[POLL] - Liberals, how much is a "fair share?" - Taxes

[ShawnChris13]

Well gee BriPat, it sounds like you'd like to have the option to chose between public and private in this case. You'd think that some enterprising individual would come along and propose just such a thing seeing how government cant do anything right and all. Why do you think they don't?

BriPat only has one solution. Do nothing and hope that someone will figure out how to make money solving the problem. If that doesn't work, do more nothing.





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

If that doesn't work then it's not a problem people are willing to pay to have solved.

Not all problems can be fixed with money. Some problems are caused by money. If only Tesla had finished that wireless energy tower...

 

[JoeNormal]

Joe called me a moron, but he only proved that he's one. He thinks private fire protection services don't exist. He also equate opposition to being force to pay for the government brand as a desire not to want the product at all.

It takes a special kind of stupid to be a liberal.

Well gee BriPat, it sounds like you'd like to have the option to chose between public and private in this case. You'd think that some enterprising individual would come along and propose just such a thing seeing how government cant do anything right and all. Why do you think they don't?

They don't because they are already paying for the government product. What I am asking for is to quit being forced to pay for the government product. If consumers had a choice, there wouldn't be any government run fire departments.

I don't think that's the way they feel about healthcare. A majority of Americans wanted Medicare for all. Of course the insurance companies made sure that never happened.

 

[bripat9643]

Well gee BriPat, it sounds like you'd like to have the option to chose between public and private in this case. You'd think that some enterprising individual would come along and propose just such a thing seeing how government cant do anything right and all. Why do you think they don't?

They don't because they are already paying for the government product. What I am asking for is to quit being forced to pay for the government product. If consumers had a choice, there wouldn't be any government run fire departments.

I don't think that's the way they feel about healthcare. A majority of Americans wanted Medicare for all. Of course the insurance companies made sure that never happened.

Whenever the public doesn't go along with the liberal agenda it's always because of some sinister corporate plot.

I'm not talking about people voting for some government program. I'm talking about each consumer individually having the choice of whether to pay for and receive the government product or some other product, just like when they buy a car. If they had such a choice, then government "services" would disappear.

 

[PMZ]

911, this is Fred on Main St. My house is on fire.

You're in luck tonight Fred there are three private companies competing for your business. Hold and they will in turn talk to you.

Hello Fred, this is the ABC company and we're proud to announce our Spring sale. 99 gallons of water on your fire for $99.99. A price that can't be beat.

But I don't know if that will put out my fire.

That’s why we offer our extended warranty plan. Whatever it takes to put out the fire will be applied for the bargain prices of $55,000.

Are you nuts? That’s outrageous.

Fred, your house is burning and you're negotiating. Isn't that penny smart and pound foolish?

But maybe there's a better deal.

Well Fred, we can't just respond without a contract. We just got a call from Harry on Aristocrat St and he's agreed to pay us more. Sorry Fred.


The conservative improvement plan for America.

 

[ShawnChris13]

911, this is Fred on Main St. My house is on fire.

You're in luck tonight Fred there are three private companies competing for your business. Hold and they will in turn talk to you.

Hello Fred, this is the ABC company and we're proud to announce our Spring sale. 99 gallons of water on your fire for $99.99. A price that can't be beat.

But I don't know if that will put out my fire.

That’s why we offer our extended warranty plan. Whatever it takes to put out the fire will be applied for the bargain prices of $55,000.

Are you nuts? That’s outrageous.

Fred, your house is burning and you're negotiating. Isn't that penny smart and pound foolish?

But maybe there's a better deal.

Well Fred, we can't just respond without a contract. We just got a call from Harry on Aristocrat St and he's agreed to pay us more. Sorry Fred.


The conservative improvement plan for America.

Is this why people argue forever about things that could be finished so quickly?

That's the worst scenario anyone could come up with and you pose hat as a serious situation? No one is suggesting something like that and you know it. Why waste time blowing smoke out your ass?

 

[PMZ]

911, this is Fred on Main St. My house is on fire.

You're in luck tonight Fred there are three private companies competing for your business. Hold and they will in turn talk to you.

Hello Fred, this is the ABC company and we're proud to announce our Spring sale. 99 gallons of water on your fire for $99.99. A price that can't be beat.

But I don't know if that will put out my fire.

That’s why we offer our extended warranty plan. Whatever it takes to put out the fire will be applied for the bargain prices of $55,000.

