Posted on 05/22/2014 8:52:08 AM PDT by JOHN W K
Mark Levin loves to TALK ABOUT SOCIALISM and how it attacks rights associated with property ownership, and how government force is used under socialism to take and then transfer the property of one group of individuals to another group selectively determined by those who hold political power. This transfer of property is primarily accomplished through a socialist tax on profits, gains, and other incomes which seeks out the most productive hard working citizens, taxes them, and then redistributes the property they have earned to those who enjoy riding in governments free cheese wagon who are expected to return the favor by prostituting their vote to those giving free government cheese which in turn keeps socialists at the helm of government power. So why does Mark Levin promote with one of his liberty amendments the socialist tax on profits, gains and other incomes which is the engine that fuels our socialist free cheese wagon?
Mark Levins Liberty Amendment which proposes to perpetuate the socialist income tax reads as follows:
SECTION 1: Congress shall not collect more than 15 percent of a persons annual income, from whatever source derived. Person shall include natural and legal persons.
SECTION 2: The deadline for filing federal income tax returns shall be the day before the date set for elections to federal office.
SECTION 3: Congress shall not collect tax on a decedents estate.
SECTION 4: Congress shall not institute a value-added tax or national sales tax or any other tax in kind or form.
SECTION 5: This Amendment shall take effect in the fourth fiscal year after its ratification.
If Mark Levin were sincere about ending the socialist state, would he not then promote the following H.J.RESOLUTION?
House/Senate Joint Resolution
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the sixteenth article of amendment and end taxes calculated from profits, gains, salaries and other incomes.
Section 1: The sixteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Section 2: Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money.
Section 3: This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by three fourths of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission thereof to the States by the Congress.
These words, if added to our Constitution, would bring us back to our Constitutions ORIGINAL TAX PLAN, as our founders intended it to operate, and they would end the socialist experiment with taxes calculated from profits, gains and other incomes.
JWK
..with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizensa wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities. Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address
Ok, since you’re so much smarter than me, you shouldn’t have any problem answering this question: How many laws will judges overturn or government ignore before we realize we have a people problem, not a policy problem?
You announced that I’m an idiot. Before I just accept your assertion, I’d like you to tell me what you think my argument is. If we were face to face you wouldn’t just call me an idiot. Unless you were a certified jerk.
A joint House and Senate amendment instead of a state called Amendment Convention with its built in limitations? I think not.
Attaching Levin’s name to your own thread on your own scheme of what you would like to see done is discourteous and self promoting IMHO.
The National Retail Sales Tax, or Fair Tax, is a way to take power back from the politicians and lobbyists by doing away with all the federal income taxes (personal, estate, gift, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, self-employment, and corporate taxes)
The FairTax is replacement, not reform. It REPLACES federal income taxes including personal, estate, gift, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, self-employment, and corporate taxes.
Let us look at the facts.
The fairtax does not withdraw Congress power to lay and collect taxes calculated from profits, gains, and other incomes. But it would, if adopted, create two new taxes, a 23 percent tax upon the purchase of articles of consumption and another 23 percent tax upon the sale of labor, and it would keep alive Congress power to lay and collect taxes calculated from profits, gains, and other incomes. The fairtax is a Washington Establishment cooked up scheme to enlarge our federal governments taxing arm.
In addition, the fairtax, just as a national retail sales tax, would violate the wisdom and brilliance of our founding fathers rule of apportionment under which they agreed that any general tax laid among the states would be apportioned so that each states contribution of the total sum being collected would be proportionately equal to its representation in Congress ___a rule based upon an idea of representation with a proportional financial obligation, or, one man, one vote, and one vote one dollar. Socialists love their one man one vote part of the rule of apportionment but fear with a passion one vote one dollar.
Under the fairtax or a national retail sales tax, although the people of a state may contribute a larger share to fund the federal government, they may not get a proportionately equal say in Congress relative to their contribution on how their money will be spent because the rule of apportionment would not be observed!
And just what were the very intentions behind the rule of apportioning both representatives and any general tax laid among the States?
In Federalist No. 54 we are reminded that our Constitutions rule requiring an apportionment of both Representatives and direct taxes
will have a very salutary effect. Madison observes in this paper . . . Were the various States share of representation alone to be governed by this rule, they would have an interest in exaggerating their inhabitants. Were the rule to decide their share of taxation alone, a contrary temptation would prevail. By extending the rule to both objects, the States will have opposite interests, which will control and balance each other, and produce the requisite impartiality.
And during the ratification debated, the following comments are made with regard to the rule of apportionment:
Pinckney addressing the S.C. ratification convention with regard to the rule of apportionment :
With regard to the general government imposing internal taxes upon us, he contended that it was absolutely necessary they should have such a power: requisitions had been in vain tried every year since the ratification of the old Confederation, and not a single state had paid the quota required of her. The general government could not abuse this power, and favor one state and oppress another, as each state was to be taxed only in proportion to its representation. 4 Elliots, S.C., 305-6
And see:
The proportion of taxes are fixed by the number of inhabitants, and not regulated by the extent of the territory, or fertility of soil3 Elliots, 243,Each state will know, from its population, its proportion of any general tax 3 Elliots, 244 ___ Mr. George Nicholas, during the ratification debates of our Constitution.
Mr. Madison goes on to remark about Congresss general power of taxation that, "they will be limited to fix the proportion of each State, and they must raise it in the most convenient and satisfactory manner to the public."3 Elliot, 255
And if there is any confusion about the rule of apportionment intentionally designed to insure that the people of each state are guaranteed a proportional vote in Congress equal to their contribution, Mr. PENDLETON says:
The apportionment of representation and taxation by the same scale is just; it removes the objection, that, while Virginia paid one sixth part of the expenses of the Union, she had no more weight in public counsels than Delaware, which paid but a very small portion3 Elliots 41
Having stated the above, I do support Congress raising its revenue from taxing consumption, but only as our Founders intended under our Constitutions ORIGINAL TAX PLAN
JWK
Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to Americas future Prosperity ___ from Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan,no longer in print.
Have you read the "Liberty Ammendments?"
And I do apologize for the name calling. Sorry.
JWK
What exactly is someone that promotes socialist ideas?
JWK
That means you don’t have an answer that doesn’t contradict your assertion.
JWK
They are not liberals. They are conniving Marxist parasites who use the cloak of government force to steal the wealth which wage earners, business and investors have worked to create
Stop digging - you can be sure that Bernie would not agree with any of Mark’s proposed amendments including the one you labeled socialist.
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.