Ready To Pay the Biden Administration Money For Every Mile You Drive YOUR Car?

[easyt65]

Administration Mulls Mileage Tax to Fund $3 Trillion Infrastructure Bill

To pay for the $3 - $4 TRILLION NON-Shovel-Ready Project Fleecing of Tax payers FURTHER, on top of the $1.9 TRILLION 'COVID-19 Relief' Bill (in which $1.7 Trillion had nothing to do with COVID Relief and instead consisted of Democrat Wish-List Pork spending), Biden and his handlers are thinking of every way possible to tax the ever-living shite out the American people to pay for these Democrat Porkulus liberal Extremist assault on America.

So, whose in favor of paying the Biden administration a monetary tax for every single mile you drive your car every single day?

Hey, New Jersey residents who already live in the state with the highest tax rate in the country, on top of paying all those tolls to drive on the parkways, whose in favor of paying an ADDITIONAL financial tax for every mile youdrive on the toll-taxed road you are driving on?

Every time the local govt wants to build a bridge, pave a road, or do some Construction they pass a 'Penny Tax', and usually at the end of the project that 'Penny Tax' never goes away. The idea that I should be have to pay the US govt for every mile I drive my car, that I have to pay taxes on already every year.

This tax, for me, rates right up there with having to pay my local /state govt money for ME to build something on MY property.

The United States is well Over $25 TRILLION in debt...meaning the US govt is not BROKE - NO MONEY - we are $25+ Trillion in DEBT....and Biden and the Democrats want to go all-in on 'drowning the baby', not on tying to save it.

From lying about the Tax Rate ($400k down to $200k) to now considering taxing Americans on every mile we drive our own cars, the Socialists are 'bleeding' the people dry to pay for their radical socialist agenda.....

Joe and the other CCP puppets are trying to increase the amount we owe to China and bankrupt the company for them, or at least help the CCP replace the US dollar as the world's currency.

Administration Mulls Mileage Tax to Fund $3 Trillion Infrastructure Bill

The Biden administration is casting about for ways to fund its gargantuan $3 trillion infrastructure program.

pjmedia.com

 

[jbrownson0831]

Administration Mulls Mileage Tax to Fund $3 Trillion Infrastructure Bill

To pay for the $3 - $4 TRILLION NON-Shovel-Ready Project Fleecing of Tax payers FURTHER, on top of the $1.9 TRILLION 'COVID-19 Relief' Bill (in which $1.7 Trillion had nothing to do with COVID Relief and instead consisted of Democrat Wish-List Pork spending), Biden and his handlers are thinking of every way possible to tax the ever-living shite out the American people to pay for these Democrat Porkulus liberal Extremist assault on America.

So, whose in favor of paying the Biden administration a monetary tax for every single mile you drive your car every single day?

Hey, New Jersey residents who already live in the state with the highest tax rate in the country, on top of paying all those tolls to drive on the parkways, whose in favor of paying an ADDITIONAL financial tax for every mile youdrive on the toll-taxed road you are driving on?

Every time the local govt wants to build a bridge, pave a road, or do some Construction they pass a 'Penny Tax', and usually at the end of the project that 'Penny Tax' never goes away. The idea that I should be have to pay the US govt for every mile I drive my car, that I have to pay taxes on already every year.

This tax, for me, rates right up there with having to pay my local /state govt money for ME to build something on MY property.

The United States is well Over $25 TRILLION in debt...meaning the US govt is not BROKE - NO MONEY - we are $25+ Trillion in DEBT....and Biden and the Democrats want to go all-in on 'drowning the baby', not on tying to save it.

From lying about the Tax Rate ($400k down to $200k) to now considering taxing Americans on every mile we drive our own cars, the Socialists are 'bleeding' the people dry to pay for their radical socialist agenda.....

Joe and the other CCP puppets are trying to increase the amount we owe to China and bankrupt the company for them, or at least help the CCP replace the US dollar as the world's currency.

Administration Mulls Mileage Tax to Fund $3 Trillion Infrastructure Bill

The Biden administration is casting about for ways to fund its gargantuan $3 trillion infrastructure program.

pjmedia.com

The Dim America hating plan is right on track

 

[Oddball]

Unconstitutional as fuck.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

I can't find a prog or Democrat who doesn't LOVE the idea

hard working people all paying for them to live in luxury on the government tit and stay home.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

I can't understand why NO ONE who values their liberty and their country has stepped up to lead patriots into a resistance of this oh so obvious plot to overthrow America.