Are you nuts? That’s outrageous.

Fred, your house is burning and you're negotiating. Isn't that penny smart and pound foolish?

But maybe there's a better deal.

Well Fred, we can't just respond without a contract. We just got a call from Harry on Aristocrat St and he's agreed to pay us more. Sorry Fred.


The conservative improvement plan for America.

Is this why people argue forever about things that could be finished so quickly?

That's the worst scenario anyone could come up with and you pose hat as a serious situation? No one is suggesting something like that and you know it. Why waste time blowing smoke out your ass?

You are not paying attention here.

 

[ShawnChris13]

911, this is Fred on Main St. My house is on fire.

You're in luck tonight Fred there are three private companies competing for your business. Hold and they will in turn talk to you.

Hello Fred, this is the ABC company and we're proud to announce our Spring sale. 99 gallons of water on your fire for $99.99. A price that can't be beat.

But I don't know if that will put out my fire.

That’s why we offer our extended warranty plan. Whatever it takes to put out the fire will be applied for the bargain prices of $55,000.

Are you nuts? That’s outrageous.

Fred, your house is burning and you're negotiating. Isn't that penny smart and pound foolish?

But maybe there's a better deal.

Well Fred, we can't just respond without a contract. We just got a call from Harry on Aristocrat St and he's agreed to pay us more. Sorry Fred.


The conservative improvement plan for America.

Is this why people argue forever about things that could be finished so quickly?

That's the worst scenario anyone could come up with and you pose hat as a serious situation? No one is suggesting something like that and you know it. Why waste time blowing smoke out your ass?

You are not paying attention here.

You're using a fake scenario that wouldn't happen to prove your point. How has that advanced your argument. I'll make up a skit about aliens eating chocolate and buying expensive cars but that has the same bearing on renal debate as your scenario.

 

[bripat9643]

911, this is Fred on Main St. My house is on fire.

You're in luck tonight Fred there are three private companies competing for your business. Hold and they will in turn talk to you.

Hello Fred, this is the ABC company and we're proud to announce our Spring sale. 99 gallons of water on your fire for $99.99. A price that can't be beat.

But I don't know if that will put out my fire.

That’s why we offer our extended warranty plan. Whatever it takes to put out the fire will be applied for the bargain prices of $55,000.

Are you nuts? That’s outrageous.

Fred, your house is burning and you're negotiating. Isn't that penny smart and pound foolish?

But maybe there's a better deal.

Well Fred, we can't just respond without a contract. We just got a call from Harry on Aristocrat St and he's agreed to pay us more. Sorry Fred.


The conservative improvement plan for America.

Is this why people argue forever about things that could be finished so quickly?

That's the worst scenario anyone could come up with and you pose hat as a serious situation? No one is suggesting something like that and you know it. Why waste time blowing smoke out your ass?

PMS is too stupid to figure out how a private fire service would work. I'm certain Obama's healthcare website doesn't work because the work is being performed by morons like PMS.

 

[bripat9643]

911, this is Fred on Main St. My house is on fire.

You're in luck tonight Fred there are three private companies competing for your business. Hold and they will in turn talk to you.

Hello Fred, this is the ABC company and we're proud to announce our Spring sale. 99 gallons of water on your fire for $99.99. A price that can't be beat.

But I don't know if that will put out my fire.

That’s why we offer our extended warranty plan. Whatever it takes to put out the fire will be applied for the bargain prices of $55,000.

Are you nuts? That’s outrageous.

Fred, your house is burning and you're negotiating. Isn't that penny smart and pound foolish?

But maybe there's a better deal.

Well Fred, we can't just respond without a contract. We just got a call from Harry on Aristocrat St and he's agreed to pay us more. Sorry Fred.


The conservative improvement plan for America.

Is this why people argue forever about things that could be finished so quickly?

That's the worst scenario anyone could come up with and you pose hat as a serious situation? No one is suggesting something like that and you know it. Why waste time blowing smoke out your ass?

You are not paying attention here.

Yes he is. That's how he knows you're a moron who probably has difficulty tying his shoes in the morning, let alone running a private fire department.

 

[RKMBrown]

Is this why people argue forever about things that could be finished so quickly?

That's the worst scenario anyone could come up with and you pose hat as a serious situation? No one is suggesting something like that and you know it. Why waste time blowing smoke out your ass?

You are not paying attention here.

You're using a fake scenario that wouldn't happen to prove your point. How has that advanced your argument. I'll make up a skit about aliens eating chocolate and buying expensive cars but that has the same bearing on renal debate as your scenario.

That's all scumbags like PMZ have. They draw up straw-man arguments that all conservatives are rich evil money hoarding crooks, then ask you to provide support for their straw-man. All the while these scumbags like PMZ rape and pillage the paychecks of hard working Americans.

But hey PMZ is smart after all he hired and fired a couple people once, while being paid by an evil rich bastard conservative.

 

[uhkilleez]

Notice that your definition doesn't make any claims that it must be defined by law.

Correct, because it is the legal definition. You should notice there was no opposition by your opposition.

 

[uhkilleez]

Congress is granted power to lay and collect internal “excise” taxes. This power, as intended by our founders allows Congress to lay and collect a tax upon specifically chosen articles of consumption, preferable specifically selected articles of luxury.

Hamilton stresses in Federalist No 21 regarding taxes on articles of consumption:

“There is no method of steering clear of this inconvenience, but by authorizing the national government to raise its own revenues in its own way. Imposts, excises, and, in general, all duties upon articles of consumption, 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 at his own option, and can be regulated by an attention to his 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. If inequalities should arise in some States from duties on particular objects, these will, in all probability, be counter balanced by proportional inequalities in other States, from the duties on other objects. In the course of time and things, an equilibrium, as far as it is attainable in so complicated a subject, will be established everywhere. Or, if inequalities should still exist, they would neither be so great in their degree, so uniform in their operation, nor so odious in their appearance, as those which would necessarily spring from quotas, upon any scale that can possibly be devised.


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 cannot be exceeded without defeating the end proposed, that is, an extension of the revenue. When applied to this object, the saying is as just as it is witty, that, "in political arithmetic, two and two do not always make four .'' If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when they are confined within proper and moderate bounds. This forms a complete barrier against any material oppression of the citizens by taxes of this class, and is itself a natural limitation of the power of imposing them.” /

I will ask you once more, how does this differ from a flat tax of the national GDP? The answer is simple, indirect taxes make for more complicated codes which are consequently more easily taken advantage of, especially by those whom are already "rich".

Let us say for conversation purposes that Congress is only allowed to raise its revenue by selecting specific articles of luxury and placing a specific amount of tax on each article selected. The flow of revenue into the federal treasury under such an idea would of course be determined by the economic productivity of the nation. If the economy is healthy and thriving and employment is at a peak, the purchase of articles of luxury will be greater than if the economy is stagnant and depressed. And thus, Congress is encouraged to adopt policies favorable to a healthy and vibrant economy because the flow of revenue into the federal treasury can be disrupted should Congress adopt oppressive regulations which impeded and burden our founder’s intended free market system.

The same can be said of direct taxation, for only with a rise in the national GDP will Congress achieve a greater income. They suffer the exact influences with a lesser opportunity to take advantage of the means given to them.

And so, if Congress is limited to raising its revenue by taxing specifically selected articles of luxury, it suddenly becomes in Congress’ best interest to work toward a healthy and vibrant economy which in turn produces a productive flow of revenue into the federal treasury! It should also be noted that taxing any specific article too high, will reduce the volume of its sales and diminish the flow of revenue into the national treasury, and thus, taxing in this manner allows the market place to determine the allowable amount of tax on each article selected as Hamilton indicates above.

It should also be said under a flat and fixed direct tax, there is no opportunity for Congress to raise taxes whatsoever, which drives their truest and only focus in terms of government toward raising the productivity and prosperity of our economy. In a fixed direct tax, the income of Congress is still solely dependent on the prosperity of the economy, the main difference being a close to loopholes which currently allow them to bring in a greater income personally as well as institutionally by stifling competition.

I disagree. Under you method of raising a federal revenue by direct taxation the people do not have the option to avoid the tax. Direct taxes ought to be used in emergency situations only, and if they are, then the rule of apportionment ought to be strictly enforced!

Under the form of true indirect taxes, so long as you reside within the borders of this country there is no ability to avoid taxation, only an ability to be ignorant of it. Your disagreement comes with notice, but receives no serious additional thought, I have already considered this option as well as the consequences of following it. It was this option we pursued in the past, and it lead us to both forms of taxation. In experience, the best way to make things known is by being direct. The easiest way to be fair is to be blunt. There is no such thing as a fair indirect tax, it simply may not exist by its own definition. The honest truth is that if we want to see improvement we need to make a change and not rely on the mistakes which brought us to this point. You may not agree intellectually, but it makes my point no less valid.

