, and can be regulated by an attention to his own resources. The rich may be extravagant, the poor can be frugal; and private oppression may always be avoided by a judicious selection of objects proper for such impositions__ It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption that they contain in their own nature a security against excess. They prescribe their own limit, which can not be exceeded without defeating the end proposed, that is, an extension of the revenue__”

Surely there is a clear enough distinction between such foods as caviar and chicken eggs, between wine and milk, between silk and cotton underwear, between a Chevy Nova and BMW to truthfully say one is a luxury and the other a necessity.

This method of taxing specific articles of consumption is self regulating, a very important feature of the founders plan. If Congress taxes any specific article excessively its consumption is lowered and so is incoming tax revenue from the purchase of the article___ not a good thing for Congress because a lack of revenue from imposts, duties and excise taxes would force Congress to resort to the direct apportioned tax in which case each member of Congress would be immediately held accountable by their state Governor and Legislature who would be left with the burden of raising their state’s share of the direct tax only to then send it off to Washington, D.C.

And, if Congress panders to a particular lobbyist and chooses to not tax a specific article, the benefit is also to the consumer who may purchase that article tax free. But in pandering to lobbyists it must be remember that each article selected to escape a pennies’ tax, another article must be selected by Congress to impose an additional penny on to make up for the penny lost which increases the price and diminishes its sales of that article ___ again, not a good idea for Congress to do as the direct tax must be laid when imposts, duties and excise taxes are found insufficient to met Congress exigencies!


JWK

 

[asterism]

I would have no problem with a flat tax, given a standard deduction that everyone receives. As for the "fair tax", it's a joke and will never get anywhere. Right off the top of my head, I can envision a massive black market being created overnight as everyone did whatever they could to avoid the tax. People would begin trading goods with no cash exchanging hands. It would be a mess and would take an unbelievably larger bureaucracy than we now have just to try to enforce it.

People who want to barter are required to cut the federal government in on the action based upon 23 percent the ’fair market value” of the exchange.

`(f) Barter Transactions- If gross payment for taxable property or services is made in other than money, then the person responsible for collecting and remitting the tax shall remit the tax to the sales tax administering authority in money as if gross payment had been made in money at the tax inclusive fair market value of the taxable property or services purchased


JWK

Barter is also required to be reported now.

Tax Topics - Topic 420 Bartering Income

 

[asterism]

If we allow Congress to pass any tax at all it's going right on top of all the other taxes we already have.

Not true, the Fair Tax replaces ALL of the taxes imposed by the feds with a consumption tax. Make a list of all of the taxes collected on any product and you will find that the price of that product will stay the same under the Fair Tax.

Actually there are many, many other taxes to be laid and collected. Under the proposed legislation, H.R. 25, we find:

SEC. 302. ADMINISTRATION OF OTHER FEDERAL TAXES.

(a) In General- Section 7801 (relating to the authority of the Department of the Treasury) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(d) Excise Tax Bureau- There shall be in the Department of the Treasury an Excise Tax Bureau to administer those excise taxes not administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

`(e) Sales Tax Bureau- There shall be in the Department of the Treasury a Sales Tax Bureau to administer the national sales tax in those States where it is required pursuant to section 404, and to discharge other Federal duties and powers relating to the national sales tax (including those required by sections 402, 403, and 405). The Office of Revenue Allocation shall be within the Sales Tax Bureau.'.

So, in fact we get

(a) a 23 percent tax upon the sale of newly manufactured products

(b) a 23 percent tax upon the sale of property which Mary and Joe have in their labor

(c) we get whatever excise taxes Congress may dream up such as a tax calculated from incomes as was laid during the Civil War and upheld in Springer vs. United States, or, a tax calculated from profits and gains as was laid under the Corporate Excise Tax of 1909, upheld in Flint vs. Stone Trace,

(d) And don’t for get the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms will also be collecting taxes.


So, although the IRS may be closed down, two new tax collecting agencies are created and Congress maintains power to collect a variety of other taxes in addition to the alleged “fairtax”.


JWK

There is no tax on property "which Mary and Joe have in their labor."

