Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: pnh102; ColdSteelTalon; ArizonaJosie; EdArt; Impy; ksen; Government Is Slavery
They were fighting taxation without representation.

In the beginning of the Republic, 20,000 citizens were represented by one representative.

Currently, 600,000+ citizens are represented by one representative.

In the beginning of the Republic, pretty only people who were taxed could vote on taxation.

Currently, the voting pool has been heavily diluted with those who SUBSIST on tax dollars.

Our "representatives" just tried to dilute the voting pool even further with their phony "amnesty".

What in God's name are you talking about when you talk about "taxation with representation"?

59 posted on 04/29/2008 5:01:12 AM PDT by an amused spectator (Spitzer would have used the Mann Act against an enemy in a New York minute.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies ]


To: an amused spectator
In the beginning of the Republic, 20,000 citizens were represented by one representative.

Currently, 600,000+ citizens are represented by one representative.

So we should increase the size of the House of Representatives so that we can have one representative for every 20,000 people? Let's see, for 300 million people that would be 15,000 representatives. To me, having potentially 435 tax and spend liberals in Congress is a bad thing, but 15,000? That sounds like big government liberalism to me!

In the beginning of the Republic, pretty only people who were taxed could vote on taxation.

Currently, the voting pool has been heavily diluted with those who SUBSIST on tax dollars.

No kidding, but that's a spending problem, not a taxation problem.

Our "representatives" just tried to dilute the voting pool even further with their phony "amnesty".

Off topic, but you're shocked by this? Did you forget the results of the 2006 elections? Most of the anti-shamnesty people were thrown out of office. Look at the 2008 primaries. All of the anti-shamnesty candidates are gone. What message does this send to elected officials, that shamnesty is OK of course!

What in God's name are you talking about when you talk about "taxation with representation"?

Way to take the Lord's name in vain, but I guess that's OK when you want to make a point? But I'll bite. You do realize that when we were a colony, we had no say in any taxes that were imposed unto us by the Crown. Under our system, we do have a say. Wesley Snipes, being a wealthy person, could have started a lobbying effort to repeal the 16th amendment if he wanted to. Sure it would be difficult, but that is the way our system is. Perhaps he should have stayed in Namibia if he hated paying our taxes so much.

62 posted on 04/29/2008 5:12:59 AM PDT by pnh102 (Save America - Ban Ethanol Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson