Posted on 03/04/2002 2:19:12 PM PST by Dementon
|
|
|
OPENING REMARKS by Bob Schulz CITIZENS’ TRUTH-IN-TAXATION HEARING Good morning ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the Citizens’ Truth-in-Taxation Hearing. On behalf of myself and the We The People Foundation for Constitutional Education, I extend a very heartfelt welcome to all of you in our audience today, to the thousands of people who are watching theses proceedings via our live web cast and to the countless thousands who will later be watching via digital and taped recordings of the hearing. We are happy to sponsor this most extraordinary educational event. DO WE STILL RECOGNIZE IT AS THE BASIS OF OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT IN AMERICA, OR NOT? DO WE STILL HAVE A CONSTITUTION THAT GUARANTEES OUR UNALIENABLE RIGHTS AS THE SOVEREIGN CITIZENS OF A GREAT AND FREE NATION, OR NOT? DO WE HAVE A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND STATE GOVERNMENTS THAT HONOR AND DEFEND THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF EQUAL JUSTICE, DUE PROCESS OF LAW, THE RIGHT TO LIFE, LIBERTY AND PROPERTY --- THE PRINCIPLES THAT REPRESENT THE VERY FOUNDATION OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT, OR NOT? WE THE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW THE TRUTH. WE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW IF WE STILL HAVE A CONSTITUTION. This is a copy of a message we published in the NY Times on Sunday, February 10th.
In effect, Mr. Dershowitz is saying that the system of governance in America has been transformed from a constitutional-republic to a democracy—that the government can do whatever it wants to do for, or TO, the people – that we are now governed by the rule of men and their whim, rather than by a Constitution. It is Mr. Dershowitz’s opinion--an opinion shared by the leaders of our major political parties, our courts, and most of our nation’s print and broadcast media--that those PERSONAL RIGHTS ENUMERATED IN THE FIRST TEN AMENDMENTS TO OUR CONSTITUTION (OUR BILL OF RIGHTS), NO LONGER EXIST EXCEPT AT THE WHIM AND DISCRETION OF GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRATS AND CAREER POLITICIANS--THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE RIGHT TO LIFE, LIBERTY AND PROPERTY EXCEPT BY GOVERNMENT PERMISSION. MR. DERSHOWITZ CONTENDS THAT ALL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS DERIVE FROM GOVERNMENT--THAT AS AMERICANS WE HAVE NO RIGHTFUL CLAIM TO OUR OWN LIVES AND TO OUR OWN PROPERTY. EVERYTHING THAT WE EARN FROM OUR LABOR—EVERYTHING THAT WE OWN THROUGH OUR HARD WORK AND PERSONAL SACRIFICE, WE OWE TO GOVERNMENT. CAN THIS BE TRUE? ARE WE NO LONGER ONE NATION UNDER GOD, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. DO WE SERVE OUR GOVERNMENT--OR DOES OUR GOVERNMENT SERVE US. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW THE TRUTH. Mr. Dershowitz made this assertion that our Constitution is merely a piece of paper---that we Americans have no God-given, unalienable rights---during a televised debate with Alan Keyes at Franklin and Marshall College, in September 2000. Before the New York Times agreed to run our ad on February 10th, their lawyers wanted proof that Mr. Dershowitz actually said those things about our rights and the constitution. I had to agree to play the video tape, while holding a telephone near the television, so the Times’ lawyer could hear Mr. Dersowitz speaking those words. The times evidently expected a significant public reaction to our ad—and specifically to Mr. Dershowitz’s statements. I too, expected a significant reaction to Mr. Dershowitz’s comments, and to our message in the February 10th NY Times ad. I expected a resounding denunciation of Mr. Dershowitz’s statements by the so-called champions of liberty in our government--people like Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and congressional members of the Liberty Caucus. I expected to hear loud protests from the few patriotic members of our print and broadcast media like the Washington Times. I was certain that religious leaders across the country would passionately object to Mr. Dershowitz’s claim that Americans have no unalienable or constitutionally guaranteed right to religious expression without government approval. I expected patriotic attorneys and business people from every corner of our great nation to stand in protest of Mr. Dershowitz’s contention that our constitution is merely a piece of paper. I hoped, and believed that after reading the NY Times ad, American men and women from every walk of life would loudly reject Mr. Dershowitz’a claim that government should be given absolute control and supreme authority over our lives. But I was wrong. We heard from no one. No voice was raised in public in defense of our unalienable rights or the original meaning of our Constitution. We heard nothing from our elected officials, from mainstream journalists, from prominent constitutional lawyers, from religious or academic leaders, or from Washington think tanks. So what are we, the People, to make of this? Has the Constitution really become a dead letter? Has our sacred Bill of Rights been destroyed by an arrogant, out-of-control and unaccountable government that has no respect for the precious liberties of every American citizen. Do we the People no longer have the right, or the power, to establish boundaries around the authority of our federal government? We The People had better take notice. When government takes one step outside the boundaries drawn around its power, it takes possession of a boundless field of authority, no longer capable of definition. There is a word for rulers unrestrained by law or constitutions --for usurpers of the people’s sovereignty. That word is “Tyrant.” There is a word for a system of government in which the rulers have unlimited power. That word is “Despotism.” Government is the enemy of freedom. Unrestrained government is not the benefactor of the people. As Amercians, we democratically elect our political representatives. But America is not a Democracy. Democracy is mob-rule. In a Democracy, 51% of the voting population can deny 49% of their fellow citizens their unalienable rights to life, liberty and property. I ask you to think about it. Is that what our founders intended for us when they wrote the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and Bill of Rights over 200 years ago? In a Constitutional Republic, such as we have in America, EVERY one of our citizens---regardless of his or her race, religion, political influence, social status, or economic station in life---has unalienable, constitutionally protected rights that cannot be lawfully abridged by a power hungry government. And it is those Americans who are most vulnerable to the abuses of democratic mob-rule and government tyranny who are most protected by our Constitutional Republican form of government. We would do well to remember those occasions in modern history when democratically elected governments have violated their citizen’s most basic rights to life, liberty and property because a MAJORITY of the population found it acceptable. In America, there are only two things that stand between the people and government tyranny---those are our Constitution and our will as a free people to protect and defend it. IN AMERICA, THE RIGHT TO PETITION OUR GOVERNMENT FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES IS THE BASIS OF OUR LIBERTY. OUR FOUNDERS EXPLICITLY RECOGNIZED THIS RIGHT IN THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO OUR CONSTITUTION—FOR THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT WITHOUT IT, WE COULD NOT HAVE A SERVANT GOVERNMENT WHOSE POWER IS DEFINED AND LIMITED BY THE CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE. In America, the right to petition our government for a redress of grievances is an unalienable right—it derives from our faith in a supreme being—an ultimate moral authority from whom we gain our understanding of equality, justice and the rule of law. Implicit in our first amendment constitutional right to petition our government for a redress of grievances, is the government’s absolute moral and legal obligation to respond honestly and completely to the people’s petition. This is the essential cornerstone of Popular Sovereignty – A government of the People, by the People, FOR the People. One of the earliest recorded guarantees of the people’s right to petition the King for redress of grievances is found in chapter 61 of the Magna Carta, written of 1215. Over time, Parliament came to claim the right to dictate the form of the King’s reply. By 1669, Parliament resolved that every commoner in England possessed “the inherent right to prepare and present petitions” to it “in case of grievance,” and that Parliament had “to receive the same” and to judge whether they were “fit” to be received. In 1689, Chapter 5 of the English Bill of Rights asserted the right of the subjects to petition the King and “all prosecutions for such petitioning to be illegal.” In other words, human liberty had evolved to the point where the government’s customary practice of using a person’s Petition for Redress as grounds for more persecution and abuse was firmly challenged on moral and legal grounds—it was no longer generally accepted that a persons rights and freedoms came from the king---but ultimately derived from a much higher authority It came to pass that a free people understood that, in practical effect, they had no rights—they were not really free--unless their right to Petition the government and government’s obligation to respond was guaranteed in writing. In 1776, as the concept of guaranteeing liberty through written constitutions evolved, the right to petition became the primary right of the People populating the states. That guarantee was expressed up front in the Constitutions of the Republics of New York State, Virginia, and the other State Republics as they came along. In 1791, the right to petition became the primary right of the People of the United States of America, expressed in the First Amendment to the federal Constitution. Some would now have us believe that our First Amendment right of petition is nothing more than a guarantee of free speech. That this vital constitutional protection—the very basis of our liberty---is simply a right to voice our grievances to the government. Some would try to convince us that We The People do not have the absolute right to an honest and complete response to our petition---or the authority to demand that our government correct the abuses and violations of our liberties that resulted in our petition. What nonsense! This is dangerous talk to a free people. We must not listen to those who would denigrate our constitution, and undermine the principles of liberty and justice that gave birth to our nation. At best they are imbeciles, and at worst they are tyrants -- or “sharing bedrooms” with tyrants. We must steel ourselves to this nonsense. We must harden our hearts to these false notions that government is God. Government has but one legitimate purpose---to serve and protect all of the people equally. Government is not God. It is our servant. It is accountable to We The People. The RIGHT to Petition for Redress of Grievances is the final protection – the final, check and balance in our system of Constitutional government in which the government derives its limited powers from the consent of the sovereign people. This is the right which publicly reveals and reiterates for all, who is Master and who is Servant If our RIGHT to Petition has truly become void of substance, we can ask no more than to see the truth. THIS HEARING IS ABOUT TRUTH. THIS HEARING IS ABOUT FACTS. WE ARE HERE TO PROTECT AND DEFEND THE TRUTHS THAT WE HOLD TO BE SELF-EVIDENT. THIS HEARING IS ABOUT THE FUTURE OF OUR NATION----ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. This hearing is about the “LAW” and it is about what we have allowed our “GOVERNMENT” to become. But even more importantly, this hearing is about US---“WE THE PEOPLE”. Who we are and Who we want to be. What kind of country do we want to leave to our children and future generations of Americans. Over the next two days, you will hear the facts. You will see the law. You will be able to judge the truth. You will see how our government has crafted and perpetuated the largest illusion and fraud ever witnessed on planet Earth. You will learn the truth about a powerful central government that hates and fears personal freedom and individual responsibility, and sees popular sovereignty as a threat to its complete authority and control over our lives. We will prove conclusively that the United States federal government---like a thief in the night---has subtly, over many years, stripped the American people of our liberty, our property, and in many cases, our very lives in order to protect and perpetuate a fraudulent, debt-based money system---and the life-blood of that system---the horribly unjust and unconstitutional personal income tax. As you observe these truths being unveiled, consider how WE as a PEOPLE have let this happen. Consider the role that each of us as citizens has played as unwitting participants and silent conspirators as our leaders have slowly, and unlawfully seized the rights of the People. Soon the truth will be known to all. The day quickly approaches when we will be forced to act on these truths. If we fail to act, we will lose forever this chapter in human history when We The People reigned sovereign, and our government was bound by the chains of a written constitution. INCOME TAX: THE MOST PERNICIOUS FORM OF TYRANNY The most pernicious form of tyranny is that which disguises itself as a benefactor to its victims. Most people believe that the income tax system is legal and that the revenue from the tax is used in the public interest. It is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated by government against the working men and women of America. It is unconstitutional in its origin, and abusive in every aspect of its operation. It uses intimidation, threat and coercion to deprive us of our lawfully acquired property. It resorts to morally reprehensible conduct in a persistent effort to divide the American people and promote envy, greed and irresponsible behavior in our society. The unlawful and unjust income tax system produces nothing but sorrow, distress and calamity and division in our society. It has been imposed on an unsuspecting people through deceptive and fraudulent means –outside of constitutional restraints; Our income tax holds people in servitude as the chattel of others. It forces the people to labor to pay off a never ending and always growing national debt to a cartel of private banks. The income tax is enforced as though payment was compulsory when, in fact, it is voluntary. For decades, a growing number of attorneys, CPAs, retired judges, former and present IRS officers, educators, experienced researchers, former and present congressmen, legislators, successful businesspeople and scores of ordinary, nonaligned citizens have been providing a substantial amount of extremely credible evidence that since 1913 the Judiciary has been cooperating with the Executive and Legislative branches in a collective attempt to deny the People their constitutionally protected rights and to deprive the People of a significant percentage of the fruits of their labor by unlawfully enforcing the IRS Code -- a code that has no basis in law -- no legal authority. The evidence supports the now WIDELY HELD belief that: It was no coincidence that the Federal Reserve System----a PRIVATELY OWNED banking cartel that is not controlled, or even audited by our government----and the income tax were both imposed on the American people in 1913. The Federal Reserve System and the Internal Revenue Service were both created by the 16th Amendment to the United States Constitution. We will prove at this hearing that the 16th Amendment is a fraud. That it was not lawfully ratified by ¾ of the States in 1913. And that as creations of the 16th Amendment, the Federal Reserve System and the IRS are not legitimate, constitutional operations of our government. The Federal Reserve System and the income tax are inextricably linked. The income tax was instituted to provide lender security and guaranteed profits to this highly secretive, privately owned and unaccountable central banking system that has obtained absolute control over our country and the federal government. You will learn at this hearing that most of the revenue generated from the income tax is not used to run the government but is collected by the private Federal Reserve System as interest on the national debt---money that this corrupt money system creates out of thin air, and then loans to the federal government—in a fraudulent scheme that has kept the American people is a state of perpetual debt to these private bankers for three quarters of a century. Since 1933, the privately owned Federal Reserve system has been granted the unconstitutional power to fabricate money out of thin air, charge interest to the government for the use of the Fed’s fabricated money and to receive taxes to pay that interest, paid with the American people’s labor. Today, the average American family pays more in taxes than it does for housing, food and clothing combined. By the end of this hearing you will KNOW that American citizens are compelled by the government to perform labor in order to pay off the government’s debt to the PRIVATE banking cartel---and that most Americans are in a condition of continual, economic slavery to the federal government and the privately owned Federal Reserve System (in violation of our rights guaranteed by the 13th Amendment). The evidence will also show that our system of income tax collection has led to widespread and unjustifiable abuse of the People’s unalienable due process rights. Among the significant wrongs committed by our government to perpetuate this fraud include: The unlawful indictment, prosecution and imprisonment of law-abiding Citizens who dare question the government’s legal authority to collect this tax. The unlawful seizures of property, wages, bank accounts --- all without court orders or proper warrants to satisfy supposed tax debts that, in fact, have no basis in law The pervasive and systemic denial of due process rights and other constitutional protections in the daily administrative operations of the IRS The collusion of the Courts in perpetuating the unlawful tax system by their failure to directly rule on proper legal challenges to our laws and the tacit approval of legal abuse by DOJ and the IRS against the People A system of tax regulations and legal definitions so complex and ambiguous that it conveniently defies comprehension and successful legal challenges. PETITION FOR REDRESS REGARDING THE INCOME TAX Researchers Benson, Schiff and others have been incarcerated because they asked the government to show them the law that gives the government the constitutional and statutory authority to impose an income tax on the people. The Executive, Legislative and the Judicial branches of our government continue to enforce the income tax law which they KNOW, without doubt, is unconstitutional and totally repugnant to our founding principles. We sponsored a symposium at the National Press Club here in Washington on July 1st and 2nd, 1999. We selected the National Press Club for three reasons: Washington is the media capital of the world and this issue needed media attention. The implications of the conclusions of the research by Messrs. Banister, Benson and Conklin, et al., are profound and of enormous national and international interest. 1. The 16th Amendment has, in fact, not been approved by ¾ of the State Legislatures, We are now in a Constitutional Crisis. The hearing today is but another step in the People’s determination to get to the truth regarding the fraudulent jurisdiction of the Federal Reserve System and the Internal Revenue Service and the illegal operations of the nation’s income tax system. IN CLOSING, The American People deserve – have a RIGHT – to a government that operates within the bounds of the law as defined by our Constitution. The government has been invited repeatedly to confront this research. Today, the evidence is brought before the People for their judgment. Thank you. Bob Schulz, Chairman |
I spit upon these varmints. You love and encourage them.
