Should Citizens Pay Taxes? OK....How Much????

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Oct 6, 2008
126,733
62,558
2,300
Brooklyn, NY
1. To Democrats, worshippers of govenment, there are no limitations on what government can do to citizens. The Constituion is the only thing that stands in their way.
At ratification of the Constitution, the problem did not go unnoticed. They knew that some would use the phrase "general welfare" to mean anything. Madison tried to cut them off: the introduction stated that the government had the power to tax and spend what it accrued. The list of authorized powers of the federal government, Article 1, section 8,he said, summarized what the funds could be used for.

" Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars. But the idea of an enumeration of particulars which neither explain nor qualify the general meaning, and can have no other effect than to confound and mislead, is an absurdity, ... For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power?"
Federalist #41




2. William Drayton, in 1828, came down on the side of Madison, Jefferson and others, pointing out that if Hamilton was correct, what point would there have been to enumerate Congresses’ other powers?

If Congress wished to do anything it was not authorized to do, it could accomplish it via taxing and spending.

He said, "If Congress can determine what constitutes the general welfare and can appropriate money for its advancement, where is the limitation to carrying into execution whatever can be effected by money?" '
Charity Not a Proper Function of the American Government' by Walter E. Williams



3. The Democrats follow a very different view:
"The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation."
Lenin

"Democrats' Proposals Increase Taxes on Millions of Americans"​

https://www.finance.senate.gov › ranking-members-news
6 days ago — Millions of Americans making less than $400,000 per year would see tax hike. Washington, D.C.--The nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) ...



4. What if you find that based on Federal taxes, state taxes, local taxes, gas tax, sales tax, parking fees, license fees, speed cameras, tolls, hidden taxes of all sorts......
....and the most regressive and insidious tax, inflation.........amounted to more than half your income at least?
Taxation to the point of slavery......or, at least serfdom.




5. The Democrats actually started a war to maintain their right to own other human beings.
August 5th, 1861 American Civil War: In order to help pay for the war effort, the United States government issues the first income tax as part of the Revenue Act of 1861



How much should the Wehrmacht....Democrats.....take from earners to buy votes and stay in power?


How much?
 
There should be no income taxes. We shouldnt be taxed for contributing to the economy.
Money shouldnt be taxed multiple times either.
I would prefer a small federal sales tax.
If we had a constitutional federal govt, they wouldnt need to tax us so much.
But alas, American citizens are stupid and let the fed gov get away with whatever it wants.
 
There should be no income taxes. We shouldnt be taxed for contributing to the economy.
Money shouldnt be taxed multiple times either.
I would prefer a small federal sales tax.
If we had a constitutional federal govt, they wouldnt need to tax us so much.
But alas, American citizens are stupid and let the fed gov get away with whatever it wants.
I agree. In or around 1914, The United States Congress decided to change the Constitution to no taxation of Americans to taxation of everyone who lives on American turf.

We now have a majority of communists in charge of Congress which slaps down President Eisenhower's Anti-Communism Act of 1954. This is very bad, because we have an ARMY of gimme-gimme spendthrifts funding their pet projects with not thousands of dollars, but TRILLIONS of dollars. I looked up how long it would take an average person to count to a trillion, and here it is:
"A trillion is a thousand times more than a billion. Based on out calculated data above, it would take someone 280,000,000 hours / 11666666 days to count from 1 to a trillion. In years this would take 31,963 years of continuous counting for an ordinary human being to successfully count from 1 to a trillion."​
Let's face it, in a hundred years, 4 or 5 generations of a family exist, so it would take 4x320 = ~1280 generations to count to a trillion, considering they couldn't do anything else but a boring recitation of numbers the whole time of their life, succeeded by an equally boring recitation by that person's child.

I don't think the people who vote in trillion dollar bills have a single clue about how much a trillion dollars is. God save us from these current morons. They're scarey spenders.
 
There should be no income taxes. We shouldnt be taxed for contributing to the economy.
Money shouldnt be taxed multiple times either.
I would prefer a small federal sales tax.
If we had a constitutional federal govt, they wouldnt need to tax us so much.
But alas, American citizens are stupid and let the fed gov get away with whatever it wants.


I don't know about no taxes......there is some payment due for the enumerated powers, and how great this nation is......but I'll use this as a scale:


Joseph gathered very much grain: It seems it was customary for Pharaoh to take 10% of the grain in Egypt as a tax. Essentially, Joseph doubled the taxes over the next seven years (Genesis 41:34 mentions one-fifth, that is, 20%).