In speaking of direct taxes, and the evils of an unrestrained power to impose them, our founders were fully cognizant of the destructive nature of this tax which was noted by Representative Williams during a debate on Direct Taxes January 18th, 1797:


The key word is unrestrained[/u[], and currently our government is unrestrained in both areas. In reality, this is the truth of our problem, is it not? A fixed and flat direct tax is hardly unrestrained, and by forcing Congress to rely on constitutional convention to raise its taxes you will find that its ability to do so is anything but unrestrained.

"History, Mr. Williams said, informed them of the annihilation of nations by means of direct taxation. He referred gentlemen to the situation of the Roman Empire in its innocence, and asked them whether they had any direct taxes? No. Indirect taxes and taxes upon luxuries and spices from the Indies were their sources of revenue; but, as soon as they changed their system to direct taxation, it operated to their ruin; their children were sold as slaves, and the Empire fell from its splendor. Shall we then follow this system? He trusted not."

And to correct the oppressive and destructive nature of direct taxation, our founders intentionally agreed that direct “taxation shall be in proportion to Representation" and they went on to command that ”No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”

We live in an era of man uncompromisable to our founding fathers, which is why the added that it should not be done unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein, they realized as well as I and others do that a time may come when the latter may be beneficial over the other. That time is now. In this day and age an indirect tax only paves the road toward unfair practices and stifling of competition, it is much more beneficial for us to pursue a fixed and flat rate tax. That is simply the way of our times, it was different 250 years ago.

In reference to the rule of apportionment and direct taxation, here is what some of our founding fathers had to say:
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 Mr. George Nicholas, during the ratification debates of our Constitution says:
“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. 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 if there is any confusion about the rule of apportionment being intentionally designed to insure that the people of each state contribute a share of this tax directly in proportion to their voting strength in Congress, Mr. PENDLETON points out:

“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

Also see an Act laying a direct tax for $3 million in which the rule of apportionment is applied.

And then see Section 7 of direct tax of 1813 allowing states to pay their respective quotas and be entitled to certain deductions in meeting their payment on time.

JWK

The problem is that we no longer live in this day and age, and in the interest of the fairness the fathers perpetuated in their rants of fairness and apportionment, the only fair apportion is a direct taxation of income, the taxation and subsidization of articles of consumption has given Congress too much an influence over the private sector, and as result competition has suffered. This is not something I need make a further point to prove, it is self-evident to you as well as it is to myself or anyone else. If you look at the numbers and follow the money, the greatest corporations of this country receive the most subsidies and as result stifle the most competition solely because of their donation into political campaign. This problem can not even be solely addressed by the institution of a fixed and flat tax rate, there are numerous other institutions of legislation which must follow. The overlaying point, however, is that indirect taxation only paves the way for political favoritism simply due to its sustainability of avoidance, but what you fail to realize is those who avoid it are the ones with money and not those whom need the money. Under such a system it is always those with needs who pay to subsidize those whom need not.

 

[orogenicman]

Nope. Fascism is what the Democrat party endorses. That's what they're talking about when they refer to "public/private" partnership. And that's also what they are talking about when they say the want to ameliorate the so-called "evils" of capitalism with regulation.

Proving your total and complete misunderstanding of what fascism is. Congratulations.

That is exactly what fascism is.

Fascism is radical authoritarian nationalism. It is a right wing political movement, dipshit.

 

[orogenicman]

Joe called me a moron, but he only proved that he's one. He thinks private fire protection services don't exist. He also equate opposition to being force to pay for the government brand as a desire not to want the product at all.

It takes a special kind of stupid to be a liberal.

Well gee BriPat, it sounds like you'd like to have the option to chose between public and private in this case. You'd think that some enterprising individual would come along and propose just such a thing seeing how government cant do anything right and all. Why do you think they don't?

They don't because they are already paying for the government product. What I am asking for is to quit being forced to pay for the government product. If consumers had a choice, there wouldn't be any government run fire departments.

Yeah, I can imagine what a privatized court system would look like. Or a privatized police department. All run by the corporations. Maybe Rupert Murdock can purchase the NYPD, and have Fox become their spokesperson. God, you are dumb.

