I was thinking about an Amendment to the Constitution partially because I was thinking of Three Felonies a Day & Constitutional Chaos and all the jerking-around the Federal Government has been doing and this is what I came up with.
What do you think?
To: OneWingedShark
2 posted on
06/07/2010 8:52:47 AM PDT by
MNJohnnie
(The problem with Socialism is eventually you run our of other peoples money. Lady Thatcher)
To: OneWingedShark
The rate of taxation shall be Five per cent of an individuals income. What are you, some kind of Communist?
The only thing we need to generate revenue is USER FEES. Of course, we need to privatise the road system, the police, the fire departments, the court system, and the military. Oddly enough, the only thing I think we should tax is marijuana, but that's just to provide a justification for legalising it.
3 posted on
06/07/2010 8:54:21 AM PDT by
Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
(We bury Democrats face down so that when they scratch, they get closer to home.)
To: OneWingedShark
why repeal the seventeenth amendment? The other ideas are great
4 posted on
06/07/2010 8:56:04 AM PDT by
screaming eagle2
(No matter what you call it,a pre-owned automobile is STILL A USED CAR!!!)
To: OneWingedShark
Nice work... YOu need to add "Any current or former agent of the BATFE is hearby barred from any public office, federal or state employment, or any law enforcement duties in any capacity".
If you are going to drain the swamp, start with the pond scum first.
10 posted on
06/07/2010 9:04:29 AM PDT by
DCBryan1
(FORGET the lawyers...first kill the "journalists".)
To: OneWingedShark
What do you think?
I like most of it.
The details about software (6. D. i. - iv.) appear to be overly specific for this type of document.
I disagree with 8. a. ii.
8. a. v. seems a bit harsh.
8. b. overall seems redundant. Why differentiate between forcible rape regardless of when/where/how it was performed? I understand that the interstate part might be "required" for it to elevate to a federal issue, but I don't think that requirement is sound - especially in light of the example of 8. a.
Punishment for 8. e. (Conspiracy against rights) seems a bit lenient.
For 8. f. punishments should be extended to and defined for employers or others who harbor illegals.
For 8. g. (Perjury) additional punishment should be extended to those in the public trust who perjure themselves (police, politicians, prosecutors, judges, etc.)
18 posted on
06/07/2010 9:08:49 AM PDT by
Filo
(Darwin was right!)
To: OneWingedShark
What I like about your tax and money amendments is this:
You do not utilize easily manipulated concepts like GNP, GDP, "Money supply", or CBO estimates.
The tax problem is easily solved (once people are persuaded).
The fix for "coin money and regulate the value thereof" is much more complicated, which you seem to realize.
Nice start!
21 posted on
06/07/2010 9:15:01 AM PDT by
Jim Noble
(If the answer is "Republican", it must be a stupid question)
To: OneWingedShark
Interesting, I would think that corruption of public employees and the political Just Us system (besides perjury) would be a huge problem left unaddressed.
Good ideas on economics.
25 posted on
06/07/2010 10:08:43 AM PDT by
Navy Patriot
(Sarah and the Conservatives will rock your world.)
To: OneWingedShark
You forgot to add “Repeal GCA68”.
26 posted on
06/07/2010 10:09:43 AM PDT by
Red in Blue PA
(Anti-Gunners suffer from Factose Intolerance)
To: OneWingedShark; bamahead
27 posted on
06/07/2010 10:11:51 AM PDT by
EdReform
(Oath Keepers - Guardians of the Republic - Honor your oath - Join us: www.oathkeepers.org)
To: OneWingedShark
I agree with most of your general points.
But the gold standard just won’t work today because the U.S. and world economy is too large to hang on a single tiny and volatile commodity demand curve.
And the list of crimes is way too far into the weeds for a constitution.
To: OneWingedShark
Where can it be added that:
No office seeker may take money to help his/her election chances, from ANYONE who is not a resident of the district/area which he/she wishes to represent?
33 posted on
06/07/2010 10:28:25 AM PDT by
litehaus
(A memory tooooo longt A)
To: OneWingedShark; EdReform; Abathar; Abcdefg; Abram; Abundy; akatel; albertp; AlexandriaDuke; ...
39 posted on
06/07/2010 11:26:17 AM PDT by
bamahead
(Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
To: OneWingedShark
Latecomer to the thread, but I like it. I’d be willing to live with all of it, except I’d limit copyright to 14 absolute years with no provision for the death of the author. You should be able to tell by the copyright date if something has expired. You shouldn’t have to determine if the author is alive or dead. I’d also eliminate the possibility of software patents.
40 posted on
06/07/2010 12:20:54 PM PDT by
zeugma
(Waco taught me everything I needed to know about the character of the U.S. Government.)
To: OneWingedShark
I didn’t see the part that says that congress has to live by the laws that they pass.
41 posted on
06/07/2010 1:02:43 PM PDT by
NerdDad
(Aug 7, 1981, I married my soul mate, CDBEAR. 28 years and I'm still teenager-crazy in love with her.)
To: OneWingedShark
You’re looking at the smaller part of the problem. Try www.webofdebt.com for the larger part.
50 posted on
06/07/2010 9:10:13 PM PDT by
Clinging Bitterly
(We need to limit political office holders to two terms. One in office, and one in prison.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson