Taxing times for 16th Amendment rebels.

reason online.com ^ | 4 2004 | Brian Doherty

[taxtruth]

Geezer,You are Uncle Sammy's gopher boy AG and freerepublic knows it and I to.I'm sorry but,your post on freerepublic for years DO NOT agree with the US CONSTITUTION as CONGRESSMAN Ron Paul and Joe Banister have said recently on a CNBC SPECIAL REPORT.Where does Uncle Sammy have a right to the head tax AG????
.Are you a US congressman AG? LOL!You are a poster on FR that dosen't watch the news nor the facts.The facts are at www.861.info or www.hearliberty.com for folks who need the real truth.ARE YOU AN UNCLE SAM BOY GEEZER?WE need no head tax in America AG like the way the Founders planned it.Americans want their $$$ back,because they have been lied to via Uncle Sammy.Geezer,who are you trying to con?Geezer,it's OVER

on FREEREPUBLIC.com these days?

[taxtruth]

Your'e garbage makes freepublic look BAD AG.

[ancient_geezer]

So much ranting, so little time.

Where does Uncle Sammy have a right to the head tax AG????

To what federal "head tax" do you refer to TT? Give me USC Title & Section so we can look at it. I don't find any.

We don't have a federal poll/head tax. Are you running out of legitimate arguments so now you need a strawman and red herring? As well as adhominen attacks on preople who disagree with you?

---

 

At one time this nation did have such taxes prior to the Civil War when "direct taxes" were used and where the "head" tax otherwise known as capitation taxes are allowed under the Constitution if applied by the rule of apportionment.

 

head tax

: a tax that imposes the same amount of tax on every individual in a class or group

 

Constitution for the United States of America:

Article I Section 2 clause 3: "Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers"

Article I Section 9 clause 4: "No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken."

 

WE need no head tax in America

You are right, that is why we don't have one, and in fact the Constitution was amended to explicitly prohibit such if the right to vote is predicated on "head taxes" known as "poll taxes" when collected in connection with the right to vote:

Amendment XXIV

(1964)

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

 

[ancient_geezer]

Your'e garbage makes freepublic look BAD AG.

LOL, I let JR be the judge of that TT. You may cetainly complain to him, or the Admin Moderator if you wish.

[taxtruth]

AG,there is no headtax permitted in the US Constitution
as US CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL has said on CNBC
2 nites ago and can be viewed at www.hearliberty.com folks.Who are you for ancient geezer???????????????????????
You must be a clinton folk or the KGB.Who is it GEEZER?

[taxtruth]

AG,Ya need to go to China and be what ya are!

[taxtruth]

Geezer,
You have added up to a joke on FR,you should be banned for lying to the American people for many years.You and your head tax garbage.Americans DON'T owe anything.

[ancient_geezer]

AG,there is no headtax permitted in the US Constitution

Since the Congress has not levied a "head" tax in over 200 years, what is your point?

 

head tax

: a tax that imposes the same amount of tax on every individual in a class or group

Fortunately we are not saddled with such a tax, and regardless of what Ron Paul may say in his rhetoric, Congress could indeed enact capitations which would be Constitutional when applied by the rule of apportionment if they were foolish enough to try to do so:

Constitution for the United States of America:

Article I Section 2 clause 3: "Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers"

Article I Section 9 clause 4: "No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken."

Before the Income Tax
By G. Edward Griffin

Before the Income Tax
By G. Edward Griffin

http://www.stoptheftaa.org/artman/publish/article_88.shtml

Danger of Direct Taxes

Direct taxes were viewed by the Founding Fathers as a dangerous tax because they give government great power over its citizens and also because, in order to assess such taxes, agents must have the authority to snoop into the private details of the daily lives of the citizens. They agreed, therefore, that direct taxes are safer if administered by the states, where elected representatives are closer to the people and easier to control. Indirect taxes, on the other hand, were viewed as less dangerous, because people could avoid them, if they wanted, merely by not purchasing the items being taxed. This assumes the establishment of taxes only on those items that are considered nonessential, such as liquor and tobacco, often called luxury taxes. Furthermore, the process of collecting indirect taxes does not endanger the individual's right of privacy. For these reasons, the delegates agreed that indirect taxes are more appropriate for the federal government.