 

[Natural Citizen]

One more reason why I've always endorsed the notion of private roads. I'd rather deal with ancaps than these communists.

It's patently clear that the people in this administration flat out despise America and the very idea of Individual prosperity.

 

[AntonToo]

Unconstitutional as fuck.

Did you actually read the Constitution?

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

Spending Power | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

An annotation about Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Unconstitutional as fuck.

Did you actually read the Constitution?

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

Spending Power | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

An annotation about Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

.

Biden is doing it unilaterally you dumbfuck

 

[Oddball]

Unconstitutional as fuck.

Did you actually read the Constitution?

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

Spending Power | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

An annotation about Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

.

Post the rest of it, asshole.....The part about apportionment.

Then let's talk about the 4th Amendment.

 

[Nostra]

If they do this they have to eliminate all gas taxes or that would be double taxation.

 

[Oddball]

One more reason why I've always endorsed the notion of private roads. I'd rather deal with ancaps than these communists.

It's patently clear that the people in this administration flat out despise America and the very idea of Individual prosperity.

I'd rather deal with ancaps than these communists.

I'd rather deal with straight-up mobsters.....At least they won't pretend that they're doing things for your own good, and nag you about the cheeeeelllllldreennnnnnn.

 

[Oddball]

If they do this they have to eliminate all gas taxes or that would be double taxation.

Since when does double taxation bother them?....The do it when they rob the grave and tax SS income.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Did you actually read the Constitution?

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

Spending Power | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

An annotation about Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

.

General Welfare Clause exists to limit congress.

Do you read it?

In the interest of convenience and as a courtesy to the casual passer-by who may be interested in the facts rather than uninformed conjecture, I'll borrow and share a snip from one of my previous postings on the topic elsewhere on the board explaining it.

The mention of the general Welfare in the Preamble was intended to serve as a limit in effect on the use of those delegated powers.

The only other mention of general Welfare is found in Article I, Sec. 8. There, too, the words were meant to serve as a limit in effect. A limit of the power granted under that clause. It does not empower the congress to spend tax money for any and all purpose arbitrarily on a pretense or even a belief that it is for the general welfare, and certainly not to Individuals and localities.

Congress possesses no ''general legislative authority.'' See Federalist #83, by Hamilton of all people, for clarification.

All who ratified the Constitution were in agreement on the limited and limiting meaning of ''general welfare'' in the Taxing Clause.

As Secretary of the Treasury, Hamilton contended for the first time in 1791 ("Opinion as to the Constitutionality of the Bank of the United States") in favor of a broader interpretation of this clause than he had formerly espoused and broader than that which Madison, with Hamilton's agreement, had presented in 1788 in The Federalist (especially number 41) as reflecting the controlling intent of the Framing Convention, which Madison and Jefferson consistently supported. Hamilton did not claim, however, that this clause gives to the Federal government any power, through taxing-spending, so as in effect to control directly or indirectly anything or anybody, or any activities of the people or of the State governments. Despite his assertion that this clause gives Congress a separate and substantive spending power, Hamilton cautioned expressly (Report on "Manufactures," 1791) that it only authorizes taxing and spending within the limits of what would serve the "general welfare" and does not imply a power to do whatever else should appear to Congress conducive to the "general welfare" that it does "not carry a power to do any other thing not authorized in the Constitution, either expressly or by fair implication."

See also the Supreme Court's 1936 decision ascertaining and defining the original, controlling intent. That would be the 1936 Carter case.

"Congress, entirely apart from those powers delegated by the Constitution, may enact laws to promote the general welfare, have never been accepted but always definitely rejected by this court."

It also decided that the Framing Convention "made no grant of authority to Congress to legislate substantively for the general welfare (citing 1936 Butler case) and no such authority exists, save as the general welfare may be promoted by the exercise of the powers which are granted."

The American people have never amended the Constitution so as to change the limited and limiting meaning of the words "general Welfare" in the Taxing Clause, as originally intended by The Framers and Adopters in 1787-1788.

I'm gonna go ahead and call checkmate ahead of time so the usual suspects know not to waste their time.

