Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Down

Author Topic: XVI Amendment  (Read 38472 times)

Brien

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • I'm a Leo
    • standard transportation
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #30 on: August 10, 2005, 11:49:41 am »

Hey Brien,

You misunderstood the "voluntary" part of the FairTax. It's voluntary because you are only taxed on goods and services you buy. Nobody forces you to buy anything, hence the tax being voluntary. I admit, it's a stretch of the pure definition, but correct nonetheless. 

BarryD

Ahhhh.  Ok.  I have no problem with that scenario.
Logged
No country can be well governed unless its citizens as a body keep religiously before their minds that they are the guardians of the law, and that the law officers are only the machinery for its execution, nothing more......M. T.

Brien

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • I'm a Leo
    • standard transportation
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #31 on: August 10, 2005, 12:06:18 pm »

The Muslims don't give a twit for us infidels.  You included.  They seek to control you and extinguish your LIBERTY.  They would make you a slave to ALLAH.  This is their stated goal.  It has nothing to do with what America does in the world theater today.  They seek only one thing.  World domination to ALLAH.  If you believe otherwise, you are mistaken.

Elsewhere you have stressed the importance of backing up claims, and not just spouting rhetoric.  Would you care to provide a link to a statement by some organization that truly represents most Muslims, where they state their goal of controlling me and extinguishing my liberty?

Sure pick up any national paper and read about what is happening in Iraq.  Do you not remember 9/11?  Do I need to provide the link for that act of war?  Osama and his buddies "truly" represent Muslims.  They have attacked the US before and they will again.  I hope you are not a causality.  Your cavalier attitude to the the war on terror leads me to believe you think it is nothing to be concerned over.  How wrong you are, and I sincerely hope you or nobody in your family becomes a causality.

Also I have used the term "extremist" time after time.  I understand that perhaps the Majority of Muslims are not Jihadist", yet if you don't understand the current threat of "extremist Muslims" to the free world today, then you have not been awake since even before 9/11.  Remember the USS Cole?  The bombing of the Embassy's in the middle east?   There is a declared war on all freedom loving nations by these Muslims.  And if you don't think they will kill you, you are very sadly mistaken. 
« Last Edit: August 10, 2005, 12:19:12 pm by Brien »
Logged
No country can be well governed unless its citizens as a body keep religiously before their minds that they are the guardians of the law, and that the law officers are only the machinery for its execution, nothing more......M. T.

SteveA

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2905
  • Freedom - Are you man enough to handle it?
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #32 on: August 10, 2005, 01:27:52 pm »

And I've heard propoganda about extremist Christians trying to kill Muslims as well.  It goes both ways.

Back when we were concerned with justice over the 9/11 attacks, we had plenty of support both here and abroad.  We stood a chance of actually detering such actions in the future as well.

What you're seeing now has nothing to do with 9/11.  It has to do with the "You're either for us or against us." declaration by Bush to the world - people are wondering which side of the line to stand on.

Before he escalated this thing, we had a lot of sympathy and help from people in Middle East and were assisted in capturing many people we felt assisted with 9/11.  Such is more difficult and becoming impossible as resistance grows against what is no longer justice but an unprovoked war with the option of neutrality removed.
Logged
"Fruitless, born a thousand times, lies barren.  Unguided inspiration, yields random motion, circumscribed in destination, going nowhere.  Guidance uninspired, always true in facing, stands immobile.  But fixed upon that destination firmly and with inspiration lofted; beget your dreams."

svillee

  • Friend of the FSP
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 105
  • I favor a constitutional plutocracy.
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #33 on: August 10, 2005, 02:51:20 pm »

Elsewhere you have stressed the importance of backing up claims, and not just spouting rhetoric.  Would you care to provide a link to a statement by some organization that truly represents most Muslims, where they state their goal of controlling me and extinguishing my liberty?

Sure pick up any national paper and read about what is happening in Iraq.  Do you not remember 9/11?  Do I need to provide the link for that act of war?  Osama and his buddies "truly" represent Muslims.  They have attacked the US before and they will again.  I hope you are not a causality.  Your cavalier attitude to the the war on terror leads me to believe you think it is nothing to be concerned over.  How wrong you are, and I sincerely hope you or nobody in your family becomes a causality.. 

Of course I'm aware of Iraq, and 9/11, and the USS Cole.  I don't have a cavalier attitude about the war on terror.  You have jumped to an incorrect conclusion, and when others jump to incorrect conclusions you lash out at them.

