Correct! And given how our modern legislatures just freely throw our money around and don't ever actually repeal any taxes, you wish to trust them with repealing the 16th Amendment AFTER giving them even more taxes to play with?
You had better get out there and figure out how to stop all them Congress Critters from deficit spending and buying votes first.
Here again, you haven't been reading. My call to educate people about this is to stir a major tax revolt to force curtailing of spending. Once spending is under control, I might even go along with a National Sales Tax of a more realistic amount.
Simply changing how the same amount of taxes, with the possibility of even more taxes being levied after 2007, (see section 101, b 2) doesn't bring relief to anyone. It just keeps the status quo going.
Correct! And given how our modern legislatures just freely throw our money around and don't ever actually repeal any taxes,
Repealing taxes is accomplished by repealing the statute. Stange what every happened to all those 40% tarriffs that were repealed and replaced with the adoption of the federal income tax.
you wish to trust them with repealing the 16th Amendment AFTER giving them even more taxes to play with?
If the American people want the 16th repealed enough to push for it, it will be. It is up to the American electorate and always has been. Congress Critters don't just show up out of thin air, they come from the public that sends them and re-elects them.
Here again, you haven't been reading. My call to educate people about this is to stir a major tax revolt to force curtailing of spending. Once spending is under control, I might even go along with a National Sales Tax of a more realistic amount
Go ahead, most citizens have paid but minimal income taxes in the history of the income tax, most citizens don't pay income taxes now, you figure more not paying taxes is going to cause government to cut spending. You figure to beat these numbers?
Bush touts relief as tax day looms
Another 3.9 million Americans will have their income tax liability completely eliminated, officials said.
Your plan just assures that government keeps right on doing what it knows best, the same old thing, deficit spend and increase the enforcement bureaucracy just like it has with every yahoo running around promising tax revolts the last 92 years:
"A hand from Washington will be stretched out and placed upon every man's business; the eye of the federal inspector will be in every man's counting house....The law will of necessity have inquisical features, it will provide penalties, it will create complicated machinery. Under it men will be hauled into courts distant from their homes. Heavy fines imposed by distant and unfamiliar tribunals will constantly menace the tax payer. An army of federal inspectors, spies, and detectives will descend upon the state."
-- Virginian House Speaker Richard E. Byrd, 1910, predicting the consequences of an income tax.
Simply changing how the same amount of taxes, with the possibility of even more taxes being levied after 2007, (see section 101, b 2) doesn't bring relief to anyone. It just keeps the status quo going.
Nice assertion however others disagree: Return control and first option on how ones income is utilized by the individual before government is key to any reform of contol of the citizen over the government supposedly set in place to serve.
Patrick Henry, Virginia Ratifying Convention June 12, 1788:
- "the oppression arising from taxation, is not from the amount but, from the mode -- a thorough acquaintance with the condition of the people, is necessary to a just distribution of taxes. The whole wisdom of the science of Government, with respect to taxation, consists in selecting the mode of collection which will best accommodate to the convenience of the people.
- "The ability of a country to pay taxes must always be proportioned, in a great degree, to the quantity of money in circulation, and to the celerity with which it circulates. Commerce, contributing to both these objects, must of necessity render the payment of taxes easier, and facilitate the requisite supplies to the treasury."
"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. "
"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.
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 of a rule of apportionment." (Emphasis added).