Income tax

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by RetiredGySgt, Oct 5, 2007.

  1. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,584
    Thanks Received:
    5,906
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +9,010
    I did not like paying Federal Income tax when I had to ( all my income now is tax exempt) but this ludicrous claim the federal Government does not have the authority to tax is getting old.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071005/ap_on_re_us/tax_evaders_arrested

    The 16th Amendment to the Constitution allows taxation on income, clarifying the power and specificly granted the power to Congress.

    http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am16.html
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Is the 16th Amendment itself Constitutional? The original Constitution allows for the owning of slaves, so it is not an infallible document.

    And yeah, I have a BIG problem with my taxes supporting the bureaucracy in DC, and or ensuring some do-nothing has high-speed internet and cable TV.
     
  3. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,584
    Thanks Received:
    5,906
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +9,010
    Of course it is Constitutional , any amendment ratified by the people becomes binding and part of the Constitution. And slavery had to be barred BY the Constitution since it was allowed by it prior.

    http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A5.html

    the only permanent exception being that no State may be denied its right to 2 Senators.
     
  4. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Wonder how a vote to repeal it would go nowadays since I'd bet money "the people" had no idea what kind of monster they were creating. Probably got some "it's only for this or that" line to get it passed.
     
  5. Little-Acorn
    Offline

    Little-Acorn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    8,384
    Thanks Received:
    2,028
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings:
    +5,885
    Gunny, that would be like coming off heroin "cold turkey". The shock would be so great, it would kill the patient. Even though the drug certainly isn't good for the patient in the first place.

    Rather than repealing the 16th, I'd suggest repealing automatic tax withholding. The people paying taxes would see their paychecks jump immediately... but then they'd get a NASTY surprise on April 15th, in the form of a bill from gov.org for the full amount of that year's taxes. They would then know exactly how much all this wonderful govenment is really costing them.

    I can think of no better way to reduce taxes, than this kind of "full disclosure" to the people. You can bet they'd examine VERY carefully, and liberal attempts to raise taxes starting at that point.

    BTW, I believe the anti-income-tax people's current gripe, isn't that the 16th is unconstitutional. Thei gripe is that the laws subsequently passed by Congress that actually establishes the income tax (the 16th just PERMITS income taxes, it didn't actually create one, Congress must do that), charged incoe taxes only Americans living overseas. It did not impose them on American citizens living here. Congress could change that (completely legally) by simply passing another law saying "all Americans are subject to this tax"... but their point is, COngress never did that.

    They haven't a chance. Congress created the IRS, and the IRS charged the tax. Further, it's been going on for many decades now, and judges will rule that possession is 9/10 of the law, if you will.

    I don't like income taxes any more than you do. But the people insisting they are illegal, are pretty much wrong.
     
  6. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,560
    Thanks Received:
    13,013
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,439
    If something is in the Constitution, it is, by definition, Constitutional (meaning authorized by the Constitution). It doesn't mean it's right, wrong or indifferent, it's just an outline for the minimum protections to which individual rights are entitled and the maximum power which can be exercised by government.
     
  7. jasendorf
    Offline

    jasendorf Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,015
    Thanks Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +76
    My biggest problem with federal taxation is that such a disproportionate amount of it goes back to red states. Red states are the welfare states of the land with blue states being their benefactors.

    http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/266.html
     
  8. indago
    Offline

    indago VIP Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,057
    Thanks Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +183
    GunnyL wrote:
    Congressman George W. Fithian of Illinois declared: "An income tax places burdens upon accumulated wealth, where they can be most easily borne. It is right, because it exacts tribute of accumulation and not of endeavor. ...The artisan who goes forth to labor for his daily bread must pay upon the tools he works with; the brickmason upon his trowel, the carpenter upon his chisel and plane, the wood-chopper upon his ax, the miner upon his pick, and so on through all the list of wage-earners, yet none escape taxes upon what they eat and wear."

    Congressman T. J. Hudson of Kansas declared: "an income tax will not touch a hair upon the head of a laboring man in the United States."

    Mr. James C. Carter, an attorney, and a most respected member of the bar of New York, arguing before the Supreme Court of the United States for his client, Continental Trust Co., and for the governments' new income tax, 28 Stat. 509, 553, summed up the efforts of the lawmakers: "The view taken by the Congress which passed the tax law in question is plain on its face. The object was to redress in some degree the flagrant inequality by which the great mass of the people were made to furnish nearly all the revenue, and leave the very wealthy classes to furnish very little of it in comparison with their means. Of course, nothing, therefore, was to be taken from the wages of labor, or from very small incomes proceeding from other sources than labor."

    The "income tax" was enacted to lighten the burden of taxation upon the working man. But there are those who not only pay a tax upon their tools, clothing, and etc., they also pay a tax that "was enacted to lighten the burden of taxation upon the working man", and further, they argue vehemently in favor of doing so, and belittle the enlightened.
     
  9. Threedee
    Offline

    Threedee Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    Messages:
    53
    Thanks Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Ratings:
    +4
    I believe the "argument" about the 16th Amendment centers around whether or not it was ever legitimately ratified. There are two ways to ratify, and obviously it met one of the two standards, but that has never prevented a few losers from denying the facts.
     
  10. workingevolutio
    Offline

    workingevolutio Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2007
    Messages:
    17
    Thanks Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +2
    Well, no one likes income tax. No one likes taxes in general. But taxes are pretty much a sure thing--kind of like death (sorry to reference the old, cliche phrase, but it's true). You have to pay them. Is it in the constitution? Yeah. Is the constitution fallible? Yeah. But does it matter? Taxation has been around for a long, long time. There's no point in trying to fight it now. The least you could do is move to a state that doesn't have a state income tax. At least you'll beat it part way, right?
     

Share This Page