All I wanted you to do is back up your claim that "the Muslims" (implying most Muslims) have a stated goal of controlling me and extinguishing my liberty.  You did not include the word "extremist" in that claim.

I understand that perhaps the Majority of Muslims are not Jihadist.

This admission is getting there, but I'm looking for more.  As far as I can tell, most Muslims not only avoid jihad violence in their own behavior, but they disapprove of others like Osama Bin Laden doing it.  If you can provide a link showing that most Muslims approve of Osama Bin Laden, then please do so.

This is an important point, because when people make sweeping statements about "the Muslims", then peace-loving Muslims are understandably offended.
Logged

Brien

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • I'm a Leo
    • standard transportation
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #34 on: August 10, 2005, 04:33:15 pm »

Of course I'm aware of Iraq, and 9/11, and the USS Cole.  I don't have a cavalier attitude about the war on terror.  You have jumped to an incorrect conclusion, and when others jump to incorrect conclusions you lash out at them.

All I wanted you to do is back up your claim that "the Muslims" (implying most Muslims) have a stated goal of controlling me and extinguishing my liberty.  You did not include the word "extremist" in that claim.

I understand that perhaps the Majority of Muslims are not Jihadist.

 

This admission is getting there, but I'm looking for more.  As far as I can tell, most Muslims not only avoid jihad violence in their own behavior, but they disapprove of others like Osama Bin Laden doing it.  If you can provide a link showing that most Muslims approve of Osama Bin Laden, then please do so.

This is an important point, because when people make sweeping statements about "the Muslims", then peace-loving Muslims are understandably offended.
Quote

Ok.  I failed to use the word extremist" as I have usually done in my posts in the the past.  And I stand by my statement that the "proof" is in the declaration of war when Extremist Muslims attacked the US by destroying the WTC and The USS Cole.   You SEEM to have a cavalier attitude by your writing.   Plus you asked for your "proof" and I have supplied it.

And if you don't think you can be caught in an attack on our soil, I think you should reconsider your thoughts.  By the grace of God, I was not in the twin towers on 9/11.  I visited there often on business and still retain the business cards of my murdered friends.  I, or other members of my family, could have been in the Underground in London as I have relatives native to England.

I am of the opinion that there are working cells of "jihadists" in America as I write this.  There are radicals who condemn both you and I for our very existence as "infidels".  They teach hatred and murder.  In my opinion they are worse than the KKK or Nazis because they hide behind the shield of religion.  They are Muslims, albeit radical extremist fundamentalists, yet still they are practicing Muslims.  You can't deny that fact.

Other Muslims may "disapprove" of Osama, and his henchmen, but what do they do to stop it?  The good people of Iraq are fighting for their very existence and the American Press hammers the US everyday for aiding their fight against these "exteremists."  Thomas Sowell wrote a recent column on how the American Press consistently highlights the "violence" in Iraq and ignores the heroes and good things that are happening there.

What do the non violent Muslims, as a group, do here in this country do to stem the tide of extremist radical fundamentalism taught by the radical sects?  I have heard rhetoric but I haven't seen any actions upon their behalf.  Do you know of any organized Muslim activity that has contributed to the fallen Americans of 9/11?  If so, please educate me.  I fully understand the difference between non violent Muslims and extremist Muslins.  I am not indicting ALL Muslims but I am advocating and all out war against the extremists that have vowed to kill both you and me.  For the free world to do anything less is irresponsible and inviting terrorism right up to your front door.

American citizens from all walks of life have contributed to the families who lost their loved ones in the 9/11 act of war.  Religious groups have taken up collections.  Organized Charities have participated.  Are any of these Muslim ?  All I have seen is "extremist" Muslims dance in the streets after 9/11 and the London Underground bombings.

Did we, as citizens of the free world, dance in the streets when we invaded Iraq to restore Kuwait's international borders?  Did we dance in the streets when Saddam was removed from power after raping, torturing, and killing entire families?  Did we dance in the streets when Saddam was removed from power because he committed genocide against his own people in Kurdistan?  Did we dance in the streets when the US dropped the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki?  We all know the answer to these questions.  This is what sets us apart from those who do dance in the streets over the killing innocent people.

No.  We are a nation of compationate and just people.  We will have to meet this enemy head on right here upon our own soil.  They have already proved that during 9/11.  I sincerely hope you and your family remain safe from these extremist Muslims that hide behind the robes of ALLAH.   

