Taxation without Representation - is it OK? Poll

[OohPooPahDoo]

Undoubtedly you would also want to be consistent then and bar all residents of DC from any Federal funding, any Federal jobs, etc?

I'm sorry but I don't recall them chanting "No government benefits without representation" at the Boston Tea Party.

I'm merely trying to be consistent with what is probably our biggest reason for separating from Great Britain. Don't you think its a bit hypocritical to shed blood over "no taxation without representation" and then proceeding to tax people without representation?

Tell me, were people in Hawaii and Alaska exempt from Federal income tax before they became states?

There is nothing at all consistent about your reasoning.

I don't know. Were they?


Puerto Rico is not a state. They don't pay federal income tax.




Your position is now:
"Taxation without Representation is not OK except when I say so!"

????


Do you wanna tell me what part of the Declaration of Indepedence is it that says only men that live in a state have full rights?

 

[The Rabbi]

The 24th amendment shit for brains.

That's a tax specifically for the right to vote, dumbshit.
Fail.
A little knowledge is a stupid thing.

See above

Do you see that big fat OR?

Sorry, but do the writers of this amendment have to get in a time machine, come to today, and beat you with it to get you to understand their point? Do understand that the phrase "poll tax or other tax" is meant to include ALL taxes are you just a big fat idiot?

So now you're a constitutional lawyer? Like Obama I guess.
The word OR still indicates a tax specifically for voting. Not the general income tax.
Fail.

 

[RockyRacoon]

How about representation without taxation? WIth over 50% of income earners not paying taxes should they be entitled to vote?

Bullshit!!!! Everybody pays taxes one way or another.

 

[Artevelde]

I'm sorry but I don't recall them chanting "No government benefits without representation" at the Boston Tea Party.

I'm merely trying to be consistent with what is probably our biggest reason for separating from Great Britain. Don't you think its a bit hypocritical to shed blood over "no taxation without representation" and then proceeding to tax people without representation?

Tell me, were people in Hawaii and Alaska exempt from Federal income tax before they became states?

There is nothing at all consistent about your reasoning.

I don't know. Were they?


Puerto Rico is not a state. They don't pay federal income tax.




Your position is now:
"Taxation without Representation is not OK except when I say so!"

????


Do you wanna tell me what part of the Declaration of Indepedence is it that says only men that live in a state have full rights?

Do you really feel an urgent need to ridicule yourself? You do know that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are two different things, right?

And the one who says it's not OK except when I say so is you. You feel that non-citizens and corporations should be taxed without being able to vote.

As for my position: I see no reason to change the Constitution as it stands on this point.

 

[Leweman]

taxation without representation happens when the person representing you does so against the interests you are in favor of. But still you have to pay taxes. taxation without representation technically happens all the time if you think about it.

 

[Vel]

The 24th amendment says you can't be denied the vote for national office for not paying a tax.

Which part of the Constitution says Congress must tax people that aren't represented in Congress?

Which part of the Constitution says other territories than the States should be represented in Congress?

None. Where did I ever say DC should be represented in Congress? If you could read English you'd understand my suggested remedy would be to not levy a tax on residents of DC.

Sounds fine to me as long as they take no benefits derived from the federal tax. No EIC payments and other direct redistribution of federal taxes.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

That's a tax specifically for the right to vote, dumbshit.
Fail.
A little knowledge is a stupid thing.

See above

Do you see that big fat OR?

Sorry, but do the writers of this amendment have to get in a time machine, come to today, and beat you with it to get you to understand their point? Do understand that the phrase "poll tax or other tax" is meant to include ALL taxes are you just a big fat idiot?

So now you're a constitutional lawyer? Like Obama I guess.

Yeah right I've got a law degree from Harvard sure. Man you are dumb as rocks.

The word OR still indicates a tax specifically for voting. Not the general income tax.
Fail.

Jesus fucking Christ, can you read English? It says "or OTHER tax" Are you a fucking moron or something? You are telling me the phrase means "poll taxes or other poll taxes" ? How fucking stupid would that be?

Not to mention the fact that the income tax becomes a poll tax when you make it a condition for voting numb nuts By your moronic interpretation the entire 24th amendment is toothless because all you need to do to get around it is just call your "poll tax" something else.

