Funny, the First Amendment does not differentiate between political and non-political speech. So now you are the arbiter of what is First Amendment Speech and what is not? Hmmm - guess you're not the First Amendment absolutist you claim to be. Have a nice day.
Funny, the First Amendment does not differentiate between political and non-political speech. So now you are the arbiter of what is First Amendment Speech and what is not? Hmmm - guess you're not the First Amendment absolutist you claim to be. Have a nice day.
As I as I do not hold to the concept of taxing any incomes or contributions in either case regardless of their purpose that is rather a null issue.
In point of fact I would not tax the purchase of a commercial by a business nor do I believe the constitution requires such.
However, a proper tax on articles of consumption imposed on the consumer is entirely another issue all together.
"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."
I refer you back to my first post on this thread: #26
Have a nice day yourself