That 20% figure appears again in the relationship of colonists to North America, and the English crown "....colonists were free to retain all the profits and fruits of their labor save for the crown's 20 percent share of any gold and silver discovered." "Freedom Just Around the Corner: A New American History: 1585-1828," by Walter A. McDougall, p.33
 
I don't know about no taxes......there is some payment due for the enumerated powers, and how great this nation is......but I'll use this as a scale:


Joseph gathered very much grain: It seems it was customary for Pharaoh to take 10% of the grain in Egypt as a tax. Essentially, Joseph doubled the taxes over the next seven years (Genesis 41:34 mentions one-fifth, that is, 20%).



That 20% figure appears again in the relationship of colonists to North America, and the English crown "....colonists were free to retain all the profits and fruits of their labor save for the crown's 20 percent share of any gold and silver discovered." "Freedom Just Around the Corner: A New American History: 1585-1828," by Walter A. McDougall, p.33
Thats where the small federal sales tax comes in.
 
We should be taxed enough to cover what our government spends.

It is immoral to keep giving our debt to our children and grandchildren.
 
6. The Civil War produced the first tax on personal income: the Revenue Act of 1861. Interestingly, it was called an ‘indirect’ tax, defined as taxing an ‘event:’ a tax on the event of receiving income….therefore it didn’t have to be ‘apportioned,’ merely imposed uniformly throughout all areas “not in rebellion.”

The tax was moderately progressive, 3% on all income over $800. This meant that most workers didn’t have to pay any tax.
Revenue Act of 1861 - Wikipedia



The following year, due to a greater need, Congress increased both the rates and the progressivity. The exemption was lowered to $600 @ 3%, and a new 5% on income over $10,000. This, then was the first “progressive,” not flat tax. The law also imposed a duty on paymasters to deduct and withhold the income tax, and to send the withheld tax to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
Revenue Act of 1862 - Wikipedia



After the war exemptions were increased, and rates lowered, and in 1872, the tax was abolished.

On February 26, 1848, Marx and Engels published the Communist Manifesto.

Don't miss the connection.


But, having had a taste of taking and using free money, politicians passed more than 60 bills designed to reinstate the income tax over the next 20 years.
David G. Davies, “United States Taxes and Tax Policy,” p. 22.
 
1659707843946.png
 
There should be no income taxes. We shouldnt be taxed for contributing to the economy.
Money shouldnt be taxed multiple times either.
I would prefer a small federal sales tax.
If we had a constitutional federal govt, they wouldnt need to tax us so much.
But alas, American citizens are stupid and let the fed gov get away with whatever it wants.
8c872a352236437eb749a726b70ce474--irs-tax-tax-preparation.jpg
 
7. The publication of Marx’s opus in 1848 was neither the start nor the end of the movement designed to gain power by taking from earners and spreading the money to others for their votes.



Socialist, Populist, and Progressive movements
paralleled this move, and this desire based on “taxing the rich.” In 1894, the Democrat-controlled Congress passed a bill that included a flat income tax…but part included taxes on income from real estate and personal property, and this triggered a court challenge as a direct tax infracting the Constitution’s apportionment rule,…



Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429 (1895), aff'd on reh'g, 158 U.S. 601 (1895), with a ruling of 5–4, was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the unapportioned income taxes on interest, dividends and rents imposed by the Income Tax Act of 1894 were, in effect, direct taxes, and were unconstitutional because they violated the provision that direct taxes be apportioned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollock_v._Farmers'_Loan_%26_Trust_Co.




Interesting decision, since the same principles had been upheld vis-à-vis the 1861 Revenue Act…. Springer v. United States, 102 U.S. 586 (1881),[1] was a case in which the United States Supreme Court upheld the Federal income tax imposed under the Revenue Act of 1864.
Springer v. United States - Wikipedia







The Progressives were horrified!

They had been focused on forcing the “money class” to pay “in proportion to their ability to pay…’ which, essentially was the first half of “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs - Wikipediao

Where have you seen that phrase before?



The Progressives launched a campaign designed to reverse this decision, and that culminated with the ratification of the 16th Amendment, in 1913.
 
Because threatening people with the use of physical force if they don't pay up is very civilized.

You must be doing something wrong
I have never been threatened with physical force
 
We should be taxed enough to cover what our government spends.

It is immoral to keep giving our debt to our children and grandchildren.
The problem is fiscal conservatives kick the can down the road for decades. Never to repair, renew or replace roads, damns, bridges, tunnels or annually flooding rivers. That is leaving the dangers of rusting infrastructures to our children & grandchildren; as well as this metaphor: The higher costs of letting a leak in the roof of the house until the roof collapsed and destroys everything in the house.
 

Forum List

Back
Top