I'm really sorry your dream of rule by oligarchy isn't allowed by the Constitution.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

How about representation without taxation? WIth over 50% of income earners not paying taxes should they be entitled to vote?

Bullshit!!!! Everybody pays taxes one way or another.

Its funny how corporate taxes get passed down to the consumer - unless, apparently, the consumer is poor.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

taxation without representation happens when the person representing you does so against the interests you are in favor of. But still you have to pay taxes. taxation without representation technically happens all the time if you think about it.

That's not the definition the Founders operated on. Its one you just invented for the purposes of constructing a lame ass argument. Representation in Congress doesn't mean you get your way 100% of the time.

 

[Two Thumbs]

anyone?

I personally think the residents of DC should not have to pay federal income tax. They have no voting representation in Congress - they should not be taxed by Congress. THe Constitution certainly alows for it but it goes against everything this nation was founded on.

interesting

The only thing they don't get from the Fed is the right to vote on the Fed level.

Like PR and other terrirtories

If they don't get taxed they don't get welfare or other benefits.

fair enough?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The only thing they don't get from the Fed is the right to vote on the Fed level.

The same being said of British Pariliament was enough to cause our Founders to rise up and take blood, was it not?

 

[Two Thumbs]

The only thing they don't get from the Fed is the right to vote on the Fed level.

The same being said of British Pariliament was enough to cause our Founders to rise up and take blood, was it not?

Vast difference.

We fully support DC and our territories

They don't have different taxes.

England didn't and we did.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

We fully support DC and our territories

Define "fully support"

They don't have different taxes.

So its "no taxation without representation unless those taxes are the same as paid by those who are represented!"

Is that what they were chanting at the Boston Tea Party?

 

[Vast LWC]

You're not really very bright I guess.

Tell me, how many representatives in Congress did the US citizens who lived in the various territories have before they became states? Oh yes, zero.

The various territories had yet not qualified for statehood, or had not applied for statehood, like in the case of Puerto Rico.

The residents of DC have been asking for statehood for some time now, and there is no reason to disqualify them.

And, as for your "they can move to another state" suggestion, DC could just as easily be represented nationally as part of Virginia.

Of course, that would make Virginia blue as Massachusetts, LOL.

 

[Vast LWC]

Vast difference.

We fully support DC and our territories

They don't have different taxes.

England didn't and we did.

That makes no sense at all.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Taxation without Representation - is it OK? Poll

pending....

Funny thing, Congress could easily solve this the same way they solved the problem with forts and other federal territories, yet they prefer to whine about it.

I wonder why.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

You're not really very bright I guess.

Tell me, how many representatives in Congress did the US citizens who lived in the various territories have before they became states? Oh yes, zero.

The various territories had yet not qualified for statehood, or had not applied for statehood, like in the case of Puerto Rico.

The residents of DC have been asking for statehood for some time now, and there is no reason to disqualify them.

And, as for your "they can move to another state" suggestion, DC could just as easily be represented nationally as part of Virginia.

Of course, that would make Virginia blue as Massachusetts, LOL.

I think you mean Maryland. All of Present day DC was once part of Maryland.


I think the best way to handle it would be to return all the residential parts of DC to the state of Maryland. If Maryland doesn't want them, then they can form their own state if they wish.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

anyone?

I personally think the residents of DC should not have to pay federal income tax. They have no voting representation in Congress - they should not be taxed by Congress. THe Constitution certainly alows for it but it goes against everything this nation was founded on.

Actually DC does have membership in Congress thanks to an amendment in 1961 I believe.

 

[Charles_Main]

Taxation without Representation - is it OK? Poll

pending....

Are we actually asking this Question in the Nation that Fought a Revolution over it? Really?

It's Never ok. I have always said DC should have Full Representation in Congress. Whether you call it a State or not is not Important so long as they have Representation.

 

[Charles_Main]

anyone?

I personally think the residents of DC should not have to pay federal income tax. They have no voting representation in Congress - they should not be taxed by Congress. THe Constitution certainly alows for it but it goes against everything this nation was founded on.

Actually DC does have membership in Congress thanks to an amendment in 1961 I believe.

They Have Symbolic NONE voting Membership.