And please, I am not "lashing out" at anyone.  Just the opposite, see some of the posts that are directed at me.  I write with emphasis so that you may understand the importance of what I write, not to demean or lash out at any particular person.  As a matter of fact, I have written apologies here on this site which is more than I have seen from other posters when they are incorrect, rude and insulting.  So, please spare me the lecture on etiquette.

I hope you understand. :(
Logged
No country can be well governed unless its citizens as a body keep religiously before their minds that they are the guardians of the law, and that the law officers are only the machinery for its execution, nothing more......M. T.

svillee

  • Friend of the FSP
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 105
  • I favor a constitutional plutocracy.
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #35 on: August 10, 2005, 06:32:13 pm »

Plus you asked for your "proof" and I have supplied it.

You supplied proof of a modified statement with the word "extremist" inserted.  That proof was unnecessary, because I never questioned the modified statement.

All I wanted you to do is admit that the extremists are in the minority, or else prove otherwise.  As I said, this is an important point for peace-loving Muslims who have endured various forms of harassment since 9/11.  And I stand by my statement that I don't have a cavalier attitude.

Organized Charities have participated.  Are any of these Muslim ?

I know that many Muslims have become afraid to give to charities since 9/11.

I hope you understand. :(

Again, please refrain from sarcastic emoticons.
Logged

Brien

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • I'm a Leo
    • standard transportation
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #36 on: August 15, 2005, 04:22:49 pm »

Plus you asked for your "proof" and I have supplied it.

You supplied proof of a modified statement with the word "extremist" inserted.  That proof was unnecessary, because I never questioned the modified statement.

All I wanted you to do is admit that the extremists are in the minority, or else prove otherwise.  As I said, this is an important point for peace-loving Muslims who have endured various forms of harassment since 9/11.  And I stand by my statement that I don't have a cavalier attitude.

Organized Charities have participated.  Are any of these Muslim ?

I know that many Muslims have become afraid to give to charities since 9/11.

I hope you understand. :(

Again, please refrain from sarcastic emoticons.

Ok  Check out the Council for American-Islamic Relations or CAIR. 

Bossem Khafagi, director of community relations pleaded guilty to criminal charges in court and was deported.  Ismail Royer, CAIR communications specialist and civil rights coordinator was sentenced to 20 years on terrorist charges.  Sinaj Wahhaj was linked to Omar Abdul Ramhan in the plot to blow up the WTC in 1995.

Ghassan Elashi, founder of the Texas chapter of CAIR was convicted of knowingly doing business with Hammas.  He gave Hammas over 12.4 million dollars.

Omar Ahmand, founding Chairman of CAIR, announced in July 1998 that:   "Islam isn't in America to be equal to every other faith, but t o become dominant.  The Koran... should be the highest authority in America and Islam the only religion on Earth."

So, I agree we should open a true and honest dialog with ALL Muslims of Islam's Faith and separate the "wheat from the chaff", before it is too late.

Why would Muslims be afraid of giving to American and World based charities to help those who have been harmed by the extremist Muslims?  I would think it would be the opposite?  Even if there was some proof, on a per capita basis, that Muslims in the United States were equal in giving to Charities dedicated to helping those harmed by people the of their faith that have caused death and tragic events, they would gain more credibility with those who stand against Muslims who dedicate themselves to kill innocent people.

For example./ There are a few Christians that dedicate themselves to saving an unborn fetus through bombing abortion clinics.  They, or any organization connected to the Christians, do not provide funds to extremists of the same religion.  Nor do they stand by and do nothing while a very few "extremist" bomb clinics or shoot Physicians.  They provide alternatives to the violence.  And certainly, this example is by no means even remotely comparable statistically because almost every Christan who is anti-choice is non violent.  Futhermore, the guilty are hunted down, tried, convicted, and sentenced under our law.

My point here is that Muslims, although many abhor violence, do not do anything to counter the terrorist behavior of their "brother" Muslim jihadists.  In fact, as I cited, some even give millions of dollars to terrorists organizations like Hammas.  So logically speaking,these terrorist organizations are getting their money from other Muslims. It is my belief, unless the non violent Muslims begin an organized resistance to take back their religion that has been hijacked by extremists, they too will begin to suffer the consequences that will befall the extremists.  Unfortunately it is becoming a situation of "either you are with the free world, or against it". They will have to prove their allegiance to a free world that is tolerant of other religions and cultures or become associated with the enemies of freedom and liberty for which the free world is now waging war.
Logged
No country can be well governed unless its citizens as a body keep religiously before their minds that they are the guardians of the law, and that the law officers are only the machinery for its execution, nothing more......M. T.

svillee

  • Friend of the FSP
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 105
  • I favor a constitutional plutocracy.
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #37 on: August 15, 2005, 10:09:53 pm »

Ghassan Elashi, founder of the Texas chapter of CAIR was convicted of knowingly doing business with Hammas.  He gave Hammas over 12.4 million dollars.

