Replies

Filo we know you are very slow in comprehension.

Let’s repeat it again in the hopes that you finally get it.

The Congress has the power to ‘Lay’ and ‘Collect’ taxes.

‘Lay’ means establish a law to implement and administer.

The FairTax is a law that imposes a tax on retail purchases once spending is above the poverty line.

Let’s repeat the point you are missing in CAPS:

The FairTax is a law that imposes a tax on retail purchases ONCE SPENDING IS ABOVE THE POVERTY LINE.

There is nothing unconstitutional in the above law and it remains constitutional even in the event the 16th Amendment is repealed.

So the question then comes to HOW the FairTax law can best implement and administer the portion I typed in CAPS for you.

And the answer is simple: refund the tax up to the poverty line in the form of a rebate. Because the government will not be tracking how much each individual spends, it cannot be called a refund, therefore it is called a rebate. But it is in effect a refund to every American up to poverty.

Filo we know you are very slow in comprehension.

And yet I realized that you are a moron immediatly.

Hmm.

The Congress has the power to ‘Lay’ and ‘Collect’ taxes.

‘Lay’ means establish a law to implement and administer.

Still no argument and you still haven't answered the question.

Let's ask it another way.

Can the Federal government implement special taxes only on black people? Jews? Catholics?

Can they implement tax policy that specifically prohibits free speech or jury trials ($500,000 tax on speaking engagements or to seat a jury?)

Or does The Constitution somehow prevent these things in spite of the fact that "The Congress has the power to ‘Lay’ and ‘Collect’ taxes?"

Or are you still too thick to get it?

There is nothing unconstitutional in the above law and it remains constitutional even in the event the 16th Amendment is repealed.

Then, again, I challenge you to show me where The Constitution allows for the redistribution of wealth.

You can't.

Socialism is unconstitutional.