 

[johnwk]

The problem is that we no longer live in this day and age, and in the interest of the fairness the fathers perpetuated in their rants of fairness and apportionment, the only fair apportion is a direct taxation of income, the taxation and subsidization of articles of consumption has given Congress too much an influence over the private sector, and as result competition has suffered. This is not something I need make a further point to prove, it is self-evident to you as well as it is to myself or anyone else.

What is self-evident to me is, your love affair with taxing “income” has paved the way to our nation’s enslavement.

To fully understand this issue one must first recall the progressive movement of the late 1800s and early1900s, a movement which was, among other things, intentionally designed by its leadership to enslave the working class person, not to mention seizing an iron fisted regulatory control over America’s businesses and industries.

In 1913 the leadership of the progressive movement convinced the working person [that’s your ordinary working person] to get behind the 16th Amendment. It was sold to the working person as a means to get those greedy corporations to pay their “fair share” in taxes.

During the 16th Amendment debates we find Mr. HEFLIN agitating the working class people into supporting the amendment by saying “An income tax seeks to reach the unearned wealth of the country and to make it pay its share.”44 Cong. Rec. 4420 (1909). Note the wording “unearned wealth“ as distinguished from earned wages.

And this was shortly after Mr. BARTLETT of Georgia had begun the class warfare attack by preaching to the working poor: As I see it, the fairest of all taxes is of this nature [a tax on gains, profits and unearned income], laid according to wealth, and its universal adoption would be a benign blessing to mankind. The door is shut against it, and the people must continue to groan beneath the burdens of tariff taxes and robbery under the guise of law.” 44Cong. Rec. 4414 (1909).

But what these cunning con artists really had in mind was to create a tax allowing the expansion of the federal government’s manipulative iron fist over the economy which would eventually be used to squeeze the working people’s earned wages from their pockets in a more devastating manner than any tariff had ever done, and make them dependent upon government for their subsistence! But they cleverly waited for one generation to pass after the adoption of the 16th Amendment and a war to begin before completing their mission which was the imposition of the Temporary Victory Tax of 1942!

Roosevelt’s class warfare tax expanded the “income tax” upon corporations and businesses to include a 5 percent “temporary” tax upon working people’s earned wages. And although the 16th Amendment was sold as a way to tax “unearned income”, the temporary tax on working people’s earned wages was sold as a patriotic necessity in the war effort. But somehow Roosevelt’s class warfare tax, which robs the bread working people earned by the sweat of their brow, is still to this very day being collected, and its burden has constantly increased over the years, forcing millions upon millions of poor working people into a state of poverty and then dependency upon government for their subsistence, an outcome which is needed by corrupted political leaders to maintain a permanent and captive voting block!


Now, with this in mind the question is, why is there not one media personality, and this includes Glenn Beck and Mark Levin and his proposed Liberty Amendment to reform taxation, ignore the wisdom of our founding fathers original tax plan?

Why do they avoid getting to the root cause of our tax miseries which could be ended by adding the following 32 words to our Constitution?

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

These words, if added to our Constitution, would return us to a consumption based taxing system, our founding father’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as they intended it to operate! And, they would remove the destructive power Congress now exercises which has socialized America‘s once free enterprise system. The words would also help to end Congress’ current love affair with class warfare, which it now uses to divide the people while plundering the wealth which America’s businesses and labor have produced.

JWK

“Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to America’s future Prosperity“ ___ from “Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan”,no longer in print.

 

[PMZ]

The problem is that we no longer live in this day and age, and in the interest of the fairness the fathers perpetuated in their rants of fairness and apportionment, the only fair apportion is a direct taxation of income, the taxation and subsidization of articles of consumption has given Congress too much an influence over the private sector, and as result competition has suffered. This is not something I need make a further point to prove, it is self-evident to you as well as it is to myself or anyone else.

What is self-evident to me is, your love affair with taxing “income” has paved the way to our nation’s enslavement.

To fully understand this issue one must first recall the progressive movement of the late 1800s and early1900s, a movement which was, among other things, intentionally designed by its leadership to enslave the working class person, not to mention seizing an iron fisted regulatory control over America’s businesses and industries.

In 1913 the leadership of the progressive movement convinced the working person [that’s your ordinary working person] to get behind the 16th Amendment. It was sold to the working person as a means to get those greedy corporations to pay their “fair share” in taxes.

