On the elimination of the Federal Income Tax.

Federal income tax could be eliminated and replaced with taxes that more fairly represent the benefits received by citizens.

Since the Department of Defense takes such a large share of tax revenue we could have a National Defense Tax. Based on the premise "The purpose of government is to protect private property" or government was instituted to protect the haves from the have nots it makes sense to pay for defense based on how much you have. The poor do the fighting so it makes sense that the rich should foot the bill.

This idea is not much different than the rate structure insurance companies use. Small house, modest possessions, small homeowners' insurance premium. Large home with expensive stuff. large premiums.

Another tax should be an "infrastructure tax". Based on the benefit business receives from government provided improvements companies like General Electric that now pay no income tax would at least have to pay for their footprint.

The the resources depletion tax that would be paid by resource extraction industries would partially reimburse the people for the loss of mineral wealth and damage caused by drilling, logging, etc.

These taxes would hit hardest those who actually cause the largest government expenditures. And would eliminate the duel rate that taxes "bust your body" income higher than "sitting on your ass" income.

 

"Department of Defense" should be more properly termed Department of Assault. The troops are armed with assault rifle.

That is why the federal income tax was implemented in the first place:


"The income tax is, therefore, not a tax on income as such. It is an excise tax with respect to certain activities and privileges which is measured by reference to the income which they produce. The income is not the subject of the tax: it is the basis for determining the amount of tax." — Congressional Record - House, March 27, 1943 Page 2580 (It was read into the Congressional Record by Congressman Carlson of Kansas from a publication by Mr. F. Morse Hubbard, "a former legislative draftsman in the Treasury Department." Congressman Carlson also noted: "This compilation of information concerning our income-tax law is so well written that I am making it a part of my statement and the record". Item number one is entitled: THE INCOME TAX IS AN EXCISE TAX, AND INCOME IS MERELY THE BASIS FOR DETERMINING ITS AMOUNT.)

"This method lays the burdens on those possessing the ability to pay, and compels those who reap the largest harvests under the sunshine of our generous institutions to give more of that harvest for the common good. ...an income tax will not touch a hair upon the head of a laboring man in the United States" — Congressman T. J. Hudson Congressional Record 15 January 1894

"An income tax places burdens upon accumulated wealth, where they can be most easily borne. It is right, because it exacts tribute of accumulation and not of endeavor. ...The artisan who goes forth to labor for his daily bread must pay upon the tools he works with; the brickmason upon his trowel, the carpenter upon his chisel and plane, the wood-chopper upon his ax, the miner upon his pick, and so on through all the list of wage-earners, yet none escape taxes upon what they eat and wear." — Congressman Fithian Congressional Record 24 January 1894

"The view taken by the Congress which passed the tax law in question is plain on its face. The object was to redress in some degree the flagrant inequality by which the great mass of the people were made to furnish nearly all the revenue, and leave the very wealthy classes to furnish very little of it in comparison with their means. Of course, nothing, therefore, was to be taken from the wages of labor" — Attorney James C. Carter - Pollock v Farmers Loan & Trust 157 US 429, 517 (1895)

The federal "income tax" was legislated to lighten the burden of taxation on the working man, and place the tax upon those who are more able to pay, but there are those who argue vehemently that they want to pay that tax too.

This premise was recognized over a hundred years ago:

"The citizen owes to the Government military and jury duty, but corporations bear neither of these burdens. ...How often do the wage-earners, the bone and sinew of the country, call for the machinery of the Federal Government to be put in motion for their aid? Scarcely at all. Yet this industrial class go on day after day, week after week, month after month, and year after year toiling for daily bread, asking nothing of the Government but to be let alone and given a chance to gain an honest living. In times of peace they are the busy bees who create the wealth upon which the idle and indolent feed, and in times of war they are the patriots who fight the battles of the nation. Under the Constitution they are all subject to be called by the President to do military duty to protect the property of aggregated wealth that under our present system escapes its just proportion of taxation. ...How is it with corporate wealth? The Congress, the courts, and all the branches of the Government are almost daily engaged in dealing with the affairs of corporate wealth. And to protect the property of these greedy corporations the whole Army and Navy of the United States is at their command." — Hon. George W. Fithian of Illinois, in the House of Representatives, Wednesday, 24 January 1894

 

The current income tax was created by Democrats to FORCE people to pay for planned Democrat violations of the Constitution. The government collected enough money BEOFRE the passage of the Income Tax Amendment when they only did things listed in the Constitution. Democrats (Progressives) passed the Income Tax Amendment and modeled it after Pillar or Plank # 2 (A heavy progressive or graduated income tax) of the Communist Manifesto. Before the ink was even dry on the Income Tax Amendment, the Democrats were creating a “progressive” income tax system even though the Sixteenth Amendment does not allow a “progressive” income tax. The Progressive Left never explained they were trying to implant part of the Communist Manifesto into the US Constitution. Had they been honest do you think the Sixteenth Amendment would have EVER passed?

 

Haha The Department of Offense.

 

The fact remains that some form of taxation is necessary if we are to have a government.

I guess it's asking to much to expect an intelligent discussion of taxation here.

Color this thread dead.

 

Why do you say that?

 

Call it what you may, the department is Constitutional. Democrats evolved the department of Health and Human Services (HHS) into the Department of Wealth Distribution (not re distribution because wealth is not DISTRIBUTED in the first place, but created and earned) as the department was charged with administrating the unconstitutional Democrat Welfare State, and oh BTW YOUR future healthcare.

 

Why is that "fact"?

Why do you believe forced coercion is necessary? Why not volunteer contractual obligations?

 

LOL!!
Wow!

- - - Updated - - -

It was a nice try but the word 'tax' brings the nutters out of the wood work.
They seem to live in a different dimension where all the services they receive just 'happen' and no one has to pay for them.