Just how much you gett'n paid to confuse the issue? Clinton's pay'n me 1700 a month.
Yep lewis I sure told you that didn't I. You never did answer the question of how much you are gett'n paid by the way.
And it's an absolute fact lewislynn, just as you and every other TPr continues to pay every disabled veteran out there including me. It sticks in Clintoon's craw too and I'm happy to notice you and he are both choking on it.
Everyone who purchases goods and services today unknowingly pays the full burden of the income/payroll tax system whether they file tax returns or not.
That individual income tax return that captures everyone's attention each April, is nothing more an accounting sheet the government cons individuals, held at ransom, into filling out. It puts a blinder on the eyes of the voter, and totally distorts their perceptions as to the real impact of taxation in their lives.
The tax system is actually fuelled from the dollars we spend which pays gross wages, and investment returns to individuals who are the ultimate purchasers of goods and services, hence the payers of all taxes.
We spend "disposable income", (i.e. "aftertax" income) which finances all income that is taxed. Viewing from the perspective of consumption dollars, where it is all generated, we get an entirely different perspective on what is being done to us. Between business income taxes and payroll taxes, the burden on citizen as reflected through higher prices, lower wages, and lower return on investements are indeed horrendous.
The following article covers the mechanism on how the current Federal tax system propagates and is embedded into consumption expenditure.
DO YOU PAY YOUR INCOME TAX
AT THE SUPERMARKET?
by D. Sherman Cox J.D. L.L.M. Taxation
The percentage used in the above article is somewhat off target in that it is based on a percentage that excludes the Individual income tax and SS/medicare contribution extracted out of individual wages & salaries. The 24% in the article considers only those factors actually paid to government out of impositions on the business in complying with the income, payroll, excise & tariff tax laws.
The total contribution of the federal tax system(including taxes in gross wage/salaries) to the price of retail consumption goods and services is 36% for federal taxes alone. Why? Because wages and the taxes on them are paid for out of sales receipt to business,(i.e. consumption expenditure). If we add in the cost of compliance of more than $600billion/year, the percentage that truely represents the burden on the family due to the Federal income payroll tax system increases to about a 47% of family consumption expenditures.
Federal Tax as % of current family retail expenditure = fed/(1-state-fed-savings) =
23.5/(1-.235-0.102-0.012) = 36.09%
Current total Federal tax revenues are about $1900billion, more than $600billion(Paine '97, Pilla '95, AGCCA 2000, Williams 2000) additional dollars are passed on in consumption prices due to the business costs of complying with the federal income/payroll tax laws.
Percent total current federal burden (taxes + compliance costs) of consumption dollars = 36*(1900+600)/1900 = 47.36% as passed through consumption prices.
Choke on it lewislynn, you are paying for my puppy dog's chocolate bon bons, and she loves every one of them. The fun part is she thinks they come from me, and you don't even get the credit for it.
I knew I could persuade you to cut to the chase. I can spot a socialist besides some sort of authoritarian from a mile away. So tell me more about your political philosophy and substantiation of the destruction of America.
I spit upon these varmints.
So? Why then do you expect anyone to listen to your grievences? Who cares. You don't believe in the "institutions". The varmits are totally irrelavent against that, varmits are replaceble. The institutions when denied, aren't.
You love and encourage them.
Again another of your unfound beliefs, I love and encourage the Constitution and uphold its institutions, the varmits are on their own with no love from me.
