Replies

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)

"'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 [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 up to the people to restrain their representatives.

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.

Ruml wasnt wishing, he was reporting on things as they were --and are as far as I can tell. As Ruml infers, public policy trumps the Constitution. Take a look at U.S. v. BANKERS' TRUST CO., 294 U.S. 240 or Hudson County Water Co. v. McCarter, 209 U.S. 349, 357. Quoting the later case:

"All rights tend to declare themselves absolute to their logical extreme. Yet all in fact are limited by the neighborhood of principles of policy which are other than those on which the particular right is founded, and which become strong enough to hold their own when a certain point is reached. The limits set to property by other public interests present themselves as a branch of what is called the police power of the state."

Other examples of public policy trumping the constitution include gun laws, nonconvertable money, standing armies, siezing grandmas gold coins in 1933, the list goes on.

As I said, I am seeking wisdom only here, and I will learn from you if I can.

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,"

Agreed. However I'm not convinced we are governed by entities greatly inconvenienced by the Constitution, your assertions notwithstanding. Ruml is telling it like it is, not how he wants it to be. If we were in a constitutional republic, I can see the wisdom of a sales tax over an income tax.

On this planet however, if the Fairtax doesnt implement public policy, its congenitally flawed (not my coinage). Either the Texas grass roots draftees are woefully uninformed, or this whole Fairtax thing is a smokescreen to keep the debate going, and maintain useful illusions.