Omar Ahmand, founding Chairman of CAIR, announced in July 1998 that:   "Islam isn't in America to be equal to every other faith, but to become dominant.  The Koran... should be the highest authority in America and Islam the only religion on Earth."

Yes, CAIR is a scary group.  We all need to keep an eye out for organizations like this.

Why would Muslims be afraid of giving to American and World based charities to help those who have been harmed by the extremist Muslims?

Charity can be a tricky thing.  In the case of Muslims considering donations to a Muslim organization, they may be legitimately afraid that the organization will turn out to be like CAIR.  On the other hand, even if they're considering donations to a faith-neutral charity, it's always possible the funds will be used for other things.  You may have heard about the scandal involving Bernadine Healy at the Red Cross, where funds earmarked for 9/11 relief were actually diverted elsewhere.  Of course this issue applies to both Muslim and non-Muslim donors, but still, for this and other reasons, I'm reluctant to disparage people simply for not donating.

My point here is that Muslims, although many abhor violence, do not do anything to counter the terrorist behavior of their "brother" Muslim jihadists.  In fact, as I cited, some even give millions of dollars to terrorists organizations like Hammas.  So logically speaking,these terrorist organizations are getting their money from other Muslims. It is my belief, unless the non violent Muslims begin an organized resistance to take back their religion that has been hijacked by extremists, they too will begin to suffer the consequences that will befall the extremists.  Unfortunately it is becoming a situation of "either you are with the free world, or against it". They will have to prove their allegiance to a free world that is tolerant of other religions and cultures or become associated with the enemies of freedom and liberty for which the free world is now waging war.

I prefer not to take this view of "you're either with us or against us".  I don't expect Muslims to prove their allegiance.  I'm willing to treat them as innocent until proven guilty.  To me, that's the American way.
Logged

Brien

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 180
  • I'm a Leo
    • standard transportation
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #38 on: August 16, 2005, 02:08:52 pm »

Ghassan Elashi, founder of the Texas chapter of CAIR was convicted of knowingly doing business with Hammas.  He gave Hammas over 12.4 million dollars.

Omar Ahmand, founding Chairman of CAIR, announced in July 1998 that:   "Islam isn't in America to be equal to every other faith, but to become dominant.  The Koran... should be the highest authority in America and Islam the only religion on Earth."

Yes, CAIR is a scary group.  We all need to keep an eye out for organizations like this.

Why would Muslims be afraid of giving to American and World based charities to help those who have been harmed by the extremist Muslims?

Charity can be a tricky thing.  In the case of Muslims considering donations to a Muslim organization, they may be legitimately afraid that the organization will turn out to be like CAIR.  On the other hand, even if they're considering donations to a faith-neutral charity, it's always possible the funds will be used for other things.  You may have heard about the scandal involving Bernadine Healy at the Red Cross, where funds earmarked for 9/11 relief were actually diverted elsewhere.  Of course this issue applies to both Muslim and non-Muslim donors, but still, for this and other reasons, I'm reluctant to disparage people simply for not donating.

My point here is that Muslims, although many abhor violence, do not do anything to counter the terrorist behavior of their "brother" Muslim jihadists.  In fact, as I cited, some even give millions of dollars to terrorists organizations like Hammas.  So logically speaking,these terrorist organizations are getting their money from other Muslims. It is my belief, unless the non violent Muslims begin an organized resistance to take back their religion that has been hijacked by extremists, they too will begin to suffer the consequences that will befall the extremists.  Unfortunately it is becoming a situation of "either you are with the free world, or against it". They will have to prove their allegiance to a free world that is tolerant of other religions and cultures or become associated with the enemies of freedom and liberty for which the free world is now waging war.

I prefer not to take this view of "you're either with us or against us".  I don't expect Muslims to prove their allegiance.  I'm willing to treat them as innocent until proven guilty.  To me, that's the American way.