 

[Oddball]

Unconstitutional as fuck.

Did you actually read the Constitution?

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

Spending Power | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

An annotation about Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

.

General Welfare Clause exists to limit congress.

Do you read it?

He took a powder after I told him to post the part of Article 1; Section 8 about apportionment....He's yet another in a long line of cafeteria constitutionalists around here.

 

[Natural Citizen]

He took a powder after I told him to post the part of Article 1; Section 8 about apportionment....He's yet another in a long line of cafeteria constitutionalists around here.

When we're addressing ignorant pride, I've found it best to just correct them and move along. In almost every instance, they just don't understand. But ignorance and pride are very destructive to functional discussion as well as the learning process for those trying to learn more about these things. It doesn't serve anyone well. It's why I tend to address the casual passer-by rather than wrestling in mud with people who may very likely be more comfortable wallowing in the mud than stimulating debate/discussion.

It's comical whenever I see people say things like do you even read the constitution, and then it's blatantly apparant that they haven't read it themselves. Gosh love em.

 

[candycorn]

Administration Mulls Mileage Tax to Fund $3 Trillion Infrastructure Bill

To pay for the $3 - $4 TRILLION NON-Shovel-Ready Project Fleecing of Tax payers FURTHER, on top of the $1.9 TRILLION 'COVID-19 Relief' Bill (in which $1.7 Trillion had nothing to do with COVID Relief and instead consisted of Democrat Wish-List Pork spending), Biden and his handlers are thinking of every way possible to tax the ever-living shite out the American people to pay for these Democrat Porkulus liberal Extremist assault on America.

So, whose in favor of paying the Biden administration a monetary tax for every single mile you drive your car every single day?

Hey, New Jersey residents who already live in the state with the highest tax rate in the country, on top of paying all those tolls to drive on the parkways, whose in favor of paying an ADDITIONAL financial tax for every mile youdrive on the toll-taxed road you are driving on?

Every time the local govt wants to build a bridge, pave a road, or do some Construction they pass a 'Penny Tax', and usually at the end of the project that 'Penny Tax' never goes away. The idea that I should be have to pay the US govt for every mile I drive my car, that I have to pay taxes on already every year.

This tax, for me, rates right up there with having to pay my local /state govt money for ME to build something on MY property.

The United States is well Over $25 TRILLION in debt...meaning the US govt is not BROKE - NO MONEY - we are $25+ Trillion in DEBT....and Biden and the Democrats want to go all-in on 'drowning the baby', not on tying to save it.

From lying about the Tax Rate ($400k down to $200k) to now considering taxing Americans on every mile we drive our own cars, the Socialists are 'bleeding' the people dry to pay for their radical socialist agenda.....

Joe and the other CCP puppets are trying to increase the amount we owe to China and bankrupt the company for them, or at least help the CCP replace the US dollar as the world's currency.

Administration Mulls Mileage Tax to Fund $3 Trillion Infrastructure Bill

The Biden administration is casting about for ways to fund its gargantuan $3 trillion infrastructure program.

pjmedia.com

You're complaining about debt now? Where were you when the blob ran up $8T in debt. BTW...what did we get for the $8T in red ink he put on the books?

 

[Natural Citizen]

I'd rather deal with ancaps than these communists.

I'd rather deal with straight-up mobsters.....At least they won't pretend that they're doing things for your own good, and nag you about the cheeeeelllllldreennnnnnn.

eeeyep. It's funny how you said that, but it's true.

I kind of miss the old days of debating anarchists (the real ones) and ancaps, to be honest. Those were some of the best debates I've ever had with people. And it's always functional and intelligent discussion. Always elevated, too, none of that dumbed down blue helmet vs red helmet nonsense where you just get your talking points off the idiot box and then run to sign into a forum or something to quickly regurgitate it. Those were good times. It was kind of just understood that we all agreed that we didn't have to all agree on everything. It was only important that we all agreed that we should all be free. And people understood things. They understood concepts. Principles. Ideologies. History.

There was none of this Mickey Mouse nonsense you see in the mainstream discussion where the participants are always stuck inside the prefabricated logic box. The thought process goes only so far as arguing over doing more or less of the same thing rather than doing things differently. I think because thinking is hard? Doing things differently requires independent thought and a grasp on the actual issue at hand? It's just so much easier to stay inside the defined box. It's a sad state of affairs, oddball. Which I suppose you already know.