 

[johnwk]

I would have no problem with a flat tax, given a standard deduction that everyone receives. As for the "fair tax", it's a joke and will never get anywhere. Right off the top of my head, I can envision a massive black market being created overnight as everyone did whatever they could to avoid the tax. People would begin trading goods with no cash exchanging hands. It would be a mess and would take an unbelievably larger bureaucracy than we now have just to try to enforce it.

People who want to barter are required to cut the federal government in on the action based upon 23 percent the ’fair market value” of the exchange.

`(f) Barter Transactions- If gross payment for taxable property or services is made in other than money, then the person responsible for collecting and remitting the tax shall remit the tax to the sales tax administering authority in money as if gross payment had been made in money at the tax inclusive fair market value of the taxable property or services purchased


JWK

Barter is also required to be reported now.

I know. I think most people know that. But the point of my mentioning bartering is taxed under the alleged fair tax is, most people believe the alleged “fairtax” replaces existing taxes with a single tax when in fact, H.R. 25 is a clever proposal for a massive expansion of what Congress will tax and keeps alive Congress’ power to lay and collect taxes calculated from profits, gains, salaries and incomes.

JWK


Are we really to believe the founder of fairtax.org., Leo E. Linbeck Jr., who was a former ringleader of the federal reserve banking cartel which plunders our national treasury?

 

[johnwk]

Not true, the Fair Tax replaces ALL of the taxes imposed by the feds with a consumption tax. Make a list of all of the taxes collected on any product and you will find that the price of that product will stay the same under the Fair Tax.

Actually there are many, many other taxes to be laid and collected. Under the proposed legislation, H.R. 25, we find:

SEC. 302. ADMINISTRATION OF OTHER FEDERAL TAXES.

(a) In General- Section 7801 (relating to the authority of the Department of the Treasury) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(d) Excise Tax Bureau- There shall be in the Department of the Treasury an Excise Tax Bureau to administer those excise taxes not administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

`(e) Sales Tax Bureau- There shall be in the Department of the Treasury a Sales Tax Bureau to administer the national sales tax in those States where it is required pursuant to section 404, and to discharge other Federal duties and powers relating to the national sales tax (including those required by sections 402, 403, and 405). The Office of Revenue Allocation shall be within the Sales Tax Bureau.'.

So, in fact we get

(a) a 23 percent tax upon the sale of newly manufactured products

(b) a 23 percent tax upon the sale of property which Mary and Joe have in their labor

(c) we get whatever excise taxes Congress may dream up such as a tax calculated from incomes as was laid during the Civil War and upheld in Springer vs. United States, or, a tax calculated from profits and gains as was laid under the Corporate Excise Tax of 1909, upheld in Flint vs. Stone Trace,

(d) And don’t for get the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms will also be collecting taxes.


So, although the IRS may be closed down, two new tax collecting agencies are created and Congress maintains power to collect a variety of other taxes in addition to the alleged “fairtax”.


JWK

There is no tax on property "which Mary and Joe have in their labor."

Maybe you missed it but when Mary and Joe as I have described them sell the property they have in their labor i.e. painting or cleaning someone’s home, they are required under the “fairtax” to give the federal government a 23 percent cut of the selling price of their labor, and, before selling the property they have in their labor they must register with government, and also file fairtax returns 12 times a year under the penalty of perjury, simply because they dare to sell the property they have in their labor.

Here are some of the specific fairtax provisions:

`(d) Liability for Tax-

`(1) IN GENERAL- The person using or consuming taxable property or services in the United States is liable for the tax imposed by this section, except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection.


`(2) EXCEPTION WHERE TAX PAID TO SELLER-A person using or consuming a taxable property or service in the United States is not liable for the tax imposed by this section if the person pays the tax to a person selling the taxable property or service and receives from such person a purchaser's receipt within the meaning of section 510.


`(a) In General- Any person liable to collect and remit taxes pursuant to section 103(a) who is engaged in a trade or business shall register as a seller with the sales tax administering authority administering the taxes imposed by this subtitle.


JWK


It has been well said that

"the property which every man has in his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable. The patrimony of the poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his own hands, and to hinder his employing this strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property. It is a manifest encroachment upon the just liberty both of the workman and of those who might be disposed to employ him. As it hinders the one from working at what he thinks proper, so it hinders the others from employing whom they think proper." __ See Butchers' Union Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746 (1884) quoting Smith, Wealth of Nations, Bk. I, c. 10.