I know what you are saying and agree in the "American Way" as well.  However two points come to mind.  The war on terror is a Free World effort so the American Way will not always prevail.  Witness Tony Blair recently expelling Muslims in Great Britain for inciting hatred against the homeland.

And here in America, Americans, in my opinion, are very tolerant, to a point.  Some make light of the 911 act of war against this country because they say it didn't affect them where they live.  Not me.  And the worldwide acts of terrorism in the Philippines, England, Saudi Arabia, and the United States for example, tend to make ordinary citizens very frightened.  And ordinary citizens will do extraordinary things in order to protect their way of life.   I am not advocating a all out witch hunt against every Muslim for extremists residing in the US, but I am saying, it has happened before, and it may happen again.

The peace advocates of Islam could do more to protect their image here in the US and abroad.  Otherwise they may be in for a rough ride when the next terrorist attacks happens upon the soil of the US.  I have heard many so called "experts" state it is only a matter of time when the next attack will come.  I mean look at it this way, we detained the Japanese during WWII against all of the rights and freedoms we hold dear to us.  And they didn't do anything either.  Some say it can't happen again.  I say nay.  When the Americans are attacked again, and the attack is of large proportions again, there is a chance that the citizens of this country will pressure the government to take drastic steps to protect their way of life.  Other citizens who know better will probably be in the minority.     Witness the so called Patriot Act. 


Oh, and yes I remember the Red Cross scandal.  However, that doesn't mean the Muslims can't find, or even start, a charity which would benefit those who were murdered in the 911 act of war.  It would go a long way in helping Americans understand reasonable Muslims practicing Islam the way it was probably meant to be understood.                                                                                                                                     
Logged
No country can be well governed unless its citizens as a body keep religiously before their minds that they are the guardians of the law, and that the law officers are only the machinery for its execution, nothing more......M. T.

libertyworker

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 319
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #39 on: August 23, 2005, 09:24:53 am »

I recognize that some taxes are necessary.  I would advocate returning to the pre-Civil War method of funding the federal government:

The localities all have a property tax, funding all local functions to the degree that community members desire.  The state government has a property tax, usually a set percentage of the local property tax.  Once a year, the federal government sends each state a bill for 1/50th of the annual budget.  As part of the return to this system, I'd advocate repeal of the 17th amendment, returning the election of senators to the state legislatures.  In this manner the states have a powerful voice in the size of the bills they receive.  This is a crucial aspect of the original Constitution that we are missing.  It is the missing reins on today's runaway federal government.


                                                                                                                                                                     
  Basically that was custom duties which was very high and studies have shown the benefits that America got from Immrants post civil war was reduced a lot by the high tariffs that the merchantilist GOP pushed. Still for a basic constitutional  federal government tariffs these days would not have to be very high, although they would probally be higher that the across the board average today.                                                                                                                 
       Imports are  over 150 billion dollars and soon will be 200 billion, an across the board custom duty of 5%  to 10% should be enough to raise the 50 billion to 200 billion that the federal government could really use. Of course assement risk could be placed on Country of Orgin, for example stuff coming from China may have a high duty while Canada a very low  duty or even no duty because China is a big miltary threat, while Canada is not.                                                                 
  The  point of collection should also be Constitutional and also be respectful of property rights, thus the federal government has to get the ok from the state legisltor to build a collection point in that state, plus state constitutions may require permission from the county and local governments, and the state must get the consent from the property owner if the collection point is built on private property( see my arguments on the eminet domain/ just compensation thread) or they state must convince a jury why the private propert is owed to the state and they must pay just compensation if the jury and appels courts decide in favor of the state, that just compensation not market value, the jury can award just compensation which may include punitive damages on the state.                                                                                           
      If the federal government cannot get the property it wants, it can move the property back to the place where it can obtain the property.
Logged

libertyworker

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 319
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #40 on: August 23, 2005, 09:51:51 am »

As for raising taxes for the federal government, I'd like to see it be apportioned to the states again, and then the 50 states can all come up with their own solution. Some states might use a property tax, a sales tax, a VAT, an income tax, a progressive income tax, a pollution tax, a state lottery,...

At the national level, whatever the tax collection method is, I would like to see it as transparent as possible. If we continue to use the income tax then get rid of withholding so that workers need to pay quarterly like businesses do. I'm not sure of the differences between a VAT and sales tax, but my understanding is the VAT is harsher on the economy. If we have a sales tax then put the tax on the sales receipt as a separate line item. Stop hiding the $0.19 federal gas tax. Gas companies should be advertising their gas at their price and then the final bill will have the federal and state taxes added onto it.