During the 16th Amendment debates we find Mr. HEFLIN agitating the working class people into supporting the amendment by saying “An income tax seeks to reach the unearned wealth of the country and to make it pay its share.”44 Cong. Rec. 4420 (1909). Note the wording “unearned wealth“ as distinguished from earned wages.

And this was shortly after Mr. BARTLETT of Georgia had begun the class warfare attack by preaching to the working poor: As I see it, the fairest of all taxes is of this nature [a tax on gains, profits and unearned income], laid according to wealth, and its universal adoption would be a benign blessing to mankind. The door is shut against it, and the people must continue to groan beneath the burdens of tariff taxes and robbery under the guise of law.” 44Cong. Rec. 4414 (1909).

But what these cunning con artists really had in mind was to create a tax allowing the expansion of the federal government’s manipulative iron fist over the economy which would eventually be used to squeeze the working people’s earned wages from their pockets in a more devastating manner than any tariff had ever done, and make them dependent upon government for their subsistence! But they cleverly waited for one generation to pass after the adoption of the 16th Amendment and a war to begin before completing their mission which was the imposition of the Temporary Victory Tax of 1942!

Roosevelt’s class warfare tax expanded the “income tax” upon corporations and businesses to include a 5 percent “temporary” tax upon working people’s earned wages. And although the 16th Amendment was sold as a way to tax “unearned income”, the temporary tax on working people’s earned wages was sold as a patriotic necessity in the war effort. But somehow Roosevelt’s class warfare tax, which robs the bread working people earned by the sweat of their brow, is still to this very day being collected, and its burden has constantly increased over the years, forcing millions upon millions of poor working people into a state of poverty and then dependency upon government for their subsistence, an outcome which is needed by corrupted political leaders to maintain a permanent and captive voting block!


Now, with this in mind the question is, why is there not one media personality, and this includes Glenn Beck and Mark Levin and his proposed Liberty Amendment to reform taxation, ignore the wisdom of our founding fathers original tax plan?

Why do they avoid getting to the root cause of our tax miseries which could be ended by adding the following 32 words to our Constitution?

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

These words, if added to our Constitution, would return us to a consumption based taxing system, our founding father’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as they intended it to operate! And, they would remove the destructive power Congress now exercises which has socialized America‘s once free enterprise system. The words would also help to end Congress’ current love affair with class warfare, which it now uses to divide the people while plundering the wealth which America’s businesses and labor have produced.

JWK

“Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to America’s future Prosperity“ ___ from “Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan”,no longer in print.

Government services are not free. Taxes are not the boogeyman that you present, merely the mechanism by which we pay our Federal bills.

If you want to do something useful while you are entertaining yourself with your words, think of ways to reduce poverty or ways for businesses to restore what they used to know, how to grow. . Solve real problems.

 

[johnwk]

The problem is that we no longer live in this day and age, and in the interest of the fairness the fathers perpetuated in their rants of fairness and apportionment, the only fair apportion is a direct taxation of income, the taxation and subsidization of articles of consumption has given Congress too much an influence over the private sector, and as result competition has suffered. This is not something I need make a further point to prove, it is self-evident to you as well as it is to myself or anyone else.

What is self-evident to me is, your love affair with taxing “income” has paved the way to our nation’s enslavement.

To fully understand this issue one must first recall the progressive movement of the late 1800s and early1900s, a movement which was, among other things, intentionally designed by its leadership to enslave the working class person, not to mention seizing an iron fisted regulatory control over America’s businesses and industries.

In 1913 the leadership of the progressive movement convinced the working person [that’s your ordinary working person] to get behind the 16th Amendment. It was sold to the working person as a means to get those greedy corporations to pay their “fair share” in taxes.

During the 16th Amendment debates we find Mr. HEFLIN agitating the working class people into supporting the amendment by saying “An income tax seeks to reach the unearned wealth of the country and to make it pay its share.”44 Cong. Rec. 4420 (1909). Note the wording “unearned wealth“ as distinguished from earned wages.

And this was shortly after Mr. BARTLETT of Georgia had begun the class warfare attack by preaching to the working poor: As I see it, the fairest of all taxes is of this nature [a tax on gains, profits and unearned income], laid according to wealth, and its universal adoption would be a benign blessing to mankind. The door is shut against it, and the people must continue to groan beneath the burdens of tariff taxes and robbery under the guise of law.” 44Cong. Rec. 4414 (1909).