 

[asterism]

People who want to barter are required to cut the federal government in on the action based upon 23 percent the ’fair market value” of the exchange.

`(f) Barter Transactions- If gross payment for taxable property or services is made in other than money, then the person responsible for collecting and remitting the tax shall remit the tax to the sales tax administering authority in money as if gross payment had been made in money at the tax inclusive fair market value of the taxable property or services purchased


JWK

Barter is also required to be reported now.

I know. I think most people know that. But the point of my mentioning bartering is taxed under the alleged fair tax is, most people believe the alleged “fairtax” replaces existing taxes with a single tax when in fact, H.R. 25 is a clever proposal for a massive expansion of what Congress will tax and keeps alive Congress’ power to lay and collect taxes calculated from profits, gains, salaries and incomes.

JWK


Are we really to believe the founder of fairtax.org., Leo E. Linbeck Jr., who was a former ringleader of the federal reserve banking cartel which plunders our national treasury?

Look into it yourself without all the spin and lies, then make your own decision.

 

[asterism]

Actually there are many, many other taxes to be laid and collected. Under the proposed legislation, H.R. 25, we find:

SEC. 302. ADMINISTRATION OF OTHER FEDERAL TAXES.

(a) In General- Section 7801 (relating to the authority of the Department of the Treasury) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(d) Excise Tax Bureau- There shall be in the Department of the Treasury an Excise Tax Bureau to administer those excise taxes not administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

`(e) Sales Tax Bureau- There shall be in the Department of the Treasury a Sales Tax Bureau to administer the national sales tax in those States where it is required pursuant to section 404, and to discharge other Federal duties and powers relating to the national sales tax (including those required by sections 402, 403, and 405). The Office of Revenue Allocation shall be within the Sales Tax Bureau.'.

So, in fact we get

(a) a 23 percent tax upon the sale of newly manufactured products

(b) a 23 percent tax upon the sale of property which Mary and Joe have in their labor

(c) we get whatever excise taxes Congress may dream up such as a tax calculated from incomes as was laid during the Civil War and upheld in Springer vs. United States, or, a tax calculated from profits and gains as was laid under the Corporate Excise Tax of 1909, upheld in Flint vs. Stone Trace,

(d) And don’t for get the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms will also be collecting taxes.


So, although the IRS may be closed down, two new tax collecting agencies are created and Congress maintains power to collect a variety of other taxes in addition to the alleged “fairtax”.


JWK

There is no tax on property "which Mary and Joe have in their labor."

Maybe you missed it but when Mary and Joe as I have described them sell the property they have in their labor i.e. painting or cleaning someone’s home, they are required under the “fairtax” to give the federal government a 23 percent cut of the selling price of their labor, and, before selling the property they have in their labor they must register with government, and also file fairtax returns 12 times a year under the penalty of perjury, simply because they dare to sell the property they have in their labor.

Here are some of the specific fairtax provisions:

`(d) Liability for Tax-

`(1) IN GENERAL- The person using or consuming taxable property or services in the United States is liable for the tax imposed by this section, except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection.


`(2) EXCEPTION WHERE TAX PAID TO SELLER-A person using or consuming a taxable property or service in the United States is not liable for the tax imposed by this section if the person pays the tax to a person selling the taxable property or service and receives from such person a purchaser's receipt within the meaning of section 510.


`(a) In General- Any person liable to collect and remit taxes pursuant to section 103(a) who is engaged in a trade or business shall register as a seller with the sales tax administering authority administering the taxes imposed by this subtitle.


JWK


It has been well said that

"the property which every man has in his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable. The patrimony of the poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his own hands, and to hinder his employing this strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property. It is a manifest encroachment upon the just liberty both of the workman and of those who might be disposed to employ him. As it hinders the one from working at what he thinks proper, so it hinders the others from employing whom they think proper." __ See Butchers' Union Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746 (1884) quoting Smith, Wealth of Nations, Bk. I, c. 10.

Ah. I finally understand. You're saying that business selling products and businesses selling services have to register and pay taxes. So instead of income taxes paid quarterly the FairTax levies sales taxes paid monthly.

It doesn't bother me.

 

[beowolfe]

"Mary and Joe also get to pay a new 23 percent tax upon their purchases under the alleged fairtax."

