Why don't you want to tax the rich?

[Soupnazi630]

I knew you couldnt back it up. 5% income tax wouldnt cover what we are spending on the military. You can live in the woods for free but you dont. Why? Cause you'd rather pay for a nice home and car. We've chosen our expenses. The only question is how you pay for it. Even if you cut the expenses you still owe $30 Trillion and no flat tax can address the reality of our situation.

I did back it up

You are assuming we have to have the same size government. We do not

Yes it can and I have proven that You are going in circles

 

[Dekster]

If you are opposed, why?

Why do you oppose aggressive taxation of people making more than $250,000+ a year or $400,000+ a year annually?

I would treat all income equally by doing away with long-term gains, forced depreciation, and would tax dividends as same as if earned income.

 

[dblack]

No they do not

They only have to provide what their voting base wants which may in fact be out of step with everyone else and usually is

They can try to do that, but it's pointless. Passing laws with no consensus means they'll just get repealed, or otherwise neutralized, when the 'other side' is in power. It's a really stupid way to run the government.

 

[rightwinger]

I did back it up

You are assuming we have to have the same size government. We do not

Yes it can and I have proven that You are going in circles

Can you identify the government functions you want to cut?

 

[hadit]

Only thing a super majority is called for is impeachment

No, amending the Constitution should be difficult to do, otherwise it would be done every time a different party held the majority.

 

[Nostra]

Very true

Now, tell us what you are talking about and specifically what you want changed

ZERO out every budget for every Government entity. Then make them show up and cite the specific clause of the Constitution that allows the Fed govt to spend money on what they claim to do. Then a separate vote to see if it needs to be done.

The “General Welfare” clause can’t be used for anything that doesn’t fall under the very limited definition used by the Founding Fathers.


Enumerationist View: James Madison championed this, arguing the "general welfare" referred only to the specific enumerated powers (like defense, commerce, borrowing) that followed the Clause, making it a preamble to those specific powers, not a separate grant

 

[rightwinger]

No, amending the Constitution should be difficult to do, otherwise it would be done every time a different party held the majority.

Constitution has not been amended for 33 years and that was for a trivial Congress can’t give themselves raises

Since that time, we no longer have a bipartisan Congress capable of passing basic legislation let alone amending the Constitution

 

[BrokeLoser]

Can you identify the government functions you want to cut?

All that punish and force productive Americans to pay for the pathetic lives of ALL the filthy pieces of worthless dogshit living among us?

 

[hadit]

Constitution has not been amended for 33 years and that was for a trivial Congress can’t give themselves raises

Since that time, we no longer have a bipartisan Congress capable of passing basic legislation let alone amending the Constitution

And it should remain a supermajority requirement to change the Constitution. We simply can't afford to give Chuck U Schumer the power to ram through an amendment on a bare majority vote. Requiring that the states agree as well was a stroke of genius.

 

[DGS49]

The powers of Congress to spend our money are detailed in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment states that a if a power is not granted to the Feds in the Constitution, then it is reserved to the States and the private sector.

Show me where Congress gets the power to spend my money on:

• Food for individuals,
• Housing,
• Healthcare for anyone other than the Armed Forces and, by implication, Veterans,
• Education,
• Saving the planet.

I won't hold my breath.

Balancing the Federal budget is a simple as just following the rules.

 

[rightwinger]

All that punish and force productive Americans to pay for the pathetic lives of ALL the filthy pieces of worthless dogshit living among us?

Ok
That’s a good start

Get rid of poor people

What else you got?

 

[rightwinger]

The powers of Congress to spend our money are detailed in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment states that a if a power is not granted to the Feds in the Constitution, then it is reserved to the States and the private sector.

Show me where Congress gets the power to spend my money on:

• Food for individuals,
• Housing,
• Healthcare for anyone other than the Armed Forces and, by implication, Veterans,
• Education,
• Saving the planet.

I won't hold my breath.

Balancing the Federal budget is a simple as just following the rules.

General Welfare

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I would treat all income equally by doing away with long-term gains, forced depreciation, and would tax dividends as same as if earned income.

What's "forced depreciation"?
Why would you get rid of it?

 

[hadit]

General Welfare

How was that defined by the writers of the Constitution?

 

[rightwinger]

How was that defined by the writers of the Constitution?

It provides Congress wide latitude in doing what needs to be done for We the People

 

[Nostra]

General Welfare

That is narrowly defined to powers specifically enumerated by the Constitution.

Show us tranny comic books for Iran in the Constitution.

ENUMERATION View: James Madison championed this, arguing the "general welfare" referred only to the specific enumerated powers (like defense, commerce, borrowing) that followed the Clause, making it a preamble to those specific powers, not a separate grant

 

[Hafar1014]

It provides Congress wide latitude in doing what needs to be done for We the People

So how come de crats voted against the biggest tax cut for the middle class and fight to the death to keep illegal criminals in the country. Illegals are not we the people

 

[Nostra]

It provides Congress wide latitude in doing what needs to be done for We the People

No, it does exactly the opposite. You are a clueless hack, Trollwinger.

 

[Nostra]

How was that defined by the writers of the Constitution?

Enumerationist View: James Madison championed this, arguing the "general welfare" referred only to the specific enumerated powers (like defense, commerce, borrowing) that followed the Clause, making it a preamble to those specific powers, not a separate grant

 

[hadit]

It provides Congress wide latitude in doing what needs to be done for We the People

How did the people who wrote it define it?