The varmits are not the institution nor can they ever be, until one denies the existence of the foundation of the instutions that can be used to oust them.
But then you do not believe "in government, any government;" so what do you care about varmits, they've just got bigger guns, and that's all anarch is about. You should be happy. No government.
I can spot a socialist besides some sort of authoritarian from a mile away. So tell me more about your political philosophy and substantiation of the destruction of America.
BZZZZT wrong again. refer #84 above. The Varmints are not the institution. They are merely varmits, and ultimately get removed from office.
It's up to the individual citizen to work to create the local conditions and environment that his own varmit gets replaced with someone of moral integrity reflecting a concern for the nation under the Constitution rather than pandering to local constitutencies and private issues.
You seem to suck a lot of government pablum, "we are here to help you."
You don't read very well do you, "we are here to help you" folks are panderers to local constituencies and private issues.
I have no such belief system.
Obviously your belief system is not believing in "govenment, any government". You could not even bring yourself to acknowledge even the most fundamental authorities of government under the Constitution as stated by its authors and proponents in reply #71 above.
You see yourself as an individual as law unto yourself. What do you need a Constitution for?
You get to protect your own rights as you may, no government to get in the way. Hope yah got bigger guns than the neighbor.
I need not remind you, the government of the people, by the people and for the people. Not a government by the government and their well wishers.
the government of the people, by the people and for the people.
And what decides what's good for the people? If its the "people" that's democracy and mob rule, one step from anarchy and bound towards Tyranny.
Ole Abe Lincoln was one of your varmit politicians by the way.
This is a republic and the representatives therein, should not represent the will of the people where such is in abrogation of the Constitution or would place the nation's general welfare behind that of some local issue or private concern.
The rule of law must prevail, not the rule of majorities and faction led mobs. Else there are no individual rights whatsoever.
But you avoid the point with that digression, the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, you still fail to acknowledge those most basic authorities of government under the Constitution that assures that Constitution is capable of guaranteeing anyones fundamental rights inspite of the mob.
This idea of yours about "mob-rule" is exactly what America is about, today. I stand for our Constitution with the Bill of Rights. You do not. You apparently believe in any law passed is 'huncky-dorrey.' You should be ashamed. You are not a Constitutionalist.
We see a lot of your self-acclaim upon the internet.
This idea of yours about "mob-rule" is exactly what America is about, today.
Really? I don't see you getting your way, infact I don't see any "majority" of the people getting their way. Many would like to believe we are at the state, but your complaint is totally to the contrary, you have told me we are under the rule of Varmits, not the people.
I stand for our Constitution with the Bill of Rights.
Then why do you not acknowledge the basic authorities of the Constitution including those amendments ratified under article V of the constitution.
You have yet to even acknowledge the clear intent of the authors of the Constitution as ratified by the people and evidenced in reply #71.
You do not.
I have no trouble acknowledging the authority of the Constitution and all its amendments.
It is you who has balked at the content of reply #71
You apparently believe in any law passed is 'huncky-dorrey.'
BZZZT Wrong again, as you have been all the way through this discussion. When are you going to get away from "beliefs" and start rebutting the authorities of the Constitution of reply #71, and justify your position of Representation without Taxation that you support.
You should be ashamed. You are not a Constitutionalist.
BZZZZZT Wrong again, you are letting emotion drive you once again. You have stated no support for your position, as has been clearly demonstrated across the last 21 replies.
In fact you do not and apparently will not acknowledge the most fundamental and basic of enumerated authorities of the national government under the Constitution.
Instead you now decend into adhominen attack to avoid rational and reasoned discussion and the acknowledgement of that Supreme Law of the Land. On top of that you still have not rationalized or provided any basis for your so-called grievence, that you deserve Representation without Taxation.
You accuse others, of that which you have condemned yourself, by not acknowledging the authorities of the Constitution. Rather you have stated and repeatedly demonstrated that you do not believe in "government, any government" which is a total antithesis of the fabric and institutions of the Constitution.