That statement should convince anyone reading your rant that you know absolutely NOTHING about the
fair tax.

I think we all know it won't be 'fair'. There is nothing fair about it. It's titled to the 'haves'. I say keep the system we have an let those who have taken more out of the till, pay more to fill it back up.

 

[johnwk]

JWK, I have a question.

What if all of the other federal taxes were repealed, and the Fair Tax was the only tax there?

Would you still oppose it then? I'm curious, as I'm trying to REALLY learn about our tax system much better.

No, I would not support the “fairtax” even if all of the other federal taxes were repealed, or to be more exact, withdrawn from Congress’ power to lay them and Congress were left with but one tax, the alleged fairtax. But there is a very good reason for my answer of “no” and it has to do with the big lie taught in government schools, that our Constitution made Blacks 3/5th of a person.

The historical fact is, the rule of apportionment, which has often been referred to as the founding father’s “Great Compromise” was intended to protect the people of the most productive states from being taxed by Congress disproportionately to their representation in Congress. This is what the 3/5th clause was all about, and not about making Blacks 3/5ths of a person. Let me explain.

Our founders intended for Congress to finance its expenditures from imposts and duties at our water‘s edge, and as a second means to fill the national treasury miscellaneous excise taxes on specifically chosen articles of consumption (indirect taxes) were permitted . But if these taxes were found insufficient to meet Congress expenditures, then, and only then was a general tax among the states allowed to be laid by Congress to equal and extinguish any shortfall created by Congress.

Our Constitution’s fair share formula for any general tax laid among the states, considering subsequent amendments to our Constitution, may be expressed as follows:



States’ population

---------------------------- X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE’S SHARE

Total U.S. Population

And keep in mind that each state’s representation in Congress is likewise determined by population size, the formula being:


State`s Pop.
___________ X House membership (435) = State`s No.of Reps
Pop. of U.S.



In fact, the rule of apportionment was specifically adopted to protect the people of the most productive States from being saddled with carrying the lion’s share of any general tax laid among the States without also being guaranteed a vote in Congress proportionately equal to their financial contribution!

Keep in mind our progressive crowd gave us the 16th Amendment which they intended to use to circumvent the rule of apportionment as applied to raising a federal revenue. However, their intentions were to keep alive the one man one vote part of our Constitution.

Socialists, “progressives”, and the friends of big government, especially in pinko states with large populations such as New York, California, Pennsylvania who have enormous voting strength in Congress are great at spending other people’s money and always demand their one man one vote part of the Constitution when it comes to spending from the federal treasury. But when it comes time to fill the national treasury in a general tax among the states they run and hide from the one vote one dollar part of the Constitution, which is also part of the apportionment formula and gave them their one man one vote.

The alleged fair tax, just as progressive income taxation now does, is designed to subjugate the rule of apportionment so that the people of those states who contribute the lion’s share under the alleged fair tax are not given their constitutionally guaranteed proportionate vote in Congress equal to their financial contribution. And this is what Mike Huckabee, Neal Boortz and Herman Cain hide from their listening audience___ our founding fathers intended rule requiring representation with proportional obligation whenever a general tax is laid among the states to fill the national treasury!

But let our founding fathers speak for themselves with regard to the rule of apportionment.

Pinckney addressing the S.C. ratification convention with regard to the rule of apportionment :


With regard to the general government imposing internal taxes upon us, he contended that it was absolutely necessary they should have such a power: requisitions had been in vain tried every year since the ratification of the old Confederation, and not a single state had paid the quota required of her. The general government could not abuse this power, and favor one state and oppress another, as each state was to be taxed only in proportion to its representation 4 Elliot‘s, S.C., 305-6

And see:

“The proportion of taxes are fixed by the number of inhabitants, and not regulated by the extent of the territory, or fertility of soil” 3 Elliot’s, 243,“Each state will know, from its population, its proportion of any general tax” 3 Elliot’s, 244 ___ Mr. George Nicholas, during the ratification debates of our Constitution.

Mr. Madison goes on to remark about Congress’s “general power of taxation” that, "they will be limited to fix the proportion of each State, and they must raise it in the most convenient and satisfactory manner to the public."3 Elliot, 255

And Mr. PENDLETON says:

“The apportionment of representation and taxation by the same scale is just; it removes the objection, that, while Virginia paid one sixth part of the expenses of the Union, she had no more weight in public counsels than Delaware, which paid but a very small portion”3 Elliot’s 41


What I support is adding the following 32 words to our Constitution which would bring us back to our Constitution’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as our founders intended it to operate.

