Sunday, May 24th, 2009 | Author: markross
Arguments against United States income tax – Some of the original United States tax laws, as per The United States Constitution: Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, and Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4 (No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless…) The Sixteenth Amendment (1913), gave Congress the ability to tax income from The United States’ citizens. – The The Fair Tax Act of 2009 is one of the more popular alternatives that our law-makers are currently considering… “It promotes more freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.” This bill (H.R.25) is sponsored by Congressman John Linder.
Twitter
Facebook
Monday, May 25th, 2009 (url)
So if our founders "explicitly" said, "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census…" then wouldn't it have been extremely immoral for Congress to put fourth a proposed amendment to The Constitution, that allowed The Federal Government to directly (and progressively) tax the income of The United State's citizens?
Then for a sitting president or any legislator to uphold that it is patriotic to pay more taxes, is simply wrong. In fact, I would argue that by following the constitution (as it relates to taxation) as our founders wrote it, is far more patriotic.
Then to tax citizens more (progressively) money, just because they have more money, or have worked very hard to make more money, in my opinion, is not only immoral, but should be considered downright illegal.
—
One reason our founders took up arms against England was because they were being directly taxed; however, they had no (taxation without representation) representation in Parliament, back in England. Today, in The United States, I see our current system of taxation as taxation with mis-representation.
It is simply immoral to force anyone to give up money from their hard earned pay, especially when that person has "no say" as to "where and how" that money is being allocated.
Please consider the wisdom of President Abraham Lincoln:
Capital and property are the fruits of labor
Monday, June 15th, 2009 (url)
I agree…couldnt have said it better myself
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009 (url)
This is a really good history of taxation, in The United States, from The Treasury Department web site.
And this paragraph came from the above web site…
–
"Prior to the enactment of the income tax, most citizens were able to pursue their private economic affairs without the direct knowledge of the government. Individuals earned their wages, businesses earned their profits, and wealth was accumulated and dispensed with little or no interaction with government entities. The income tax fundamentally changed this relationship, giving the government the right and the need to know about all manner of an individual or business' economic life."
Thursday, January 7th, 2010 (url)
Incidentally, when The 16th Amendment was ratified, the taxable rate was 1 to 7% for people who earned in excess of $500,000, and it only applied to 1% of the population. For me, this begs the question, should this amendment still be valid? I would have to believe, that amendment would not have been ratified by the states had they known it would effect all income earners; and one day, the taxable rates would grow in excess of 30%. Also, from what I understand, the amendment was created because the people were unhappy with many of the (sales) excise taxes at the time. Today, the average income earners not only pay over 30% on their income, but most states also have state taxes, as well as a plethora of other taxes. It is more then high-time for the states to reconsider this antiquated, and extremely unfair system of taxation.
Thursday, July 1st, 2010 (url)
Please see:
The present assault upon capital
–
Congress in implementing the 16th amendment