 

There is a BIG problem with this latest taxation movement.

The House Republicans, more than one of them, are attempting to replace portions of Income Tax (which takes more money from the rich), replacing it with Sales Tax which overburdens the poor. For example tax on 1 egg is a greater percentage of the poor person's income than it is the rich person's, hence the poor person is unduly burdened.

Please... Look it up. The house republicans have passed these bills already, and are creating more legislation to extend the measures.

What's worse, is after the Republicans get their mind set on societal decay, we get a lot of people delusionally touting the benefits of some issue, like tax reform. It is Too much a coincidence that the Republicans are currently pushing the agenda, and it has been clear that Republicans spread propaganda amongst their ilk to get people to be conducive to these policies.

I have heard the same Republican propaganda reach me from multiple sources. Be aware of what policies you are spreading! It will further the rich/poor gap, create fewer but greater rich, and poorer yet many more poor. The USA is forming an Aristocracy!!!

 

If the US rich are permitted to eliminate or reduce income tax, and replace it with a sales tax, they will merely purchase their commodities wholesale at less tax under the guise of strategic business friendly taxation, and the common American people will simply be further burdened with the tax responsibility. Common American businesses will be even less able to compete because they cannot buy at the bulk necessary to enjoy the lesser tax.

The evil US corporatists have taken over the US Government and it is a VERY dark world that they are creating with their policies. Policy after policy! From fundamentally changing the US patent system from first to invent to first corporation to steal and file. They are destroying the country! It is no longer America!!!

 

We wouldn't need any taxes on incomes, but for our warfare-state spending.

 

Where are you from? Kaliningrad? Oh, yeah, we are the ones who have a department of offense.

 

This was a hilarious read. Thank you.

 

People have so stated in THIS thread. Trouble is (for the chucklers ) it's all true and no one can refute a single word! A progressive income tax is the second Pillar or Plank of Communism according to the Communist Manifest. No one can argue that FACT. No one can claim the Democrats DID NOT quickly create a Progressive income tax even though the Sixteenth Amendment does not grant that ability. Figure out what percentage you pay in income taxes and realize you don't get that money BECAUSE of Democrat violations of the Constitution. The argument of "we have to pay for the services we demand from the government" is weak. After giving that argument, most people then give the examples of police, and fire services most of which are paid through local and state taxes, not federal income tax. Most of the federal budget is spent on welfare spending. Thank God most don't receive such handouts as a majority MUST PAY for the handouts. Even the Democrat Ponzi Scheme better known as Social Security is a bust. One would do much better investing their own money in real investments than participating in the Democrat Paper Pyramid scheme. If federal spending were limited to that which is enumerated in the Constitution there would be no need for the income tax at all, and certainly no need of a Progressive income tax straight out of the Communist Manifesto. See when you wish to distribute wealth you must first confiscate it!

 

Historically in the US, income taxes were only levied in response to war.

There should be no need for taxes on the incomes of real persons during times of peace, for any welfare-state.

 

Ah, but with Democrats in any sort of power we are never at "peace" with their Class Warfare; pitting one American against another. Democrats have spent Trillions of dollars on their never ending "war on Poverty" (their attempts to distribute stolen wealth to their supporters) with no Constitutional justification whatsoever. How can we have "peace" when one party targets half the population?

 

It was a republican administration that decided on a War on Terror that turned massive federal surpluses into massive federal deficits; while allowing persons with enough wealth, to make more wealth, under our form of Capitalism.

 

Income tax (fed) was a constitutionally invalid mandate

 

Going to war and providing for the county's Common Defense IS a Constitutional activity. We can argue exactly what is "defense" (or if we were actually under a threat) but whatever it is it uses the military. Welfare spending, or the Democrats "War on Poverty" (soon they will add the "War on Obesity" with Obamacare) is not Constitutional, and therefore IS illegitimate. Most of the federal budget is not called for in the Constitution, and was created by Democrats after Democrats FDR threatened the Supreme Court in 1937 so they would stop ruling his "New Deal" unconstitutional. Google the "Switch in Time That Saved Nine!"

Democrats have built their party platform on violating the US Constitution!

 

If we weren't paying trillions of dollars to support Democrat violations of the Constitution we would STILL have "massive federal surpluses" regardless of any war we fight!

 

It is a power available after certain prerequisites in Article 1, Section 9.

- - - Updated - - -

If that is your line of reasoning, then providing for the general welfare is also, a specifically enumerated general power delegated to our federal Congress.

And, providing for the common defense and general welfare of the United States does not require an tax on the incomes of real persons.

 

You are welcome to your opinion. My opinion is that we would not have an income tax now, if our elected representatives could distinguish between a warfare-state and a welfare-state.

 

Are you saying the federal government SHOULD NOT provide for the Common Defense? Are you saying we should not ATTACK those who blow up buildings and kill hundreds to thousands of American citizens? I stand by my claim as it is fact, and not purely conjecture. If we followed the Constitution, and the federal government only spent money paying for what was actually IN the Constitution we would not need a federal income tax. If we had one it would be VERY small and the government would run surpluses all the time. The truly expensive things are again Democrat violations of the Constitution.

 

Providing for the General Welfare IS NOT a specific enumerated power of Congress. Article 1, Section 8 states the following in part:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes..., to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; ​

Then it goes on to ENUMERATE (meaning "list" look it up if you don't believe me) actual powers to Congress which include the following for providing for the common defense.

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;​

The Constitution defines "providing for the general welfare" in the following enumerated powers (in part).

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;​

The General Welfare defined by Democrats as a federal Welfare State where wealth is distributed to demanding Democrat voters IS NOT an enumerated power in the Constitution.