The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money


Regards,

JWK

 

[asterism]

JWK, I have a question.

What if all of the other federal taxes were repealed, and the Fair Tax was the only tax there?

Would you still oppose it then? I'm curious, as I'm trying to REALLY learn about our tax system much better.

No, I would not support the “fairtax” even if all of the other federal taxes were repealed, or to be more exact, withdrawn from Congress’ power to lay them and Congress were left with but one tax, the alleged fairtax. But there is a very good reason for my answer of “no” and it has to do with the big lie taught in government schools, that our Constitution made Blacks 3/5th of a person.

The historical fact is, the rule of apportionment, which has often been referred to as the founding father’s “Great Compromise” was intended to protect the people of the most productive states from being taxed by Congress disproportionately to their representation in Congress. This is what the 3/5th clause was all about, and not about making Blacks 3/5ths of a person. Let me explain.

Our founders intended for Congress to finance its expenditures from imposts and duties at our water‘s edge, and as a second means to fill the national treasury miscellaneous excise taxes on specifically chosen articles of consumption (indirect taxes) were permitted . But if these taxes were found insufficient to meet Congress expenditures, then, and only then was a general tax among the states allowed to be laid by Congress to equal and extinguish any shortfall created by Congress.

Our Constitution’s fair share formula for any general tax laid among the states, considering subsequent amendments to our Constitution, may be expressed as follows:



States’ population

---------------------------- X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE’S SHARE

Total U.S. Population

And keep in mind that each state’s representation in Congress is likewise determined by population size, the formula being:


State`s Pop.
___________ X House membership (435) = State`s No.of Reps
Pop. of U.S.



In fact, the rule of apportionment was specifically adopted to protect the people of the most productive States from being saddled with carrying the lion’s share of any general tax laid among the States without also being guaranteed a vote in Congress proportionately equal to their financial contribution!

Keep in mind our progressive crowd gave us the 16th Amendment which they intended to use to circumvent the rule of apportionment as applied to raising a federal revenue. However, their intentions were to keep alive the one man one vote part of our Constitution.

Socialists, “progressives”, and the friends of big government, especially in pinko states with large populations such as New York, California, Pennsylvania who have enormous voting strength in Congress are great at spending other people’s money and always demand their one man one vote part of the Constitution when it comes to spending from the federal treasury. But when it comes time to fill the national treasury in a general tax among the states they run and hide from the one vote one dollar part of the Constitution, which is also part of the apportionment formula and gave them their one man one vote.

The alleged fair tax, just as progressive income taxation now does, is designed to subjugate the rule of apportionment so that the people of those states who contribute the lion’s share under the alleged fair tax are not given their constitutionally guaranteed proportionate vote in Congress equal to their financial contribution. And this is what Mike Huckabee, Neal Boortz and Herman Cain hide from their listening audience___ our founding fathers intended rule requiring representation with proportional obligation whenever a general tax is laid among the states to fill the national treasury!

But let our founding fathers speak for themselves with regard to the rule of apportionment.

Pinckney addressing the S.C. ratification convention with regard to the rule of apportionment :


With regard to the general government imposing internal taxes upon us, he contended that it was absolutely necessary they should have such a power: requisitions had been in vain tried every year since the ratification of the old Confederation, and not a single state had paid the quota required of her. The general government could not abuse this power, and favor one state and oppress another, as each state was to be taxed only in proportion to its representation 4 Elliot‘s, S.C., 305-6

And see:

“The proportion of taxes are fixed by the number of inhabitants, and not regulated by the extent of the territory, or fertility of soil” 3 Elliot’s, 243,“Each state will know, from its population, its proportion of any general tax” 3 Elliot’s, 244 ___ Mr. George Nicholas, during the ratification debates of our Constitution.

Mr. Madison goes on to remark about Congress’s “general power of taxation” that, "they will be limited to fix the proportion of each State, and they must raise it in the most convenient and satisfactory manner to the public."3 Elliot, 255

And Mr. PENDLETON says:

“The apportionment of representation and taxation by the same scale is just; it removes the objection, that, while Virginia paid one sixth part of the expenses of the Union, she had no more weight in public counsels than Delaware, which paid but a very small portion”3 Elliot’s 41


What I support is adding the following 32 words to our Constitution which would bring us back to our Constitution’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as our founders intended it to operate.