But what these cunning con artists really had in mind was to create a tax allowing the expansion of the federal government’s manipulative iron fist over the economy which would eventually be used to squeeze the working people’s earned wages from their pockets in a more devastating manner than any tariff had ever done, and make them dependent upon government for their subsistence! But they cleverly waited for one generation to pass after the adoption of the 16th Amendment and a war to begin before completing their mission which was the imposition of the Temporary Victory Tax of 1942!

Roosevelt’s class warfare tax expanded the “income tax” upon corporations and businesses to include a 5 percent “temporary” tax upon working people’s earned wages. And although the 16th Amendment was sold as a way to tax “unearned income”, the temporary tax on working people’s earned wages was sold as a patriotic necessity in the war effort. But somehow Roosevelt’s class warfare tax, which robs the bread working people earned by the sweat of their brow, is still to this very day being collected, and its burden has constantly increased over the years, forcing millions upon millions of poor working people into a state of poverty and then dependency upon government for their subsistence, an outcome which is needed by corrupted political leaders to maintain a permanent and captive voting block!


Now, with this in mind the question is, why is there not one media personality, and this includes Glenn Beck and Mark Levin and his proposed Liberty Amendment to reform taxation, ignore the wisdom of our founding fathers original tax plan?

Why do they avoid getting to the root cause of our tax miseries which could be ended by adding the following 32 words to our Constitution?

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

These words, if added to our Constitution, would return us to a consumption based taxing system, our founding father’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as they intended it to operate! And, they would remove the destructive power Congress now exercises which has socialized America‘s once free enterprise system. The words would also help to end Congress’ current love affair with class warfare, which it now uses to divide the people while plundering the wealth which America’s businesses and labor have produced.

JWK

“Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to America’s future Prosperity“ ___ from “Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan”,no longer in print.

Government services are not free. .

You are absolutely correct. All the free stuff people receive who are on the public dole is not really free, but is paid for by government confiscating the productive citizens paycheck and transferring it to the unproductive who sell their vote to politicians who remain in power by bribing the unproductive for their vote.


JWK



If we can make 51 percent of America’s population dependent upon an Obama, welfare, food stamp, section 8 housing, college loan check, and now free Obamacare along with FREE BACON, we can blackmail them for their vote, keep ourselves in power and keep the remaining portion of America’s productive population enslaved to pay the bills ____ Obama’s Marxist Free Stuff Party, which is designed to establish a federal plantation and redistribute the wealth which wage earners, business and investors have worked to create.

 

[PMZ]

What is self-evident to me is, your love affair with taxing “income” has paved the way to our nation’s enslavement.

To fully understand this issue one must first recall the progressive movement of the late 1800s and early1900s, a movement which was, among other things, intentionally designed by its leadership to enslave the working class person, not to mention seizing an iron fisted regulatory control over America’s businesses and industries.

In 1913 the leadership of the progressive movement convinced the working person [that’s your ordinary working person] to get behind the 16th Amendment. It was sold to the working person as a means to get those greedy corporations to pay their “fair share” in taxes.

During the 16th Amendment debates we find Mr. HEFLIN agitating the working class people into supporting the amendment by saying “An income tax seeks to reach the unearned wealth of the country and to make it pay its share.”44 Cong. Rec. 4420 (1909). Note the wording “unearned wealth“ as distinguished from earned wages.

And this was shortly after Mr. BARTLETT of Georgia had begun the class warfare attack by preaching to the working poor: As I see it, the fairest of all taxes is of this nature [a tax on gains, profits and unearned income], laid according to wealth, and its universal adoption would be a benign blessing to mankind. The door is shut against it, and the people must continue to groan beneath the burdens of tariff taxes and robbery under the guise of law.” 44Cong. Rec. 4414 (1909).

But what these cunning con artists really had in mind was to create a tax allowing the expansion of the federal government’s manipulative iron fist over the economy which would eventually be used to squeeze the working people’s earned wages from their pockets in a more devastating manner than any tariff had ever done, and make them dependent upon government for their subsistence! But they cleverly waited for one generation to pass after the adoption of the 16th Amendment and a war to begin before completing their mission which was the imposition of the Temporary Victory Tax of 1942!