Anarchy is not the form of government of the Constitution.
Article IV Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.
That constitution does not guarantee anarchy or any form of everyman for himself. And yet you accuse me of not being a Constitutionalist.
You sir are full of bovine excretement.
There is no need to call me, "sir."
So talk to me;
Fine, I've been ready to from the beginning.
tell me your vivid point of view about how great the federal tax system is.
It's a legal pile of excretement, the entire US income/payroll tax system is an abomination that should have been scrapped the first time it was implemented in 1863.
The income/payroll tax systems only function is to create a legal jeopardy over every individual in the nation and to provide a means of social and economic control and political control by pitting one group of citizens against another to the benefit of those who would garner power by pandering to the greed of the many on the backs of the few. It provide mechanisms and means to hide taxes, reward political friends, an punishing dissidents. That tax system and its abusive nature must end.
However, bad that system may be in its abuses, it is still constitutional in the manner in which is levied, as a duty or excise upon activities of commerce. The authorities of the Constitution are such that there is no protection from ill-conceived laws or those that have the potential of abuse. All statute, all law is capable of being abusive when wrongly applied.
To quote Champion v. Aims:
'But if what Congress does is within the limits of its power, and is simply unwise or injurious, the remedy is that suggested by Chief Justice Marshall in Gibbons v. Ogden [21 US 1, 9 Wheat. 1, 6 L. ed. 23], when [195 U.S. 27, 56] he said: 'The wisdom and the discretion of Congress, their identity with the people, and the influence which their constituents possess at elections, are, in this, as in many other instances, as that, for example, of declaring war, the sole restraints on which they have relied, to secure them from its abuse. They are the restraints on which the people must often rely solely, in all representative governments."
It is the responsibility of the electorate to pound on Congress Critters to change the tax laws into a form more appropriate to this american republic, and more consistent with the ideals of right of property and privacy against government intrusions.
It is not however appropriate that the national institutions be stripped of the means to conduct the proper functions and meet the current obligation of the nation.
To that end , I completely support the total abolishment of all income taxes, payroll & wage taxes, and gift/estate taxes, replacing them with a totally visible (to the citizen) tax upon first retail sales of products and service, levied strictly upon the activity of commerce, (i.e. exchange of property or services for value).
Because the essential features of the income/payroll tax system are "legal" and with Constitutional authorities under Article I Section 8, along with the repeal of statutes there must follow the repeal of the 16th amendment as well as an explicit prohibition against the use of income, payroll and gift/estate taxes by the national government.
The moral reasons are clear and well stated by Alan Keyes with who I whole heartedly agree with on this subject with but few reservations regarding exemption of products.
The economic factors of an appropriate tax as opposed to bad taxes, are well laid out in Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations. The income/payroll tax systems fail miserably to measure up to that standard. The single stage, single rate retail sales tax meets those standard very well.
Above all is the visibility of the tax which assures the perception of the burden of government by all citizens proportionately that all, particpate and recognise the costs of largess. It is only in such manner that progress can every be made toward the repeal and reduction of the plethora of government programs that are rapidly outstripping this nation's capacity to bear them.
What about states' revenues? The same thing? Municipalities? Counties? What's to prevent every level of government from piling on, until we are no better off than we are now?
What's to keep them from piling on now?
The only thing about the NRST, is that it makes visible what is currently hidden. No burden is actually increased, in fact compliance costs drop dramatically. In the current system much of the burden is hidden in price inflation. The shelf price of goods would drop in the first few months after enactment, on items in a highly competitive market they would drop very rapidly, and to that new price the NRST would be applied along with any state & local taxes. Even with slower drops in price, overall income from wages and investments would tend to increase your gross. Compensating in that way.
The immediate levies of Federal tax is 23% of gross family income now, States pile on another 8%. That is a total of 31% of gross income. That does not account for compliance costs which increase the effective burden to over 41% of gross income.
Under a retail sales tax 90% of the compliance costs disappear and turn to production and reductions in product pricing instead of being dead weight cost embedded in products expanding the economy.