The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money


Regards,

JWK

So given the option of a consumption tax vs. an income tax you choose something else.

Okie dokie.

 

[johnwk]

There is no tax on property "which Mary and Joe have in their labor."

Maybe you missed it but when Mary and Joe as I have described them sell the property they have in their labor i.e. painting or cleaning someone’s home, they are required under the “fairtax” to give the federal government a 23 percent cut of the selling price of their labor, and, before selling the property they have in their labor they must register with government, and also file fairtax returns 12 times a year under the penalty of perjury, simply because they dare to sell the property they have in their labor.

Here are some of the specific fairtax provisions:

`(d) Liability for Tax-

`(1) IN GENERAL- The person using or consuming taxable property or services in the United States is liable for the tax imposed by this section, except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection.


`(2) EXCEPTION WHERE TAX PAID TO SELLER-A person using or consuming a taxable property or service in the United States is not liable for the tax imposed by this section if the person pays the tax to a person selling the taxable property or service and receives from such person a purchaser's receipt within the meaning of section 510.


`(a) In General- Any person liable to collect and remit taxes pursuant to section 103(a) who is engaged in a trade or business shall register as a seller with the sales tax administering authority administering the taxes imposed by this subtitle.


JWK


It has been well said that

"the property which every man has in his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable. The patrimony of the poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his own hands, and to hinder his employing this strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property. It is a manifest encroachment upon the just liberty both of the workman and of those who might be disposed to employ him. As it hinders the one from working at what he thinks proper, so it hinders the others from employing whom they think proper." __ See Butchers' Union Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746 (1884) quoting Smith, Wealth of Nations, Bk. I, c. 10.

Ah. I finally understand. You're saying that business selling products and businesses selling services have to register and pay taxes. So instead of income taxes paid quarterly the FairTax levies sales taxes paid monthly.

It doesn't bother me.

No, I am not saying that at all. I am talking specifically about ordinary working people who have full time jobs, such as Mary and Joe Sixpack as I have described them who work odd jobs in their neighborhood [cleaning homes, baby sitting, painting homes , cutting people’s lawns, handyman work, etc.] to earn extra cash to pay their bills having to give the federal government a 23 percent cut of the selling price of the property they have in their labor, and having to file “fairtax” returns 12 times a year under the penalty of perjury and keep any records and reports which Congress may dream up simply because they dare to sell the property they have in their labor. And in addition to having to give the federal government a 23 percent cut of the action when they sell their labor, Mary and Joe Sixpack will be paying an additional 23 percent tax on their purchases such as food, clothing, medical supplies, etc. And this doesn’t even take into account that Congress maintains power under the “fairtax” to lay and collect excise taxes which may be calculated from profits, gains, salaries and incomes, such as the tax calculated from incomes laid during the civil war, or the Corporate Excise Tax of 1909. And we know these Excise taxes will come because the “fairtax” creates an Excise Tax Bureau in addition to a Sales tax Bureau, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms will also be collecting taxes!

Bottom line is, the “fairtax” is a clever trap for a massive expansion of what Congress taxes. But don’t expect Mike Huckabee or Herman Cain to explain the fine print of H.R.25 to their captive audiences. Their mission is to give the Washington Establishment a helping hand in enlarging its iron fist over America’s businesses and working class people.

I take it you support this proposed massive expansion of what Congress may tax?


JWK


If we can make the majority of America’s families dependent upon a federal government check, [the alleged fair tax’s family consumption entitlement] we can then bribe them for their vote, keep ourselves in power and keep the remaining portion of America’s productive population enslaved to pay the bills ___Our Washington Establishment’s Marxist game plan, a plan to establish a federal plantation and redistribute the bread which America’s labor and business has produced.

 

[johnwk]

.