With this understanding in mind, we are ready to examine the Uniform Apportionment Tax in detail. The compromise that allowed the states "to form a more perfect union" consisted of two provisions: (1) The federal government shall derive its primary revenue from indirect taxes, and these must be uniform in all states; (2) In the event of war or similar emergencies, the federal government, with the consent of Congress, may levy direct taxes "passed through" the states to their citizens, but these must be proportional to the number of Representatives that each state has in Congress. This process is called apportionment. In other words, if there were one hundred Representatives in Congress, and the state of Virginia had seven of them, the voters in Virginia would have to pay seven percent of the direct national, emergency tax. The specific wording establishing the Uniform Apportionment Tax is found in Article I of the Constitution, which says:

Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States .... Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this Union .... No capitation [a capitation is a head tax, sometimes called a poll tax], or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

Let us take a moment to sample the extensive historical record to appreciate the reasoning of the men who created this concept. Alexander Hamilton, who was to become the first Secretary of the Treasury, expressed it this way in Federalist Paper #21:

Imposts, excises, and, in general, all duties on 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 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 .... Impositions of this kind usually fall under the denomination of indirect taxes, and must for a long time constitute the chief part of the revenue raised in this country. Those of the direct kind, which principally relate to land and buildings, may admit to a rule of apportionment.

 

[You Dirty Rats]

I wish all of these cranks the best of luck in their new home -- jail.

[ancient_geezer]

Ya need to go to China and be what ya are!

Since you are the one so worried about head taxes, you might want to take a trip to someplace that actually levies one. You know, help them fight the battle against a head tax that actually exists:

mash clicker here ===> Head Tax

instead of sticking around where there isn't a even federal capitation tax to fight over.

You and your head tax garbage.

The original one to interject head taxes into the discussion has been you.

Americans DON'T owe anything.

Certainly not head taxes, since Americans are not assessed a head tax in this country.

It must be a terrible thing to fight windmills that aren't there.

[EternalVigilance]

Sorry, but these folks, no matter their intentions or their motives, are fighting the wrong battle.

One they can't and won't win.

The proper course for sensible patriots, as has been pointed out on this thread, is to effect change by electoral means.

That is why I support the FairTax; and the elimination of our current stupid income tax system.

A uniform National Retail Sales Tax is the only solution that meets all of the demands of liberty, efficiency and political reform.

EV

[taxtruth]

ag,move to China where ya belong and be a slave if you believe in your own BS.

[taxtruth]

It's still a unfair tax and UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

[taxtruth]

No head tax is a fair tax unless it goes through the states for collection.The fed cannot directly go to the people,it must go through the states 1st.Where do you get off being a slave for Uncle Sammy?You owe Sammy 0.Sammy's job is to PROTECT your rights and not to steal your money and lie to you as they have been doing in their so called democracy.

[taxtruth]

Sorry,don't see anything there about a mans fruits of his labor or his own personal income.You seem to be talking in circles as you always have done on FR.You just don't have an agenda except to get the American people another New tax.You seem to have a problem with what a direct tax is and what an excise tax is.

[lewislynn]

A uniform National Retail Sales Tax is the only solution that meets all of the demands of liberty, efficiency and political reform.

LOL!

[Doe Eyes]

Schultz is a true American Patriot.

I'll bet he voluntarily sends in enough to pay his fair share for the war on terrorism.

[philetus]

The proper course for sensible patriots, as has been pointed out on this thread, is to effect change by electoral means. "


Electoral means don't work.
We win a battle once in a while, but we are losing the war.

[EternalVigilance]

Electoral means don't work. We win a battle once in a while, but we are losing the war.

Your defeatism is astounding.

Fact is, we're winning.

The only way we can lose is if we quit, and many of us will never do that, even in the face of such defeatism.

[EternalVigilance]

LOL!

Was that like a crazed cackle?