You would receive your full gross pay, with nothing taken away at the front end income. Under HR2525 all families would recieve the monthly FCA that fullfills a similar function of the personal exemption of an income tax. The consequence of the two taken together would provide an increase in family takehome pay of nearly 30% of what is available now for wage earners.
The overall economic impact is estimated to provide, at minimum, a 15% increase in standard of living for all families.
Revenues available to you would be greater, and you would have more bang for the buck price + all taxes that you are currently burdened with.
Same is true for you Buckeroo, I've learned not to be shy or offended after several years now of duking it out with everyone and his brother about taxes. :o)
Beardsley may not be an expounder on the Constitution (who is really), but he certainly is not just another minion. He was chairman of the NY FED and architect of the withholding we all suffer from our paychecks today. Hardly your everyday dude. You are good to debate all this stuff, with the likes of me and Buckaroo. There are way more than just two of us that suspect something is wrong out there. We are told over and over that this is a constitutional republic, but it doesnt feel like it, especially on taxes. So I am a TP, but not a resistor. Just got my Klipingers 'Tax Cut' software, but like you I'm not filing till the last minute. Heck with em.
You maintain that the constitution is relevant to tax policy, and it is merely the clamoring for freebies. or representation without taxation thats wrong. A uniform sales tax would be better you say. At least the freeloaders would have less incentive to demand goodies from the most inefficient of sources, the government.
Beardsley paints a very different picture,and it seems more like our present reality. He says:
"All federal taxes must meet the test of public policy and practical effect. The public purpose which is served should never be obscured in a tax program under the mask of raising revenue."He goes on at some length telling how this contituency or that is controlled by taxation, and all of it is for implementation of public policy. The problem of raising revenue was solved he say by making the dollar nonconvertable. We can just print the money we need now he says.
Ruml is reporting on the world we live in. He is not proposing some wild socialistic scheme. How does the "Fairtax" implement public policy? How does it stabilize the fiat dollar, how does it limit individual wealth accumulation, how does it subsidize favored industries, and how does it visibly place a price tag on certain national benefits? That was public policy in 1946. Its not far different from public policy now I suspect.
He [Beardly Ruml] goes on at some length telling ... print the money we need now he says.
So? Are you one of those worshipers of Beardsly Ruml's alter?
How does the "Fairtax" implement public policy?
The Constitution sets enumerated limits of the powers of Congress, to set public policy through its enactments of "public law", not to fullfill, the aspirations of Ruml's or any socialist's desires.
The Fair tax merely implements the Constitutional mandate of taxes "to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States"
For it is the Constitution that set the boundries of public policy.
How does it stabilize the fiat dollar,
The Fair Tax doesn't only fiscal responsibility under the powers of Congress can do that under the Constitution.
how does it limit individual wealth accumulation,
The FairTax doesn't nor should any appropriate tax system limit individual wealt accumulation.
how does it subsidize favored industries,
It doesn't it a economically neutral tax, not should it under the express purposes of taxes under the Article I Section 8 of the Constitution.
and how does it visibly place a price tag on certain national benefits?
It doesn't as that is not the function of a Constitutional tax under Article 8 Section 1 of the Constitution. It does however expose the impact of the federal burden on the individual citizen through the required printing of the tax for each product/service purchased. Which is a proper function of an appropriate tax that the American people may perceive the cost and exercise the proper "eternal vigilance" that is necessary to defending our liberties.
Beardsly Ruml does not establish the purposes of the Constitution. His writings have been used to justify the corruption of a Consitutional tax system into a tool of political and social control.
The fundamental purpose of taxation under the Constitution is "to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,"
Not to provide the wish list of Beardsly Ruml. The Constitution to not prevent Congress from abusing power or commiting indescretions making injurious statutes, so long as Congress is exercising its powers within the bounds of the enumerate powers of the Constitution.
MCCRAY v. U S, 195 U.S. 27 (1904)
It is up to the people to restrain their representatives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.