Just for the record, here is a list of Senators who are promoting the Fair Tax Act of 2011-2012, more appropriately called the Fair Tax Trap of 2012:


Sen Chambliss, Saxby [GA] who introduced the legislation and its five co-sponsors

Sen Burr, Richard [NC] - 1/25/2011
Sen Coburn, Tom [OK] - 1/25/2011
Sen DeMint, Jim [SC] - 1/25/2011
Sen Isakson, Johnny [GA] - 1/25/2011
Sen Moran, Jerry [KS] - 1/25/2011


And here is a list of House members who have supported the fairtax trap


Rep Adams, Sandy [FL-24] - 1/5/2011
Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] - 1/5/2011
Rep Alexander, Rodney [LA-5] - 1/11/2011
Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. [MD-6] - 1/5/2011
Rep Bilbray, Brian P. [CA-50] - 1/5/2011
Rep Bilirakis, Gus M. [FL-9] - 1/5/2011
Rep Bishop, Rob [UT-1] - 1/5/2011
Rep Boren, Dan [OK-2] - 1/5/2011
Rep Brooks, Mo [AL-5] - 1/5/2011
Rep Burton, Dan [IN-5] - 1/5/2011
Rep Carter, John R. [TX-31] - 1/5/2011
Rep Conaway, K. Michael [TX-11] - 1/5/2011
Rep Crenshaw, Ander [FL-4] - 1/5/2011
Rep Culberson, John Abney [TX-7] - 1/5/2011
Rep Duncan, Jeff [SC-3] - 1/5/2011
Rep Duncan, John J., Jr. [TN-2] - 1/5/2011
Rep Farenthold, Blake [TX-27] - 1/5/2011
Rep Flake, Jeff [AZ-6] - 1/5/2011
Rep Fleming, John [LA-4] - 1/11/2011
Rep Foxx, Virginia [NC-5] - 1/5/2011
Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] - 1/5/2011
Rep Granger, Kay [TX-12] - 1/6/2011
Rep Graves, Tom [GA-9] - 1/5/2011
Rep Hall, Ralph M. [TX-4] - 1/24/2011
Rep Huelskamp, Tim [KS-1] - 1/24/2011
Rep Issa, Darrell E. [CA-49] - 1/5/2011
Rep King, Steve [IA-5] - 1/5/2011
Rep Kingston, Jack [GA-1] - 1/5/2011
Rep Kline, John [MN-2] - 1/24/2011
Rep Lankford, James [OK-5] - 1/5/2011
Rep Long, Billy [MO-7] - 1/5/2011
Rep McCaul, Michael T. [TX-10] - 1/5/2011
Rep Mica, John L. [FL-7] - 1/5/2011
Rep Miller, Gary G. [CA-42] - 1/5/2011
Rep Miller, Jeff [FL-1] - 1/5/2011
Rep Myrick, Sue Wilkins [NC-9] - 1/5/2011
Rep Neugebauer, Randy [TX-19] - 1/5/2011
Rep Nugent, Richard [FL-5] - 1/5/2011
Rep Olson, Pete [TX-22] - 1/5/2011
Rep Pence, Mike [IN-6] - 1/5/2011
Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2] - 1/5/2011
Rep Pompeo, Mike [KS-4] - 1/5/2011
Rep Posey, Bill [FL-15] - 1/11/2011
Rep Price, Tom [GA-6] - 1/5/2011
Rep Ross, Dennis [FL-12] - 1/5/2011
Rep Scott, Tim [SC-1] - 1/5/2011
Rep Stearns, Cliff [FL-6] - 1/5/2011
Rep Stutzman, Marlin A. [IN-3] - 1/5/2011
Rep Sullivan, John [OK-1] - 1/5/2011
Rep Thornberry, Mac [TX-13] - 1/5/2011
Rep Walberg, Tim [MI-7] - 1/5/2011
Rep Westmoreland, Lynn A. [GA-3] - 1/5/2011
Rep Wittman, Robert J. [VA-1] - 1/5/2011
Rep Young, Don [AK] - 1/5/2011


Why on earth the above members of Congress support the fairtax trap is beyond human comprehension. I wonder if they even took the time to read and study the text of the proposed legislation.


JWK

If we can make the majority of America’s families dependent upon a federal government check, [the alleged fair tax’s family consumption entitlement] we can then bribe them for their vote, keep ourselves in power and keep the remaining portion of America’s productive population enslaved to pay the bills ___Our Washington Establishment’s Marxist game plan, a plan to establish a federal plantation and redistribute the bread which America’s labor and business has produced.