Roosevelt’s class warfare tax expanded the “income tax” upon corporations and businesses to include a 5 percent “temporary” tax upon working people’s earned wages. And although the 16th Amendment was sold as a way to tax “unearned income”, the temporary tax on working people’s earned wages was sold as a patriotic necessity in the war effort. But somehow Roosevelt’s class warfare tax, which robs the bread working people earned by the sweat of their brow, is still to this very day being collected, and its burden has constantly increased over the years, forcing millions upon millions of poor working people into a state of poverty and then dependency upon government for their subsistence, an outcome which is needed by corrupted political leaders to maintain a permanent and captive voting block!


Now, with this in mind the question is, why is there not one media personality, and this includes Glenn Beck and Mark Levin and his proposed Liberty Amendment to reform taxation, ignore the wisdom of our founding fathers original tax plan?

Why do they avoid getting to the root cause of our tax miseries which could be ended by adding the following 32 words to our Constitution?

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

These words, if added to our Constitution, would return us to a consumption based taxing system, our founding father’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as they intended it to operate! And, they would remove the destructive power Congress now exercises which has socialized America‘s once free enterprise system. The words would also help to end Congress’ current love affair with class warfare, which it now uses to divide the people while plundering the wealth which America’s businesses and labor have produced.

JWK

“Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to America’s future Prosperity“ ___ from “Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan”,no longer in print.

Government services are not free. .

You are absolutely correct. All the free stuff people receive who are on the public dole is not really free, but is paid for by government confiscating the productive citizens paycheck and transferring it to the unproductive who sell their vote to politicians who remain in power by bribing the unproductive for their vote.


JWK



If we can make 51 percent of America’s population dependent upon an Obama, welfare, food stamp, section 8 housing, college loan check, and now free Obamacare along with FREE BACON, we can blackmail them for their vote, keep ourselves in power and keep the remaining portion of America’s productive population enslaved to pay the bills ____ Obama’s Marxist Free Stuff Party, which is designed to establish a federal plantation and redistribute the wealth which wage earners, business and investors have worked to create.

Why don't we put them to work?

 

[johnwk]

Government services are not free. .

You are absolutely correct. All the free stuff people receive who are on the public dole is not really free, but is paid for by government confiscating the productive citizens paycheck and transferring it to the unproductive who sell their vote to politicians who remain in power by bribing the unproductive for their vote.


JWK



If we can make 51 percent of America’s population dependent upon an Obama, welfare, food stamp, section 8 housing, college loan check, and now free Obamacare along with FREE BACON, we can blackmail them for their vote, keep ourselves in power and keep the remaining portion of America’s productive population enslaved to pay the bills ____ Obama’s Marxist Free Stuff Party, which is designed to establish a federal plantation and redistribute the wealth which wage earners, business and investors have worked to create.

Why don't we put them to work?

Our progressives in Congress do not want them to work and achieve financial independence because they would no longer have a dependent voting block to keep themselves in power. We were warned about such dependence in Federalist No. 79:


A POWER OVER A MAN's SUBSISTENCE AMOUNTS TO A POWER OVER HIS WILL ____ Hamilton, No. 79 Federalist Papers


JWK


The liberty to fail or succeed at one’s own hand is a PROGRESSIVE`S nightmare and not the American Dream

 

[PMZ]

You are absolutely correct. All the free stuff people receive who are on the public dole is not really free, but is paid for by government confiscating the productive citizens paycheck and transferring it to the unproductive who sell their vote to politicians who remain in power by bribing the unproductive for their vote.


JWK



If we can make 51 percent of America’s population dependent upon an Obama, welfare, food stamp, section 8 housing, college loan check, and now free Obamacare along with FREE BACON, we can blackmail them for their vote, keep ourselves in power and keep the remaining portion of America’s productive population enslaved to pay the bills ____ Obama’s Marxist Free Stuff Party, which is designed to establish a federal plantation and redistribute the wealth which wage earners, business and investors have worked to create.

Why don't we put them to work?

Our progressives in Congress do not want them to work and achieve financial independence because they would no longer have a dependent voting block to keep themselves in power. We were warned about such dependence in Federalist No. 79:


A POWER OVER A MAN's SUBSISTENCE AMOUNTS TO A POWER OVER HIS WILL ____ Hamilton, No. 79 Federalist Papers


JWK


The liberty to fail or succeed at one’s own hand is a PROGRESSIVE`S nightmare and not the American Dream

If business created jobs and hired them, Congress would have no say in the matter.