 

[HenryBHough]

Consider that there is no tax on electric vehicles that corresponds to the huge federal and state taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel. In some states agricultural and stationary uses that do not use public roads are exempt. But the Prius pious use the roads you are payiing for at no charge.

So there could be a legitimate point to taxing mileage but only if it also immediately cancelled all state and federal "highway" taxes on motor fuels. Alas, taxes never go away when replaced by new taxes. There was one exception; Alaska once had an income tax but it was removed many years ago. Of course every year it's reported that Democrats in their part-time legislature work like devils to get it reinstated.

A mileage tax would also address the inequity that would occur if all (grid originated) electricity were taxed for roads and a flock of the Prius-pious started in with solar panels, windmills and rubbing cats together to "roll their own".

Suggestion: Force* legislators to eliminate road fuel taxes BEFORE enacting a mileage tax.

(* by whatever means necessary)

 

[AntonToo]

Unconstitutional as fuck.

Did you actually read the Constitution?

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

Spending Power | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

An annotation about Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

.

Biden is doing it unilaterally you dumbfuck

You are clueless.

This is about an infrastructure bill that a Congress would have to pass. Administration has no power to unilateraly issue new taxes/spending.

 

[AntonToo]

Did you actually read the Constitution?

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;

Spending Power | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

An annotation about Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States.

constitution.congress.gov

.

General Welfare Clause exists to limit congress.

Do you read it?

In the interest of convenience and as a courtesy to the casual passer-by who may be interested in the facts rather than uninformed conjecture, I'll borrow and share a snip from one of my previous postings on the topic elsewhere on the board explaining it.

The mention of the general Welfare in the Preamble was intended to serve as a limit in effect on the use of those delegated powers.

The only other mention of general Welfare is found in Article I, Sec. 8. There, too, the words were meant to serve as a limit in effect. A limit of the power granted under that clause. It does not empower the congress to spend tax money for any and all purpose arbitrarily on a pretense or even a belief that it is for the general welfare, and certainly not to Individuals and localities.

Congress possesses no ''general legislative authority.'' See Federalist #83, by Hamilton of all people, for clarification.

All who ratified the Constitution were in agreement on the limited and limiting meaning of ''general welfare'' in the Taxing Clause.

As Secretary of the Treasury, Hamilton contended for the first time in 1791 ("Opinion as to the Constitutionality of the Bank of the United States") in favor of a broader interpretation of this clause than he had formerly espoused and broader than that which Madison, with Hamilton's agreement, had presented in 1788 in The Federalist (especially number 41) as reflecting the controlling intent of the Framing Convention, which Madison and Jefferson consistently supported. Hamilton did not claim, however, that this clause gives to the Federal government any power, through taxing-spending, so as in effect to control directly or indirectly anything or anybody, or any activities of the people or of the State governments. Despite his assertion that this clause gives Congress a separate and substantive spending power, Hamilton cautioned expressly (Report on "Manufactures," 1791) that it only authorizes taxing and spending within the limits of what would serve the "general welfare" and does not imply a power to do whatever else should appear to Congress conducive to the "general welfare" that it does "not carry a power to do any other thing not authorized in the Constitution, either expressly or by fair implication."

See also the Supreme Court's 1936 decision ascertaining and defining the original, controlling intent. That would be the 1936 Carter case.

"Congress, entirely apart from those powers delegated by the Constitution, may enact laws to promote the general welfare, have never been accepted but always definitely rejected by this court."

It also decided that the Framing Convention "made no grant of authority to Congress to legislate substantively for the general welfare (citing 1936 Butler case) and no such authority exists, save as the general welfare may be promoted by the exercise of the powers which are granted."

The American people have never amended the Constitution so as to change the limited and limiting meaning of the words "general Welfare" in the Taxing Clause, as originally intended by The Framers and Adopters in 1787-1788.

I'm gonna go ahead and call checkmate ahead of time so the usual suspects know not to waste their time.

Supreme Court has long ago ruled that Congress can tax and spend on pretty much whatever the f it wants to, so long as it does so uniformly across the states.

Welcome to reality, can you deal with it in sane ways?