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

To: Rakkasan1

I support the NRST in principle, but I would need to see the 16th Amendment repealed before I would be comfortable with an NRST in fact.

Otherwise, I fear we would end up with BOTH.


3 posted on 11/15/2004 7:02:27 AM PST by Maceman (It's no longer a blue world, Max!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Maceman

Worse yet, there will be an IRS agent sitting next to every cash register. I have yet to see the NRST people address exactly who is supposed to collect that sales tax.


8 posted on 11/15/2004 7:08:06 AM PST by agitator (...And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Maceman

just curious, would repealing the 16th amendment (I agree w/you, it has to happen before NRST/"fairtax") affect state income taxation at all? or is it only needed for the federal income tax?


13 posted on 11/15/2004 7:11:55 AM PST by kpp_kpp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Maceman
...but I would need to see the 16th Amendment repealed before I would be comfortable with an NRST in fact.

Amen to that. The income tax was advertised to be: ...1 percent on taxable net income above $3,000 ($4,000 for married couples), less deductions and exemptions. It rose gently to a top rate of 7 percent on incomes above $500,000.

Oh how far we've come.

26 posted on 11/15/2004 7:33:18 AM PST by AreaMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Maceman

Unfortunately, the Imperial Federal Government doesn't need the 16th Amendment to impose an Income Tax. They had an income tax during the War of Northern Agression (aka "The Civil War"), imposed by that paragon of virtue, Abraham Lincoln, without the 16th Amendment.


38 posted on 11/15/2004 7:51:29 AM PST by Little Ray (I'm a reactionary, hirsute, gun-owning, knuckle dragging, Christian Neanderthal and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Maceman
Wouldn't you think the repeal would not be necessary if it's proven it was illegal in the first place. This amendment was never ratified by the correct number of states---only by 3 states?
41 posted on 11/15/2004 7:54:28 AM PST by shield (The Greatest Scientific Discoveries of the Century Reveal God!!!! by Dr. H. Ross, Astrophysicist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Maceman

There is no law on the books that would prohibit a NRST on top of an income tax now. However, once the FairTax is the law of the land, taxation of income, estates and gifts will be prohibited.

No congress in their right mind, would totally abolish the income tax system without a successful, proven, revenue generator in place. Once the success of the FairTax is realized...taxing "income" will be irrelevant and repeal of the 16th Amendment would fly through the states for ratification. Repealing the 16th will be easier, not harder since the amendment no longer has any real meaning - it is an anachronism.


49 posted on 11/15/2004 8:08:37 AM PST by Rakkasan1 (Justice of the Piece: Hope IS on the way...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: Maceman

my thoughts exactly


242 posted on 11/17/2004 8:45:57 AM PST by zwerni (has Dan Rather conceded yet? Or is he still looking for a combination that will get kerry the win?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | 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