~ I wonder if Cicero thinks that the Emancipation of Slavery happened "CENTURIES" ago? Or. ~ Does he know that women voting hasn't been CENTURIES either? Or. If if 18 year old Americans voting hasn't been around for CENTURIES?
Since it hasn't been CENTURIES, just like the Federal Govt collecting taxes, I wonder if Cic is also against freeing the slaves, or women voting or allowing 18 year old Americans to vote?
Did you just make morally equivalent the government sanctioned practice of slavery and women’s voting rights with government sanctioned taxation? In one example government brought liberty to minority groups, in the case of taxation, government is taking away liberty by forcefully taking property (in a discriminatory manner I might add, the more productive you are the more they take).
The federal government is the only slave master now.
A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant and the crazy crazier. ~ H.L. Mencken Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. ~ H. L. Mencken The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. ~H. L. Mencken
Huh!!! In 1913 the 16th Amendment established the Federal Income Tax. The funny thing is, the 16th Amerndment wasn't ratified by 2/3's of the states. Prior to that, a federal income tax was imposed during the civil war. Between the civil war and 1913, the federal inome tax was declared unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court.
You "beleive" the government has the right to impose taxes, just like you "believe" it has been constitutionaly accepted for "CENTURIES".
The US Constitution was written 225 years ago (that is 2 plus CENTURIES) and it certainly gave the Federal government the authority to establish taxes --- which it did from Day 1 -- in the form of Excise Taxes and Tariffs ...... the 16th Amendment was ratified and gave it the authority to establish an income tax.
I have not seen any judicial decision that declares the income tax unconstitutional nor any decision which negates the ratification of the 16th amendment. Until such time that there is a judicial decision that declares the income tax unconstitutional or overturns the ratification of the 16th amendment the FACT remains that the income tax is considered officially CONSTITUTIONAL.
One can go further back into British history and the history of civilized nations that the national government has FOR CENTURIES been authorized to establish various types of taxes.
End of debate.
“And yet our opponents tell us not to interfere with abortion. They tell us not to impose our morality on those who wish to allow or participate in the taking of the life of infants before birth. Yet no one calls it imposing morality to prohibit the taking of life after a child is born. We’re told about a woman’s right to control her own body. But doesn’t the unborn child have a higher right, and that is to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?” – Ronald Reagan
Did you just make morally equivalent the government sanctioned practice of slavery and women’s voting rights with government sanctioned taxation? In one example government brought liberty to minority groups, in the case of taxation, government is taking away liberty by forcefully taking property (in a discriminatory manner I might add, the more productive you are the more they take).
No Cicero... I just pointed out that the USA has had several changes to the original Constitution... They're called amendments... and they are legal, even though some Right Wing Extremists profess that they aren't. Those Right Wingers (and even some on this board) decide which ones they will deny and which ones fit their agenda. The second, for example... Some Righties will die for that one... Others they deny even exist.
Those wacko Right Wing Extremists are known as "Smorgasbord Patriots"... the pick and choose which laws to follow and which ones to ignore. Any part of the US Constitution that agrees with their agenda is sacred... any part that doesn't, they consider 'optional', or invalid.
tax on tax on tax on tax.....all on the same income.....they tax $$ changing hands/ food changing hands/ fuel changing hands/ your rent at the nursing home/ chips/ soda/ beer/ cigarettes/ buying home/buying car/ buying a coat/buying underwear/ buying deodorant/ buying some medications/ some medical procedures(not cosmetic in nature)....blah blah blah blah......
the list is endless......THEN..................BAM
enters your income tax and all the dumba$$ deductions that most folks dont have
DOES ANYONE OR IS ANYONE ABLE TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NEEDS AND WANTS DICTATED BY OUR GOVERNMENT????
Dont tell me we have to sit around a campfire dont tell me I have to help suzie and bobby raise their child dont tell me Michael Moore and crew need more air time dont tell me I have to help you pay for your home
etc etc etc......
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
16th amendment freed Americans from the money they earn from their labor to pay the interest on government debt. Just like ending slavery and women voting rights. Free at last ... Free at last... I did't know that meant freeload off of the taxpayer
A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant and the crazy crazier. ~ H.L. Mencken Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. ~ H. L. Mencken The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. ~H. L. Mencken
One can go further back into British history and the history of civilized nations that the national government has FOR CENTURIES been authorized to establish various types of taxes.
Ohhh...Go even FURTHER BACK!! How about Solomon's Yoke?