If the federal government was scaled back to their explicit constitutional duties defense, courts, treasurer, postal roads,... then we could fund the federal government with an excise tax as we used to fund the federal government.

Hardy
                                                                                                                                                                 
  Hardy, I  sort of agree, a state membership fee would be best or should be a very big part of the federal fee. If the federal government requires 150 billion dollars, that would be 500 dollars per person, NH would be charged around 600 million to 700 million dollars and CA around 25 billion dollars. At least the debt including the social security debt should be passed to the states based on population, then let  each state decide how they are going to pay the debt, they could also re neotate the debt with debt holders, most which are state and local governments and state citizens, federal property and nonUS constitutional assets and operations of the federal government would go to the states.                             
     Another source of revenue that the federal government could get would be from coining money,  if they could buy sliver for 7 dollars an ounce they might coin a 1 ounce coin and charge 8 to 20 dollars for it. Local public credit unions could replace the Federal Reserve, they could produce their own notes, use the federal coins for full or partial backing and they individually would be responsible for not inflating their notes, not the federal reserve, not the federal tresury and not the state government.                                                                                                                                                       
                Patents and copyrights could also be another source of federal constitutional revenue.
Logged

AmateurEmale

  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #41 on: August 23, 2005, 10:33:30 am »

Do you think the government should charge user fees for the interstate highways?

Or do you think that we could somehow privatize the interstate highways?
Logged

libertyworker

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 319
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #42 on: August 23, 2005, 11:17:31 am »

Do you think the government should charge user fees for the interstate highways?

Or do you think that we could somehow privatize the interstate highways?
                                                                                                                                                       
        I would perfer the federal government turn over control of the interstates to the states and I would perfer my state turn over control of the the interstates to the counties and if my county had a interstate I would perfer the county turn it over to the local governments and I would perfer my local government lease not sell the section of the interstate that runs throught its jurisdiction to a private firm.                                                           
     I also would perfer that the federaly controled TVA be turned over to the counties and local governments and I would perfer my county charge a fee for large boat traffic on the river plus lease the public schools and use  the revenue to subsidze school vochers for at least modest and low income familes.                                                   
        I would like to see my county have voluntery miltia group and volunter Sheriffs department with health insurance for mitia and posse members  and their familes, Objectors could get the same benefit by joing a non violent civil defense group, EMT, or volunter fire department.
Logged

SeanSchade

  • First 1000
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #43 on: October 25, 2006, 01:55:20 pm »

At the national level, whatever the tax collection method is, I would like to see it as transparent as possible.....If we have a sales tax then put the tax on the sales receipt as a separate line item. Stop hiding the $0.19 federal gas tax. Gas companies should be advertising their gas at their price and then the final bill will have the federal and state taxes added onto it.

Hardy

Hardy,

You've contradicted yourself there. Which is it? Do you want transparent taxes, or explicit taxes?

A VAT would be a big mistake...look at the EU. Especially if the income tax wasn't abolished. You'll eventually end up double-taxed when it gets reinstated.

I'm a fan of a consumption tax. The more you consume, the more tax you pay. A national sales tax would be the easiest to implement.

Witholding taxes is there for compliance and convenience. The average American isn't going to save up for their quarterly tax bill. What a mess we would have when tax time came around!

The Federal Government is the largest employer in the country with around 2 million employees. That's a lot of jobs to replace, and couldn't happen over night. In fact I think when you include state and local governments into the mix a very large percentage of the population works for government. Yes, the government is over bloated, and needs to be seriously down sized, but it's not going to be easy.

One last thing...Brien...what's up with all of the "?" in your sentences? It's very hard to read.  ???
Logged

Ward Griffiths

  • First 1000
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1050
  • Canvas and Quicklime
Re: XVI Amendment
« Reply #44 on: October 25, 2006, 02:00:48 pm »


The Federal Government is the largest employer in the country with around 2 million employees. That's a lot of jobs to replace, and couldn't happen over night. In fact I think when you include state and local governments into the mix a very large percentage of the population works for government. Yes, the government is over bloated, and needs to be seriously down sized, but it's not going to be easy.

Toss them out in the streets to starve.  While some of them may have skills useful in a free market, most of them don't deserve to swim in the human gene pool.
Logged
--
Ward Griffiths    wdg3rd@comcast.net

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.  (Denis Diderot)
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Up