Is the Income Tax unconstitutional or not? With Video. (health care, Obama, how much)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Who me? I did post my arguments. My "opinions about the other person" are germane to the discussion because all political debate returns to interpretation of the law. Understanding one's interpretation is not possible without discussing the philosophical basis that forms the viewpoint from which it is observed. It is the avoidance of such discussion that ensures we will never reach understanding of the real difference between people's views when we deal only with the results reached by such philosophy.
Who me? I did post my arguments. My "opinions about the other person" are germane to the discussion because all political debate returns to interpretation of the law. Understanding one's interpretation is not possible without discussing the philosophical basis that forms the viewpoint from which it is observed. It is the avoidance of such discussion that ensures we will never reach understanding of the real difference between people's views when we deal only with the results reached by such philosophy.
Not only you, but the last posts were just redundant imo.
Help me out. I'm not a lawyer, but I had understood that the problem was apportionment. Before the 16th amendment Congress would be forced to apportion taxes like income taxes based upon state population. That obviously can't work. Is that correct?
Apportionment is an issue alright, but that is because all direct taxes must be apportioned. Income taxes are indirect taxes and, as the Court decisions cited earlier took care to point out, they were entirely constitutional from the moment the document was ratified. The 1895 decision in Pollock rested upon a newly invented theory of taxation holding that as taxation of income in such forms as rent and dividends worked a considerable effect upon the value of the underlying asset, it was in fact a direct tax in that degree, and therefore not constitutional. The 16th Amendment exploded that aberrant interpretation.
Last edited by saganista; 09-23-2009 at 09:29 AM..
Oh no, not BUTLER. You don't mean THIS part, do you...
The clause confers a power separate and distinct from those later enumerated, is not restricted in meaning by the grant of them, and Congress consequently has a substantive power to tax and to appropriate, limited only by the requirement that it shall be exercised to provide for the general welfare of the United States.
The act invades the reserved rights of the states.
However, I do agree that some correctly point out that the Butler ruling does seem to expand, without any logical limit whatsoever, the Power of Congress to create Collectivist policy. This simply means to me that we should have the Supreme Court address this matter again. It would be foolish to think that this Court acted rationally in any way given that The Raw..I mean The New Deal was still shiny and new. Obviously the Court understood that public support for Collectivism was very high at this time.
That not withstanding, is it believed that there should be no limit placed upon Congress to redistribute wealth in this country? I really am not trying to "force" a particular answer here. Do most people really think that Congress should be able to pick and choose which citizen's freedom is more important than others based only on their level of income? I really am alone in this world if this is the case.
Methinks we should wait for that brilliant constitutional lawyer and scholar Rush Limbaugh to WEIGH IN with his legal opinions. I'm sure the right wingers here are waiting for him to back them up. If not, there's always that other scholar and genius, Sarah Palin. The intellectual bench of the right wing movement runs deep.
Your preferences for continued dedication to ignorance are noted. Regardless, the government has always had the power to levy income taxes, and as the filer prepares his or her own tax bill, the system is voluntary. These facts are not altered by either refusal or inability to recognize them.
Here's a very simple way to answer your question...
Stop paying your income tax. See if anyone notices. Get back to us with a report.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.