Solomon’s Yoke
IT IS TOLD-1 Kings, Chapter 12-that the people of Israel petitioned their new king, Rehoboam, son of Solomon, to relieve them of the "yoke" his father had suffered them to bear. The "yoke," we learn from the story, was the cost of maintaining the political establishment; it was an income tax.
The designation of a levy on one’s production as a "yoke" is interesting; it shows how keen is the mind unencumbered with erudition. The yoke symbolizes the beast of burden, who, of course, has no right of property. When the human is similarly deprived of what he has produced-which is the essence of income taxation-he is indeed degraded to the status of an ox. The Israelite, who maintained that he was made in the image of God, sensed the indignity; he wanted none of the "yoke."
The story goes on to say that Rehoboam promised to take his subjects’ plea under advisement. Apparently, he talked the matter over with his ministers. What they said to him is unrecorded, but we can infer from his ultimate decision that they strongly advised him against any reduction of the income tax; after all, ministers have to be supported in the style to which bureaucrats always like to be accustomed. So, after shilly-shallying for three days, Rehoboam came to the point and said: "Whereas my father did lade you with a heavy yoke, I will add to your yoke: my father did chastise you with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions."
Whatever chastisement with scorpions may be, it is certainly not pleasant to the recipient. And that is something you might remember when an agent of the Internal Revenue Department calls you on the carpet for not including in your income-tax return the winnings you made at poker or the gratuities you received as a waiter or a beautician. Things could be much worse with us than they are; we could be chastised with scorpions.
We learn from this biblical story that income taxation is a very old custom. Antiquarians find mention of the practice in the annals of Egypt, as far back as 1580 B.C. In those days, it appears, the Grand Vizier did not levy on the incomes of his subjects but on the incomes of public officials; since the latter had nothing of their own to tax-public officials are not producers-their taxable funds consisted of what they had mulcted from the producing public. It was tax farming. There is something to be said in favor of that system. Since the tax collector gets his "cut" first, before turning over the balance to the central government, he can never be accused of accepting bribes-a charge that is sometimes levied against agents of our Internal Revenue Bureau.
Even evasion of the income tax, by way of false income-tax returns, is not a modern invention. Gibbon makes mention of the use of racks and scourges in ancient Rome, up to the fourth century of the Christian era, to get the truth out of suspected evaders. We have not, at any rate, come to that, although we do on occasions cast a tax dodger into durance vile.
For something really different and quite startling in the income-tax business, we must again refer to the biblical story. Some of the Israelites were so resentful about the "yoke" that when Rehoboam’s chief tax collector, one called Hadoram, made his round among them, they unceremoniously met him with such a hail of stones "that he died." This was rather hard on Hadoram and his family, and is not to be recommended for agents of the Internal Revenue Bureau. In the latter part of this book-which concerns itself with the immorality of the income tax-a more orderly and effective way of getting rid of the "yoke" that Americans have been suffered to wear since 1913 will be suggested. Provided, of course, they want to get rid of it; provided they have the sense of self-respect and human dignity that characterized those stone-throwing Israelites.
A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant and the crazy crazier. ~ H.L. Mencken Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. ~ H. L. Mencken The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. ~H. L. Mencken
Jan 21, 2012 (30% of precincts reporting) Newt Gingrich 70,892 40.8% Mitt Romney 45,324 26.1% Rick Santorum 31,148 17.9% Ron Paul 23,257 13.4% Rick Perry 1,140 0.7% Other 2,146 1.2%
Gingrinch has proven that Mitt Romney is beatable --- Florida looms as the next big show down whic I predict Romney will lose.
The only question now --- Since Vulture Capitalist Romney is unelectable and Disgraced Corrupt former Speaker Gingrinch is unelectable, how does the electable Senator Santorum rise to the top and seize the nomination ?
“And yet our opponents tell us not to interfere with abortion. They tell us not to impose our morality on those who wish to allow or participate in the taking of the life of infants before birth. Yet no one calls it imposing morality to prohibit the taking of life after a child is born. We’re told about a woman’s right to control her own body. But doesn’t the unborn child have a higher right, and that is to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?” – Ronald Reagan
this is a bump in the road for romney. watch for romney to go after newt personally in the debates bringing up things like his record as speaker and his consulting work for freddie mac. several reports say jeb bush will endorse romney this week. gingrich has to win fla, because after that its nevada and michigan, both romney strongholds. mark my word, the streak of sc determining the gop nominee is over. if newt does win fla, the chance of a brokered gop convention goes up ten fold.
Logged
