Posted on 02/04/2014 4:39:05 PM PST by JOHN W K
I like it, because my ideal would be to repeal the 16th, and then tax only those things that the Federal government did before the tax was in place.
Of course we wouldn’t be able to sustain a large Federal Government in that case, which would be fine with me.
>”If “slavery” by definition is an income tax rate of 100%, then any lesser percentage is merely a matter of degree”<
It’s just making Slavery “Part Time”, like Obamacare is making Employment “Part Time”.
JWK
My comment is true. Each state’s burden would be different, call it whatever you want to.
To answer your question, I have no problem with “Representation with a proportional financial obligation whenever a direct tax is levied among the states.” It’s a wonderful principle.
How would it work today? Would it be triggered for each new aircraft carrier the Navy requested? Each new paint job for a federal building. Every time a soldier needed a new pair of boots? How would it work for repairs to an interstate highway? In an average day, how many direct taxes would you estimate the Federal Government would impose on the states? 1,000? 10,000? How large would the Federal bureaucracy have to be to manage such a task? As large as the IRS you just abolished?
The little example you offered of the $3M direct tax of 1813 was quite quaint, but not particularly instructive for an era of federal budgets approaching 4 Trillion dollars.
JWK
The apportioned tax would be triggered whenever Congress spends more than is brought in from imposts, duties and excise taxes levied upon specifically chosen articles of consumption and borrows to meet its expenditures. Our founder's intentions are expressed in a number of the state ratification documents, e.g. see:
Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New Hampshire; June 21, 1788 Fourthly That Congress do not lay direct Taxes but when the money arising from Impost, Excise and their other resources are insufficient for the Publick Exigencies; nor then, untill Congress shall have first made a Requisition upon the States, to Assess, Levy, & pay their respective proportions, of such requisitions agreeably to the Census fixed in the said Constitution in such way & manner as the Legislature of the State shall think best and in such Case if any State shall neglect, then Congress may Assess & Levy such States proportion together with the Interest thereon at the rate of six per Cent per Annum from the Time of payment prescribed in such requisition-
JWK
You really need to refrain from unsupportable assumptions.
It diminishes your argument and makes others less inclined to take you or your proposal seriously.
Goodnight.
JWK
That is what you appeared to suggest and why I asked a question.
You really need to differentiate between a question and assumption. Not doing so makes you look silly.
Good night!
JWK
I support Ted Cruz and the flat tax.
:-)
I'm not one of them!
JWK
The liberty to fail or succeed at one’s own hand is a PROGRESSIVE‘S nightmare and not the American Dream
Neither am I. ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.